Originally posted by HawkMan11

Thank you for the reply.

So, if we could take him alive, he could re affirm his confession, the prosecutor has no obligation to show any other evidence, and he can be sentenced concluding the hearings.

Yes. The court would have the decision to accept that plea, or reject it, and force him to trial.

Also, the prosecution would provide aggrivating and mitigating circumstances that would affect sentencing.

Originally posted by HawkMan11

So what exactly is the problem with taking him alive? In that case he wouldn't get the fictional trial being debated anyways. Please note I'm not saying why didn't we, or we should have.

We could have brought him in alive if he had done like Hussein et al. have and put their hands up and surrendered.

Originally posted by HawkMan11
If he pleads guilty, that satisfies the legal standard to convict and sentence. No need for further Investigation according to law.

No. He has admitted to guilt. No need to prove guilt after that.

Originally posted by HawkMan11
Is the problem that in an International Military Tribunal that may not be the the standard? And he will get some sort of legal proceeding even after confession? I truly don't know.

No, even in a IMT that is still the standard. If someone enters a guilty plea in open court, and the court accepts that plea and adjudicates him guilty, there is no need for a trial. Sentencing hearings would begin after that.

I heard he was wrapped for a ceramonial burial. A few choice words were said, then the body," wrapped in bacon", was wipped overboard. Why would they do that? That seems a little odd to me. Anyone hear about this? A ceromonial burial?

Poor guy...

Originally posted by wcitizen
The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.

Yep. And yet, indictments for the bombings of the US Embassys in Kenya and Tanzania, and the bombing of the USS Cole, still stand.

Nice dodge BTW. I never said anything about 9/11.

Originally posted by wcitizen

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?

Wrong. He was indicted on other charges. Nice strawman.

Originally posted by wcitizen

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.

It's a good thing the USG didn't ask your legal opinion. You're confused about current indictments.

Originally posted by wcitizen

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here.

I disagree.

Originally posted by wcitizen
It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.

The legal process was respected. I am sorry that you have problems with reading for comprehension.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.

Yep. And you're duped by liars like Fetzer, Jones, et al.

Originally posted by cloaked4u
I heard he was wrapped for a ceramonial burial. A few choice words were said, then the body," wrapped in bacon", was wipped overboard. Why would they do that? That seems a little odd to me. Anyone hear about this? A ceromonial burial?

Interesting, what kind of ceramony was this?

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by wcitizen
The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.

Yep. And yet, indictments for the bombings of the US Embassys in Kenya and Tanzania, and the bombing of the USS Cole, still stand.

Nice dodge BTW. I never said anything about 9/11.

Originally posted by wcitizen

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?

Wrong. He was indicted on other charges. Nice strawman.

Originally posted by wcitizen

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.

It's a good thing the USG didn't ask your legal opinion. You're confused about current indictments.

Originally posted by wcitizen

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here.

I disagree.

Originally posted by wcitizen
It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.

The legal process was respected. I am sorry that you have problems with reading for comprehension.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.

Yep. And you're duped by liars like Fetzer, Jones, et al.

No - YOU never mentioned 9/11, but the Bush administration blamed him for 9/11. That is why he was killed. That's why some people have been rejoicing about his death, that's why 9/11 victim family members have been interviewed about how they feel about his death. The whole implication of this farce is about 9/11.

Nice try.

He never went through a trial, no proper judiial process for any of the charges. He should have been brought back to US to face those charges. BUT, of course, they couldn't do that.

If you support disregard for the law and a President who can murder at will, that's your choice. Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.

Originally posted by wcitizen
No - YOU never mentioned 9/11, but the Bush administration blamed him for 9/11. That is why he was killed.

You're not understanding the pevious post, are you?

He was a wanted international terrorist. Wanted by our government, and others, for the acts of terrorism he planed/financed/participated in.

The REASON why he was not indicted for the events of 9/11, is because they (FBI, etc) didn't have enough unclassified evidence to GUARANTEE a conviction. If they had sought a conviction with all of the available evidence, we would have had to show ALL of the evidence. Much of which, is still classified.

Originally posted by wcitizen
That's why some people have been rejoicing about his death, that's why 9/11 victim family members have been interviewed about how they feel about his death. The whole implication of this farce is about 9/11.

Wow. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Nice try.

Thank you. Care to actually try to address my previous post? Or is handwaving your only weapon?

Originally posted by wcitizen
He never went through a trial, no proper judiial process for any of the charges. He should have been brought back to US to face those charges. BUT, of course, they couldn't do that.

If he had surrendered like Saddam et al. have, he WOULD have been brought to the US.

Originally posted by wcitizen
If you support disregard for the law and a President who can murder at will, that's your choice.

I support the killing of a known terrorist who made some type of move that the SEALs deemed as aggressive for one reason or another, in order to prevent their own deaths. Yes, absolutely. Just as I support your right to defend yourself if you are out on the town, and someone tries to rob you.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.

I don't associate with known terrorists, I don't kill innocent people just because of their beliefs, and I don't commit crimes against other nations, so I don't have much to worry about.

But hey, thanks for the heads up.....

Originally posted by FDNY343

Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.

I don't associate with known terrorists, I don't kill innocent people just because of their beliefs, and I don't commit crimes against other nations, so I don't have much to worry about.

But hey, thanks for the heads up.....


Wow. It's kind of sad to see people who still believe the MSM pulp propaganda.

No sympathies for Bin Laden.

However, I'm not a fan of the Commander in Chief taking it upon himself to sanction an assassination on foreign soil without the knowledge or permission of that nation's ruler.

I think it sets a dangerous precedent (as well as violating international law, and a nation's sovereignty). Glad he's dead, but still amazed we seemed to have received no real flak from the international community on it.

This is one of those things that may work once, but the next time (like trying to go in and secure nukes in Pakistan) we try it, it's going to be less well received.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by wcitizen

It's NOT about whether anyone DESERVES a trial, it is IMPERATIVE in any civilised society that EVERYONE be given a fair trial before being sentenced, and especially before being executed.

It's the LAW which has to be adhered to under all circumstances. If not, dangerous precedents are set and that can get out of control. The only thing that protects citizens from tyranny is proper adherence to the constitution and the rule of law and there should ne NO exceptions.

If you condone execution without trial, you're condoning mob rule, which is what dictatorships are. One day that might just come back and bite you on the bum.

While I will absolutely agree that everyone deserves a trial, there is no way that is going to be feasable.

It's not like this guy was walking down the street to buy some milk. This was war. In war, people are killed.

Also, here's a little analogy.

I am sitting in my living room, watching a baseball game on tv. Some dude busts through my door and tries to harm my wife and kids. I have EVERY right to defend myself, up to and INCLUDING deadly force. Should I just wait for the cops? Nope. Sorry. I guarantee I will put two shots of .45 cal right into his center mass.

Now, go ahead and try to spin this to say that we shouldn't have shot the bastard. It won't make a bit of difference. This was war.

The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here. It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.



Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.

That was really well said. As an American, I feel I am part of a ruthless gang of mobsters now, mobsters with no code of honor.