See for yourself:
http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/ne.../11/wbin11.xml

If that link doesn't work, try clicking here:
CLICK HERE

[ 11-11-2001: Message edited by: Ziroc ]</p>

This does not really surprise me any.
I mean, they were saying there was no positive proof of his guilt when denying it in the first days afterward...using the American policy of assumed innocent until proven guilty against us in regard to our retalitory actions.
Positive proof must have been uncovered, or he would no doubt still be claiming his innocence in all this.
I just hope this article justifies some of the stronger views of IW members who stand fast for military units going in and taking the Al-Quaeda apart and allows those who are vehemently opposing it to see that action has to be taken and it has to be strong or something like this can and will happen again and not necessarily on U.S. soil.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Moni:
This does not really surprise me any.
I mean, they were saying there was no positive proof of his guilt when denying it in the first days afterward...using the American policy of assumed innocent until proven guilty against us in regard to our retalitory actions.
Positive proof must have been uncovered, or he would no doubt still be claiming his innocence in all this.
I just hope this article justifies some of the stronger views of IW members who stand fast for military units going in and taking the Al-Quaeda apart and allows those who are vehemently opposing it to see that action has to be taken and it has to be strong or something like this can and will happen again and not necessarily on U.S. soil.<hr></blockquote>

I don't think people who are anti bombing in Afghanistan are anti solely because up until now there hasn't been 100% proof of guilt. As you are no doubt aware, the reasons are many. I won't go into them here because it's all been said elsewhere, many times.

Thanks Ziroc,

This is most interesting. It's the first time that Al-Queda (at least that I'm aware of) took responsibility for an attack. Now, even this doesn't justify the bombing of Afghanistan. I'm not against the bombing because we didn't have proof of his involvement but rather because it's a dumb and stupid strategic move that is actually detrimental to our civilisation's best interests. Should he (Bin) be killed... of course he should. I don't think that many would disagree with that.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


I don't think people who are anti bombing in Afghanistan are anti solely because up until now there hasn't been 100% proof of guilt. As you are no doubt aware, the reasons are many. I won't go into them here because it's all been said elsewhere, many times.<hr></blockquote>

I am well aware and you are right, they need not be covered again in this thread.
I was merely saying that people might now actually consider the (very real) potential of something like 9-11 happening in their own front yard and ponder what they think should be done to effectively stop the Al-Quaeda and other terrorist groups who pull acts (like using thousands of innocent people as ammuntion and targets) off in the name of religion and economics.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Moni:
This does not really surprise me any.
I mean, they were saying there was no positive proof of his guilt when denying it in the first days afterward...using the American policy of assumed innocent until proven guilty against us in regard to our retalitory actions.
Positive proof must have been uncovered, or he would no doubt still be claiming his innocence in all this.
I just hope this article justifies some of the stronger views of IW members who stand fast for military units going in and taking the Al-Quaeda apart and allows those who are vehemently opposing it to see that action has to be taken and it has to be strong or something like this can and will happen again and not necessarily on U.S. soil.<hr></blockquote>

Well said Moni.

Thanks for posting Ziroc.

The whole scenario greives me and makes me sick. I have never had any illusions that humanity are able to avoid war or conflict. There is so much conflict within one person, let alone two, and let alone nations.

War is the evil here. Hatred and loathing are vile.

These are some of the many reasons I turn to Jesus. An acceptance of my own, and my species own inability to attain perfection.

I see our failings as necessary in the greater scheme, as a means of knowing more positivity. Knowing death, you appreciate life.

But this view is not always easy in the face of events such as these. However, as I maintained through the darkest days of my marriage disintegration, when crisis of faith and suicidal tendancies threatened - I believe totally that there is more positive in this world, in this life than negative. Every second is a gift. Every breath a wonderfully positive experience, so much so that we have to normalise the intensity of all the good stuff in our lives that we often only notice on their departure.

This too will pass. Like all wars, efforts will be exhausted, resources drained, ideologies tested.

I pray that it will pass into a period of greater peace. That this is the Chemotherapy of the cancer that is terrorism.

Be safe guys. Be safe and God bless you.

Hugh

Well said Yorrick.

It dosent surprise me at all either. I was pretty sure that he was the one behind it all to start with.

so, the moron finally admit he did it... all the better then

Seems that old bin is telling different stories! Here he says that he had nothing to do with the September 11th attack:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapc...tsc/index.html

Doesn't really matter..I guess.

Well, it does matter, if you ask me.. I mean, blaming the wrong guy can turn out into a disaster.. Not saying that Bin Laden didn't do it, but making a mistake like this, well.. it's pretty bad.. :(