POST HERE For Discussion About The DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN (Updated)

Scroll to see replies

and according to your thing about this shrine etc no we would have not made a shrine and made it an icon because that is against our religion, saladin (a very strong muslim leader has a small wooden shrine thats it) so bin laden would have been no different!

I don't think you'd call Al Qaeda an Islamic group, would you? I mean, they twist the words of Islam to suit their own ways.

Reply 1721

ihaveyourcat

Original post by umarrehman187

1stly please stop saying they would attack us, because you guys have been killing iraqi kids mothers and soldiers till this day, im sure the amount of innocent civlians bush killed in his president days is enough for me to keep calling out his name...and dont say awww the terrorists did it then george bush retalited because thats not true, they equally as bad!

obviously as an american you will say we started it, and we will say you started it....so yh this is never going to end

and according to your thing about this shrine etc no we would have not made a shrine and made it an icon because that is against our religion, saladin (a very strong muslim leader has a small wooden shrine thats it) so bin laden would have been no different!

bush is not the sole figure but one of the figures in this war just like bin laden....

the day the americnas get out of all the muslim countries there will be peace :smile:

Killing innocent people is also against Islam but extremists seem to be doing that anyway... I think that burying him in sea was the right desicion- wherever you burried him on land would have caused more trouble than its worth. Plus the USA did try to give his body to saudi arabia (where he was from originally) but saudi arabia refused to take it. Which country would have wanted to take his body and associate themselves with it? Under the circumstances as the body had to be burried in 24 hours (according to muslim tradition) I think they did the right thing.

Reply 1722

sammca

Original post by greengrapes

with todays advances in technology a application called photoshop does exist. If the USA wanted to show us actual evidence of Osama's "death" they would of given him a dignified muslim burial instead of drowning him at sea..

They didn't drown him. He was buried at sea so that his followers couldn't use his grave as a gathering place to praise him. And what would a grave mean to anyone, and its not like the whole worlds gonna want to watch a televised funeral of the worlds most hated man. That is exactly what he wants, to be a legend to his people.

Reply 1723

umarrehman187

i do agree with some people here that yes they do take ilsam and make it suit thier own ways which i do think is wrong as in jihad innocent people should not be killed... so i do agree on that, extremists blowing up trains with children to get thier point across and extresmists who blow thier own kind up i do think that is wrong i do not support that...... but when america bombs innocent civlians in iraq do you not think that is extreme too?

but they did ask saudi arabia and they refused? ok
bin laden has been fighting for iraq and staying in pakistan since a young age why did they not ask them?

they found him in pakistan why did they not ask them would they like to keep him?

they did not ask ask because they knew they would say yes

they asked saudi because the saudi are puppets of america!

its sounds stupid but thats the truth!

Reply 1724

greengrapes

Original post by sammca

islamically graves are not marked soo it wouldnt of been used as a shrine or for people to come and praise and i dont understand how u can bury somone in sea when you just drop there coffin in the middle of nowhere im pretty sure where they dropped him there isnt a underwater grave yard. he may of been the most hated man but he he is a human and God will deal with him as he pleases.

Reply 1725

moonkatt

Original post by Ewan

It's amazing people would condone this then go and rally against the death penalty. At least death row inmates were actually sentenced in a court of law.

There is a difference between sentencing a prisoner to death, who is already locked up and is not presenting a threat to anyone and having to open fire and kill someone who is trying to kill you in a firefight.

Reply 1726

Gangee

Original post by umarrehman187

Rubbish

You sir are a moron.

Reply 1727

Tabris

Original post by umarrehman187

What the USA does to the innocent and how extreme it is, is completely irrelevant. We're talking about Al Aqaeda using Osama Bin Laden's body as a beacon of some kind if his body were to be found.

You said that nobody would use his body as n icon because it is unislamic; however, you've just ceded that they do bend Islam to their own ways. You have no reason to say that his case would be the no different to Saladin's.

