Michael Moore: ‘Bin Laden Wasn’t Killed, He Was Executed’

Michael Moore. Photo: nicolas genin (CC)

Michael Moore. Photo: nicolas genin (CC)

Michael Moore gives his take on the Osama affair exclusively to TheWrap:

Osama bin Laden wasn’t killed by a Navy SEAL team, he was straight up executed, Michael Moore told TheWrap on Wednesday,

The “Fahrenheit 9/11” director has been setting Twitter aflame Wednesday afternoon urging the Obama administration to come clean about the circumstances surrounding the terrorist leader’s death — particularly in light of the White House’s shifting account of last weekend’s firefight in Abbottabad.

The Oscar-winning director has been tweeting about his belief that Bin Laden should have received a trial, and his theory that Pakistan was keeping the Al Qaeda head under house arrest. TheWrap grilled Moore about his controversial views.

Is Obama lying about how Bin Laden died?

Common sense tells you he was executed. That was the plan all along. Just tell us that and quit treating us like children.

I have a lot of faith in Obama, but we’ve received three different stories in three days. We heard, “There was a firefight.” “He used a woman as a shield.” Now it turns out none of these things were true. He wasn’t armed.

Does it matter if he was executed? Do you think he deserved a trial?

I am a Catholic, and the position of the Catholic Church and the Pope is that we are 100 percent against the death penalty unless it is in self-defense. Look at the Nuremberg Trials. We didn’t just pop a bullet in the heads of the worst scum in history. We thought it was important to put them on trial and expose their evil. In a democracy we believe in a system of justice and we believe in a judicial system that gives people a day in court…and then we hung them.

It doesn’t mean we can’t hang them afterward…

[continues at TheWrap]

, , ,

78 Responses to Michael Moore: ‘Bin Laden Wasn’t Killed, He Was Executed’

  1. Navysealteam7 May 5, 2011 at 1:44 pm #

    Damn right he was executed.. Get over it fat-boy ;P

  2. Navysealteam7 May 5, 2011 at 9:44 am #

    Damn right he was executed.. Get over it fat-boy ;P

  3. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 1:52 pm #

    I hate Micheal Moore. Really I do, but he’s right. I guess the pretense of civility and decency have been completly tossed aside for blatant barbarism. I’m no fan of Osama or the family of Saddam Hussien for that matter, but we EXECUTED them, wiped them OUT. No capture, trial or process resembling civilized behavior.
    Silence. Silence is achieved. The victor writes history to his liking and the war can continue now, revitalized by the spilled blood of our enemy.

    Think what you will….but to say we are free and civilized is simply a big joke. Its a big yellow smiley-face plastered over your face. This is zombieland -where we eat human flesh like its party-mix. Blood is in the wine…

  4. GoodDoktorBad May 5, 2011 at 9:52 am #

    I hate Micheal Moore. Really I do, but he’s right. I guess the pretense of civility and decency have been completly tossed aside for blatant barbarism. I’m no fan of Osama or the family of Saddam Hussien for that matter, but we EXECUTED them, wiped them OUT. No capture, trial or process resembling civilized behavior.
    Silence. Silence is achieved. The victor writes history to his liking and the war can continue now, revitalized by the spilled blood of our enemy.

    Think what you will….but to say we are free and civilized is simply a big joke. Its a big yellow smiley-face plastered over your face. This is zombieland -where we eat human flesh like its party-mix. Blood is in the wine…

    • Liam_McGonagle May 5, 2011 at 12:56 pm #

      I think I basically agree with Moore’s theoretical point here,and your point as well. But I feel a little swell of pragmatism rising again, and I’m not sure the best thing for me to do about it is ignore it.

      There was no fucking way in Hell Bin Laden COULD HAVE received a fair trial–not even theoretically. It assumes the agreement of both parties to a platform of arbitration; a set of processes and criteria and panel of jurors. Is there anything in the alleged behaviour that leads one to believe that type of consensus when even conceptually possible in this case?

      If a person even contemplates that OBL POSSIBLY did the horrible things he was alleged to, it’d be obvious that he wouldn’t even be a candidate for honorable participation in the type of consensus-driven procedure I described. Even the best case scenario under these conditions would only be a show trial, as many felt the Nuremberg or Zinoviev things were.

      My decision is that, on balance, OBL was less credible than the U.S. government on the issue of whether or not to try him. That sounds like a horrible thing to say, easy to reductively misrepresent as a rubber-stamping of corrupt, irregular proceedings by a very manipulative government.

