I am fully aware of Bin Ladens' position within the terrorist community and that he is wanted as the worlds number 1 criminal, but what actual evidence is there that can bring him to trail? Everytime I hear about anything that he was possibly involved in the words 'prime suspect', 'alledgedly', 'thought to have organised' etc... are used. I am all for bringing the correct people to justice for this act, but I don't see this as a reason for the intelligence community to settle old scores because he has managed to evade them for so long. Also if he is brought to trial which countrys law does it take place under? The USA seem pretty intent to take him back there, but I can't see it being a fair trial with all the speculation in the media.

------------------
"The old law about "an eye for an eye" leaves everybody blind."
--Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

If he does get convicted, he'll be sentenced to death I know it.

------------------
http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...o_ani_fire.gif
All your base are belong to us! How Are you gentlemen?


Co-owner of The Abyssal Pit
The Spaminyte Emperor
Official Demon/Villain of IW!
***********************
Fish? Welcome to your Doom!
**********************

If he is sentanced to death he will be heralded as a martyr by his followers, and maybe more than that, (a similar thing happened to Jesus). If he is not then someone had better find somewhere very safe to put him.

He ought to be tried in a completely independant country without christiam or muslim interests influencing either the trial or the judgement. China, maybe?

As for his actual guilt, we don't know. It seems all leads POINT at him but never get all the way there. This is a VERY tricky business indeed and I do not envy anyone who is trying to deal with it.

------------------
http://www.ranchoweb.com/images/bg2guy/bitchingcopy.gif

http://www.ranchoweb.com/images/bg2guy/fljotsdale.gif

[This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 09-19-2001).]

The way bin Laden's organisation works is he organises and funds things, but often the actual people who carry out actions are not actual members of his organisation. They may not have ever met him! That's not always the case of course, but it is one of the way it works. That could have happened in this case, - we don't know, because the intelligence agencies are obviously keeping the evidence pretty close to their chests at present (as one would expect). It does complicate things as far as 'hard evidence' is concerned. (They must have very good reason for implicating bin Laden though, I would have thought. This whole situation is far too serious to accuse someone if there is nothing linking them to the crime. Its unlikely in the extreme that they would go on nothing but supposition. It would wreck America's standing with the international community for ever, not to mention what it would stir up in the Middle East.

But yeah, it's a real problem. With the Lockerbie disaster, and also Milosovic, the trials were done in a neutral country, but I don't think America would go for that for a minute. This is really complicated. America and the international community together need to work out a way forward on this one, that will ensure that true justice is seen to be done. It's going to need a LOT of work, and careful thinking. We have to proceed so so carefully and mindfully now. There is so much at stake.

------------------
http://www.asnsoup.com/silvercheetahfinal.jpg

[This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 09-19-2001).]

Ouch. Kind of a dodgy comparison there... heh.
But I get your point... we need to try and understand just how different these people's minds work. What is punishment to us is eternal glorification for them. Simply assassinating him would possibly be the worst thing we can do. This incredible, horrible disregard of the value of a human life that these terrorists display is something that needs to be rooted out and destroyed.
I really see that as the core of the problem. To me it is unconcievable that there are human beings on this world to whom the life of another human being has no value at all! I used to think it was precisely THAT which made us human! http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/frown.gif


EDIT: aaaaaaargh quoting function http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...es/biggrin.gif
------------------
Melusine, Sultry Elflet, High Queen of Fluffies, Archbabe of the OHF, LH and HADB
http://www.angelfire.com/anime2/memnoch/mel1.gif
Your voice is ambrosia
Amy Brown Fantasy Art

[This message has been edited by Melusine (edited 09-19-2001).]

Well, remember O.J Simpson? There was STILL tons of evidence, yet he walked.. yet EVERYONE knew he did it.. I don't know what we will do, but we DO need to watch out how we do it..


------------------
Ziroc™
Ironworks Webmaster
www.tgeweb.com/ironworks

http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...miles/hero.gif

The great difficulty with fighting bin Laden is that it's very difficult to wage war on an idea. The Western world tried it with communism for over 50 years and even then it took communism to spectacularly implode - it was not due primarily to any military action on the West's part (although some would argue that the West engaged the Warsaw pact in an arms race that the communists could not win).

Here's an article that appeared in the Sydney Daily Telegraph today.

<font color="silver">
THE first question George W. Bush should ask as he prepares his nation for war – with Australia's blank cheque in his pocket – is: "Is it winnable?"

Before he starts, he must know how he wants it to end, unlike his father, who let Saddam Hussein off the hook after the Gulf War.

If he has in his sights things which he can blow up – people, buildings, bunkers, rocket launchers, missiles, tanks, ships or whatever – the answer is probably "Yes", for the military might of the US and its allies, and their technologies of war, are unmatched.

