h1

Judge Jury and Executioner – The American Murder of Osama Bin Laden

May 7, 2011

By Saiful Islam

We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole…”

Noam Chomsky’s Reaction to the Osama Bin Laden’s Death

AP PhotosDuring WWII the Jews were gassed and massacred on a huge scale; a genocide no-less.  The perpetrators of these crimes were brought to the now famous Nuremburg trials to face justice.  Later we saw the atrocities and genocide in Bosnia as the world looked on.  Having read parts of the incredibly long judgement some of the crimes are stomach-churningly revolting. Foetus’ were practically ripped out of mother’s wombs and stomped on by the Christian Serbs. Suckling babies were stomped on before the eyes of their wavering parents and mothers repetitively gang-raped before their husbands and children. And these were not one-off events; this was systematic throughout the Serb forces.

Tadic, a Christian Serb conducted ethnic cleansing of Muslims in his home-town and later became a leader. He was caught and then tried at the Hague.  A criminal he was indeed, but in order to be convicted of the various crimes against humanity he perpetrated he had to satisfy a burden of proof.  It is remarkable analysing the verdict of his hearing.  Out of the thirty-one counts, Tadic was found to be not guilty of twenty counts and guilty of eleven, which were arguably comparatively less severe in nature in some instances.

What is the purpose of relating the above?  The point is to highlight the fact that the above acts were far worse than what Osama bin Laden had ever purported to have done, yet he was not given the opportunity of a fair trial at the Hague or the International Criminal Court. Obama became the judge, jury and executioner on the spot and murdered him without an opportunity for him to defend himself.  Clearly these are the “liberties” the American government wishes to defend through the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan:  the right to kill anyone in the world.  At least we now know where Israel gets its assassination ideas from.

It would be interesting to see evidence directing atrocities around the world to Bin Laden.  One thing is a “link” or suspicion and another is hard evidence proving beyond reasonable doubt that Bin Laden was a criminal.  As for the 9/11 incident, as is so blatantly being propagated around the world, Bin Laden was behind the attacks yet, as we shall later see, all his statements are tantamount to a negation of responsibility for 9/11.

Further, he was unarmed, as we have come to know several story changes later. Surely it would not have been too difficult for the “brave” team of Navy Seals to tranquilise him and take him.  Surely it would have been more beneficial for the CIA terrorist network to extract and utilise intel from the man whilst he was alive rather than having to trawl through hard discs and papers over a dead body?  To shoot him unarmed goes against natural justice, the rules of war, common sense and the national security interests of the US yet he was, supposedly, shot. Brave indeed.

A Question of Legality

Interestingly, the legality of the killing is now starting to be questioned .  One report states,

“Like Mr Ferencz, British law professor Philippe Sands QC says it is impossible to make a definitive legal judgement without knowing precisely what happened. But he says the case for the raid’s legality has been weakened.

“The question to ask is: were the measures taken in the actual situation that pertained reasonable and proportionate given the circumstances in which the [Navy Seals] found themselves?” he told the BBC. “The facts for Bin Laden don’t appear to easily meet that standard.”

Further, the operation took place on a sovereign state without its permission – illegal under International law, a violation of territorial integrity of Pakistan (as understood by the UN Charter (Article 2.(4)) and can be perceived as an act of war.  Again this has been picked up by recent reports,

“As a matter of international law, one country is not free to enter another country apparently without the authorisation of that country, and intervene, whether to kidnap or kill a national of a third state,” Mr Sands said.”

And,

“The UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, and the special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Martin Scheinin, have raised a similar concern.

“In certain exceptional cases, use of deadly force may be permissible as a measure of last resort… including in operations against terrorists,” they said in statement.

“However, the norm should be that terrorists be dealt with as criminals, through legal processes of arrest, trial and judicially decided punishment,” they added.

The perpetrators of the Holocaust and the Bosnia genocide were trialled in a criminal court. Bin Laden was a suspect NOT a convict – he had no trial, no fair hearing and was shot, unarmed in front of his 12 year-old daughter. Such is the way of the Western justice.

The next time Obama lectures Muslims about rights, liberties and especially the “equal administration of justice”, perhaps he should contemplate on his own application of these principles.  And let’s not even begin to bring in the Ramon Davis fiasco or the drone attacks on Pakistan into this discussion.

Why was he shot?

If he was shot, it was for the simple reason that there was little evidence to convict the man.  Just like Tadic was tried and was acquitted of several counts of crimes against humanity, it would have been difficult to convict Bin Laden.  He denied being behind the September the 11th atrocity and explicitly stated that,

“I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam.”

It is interesting to note, the reason of the invasion and warring in Afghanistan was because the Taliban would not surrender Bin Laden.  However, most commentators fail to acknowledge the very legitimate response of the Taliban – provide the evidence.  This request was made several times but no evidence has been provided to this day and probably never will be.

Yet the US narrative remains that Bin Laden was the definitive man behind 9/11 and was hence a legitimate target despite the FBI wanted page not mentioning 9/11 in the list of allegations.

Concluding Remarks

Was he murdered? Or is he still roaming the Tora Bora mountains?  We will never know, especially as now the one letter-different-from-Osama Obama has said he will not be issuing the photos, but assures everyone repeatedly, and rather nervously, just like a child assuring his parents that he indeed didn’t write on the wallpaper of the house, that he is, sure enough dead. Just like Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Just like Guantanamo Bay was supposed to have shut down by now. Just like there was meant to be a reduction in the number of killers in Iraq and Afghanistan by 2010 but instead we see an increase in the ranks of the neo-crusaders.

I am no conspiracy theorist, but when I see a pattern of lies, and the involvement of the notoriously unethical torturing and killing squad otherwise known as the CIA, not to mention the shape-shifting narrative of the events, then I see an agenda behind the hocus pocus.  Recession, flailing support, dragging wars – something needs to give in order to divert the attention of the increasingly restless public. Why not kill Bin Laden – he is the arch nemesis of the war on Islam – I mean the war on terror – and the population of over 300 million is absolutely scared to death of the thin 6 footer – it’ll surely capture their minds, just like a good movie does in a cinema. And sure enough the movie played out, with almost comical images of Obama and his co-conspirators being released of the moments Bin Laden was being killed.  The desired, intended results for Obama have quite clearly manifested: the public now conveniently distracted and his popularity has increased.

The Western world rejoiced at the killing of the “evil man” like fanatics not questioning the legality of the action taken place or the agenda behind such an announcement.  Frankly, the various televised American celebrations of the killing were disgusting.  How can you celebrate killing someone when you condemn others for doing the same?  Even the widow of a Royal Marine killed in Afghanistan had enough foresight to condemn the brainless celebrations.

There is no such thing as justice for a Muslim.  The blood of Muslims is too cheap.  And Muslims have no one but themselves to blame.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Advice to Muslims on the supposed death of Osama bin Laden.

ISSM and its affliates condemn the despicable acts of terrorism perpetrated by all, including the United States of America.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: