| |
|
Also, I just went to the linked page that someone early in this thread provided re: the evidence against Bin Laden.
The poster claimed that the evidence was in the public and that it was mostly circumstantial, not enough to provide a convinction in court. The poster implied that all the evidence was out in the public domain.
BUT, the article in question uses the word "EXTRACTS". As in "this is not the whole thing". And the reason it gives is security; the need to protect sources, which I find reasonable and mentioned earlier.
--------------------------------------
Extracts from yesterday's government document
Guardian
Friday October 5, 2001
This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama Bin Laden in a court of law. Intelligence often cannot be used evidentially, due to strict rules of admissibility and the need to protect sources. But on the basis of the information available HMG is confident of its conclusions as expressed in this document.
---------------------------------------
It is interesting to note that even though the document says it is not intended to stand as a prosecutable case, Pakistan says it was enough to stand up in a court of law. Now, you can either say, "well, the extract was just a small sampling of the evidence" or you can say "Of course Pakistan said that, because it will say pretty much anything the US tells it to at this point."
Someone said:
>> If the US wasn't targeting civilians, we wouldn't still be bombing after EIGHT! DAYS! STRAIGHT! There just aren't that many military targets in Afghanistan.
No offense (I mean this in the spirit of healthy debate, no snide tone here), how do YOU know?? Are you a military expert? I'm certainly not one, but I don't think EVERYTHING we're being told by the Pentagon is 100% bullshit. There are still hundreds of Taliban troops in action.
Also, on this point:
>> Seriously now. The U.S. is not bombing Al Queda. (spelling?) It's bombing the Taliban in order to "put pressure on them to turn over Bin Laden." What are we gonna do after Bin Laden is turned over?
What the U.S. and all its allies should do is this:
No military operations. Instead, good old criminal investigation. Then track down all the cells. Get enough evidence to convict and then put the cells out of operation. Bombing Afganistan serves no purpose. Who here actually believes that Osama is still in Afganistan?
Actually, we are bombing Al Queda, because the Taliban is linked to Al Queda. Pakistan recently issued a statement saying that Bin Laden and his organization "owned" the Taliban. They are protecting him, sheilding him. They have lied about his whereabouts, saying they had no idea where he was and then saying "Oh, yes, we know where he is, he is safe and secure and under our protection."
After Bin Laden is apprehended or killed, the US and the UN and other nations around the world will continue the job of going after terrorist networks. Not only Al Queda, which will take time, of course, but others as well. Bush has made it clear this does not end with Bin Laden.
Thank you, sincerely (no snide tone here either), for providing some ideas about what the US and allies should do. Many people are saying "No war!" but when you ask them what we should do instead, they say "I dunno, but heck, man, no war!"
What you suggest -- an ongoing criminal investigation into terrorist networks and subsequent crackdown -- is what the US and its allies in NATO are doing anyway, and have been doing since a few days after Sept. 11th. Terrorist assets and financial backings have been frozen, the investigation is worldwide, diplomacy is being used sa well.
But the Taliban's connection to organized terrorism cannot be ignored. They had two weeks to turn Bin Laden and his people over, and to conduct a thorough investigation and cleaning-out of terrorist camps within the borders of their country. And they refused. |
|
|
) Furthermore, as the richest nation on the planet, many American cultural entities from McDonalds to the White House are rampantly hegemonistic. It's very easy indeed to objectify America as some sort of mass, even though I know full well that there are many in the US who are opposed to that mass.