But if George Bush's war is aimed at expunging from the Earth an idea, then the answer is "No". The war cannot succeed.

When we are hurt, the most natural instinct of all is to lash out; to fight; to deliver retribution. But there are no guarantees that striking, either first or in retaliation, will rid the Earth of the ideological drive of the rogue Muslim fundamentalists led by the No 1 twin towers suspect, Osama bin Laden.

Sure, they might corner bin Laden in one of his boltholes among the mountains of Afghanistan and subject him to (as US Vice-President Dick Cheney might say in the parlance of his predicted dirty war) "extreme prejudice". They might lob missiles into the hearts of the schools and training camps bin Laden allegedly supports in a dozen countries other than Afghanistan.

However, bombs and missiles will not pierce the armour of the minds of bin Laden's followers who see the fundamentalist struggle with the West as a jihad, or holy war. We might get him, but chances are, we will not stamp out the ideas he stands for.

As we consider the world's response to the US atrocities, it is important to remember that nothing happens without a reason. We must ask why there is such hatred against the US? What has been its cause? Can those causes be addressed with bombs, missiles, war and more loss of life? And, if not, how should those causes be contained, if not eradicated?

Osama bin Laden was trained in his deadly craft by the American CIA. He led one of the many tribes which made up the mujahadeen, the so-called "freedom fighters" who resisted and ultimately defeated the Russians in Afghanistan after a 10-year struggle through the 1980s.

Bin Laden's motive for opposing the Russians was the same as his later opposition to the US – he saw it was a Western country with no right to a presence in the holy lands of Islam.

Robert Fisk, the respected Middle Eastern correspondent for The Independent newspaper in London, interviewed bin Laden in his mountain hideout about five years ago. He said bin Laden demanded: the US must leave the Gulf; America must stop all sanctions against the Iraqi people; America must stop using Israel to oppress Palestinians.

"It was his constant theme, untouched by doubt or the real complexities of the Middle East," Fisk reported. "He was not fighting an anti-colonial war, but a religious one."

According to those who understand bin Laden and have read his speeches and writings closely, that is exactly what he wants. He believes the ineffectiveness of previous US responses to his terrorist activities has shown weakness, and he believes he can beat the West.

He wants rockets, smart bombs, missiles and the horrors of war descending on Islamic countries to radicalise the moderates and supply him with a billion soldiers willing to fight a holy war because they figure they have nothing left to lose.

The point about a war of this scale is not who would win or how long it would take, but what it would cost in material, lives, national unity and international cohesion.

I do not know how the fight against terrorism should be waged. Obviously, we should urgently upgrade security on aircraft and at airports, and the travelling public has to cop the disruption. Obviously, we need to upgrade intelligence gathering.

Equally obviously, we must not blindly stumble down a road to a war of Christians and the rest against Muslims.

The world has to pray that President Bush and his advisers are smarter than their predecessors who have blundered into previously unwinnable conflicts such as Vietnam.

They have the backing of the world to rid us the scourge of terrorism, but they cannot afford to play bin Laden's game.
</font>


------------------
http://www.angelfire.com/anime2/memnoch/memnochsig.gif http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/hero2.gif

[This message has been edited by Memnoch (edited 09-19-2001).]

Well aside from admitting on CNN that all he does is finance and train the terrorists, in the american courts of justice that makes him guilty of aiding and abetting at the least. In murder cases he would be an accessory to the crime. Just my 2 cents.


------------------
Disintigration is easy, If you really want to impress me, ReIntegrate it.

I didn't mean people to take the comparison too far, there are many other martyrs to many other causes I just felt that this was one most people would be able to relate with. There are some major differences between the 2, but I believe it is possible for their followers to see them in a similar way; both 'campaigning' for what they believe is a just cause. I don't mean to start a huge moral argument here so I'll finish by saying I don't support Bin Laden methods at , but I can see his where some of his arguments come from. I'm not a Christian either (although I do believe Jesus existed), but I do try to live by what are seen as Christian principles.

I agree with the assasinating/executing him, no matter how many lives he <u>may</u> have taken you would still be sinking to his level by killing him. There certainly are no easy solutions


Memnoch; A lot of that falls in with what I was thinking - kind of the unstopable force hitting the immovable object. The problem is a lot of the world seems to be 'baying for blood' (? - do I mean that), which to me seems the wrong path to follow (see quote below). At the moment it all seems like a huge game of poker, where the stakes are the highest possible and no one whats to call the hand yet. (Oh dear, another dodgy comparison)


------------------
"The old law about "an eye for an eye" leaves everybody blind."
--Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

[This message has been edited by Staralfur (edited 09-19-2001).]