Like people have been saying, burying him at sea saves the hassle of the possibility of anything like this happening.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 1728

umarrehman187

Original post by Gangee

You sir are a moron.

ok sir

Reply 1729

umarrehman187

Original post by Tabris

i stated yes they do bend thier way only in this exremist bomb etc not other things dont take my words and say i said i only said bend thier ways in order to kill and in the name of jihad

about burying etc shrines etc no i still think they do not bend thier ways and they would have not made a shrine and worshipped it and used to for hatred!

Reply 1730

umarrehman187

but i do understand your point and will not be ignorant and i do see sense in your comment

Reply 1731

Man G

Original post by ibysaiyan

he was buried out to sea? yeah sure.

Reply 1732

Jessieevaline

Original post by Man G

he was buried out to sea? yeah sure.

I heard the Americans did that so it wouldn't become a shrine/ pilgrimage site. Seems logical...

Reply 1733

Tabris

Original post by umarrehman187

You can't say that with 100% certainty though. If they're okay with killing innocents, I wouldn't doubt that they'd use Osama's body as a rallying point. Not a certainty, but there's a good possibility if they're happy with violating Islam to their own ends already.

Burying him at sea eliminates any possbility. It's better safe, than sorry.

Better off dead.

Original post by DH-Biker

I was applying it towards the Americans, they can't perform Torture as its against the Geneva Convention.

Of course Terrorist groups wont follow those guidelines.

Regardless of the opposing force, America will not torture any individual. Especially one like that who wouldn't give up any information anyway.

They found out what they needed there on his person.

If they even suggested doing so, the UN would rain down control order upon control order. Luckily, Obama holds more intelligence to resort to torturing someone who would rather be burnt alive then let slip any information.

did't Bush get around that by declaring the Taliban terrorists and Guerllias rather than soldiers in uniform?

Reply 1736

chloeee!

I don't understand the argument that is being banded about, even by the likes of David Cameron and co, that because of this the West will now be the victim of a 'revenge' terrorist attack, because doesn't this imply that Al Qaeda could have plotted one at any time but were refraining out of a sort of...respect? Surely they would want to launch terrorist attacks whenever and wherever possible, so although I'm sure this has incensed them and made them more keen to do something in retribution, does this make it any more likely that they will succeed?

Reply 1737

nonotrly

Clinton could've killed him in 2000, but the order never came. 11 years on, Bush has killed far more innocents and spread far more hatred and racism/discrimination/xenophobia than Osama ever did. What a mess.

Too late now, but I greatly advise Americans don't dance in the streets. Someone was killed, and the reason he was killed was because so many other s were killed. This is not something to celebrate, it's something to respect the dead and living that you love and to reflect.

Just makes you look like animals, just like the Asians who danced in 2001. While that was due to the death of civilians, it's still on the same subject.

Reply 1738

mmmmmpie

First terror arrests made on Monday, five men held after filming a nuclear power station,

The men, who are all from London and aged in their 20s, were arrested on Monday shortly after 1630 BST.

The arrests were made after Civil Nuclear Constabulary officers conducted a stop check on a vehicle close to the Sellafield site, in Cumbria.

The men were held in Carlisle overnight and are being moved to Manchester.

The BBC's Fiona Trott said the men were thought to have been filming and were all Bangladeshi.

The BBC understands the arrests were not the result of a long running investigation.

The North West Counter Terrorism Unit is leading the investigation.

A police officer can arrest anyone they "reasonably suspect" of being a terrorist, under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

The Sellafield site, on the Cumbrian coast, is responsible for decommissioning and reprocessing nuclear waste and fuel manufacturing on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

The site, which has operated since the 1940s, is heavily protected by both private security and officers from the Civil Nuclear Constabulary

Sellafield is also home to the world's first commercial nuclear power station - Calder Hall, which operated from 1956 to 2003.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-13268834

Reply 1739

DH-Biker

Original post by nosaer

Naive is thy name. :tongue:

Which GC are you talking about?

Not really.

The Third and Fourth Conventions state:

"Willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments"

Classes as a "Grave Breach".

America wouldn't dare attempt a "grave breach" as I keep saying, the UN would hinder every military action they did.