      I totally believe that the U.S. government is packed with half-witted liars and spin doctors. I just also believe that OBL was every bit as bad and worse–he didn’t claim mere sanction of legal process for his atrocities, he claimed Divine Sanction, not even up for debate.

      In a way, this is the question of our times: How do you even achieve enough consensus to engage in an honorable fight? Surely not by claiming a monopoly on Divine Revelation.

      • GoodDoktorBad May 5, 2011 at 1:12 pm #

        “Surely not by claiming a monopoly on Divine Revelation.”

        Indeed…

        • Liam_McGonagle May 5, 2011 at 1:37 pm #

          Exactly.

          Now I don’t know whether this is what you had in mind, but I’m sure someone will eventually raise the crypto-Christian ethos prevailing in American culture, and understandably assumed to be underlaying the OBL affair. But that would be a rookie mistake. And only partially because murder isn’t regarded as a particularly “Christian” or “Muslim” crime.

          Christ did not resist capture or trial, and certainly did not recruit an army of zealots to commit the attrocities on his behalf. Surely others did so, much later, but there’s nothing in the direct Jesus tradition that records him as a warrior chief mutilating women for committing adultery or the like. Quite the opposite.

          http://bible.cc/john/8-7.htm

          I think it’s safe to say that OBL’s encitements to arms and callous disregard for civilian casualties present a pretty striking contrast to the authentic Jesus story.

          Now you may say that Jesus’ example of passivity should be followed here, which would have meant not pursuing OBL at all. Or at least allowing him to dictate the terms of the trial. I don’t think so. I don’t believe Christ was a TOTAL passivist–he didn’t act particularly shy w/ regard to the money changers in the Temple.

          http://bible.cc/matthew/21-12.htm

          This story is notable, too, because it shows him referring to established law regarding conduct in the Temple (21-13)–the common law regarding popular Jewish practice. All the principles, the protagonists and the villains alike, were Jews. He didn’t walk into a Hindu shrine claiming that the Irish sun god Crom had declared the place an abomination, and start mutilating Abyssinian children accordingly. Jesus was not claiming a monopoly over the relevant law here; he was referring to the commonly accepted moral precepts of the Jewish tradition.

          It’s a tough judgment call, and even though I’m convinced you’re a person of good will and education, this would take a prolonged, dispassionate sorting through of the various moral issues at stake to even approach a consensus on this one.

          There are plenty of grounds of suspicion of the government’s actions on this one, but I don’t think we should be distracted by their fucknuttery from pusuing a thread of logical and moral consistency.

          • GoodDoktorBad May 5, 2011 at 10:47 pm #

            It’s really the trend of out right callousness in these matters coming from the highest leaders of our land.
            It’s really quite bloodthirsty and casts a greater shadow over us all.

            I wouldn’t presume to compare the mythical Jesus to the mythical Osama, but if more people in the land of the free acted like Jesus, Osama’s cause might have never been born into reality. Of course that’s all hypothetical and nearly worthless. No consensus available or possible. What’s done is done, what ever gear that has been moved will move another.

            Osama’s “officially”dead, another click in the clock -tic tock!

          • Liam_McGonagle May 6, 2011 at 11:53 am #

            Yeah, we’re dealing with two distinct lines of thought: The popular intepretation of religion, all religions, as utilities for social control, emphasizing conformity and gruesome, violent suppression of dissent. And the other interpretation, which I’ll call the “esoteric” here, for want of a better word, that seeks to understand the meaning of the story on its own terms and emphasizes internal consistency.

            I don’t think it’s any secret that the first stream is so overwhelmingly predominant in the public mind that we’ve all but forgotten that the second stream even exists. We live in a time where simplicity seems a virtue and accuracy a vice.

            Cynicism does seem to pay off in spades as well. But a further weird irony about it is that the people who truly embrace and employ cynicism, the Bushes, Bin Ladens and Obamas of this world, seem totally incapable of objectively appreciating it for what it really is; they always try to project an image of boundless optimism and bonhommie. It’s like only the half-depressed wiseasses of this world have the courage to come out and call it for what it is.

          • GoodDoktorBad May 6, 2011 at 1:29 pm #

            Aaaah, there’s a good word “esoteric”.
            “…we’ve all but forgotten that the second stream even exists” sort of alludes to the meaning of the word “esoteric” doesn’t it? Things esoteric are understood by or meant for only a select few who have the interest and inside knowledge, connections etc. to gain benefit, control etc.
            I’m not sure the line between these ” two distinct lines of thought” can be seen very well. Sort of a “can’t see the forest through the trees” scenario.

            Esoteric wisdom comes from learning to be quiet and listen to ourselves and the world. From silence comes awareness. DING! -thats my cue to be quiet. I’m out…

          • GoodDoktorBad May 6, 2011 at 1:56 pm #

            ” half-depressed wiseasses” huh? LOL

  5. Mamagriff50 May 5, 2011 at 2:23 pm #

    Alright Michael! He was executed, no trial, We sure don’t want the truth to come out about 911. [Bush and his cronies involvement]. Atleast Bin Laden is dead.

  6. Mamagriff50 May 5, 2011 at 10:23 am #

    Alright Michael! He was executed, no trial, We sure don’t want the truth to come out about 911. [Bush and his cronies involvement]. Atleast Bin Laden is dead.

  7. Al Briggs May 5, 2011 at 2:55 pm #

    it’s ok michael… he died long ago from sickness. that was someone else.

  8. Al Briggs May 5, 2011 at 10:55 am #

    it’s ok michael… he died long ago from sickness. that was someone else.

  9. justagirl May 5, 2011 at 3:00 pm #

    he should have been brought back in a smelly sack and interrogated on his homies and plans. they went about it all wrong. you can’t shoot first and ask questions later duh.

  10. justagirl May 5, 2011 at 11:00 am #

    he should have been brought back in a smelly sack and interrogated on his homies and plans. they went about it all wrong. you can’t shoot first and ask questions later duh.

  11. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 3:22 pm #

    I believe the word you’re looking for, Mr. Moore, is “assassinated”. He wasn’t executed. He was assassinated, and there was some collateral damage. I’ll agree though that it’s unlikely they ever had the intent to bring him back alive for trial or questioning.

  12. Freeman May 5, 2011 at 3:22 pm #

    Michael Moore is the next enemy of the United States. His sole source of income comes from making movies and writing books about how much he hates America. It is the beauty of America that such enemies are allowed to freely express their hatred of America. Shame on Michael Moore, you enemy you.

  13. quartz99 May 5, 2011 at 11:22 am #

    I believe the word you’re looking for, Mr. Moore, is “assassinated”. He wasn’t executed. He was assassinated, and there was some collateral damage. I’ll agree though that it’s unlikely they ever had the intent to bring him back alive for trial or questioning.

  14. Freeman May 5, 2011 at 11:22 am #

    Michael Moore is the next enemy of the United States. His sole source of income comes from making movies and writing books about how much he hates America. It is the beauty of America that such enemies are allowed to freely express their hatred of America. Shame on Michael Moore, you enemy you.

    • Tuna Ghost May 5, 2011 at 11:57 am #

      ….I can’t tell if you’re being sincere or not.

      • Freeman May 5, 2011 at 4:34 pm #

        I’m actually not being sarcastic although I usually am. I sincerely mean what I wrote. Just look at his incentives and how he is making his money. He earns only from his hatred of America

        • Hadrian999 May 5, 2011 at 5:18 pm #

          personally I can’t stand the guy but what qualifies as “Hate for america” is a joke. these days anyone who doesn’t praise every action of the GOP or military gets labeled as an america hater, expecting better of something isn’t hate.

          edit: can’t type for shit

    • Johnnyrockafellar May 5, 2011 at 10:42 pm #

      Freeman, you dont have 1/10 the balls Michael Moore has. He brings to light the things that are wrong with our country and you critisize him for it. Like most people the memory is short and is easily clouded by more crazyness the media giants spit out. Ask yourself this: why did Osama target the Government and military but not the civilians?

      • Mindy May 10, 2011 at 8:57 am #

        The people in the twin towers were military? Maybe you should go to work for Fat Bastard. Your “theories” make as little sense as his.

  15. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 3:50 pm #

    Everything about the Osama situation is just fanning the flames of conspiracy theory. Why is it that the government can not seem to just tell-it-like-it-is with regard to anything relating to 9/11?

    Of course they wouldn’t put Bin Laden on trial, because the verdict would be that he was innocent! (of 9/11 anyway). I read one report of the situation that said he was on his knees saying, “It’s not me!” A kind of strange thing to say, perhaps he was trying to say he didn’t do it??

  16. BrianApocalypse May 5, 2011 at 11:50 am #

    Everything about the Osama situation is just fanning the flames of conspiracy theory. Why is it that the government can not seem to just tell-it-like-it-is with regard to anything relating to 9/11?

    Of course they wouldn’t put Bin Laden on trial, because the verdict would be that he was innocent! (of 9/11 anyway). I read one report of the situation that said he was on his knees saying, “It’s not me!” A kind of strange thing to say, perhaps he was trying to say he didn’t do it??

  17. Tuna Ghost May 5, 2011 at 3:57 pm #

    ….I can’t tell if you’re being sincere or not.

  18. Tuna Ghost May 5, 2011 at 4:06 pm #

    I am a Catholic, and the position of the Catholic Church and the Pope is that we are 100 percent against the death penalty unless it is in self-defense.

    I’m not at all sure that I think this is a viable line of reasoning.

  19. Tuna Ghost May 5, 2011 at 12:06 pm #

    I am a Catholic, and the position of the Catholic Church and the Pope is that we are 100 percent against the death penalty unless it is in self-defense.

    I’m not at all sure that I think this is a viable line of reasoning.

    • quartz99 May 5, 2011 at 3:58 pm #

      And even if it was I’d be willing to take the argument that killing bin Laden was an act of national self-defense.

      • Tuna Ghost May 6, 2011 at 3:37 am #

        Agreed. Even if I couldn’t make that argument well enough to convince any court, I’m sure there are several people who can. I think it was prudent, too–I can’t imagine the security risks that would arise from holding him in the US. Or anywhere, really.

    • ArgosyJones May 6, 2011 at 2:16 pm #

      I think the catholic church also classifies gluttony a sin.

    • superfluous May 6, 2011 at 11:54 pm #

      death penalty in self-defense seems like a contradiction in terms to me.

      unless, of course, you mean killing (not death penalty) in self-
      defense.

      by that definition
      , osama killing SEAL
      s is morally sanctioned by the pope.

      • superfluous May 6, 2011 at 11:55 pm #

        hmm, why are my posts turning into haikus?

  20. T.R. Wolfe May 5, 2011 at 4:14 pm #

    hahahah!

  21. Liam_McGonagle May 5, 2011 at 4:56 pm #

    I think I basically agree with Moore’s theoretical point here,and your point as well. But I feel a little swell of pragmatism rising again, and I’m not sure the best thing for me to do about it is ignore it.

    There was no fucking way in Hell Bin Laden COULD HAVE received a fair trial–not even theoretically. It assumes the agreement of both parties to a platform of arbitration; a set of processes and criteria and panel of jurors. Is there anything in the alleged behaviour that leads one to believe that type of consensus when even conceptually possible in this case?

    If a person even contemplates that OBL POSSIBLY did the horrible things he was alleged to, it’d be obvious that he wouldn’t even be a candidate for honorable participation in the type of consensus-driven procedure I described. Even the best case scenario under these conditions would only be a show trial, as many felt the Nuremberg or Zinoviev things were.

    My decision is that, on balance, OBL was less credible than the U.S. government on the issue of whether or not to try him. That sounds like a horrible thing to say, easy to reductively misrepresent as a rubber-stamping of corrupt, irregular proceedings by a very manipulative government.

    I totally believe that the U.S. government is packed with half-witted liars and spin doctors. I just also believe that OBL was every bit as bad and worse–he didn’t claim mere sanction of legal process for his atrocities, he claimed Divine Sanction, not even up for debate.

    In a way, this is the question of our times: How do you even achieve enough consensus to engage in an honorable fight? Surely not by claiming a monopoly on Divine Revelation.

  22. Elmyr23 May 5, 2011 at 5:06 pm #

    I don’t think we ever bring in targets like this. There is no trial for high level enemies in america. When i saw this i rethought the idea that hitler killed himself.

    What are we going to have to wait 20 yrs to see the pictures or wait for someone to leak them and go to jail for the rest of thier life. You can’t hold these pictures form history forever, more than likely. We paid for this and now we need the proof.

  23. Elmyr23 May 5, 2011 at 1:06 pm #

    I don’t think we ever bring in targets like this. There is no trial for high level enemies in america. When i saw this i rethought the idea that hitler killed himself.

    What are we going to have to wait 20 yrs to see the pictures or wait for someone to leak them and go to jail for the rest of thier life. You can’t hold these pictures form history forever, more than likely. We paid for this and now we need the proof.

    • quartz99 May 5, 2011 at 3:55 pm #

      Pictures wouldn’t garner any positives and they’d allow several negatives. First off, the people who don’t believe it would claim the pics were photoshopped or faked. Witness the rash of photoshopped images that are already circulating the internet. Those who are willing to accept it either through complacency or simply as a practical matter unless some evidence to the contrary comes to light, don’t need to see pictures. Second, the pictures are probably pretty gory. Not the stuff you want on the prime time news where kids are going to see them. I get nightmares easily. I sure don’t want to see them. Third, as best I understand it, they shot him in the head (which would be SOP in an assassination), so it’s likely that a simple picture would not be identifiable as a particular person. Fourth, those pictures are recruitment fodder for al Qaeda. They’re going to get a surge in new recruits already because they can spin his assassination as martyrdom. We don’t need to hand them the tools to increase the effectiveness of their propaganda. Why would we give them that kind of propaganda capital for no return at home?

      I think where they erred with photos was in even alluding that they existed. Releasing them is a bad idea but now that people know about them, it can only generate ill will that the pictures haven’t been released to the public.

  24. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 5:12 pm #

    “Surely not by claiming a monopoly on Divine Revelation.”

    Indeed…

  25. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 5:37 pm #

    Exactly.

    Now I don’t know whether this is what you had in mind, but I’m sure someone will eventually raise the crypto-Christian ethos prevailing in American culture, and understandably assumed to be underlaying the OBL affair. But that would be a rookie mistake. And only partially because murder isn’t regarded as a particularly “Christian” or “Muslim” crime.

    Christ neither resisted capture or trial, and certainly did not recruit an army of zealots to commit the attrocities on his behalf. Surely others did so, much later, but there’s nothing in the direct Jesus tradition that records him as a warrior chief mutilating women for committing adultery or the like. Quite the opposite.

    http://bible.cc/john/8-7.htm

    I think it’s safe to say that OBL’s encitements to arms and callous disregard for civilian casualties present a pretty striking contrast to the authentic Jesus story.

    Now you may say that Jesus’ example of passivity should be followed here, which would have meant not pursuing OBL at all. Or at least allowing him to dictate the terms of the trial. I don’t think so. I don’t believe Christ was a TOTAL passivist–he didn’t act particularly shy w/ regard to the money changers in the Temple.

    http://bible.cc/matthew/21-12.htm

    This story is notable, too, because it shows him referring to established law regarding conduct in the Temple (21-13)–the common law regarding popular Jewish practice. All the principles, the protagonists and the villains alike, were Jews. He didn’t walk into a Hindu shrine claiming that the Irish sun god Crom had declared the place an abomination, and start mutilating Abyssinian children accordingly. Jesus was not claiming a monopoly over the relevant law here; he was referring to the commonly accepted moral precepts of the Jewish tradition.

    It’s a tough judgment call, and even though I’m convinced you’re a person of good will and education, this would take a prolonged, dispassionate sorting through of the various moral issues at stake to even approach a consensus on this one.

    There are plenty of grounds of suspicion of the government’s actions on this one, but I don’t think we should be distracted by their fucknuttery into pusuing a thread of logical and moral consistency.

  26. Guy5cool May 5, 2011 at 5:48 pm #

    So, here’s the basic argument:

    How can we rely on the CIA / FBI assessment that Bin Laden was “Public Enemy #1″ or “Most Wanted” when they are precisely the same organizations that brought us “WMDs in Iraq “?

    Here’s what we know:

    • No conclusive evidence provided that Bin Laden was involved in 9/11
    • He claimed to be, but where’s the proof? Top secrete?
    • (people often try to take credit for high-profile crimes)
    • The actual perpetrators of the crime of 9/11 died on that day
    • At best, Bin Laden was a co-conspirator – not a perpetrator
    • The SEALs shot Bin Laden even though he was unarmed
    • Where is the investigative journalism that demands facts with regard to this?
    • Since when do American Presidents (and we as Americans) sanction executing individuals without due
    process? Where’s the trial?

    This reminds me of when the group in Lord of The Flies throws away the conch and becomes a wild, savage mob.

    When we compromise our ideals to “fight terrorism” – have we not allowed them to win?

    B

  27. Guy5cool May 5, 2011 at 5:48 pm #

    So, here’s the basic argument:

    How can we rely on the CIA / FBI assessment that Bin Laden was “Public Enemy #1″ or “Most Wanted” when they are precisely the same organizations that brought us “WMDs in Iraq “?

    Here’s what we know:

    • No conclusive evidence provided that Bin Laden was involved in 9/11
    • He claimed to be, but where’s the proof? Top secrete?
    • (people often try to take credit for high-profile crimes)
    • The actual perpetrators of the crime of 9/11 died on that day
    • At best, Bin Laden was a co-conspirator – not a perpetrator
    • The SEALs shot Bin Laden even though he was unarmed
    • Where is the investigative journalism that demands facts with regard to this?
    • Since when do American Presidents (and we as Americans) sanction executing individuals without due
    process? Where’s the trial?

    This reminds me of when the group in Lord of The Flies throws away the conch and becomes a wild, savage mob.

    When we compromise our ideals to “fight terrorism” – have we not allowed them to win?

    B

  28. Guy5cool May 5, 2011 at 5:48 pm #

    So, here’s the basic argument:

    How can we rely on the CIA / FBI assessment that Bin Laden was “Public Enemy #1″ or “Most Wanted” when they are precisely the same organizations that brought us “WMDs in Iraq “?

    Here’s what we know:

    • No conclusive evidence provided that Bin Laden was involved in 9/11
    • He claimed to be, but where’s the proof? Top secrete?
    • (people often try to take credit for high-profile crimes)
    • The actual perpetrators of the crime of 9/11 died on that day
    • At best, Bin Laden was a co-conspirator – not a perpetrator
    • The SEALs shot Bin Laden even though he was unarmed
    • Where is the investigative journalism that demands facts with regard to this?
    • Since when do American Presidents (and we as Americans) sanction executing individuals without due
    process? Where’s the trial?

    This reminds me of when the group in Lord of The Flies throws away the conch and becomes a wild, savage mob.

    When we compromise our ideals to “fight terrorism” – have we not allowed them to win?

    B

  29. Guy5cool May 5, 2011 at 1:48 pm #

    So, here’s the basic argument:

    How can we rely on the CIA / FBI assessment that Bin Laden was “Public Enemy #1″ or “Most Wanted” when they are precisely the same organizations that brought us “WMDs in Iraq “?

    Here’s what we know:

    • No conclusive evidence provided that Bin Laden was involved in 9/11
    • He claimed to be, but where’s the proof? Top secrete?
    • (people often try to take credit for high-profile crimes)
    • The actual perpetrators of the crime of 9/11 died on that day
    • At best, Bin Laden was a co-conspirator – not a perpetrator
    • The SEALs shot Bin Laden even though he was unarmed
    • Where is the investigative journalism that demands facts with regard to this?
    • Since when do American Presidents (and we as Americans) sanction executing individuals without due
    process? Where’s the trial?

    This reminds me of when the group in Lord of The Flies throws away the conch and becomes a wild, savage mob.

    When we compromise our ideals to “fight terrorism” – have we not allowed them to win?

    B

    • BrianApocalypse May 5, 2011 at 1:57 pm #

      Even his claim that he did it is uncertain. In fact, he publicly denied it several times and the only ‘evidence’ for him admitting to it was that private video that was ‘discovered’ allegedly showing him talking about it, but the individual in the video does not look like him!

    • Nigelp1h1 May 5, 2011 at 3:38 pm #

      I agree with you in many ways. The problem is that we live in a complicated world. Yes, in light of the wider issues, we are dealing with a situation where Kant’s catagorical imperative should hold sway. But, theory can only guide us in real life situations. Bin Laden couldn’t have been given a “fair” trial as we define it. Not withstanding that it probably would have taken years to get to that stage. Pakistan is a sovereign state. Rendition would have caused an international incident with someone of Osama’s notoriety. The opportunities for him to play martyr, prisoner of conscience etc would be a nightmare ! All things considered, what occured was probably for the best. Finally, ask yourself this, with roles reversed would there be many “bleeding hearts” if Al Qaeda had managed to kill President Obama ? Of course not ! Congratulate yourself that these issues do trouble you. Why ? Because people of conscience, like yourself are the guardians of the free societies we in the West enjoy. no one says we live in a utopia, but it beats the hell out of all the available alternatives.

  30. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 5:57 pm #

    Even his claim that he did it is uncertain. In fact, he publicly denied it several times and the only ‘evidence’ for him admitting to it was that private video that was ‘discovered’ allegedly showing him talking about it, but the individual in the video does not look like him!

  31. Nigelp1h1 May 5, 2011 at 7:38 pm #

    I agree with you in many ways. The problem is that we live in a complicated world. Yes, in light of the wider issues, we are dealing with a situation where Kant’s catagorical imperative should hold sway. But, theory can only guide us in real life situations. Bin Laden couldn’t have been given a “fair” trial as we define it. Not withstanding that it probably would have taken years to get to that stage. Pakistan is a sovereign state. Rendition would have caused an international incident with someone of Osama’s notoriety. The opportunities for him to play martyr, prisoner of conscience etc would be a nightmare ! All things considered, what occured was probably for the best. Finally, ask yourself this, with roles reversed would there be many “bleeding hearts” if Al Qaeda had managed to kill President Obama ? Of course not ! Congratulate yourself that these issues do trouble you. Why ? Because people of conscience, like yourself are the guardians of the free societies we in the West enjoy. no one says we live in a utopia, but it beats the hell out of all the available alternatives.

  32. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 7:55 pm #

    Pictures wouldn’t garner any positives and they’d allow several negatives. First off, the people who don’t believe it would claim the pics were photoshopped or faked. Witness the rash of photoshopped images that are already circulating the internet. Those who are willing to accept it either through complacency or simply as a practical matter unless some evidence to the contrary comes to light, don’t need to see pictures. Second, the pictures are probably pretty gory. Not the stuff you want on the prime time news where kids are going to see them. I get nightmares easily. I sure don’t want to see them. Third, as best I understand it, they shot him in the head (which would be SOP in an assassination), so it’s likely that a simple picture would not be identifiable as a particular person. Fourth, those pictures are recruitment fodder for al Qaeda. They’re going to get a surge in new recruits already because they can spin his assassination as martyrdom. We don’t need to hand them the tools to increase the effectiveness of their propaganda. Why would we give them that kind of propaganda capital for no return at home?

    I think where they erred with photos was in even alluding that they existed. Releasing them is a bad idea but now that people know about them, it can only generate ill will that the pictures haven’t been released to the public.

  33. Anonymous May 5, 2011 at 7:58 pm #

    And even if it was I’d be willing to take the argument that killing bin Laden was an act of national self-defense.

  34. Freeman May 5, 2011 at 8:34 pm #

    I’m actually not being sarcastic although I usually am. I sincerely mean what I wrote. Just look at his incentives and how he is making his money. He earns only from his hatred of America

  35. Hadrian999 May 5, 2011 at 9:18 pm #

    personally I can’t stand the guy but what qualifies as “Hate for america” is a joke. these days anyone who doesn’t praise every action of the GOP or military gets labeled as an america hater, expecting a better od something isn’t hate.

  36. Ignatz May 5, 2011 at 11:03 pm #

    Look, I’m very liberal, I agree with Moore the vast majority of the time, but “Ohhh, it was an execution” – who CARES?

    This guy randomly killed three thousand people, including children, and destroyed lives for ever.

    I don’t even BELIEVE in the death penalty, and if was in that house, I would have pulled the trigger myself. GLADLY.

    We aren’t supposed to make Hitler comparisons – Godwin’s Law and all that – but this guy WAS this generations Hitler.

    And I am so glad to type that sentence in the past tense.

    You get a chance to kill him, YOU KILL HIM.

  37. Ignatz May 5, 2011 at 7:03 pm #

    Look, I’m very liberal, I agree with Moore the vast majority of the time, but “Ohhh, it was an execution” – who CARES?

    This guy randomly killed three thousand people, including children, and destroyed lives for ever.

    I don’t even BELIEVE in the death penalty, and if was in that house, I would have pulled the trigger myself. GLADLY.

    We aren’t supposed to make Hitler comparisons – Godwin’s Law and all that – but this guy WAS this generations Hitler.

    And I am so glad to type that sentence in the past tense.

    You get a chance to kill him, YOU KILL HIM.

  38. Doesitlooklikeaduck? May 5, 2011 at 11:10 pm #

    Here’s the thing that gets me about this whole deal, they keep calling the compound a mansion. That has got to be the worst excuse for a mansion I have ever seen. With 16 ft. high walls and razor wire. When the Seals raided the compound the guards just stood aside and let us have him, the only people who put up any resistance was his family members.

    Was it his home, or was it a specially built secret prison?

  39. Doesitlooklikeaduck? May 5, 2011 at 7:10 pm #

    Here’s the thing that gets me about this whole deal, they keep calling the compound a mansion. That has got to be the worst excuse for a mansion I have ever seen. With 16 ft. high walls and razor wire. When the Seals raided the compound the guards just stood aside and let us have him, the only people who put up any resistance was his family members.

    Was it his home, or was it a specially built secret prison?

  40. Guest May 5, 2011 at 11:42 pm #

    Yeah, probably should have tried him first (assuming he was executed). Its hard to say what the ramifications of a trial might be. Of course he would be found guilty and executed, but might there be attacks or hostages taken during a hypothetical trial? On the other hand, is it acceptable to sacrifice our ideals for our security?

  41. Guest May 5, 2011 at 7:42 pm #

    Yeah, probably should have tried him first (assuming he was executed). Its hard to say what the ramifications of a trial might be. Of course he would be found guilty and executed, but might there be attacks or hostages taken during a hypothetical trial? On the other hand, is it acceptable to sacrifice our ideals for our security?

  42. Johnnyrockafellar May 6, 2011 at 2:42 am #

    Freeman, you dont have 1/10 the balls Michael Moore has. He brings to light the things that are wrong with our country and you critisize him for it. Like most people the memory is short and is easily clouded by more crazyness the media giants spit out. Ask yourself this: why did Osama target the Government and military but not the civilians?

  43. Anonymous May 6, 2011 at 2:47 am #

    It’s really the trend of out right callousness in these matters coming from the highest leaders of our land.
    It’s really quite bloodthirsty and casts a greater shadow over us all.

    I wouldn’t presume to compare the mythical Jesus to the mythical Osama, but if more people in the land of the free acted like Jesus, Osama’s cause might have never been born into reality. Of course that’s all hypothetical and nearly worthless. No consensus available or possible. What’s done is done, what ever gear that has been moved will move another.

    Osama’s “officially”dead, another click in the clock -tic tock!

  44. Anonymous May 6, 2011 at 2:47 am #

    It’s really the trend of out right callousness in these matters coming from the highest leaders of our land.
    It’s really quite bloodthirsty and casts a greater shadow over us all.

    I wouldn’t presume to compare the mythical Jesus to the mythical Osama, but if more people in the land of the free acted like Jesus, Osama’s cause might have never been born into reality. Of course that’s all hypothetical and nearly worthless. No consensus available or possible. What’s done is done, what ever gear that has been moved will move another.

    Osama’s “officially”dead, another click in the clock -tic tock!

  45. Tuna Ghost May 6, 2011 at 7:37 am #

    Agreed. Even if I couldn’t make that argument well enough to convince any court, I’m sure there are several people who can. I think it was prudent, too–I can’t imagine the security risks that would arise from holding him in the US. Or anywhere, really.

  46. Liam_McGonagle May 6, 2011 at 3:53 pm #

    Yeah, we’re dealing with two distinct lines of thought: The popular intepretation of religion, all religions, as utilities for social control, emphasizing conformity and gruesome, violent suppression of dissent. And the other interpretation, which I’ll call the “esoteric” here, for want of a better word, that seeks to understand the meaning of the story on its own terms and emphasizes internal consistency.

    I don’t think it’s any secret that the first stream is so overwhelmingly predominant in the public mind that we’ve all but forgotten that the second stream even exists. We live in a time where simplicity seems a virtue and accuracy a vice.

    Cynicism does seem to pay off in spades as well. But a further weird irony about it is that the people who truly embrace and employ cynicism, the Bushes, Bin Ladens and Obamas of this world, seem totally incapable of objectively appreciating it for what it really is; they always try to project an image of boundless optimism and bonhommie. It’s like only the half-depressed wiseasses of this world have the courage to come out and call it for what it is.

  47. Anonymous May 6, 2011 at 5:29 pm #

    Aaaah, there’s a good word “esoteric”.
    “…we’ve all but forgotten that the second stream even exists” sort of alludes to the meaning of the word “esoteric” doesn’t it? Things esoteric are understood by or meant for only a select few who have the interest and inside knowledge, connections etc. to gain benefit, control etc.
    I’m not sure the line between these ” two distinct lines of thought” can be seen very well. Sort of a “can’t see the forest through the trees” scenario.

    Esoteric wisdom comes from learning to be quiet and listen to ourselves and the world. From silence comes awareness. DING! -thats my cue to be quiet. I’m out…

  48. Anonymous May 6, 2011 at 5:56 pm #

    ” half-depressed wiseasses” huh? LOL

  49. ArgosyJones May 6, 2011 at 6:16 pm #

    I think the catholic church also classifies gluttony a sin.

  50. ArgosyJones May 6, 2011 at 6:16 pm #

    I think the catholic church also classifies gluttony a sin.

  51. superfluous May 7, 2011 at 3:54 am #

    death penalty in self-defense seems like a contradiction in terms to me.

    unless, of course, you mean killing (not death penalty) in self-
    defense.

    by that definition
    , osama killing SEAL
    s is morally sanctioned by the pope.

  52. superfluous May 7, 2011 at 3:55 am #

    hmm, why are my posts turning into haikus?

  53. Anonymous May 7, 2011 at 11:54 am #

    Ok…and your point is? At least he’s gone…bang!

  54. FoxyHuntress May 7, 2011 at 7:54 am #

    Ok…and your point is? At least he’s gone…bang!

  55. Mindy May 10, 2011 at 8:54 am #

    Where would we be without Fat Bastard to explain morality to us?

  56. Mindy May 10, 2011 at 12:54 pm #

    Where would we be without Fat Bastard to explain morality to us?

  57. Mindy May 10, 2011 at 12:57 pm #

    The people in the twin towers were military? Maybe you should go to work for Fat Bastard. Your “theories” make as little sense as his.

Leave a Reply