It will be very interesting to see and hear what the next few months are going to be like now that he has been taken out.

The implications of what has happened today may impact all of us in ways we have never thought about before.

This is huge on so many levels. You think the royal wedding caused a stir... Get ready for more... Potentially.

One of the first thoughts that passed through my mind was "Ok...well, he's gone, but I wonder what is followers will do?"

Scary thoughts.

One can only hope that with him out of the way there will be room for a voice of moderation to be heard.

I'm sure that there are more whacko's where he came from......and quite a few right here in California!

Quote from True Lies:

MALIK
Come on, child. Give me the key.
(smiling)
Don't you want to live? I give
you my word.

DANA
No way you whacko.

Meh, he's been dead for almost 10 years now, this is simply another complete piece of fiction from the usual lying suspects.
Much like the Jessica Lynch story or Pat Tillman story, both of which were proved to be complete fabrications by the usual lying military/industrial/intelligence psychopaths.
Bin Ladin had Marfan's disease and was suffering from kidney failure in 2001. He was visited in the American hospital in Dubai by an American CIA agent just a few months before 911 where he was being treated for kidney failure. Anybody who truly thinks that he's been able to avoid the American military (who could find a cockroach in a jungle) for all these years while constantly undergoing kidney dialysis really needs to get a grip on reality.
There's been many people in the know who have claimed over the years that Bin Ladin died at the end of 2001. These people include Benazir Bhutto, Madeline Albright,Oliver North amongst many others in government. There was even reports of his death in several Pakistani papers back then, of course none of this was reported in the West. The military/intelligence goons have been keeping Bin Ladin "alive" as the scary boogey man all these years simply in order to continue to sell the completely contrived "war on terror".
They'll release the "picture" of a shot Bin Ladin at about the same time they release the photos of whatever it was that hit the Pentagon. It ain't gonna happen.
It's all theatre.

Well spoken Sparky..
Heres one, compare and contrast what real wreckage looks like by googling "Lockerbie" for some reason, this wreckage never appeared at the site of the pentagon.
There is without doubt so much to be "gained" (in their minds) for a government to constantly keep its population living "in fear" Fear of Weapons of mass destruction" (Tony Blair is still unrepentent and claims they will still be found in Iraq! yeh righty oh then tony) Fear of Biohazard, fear of global warming, fear of a hole in the ozone layer, fear of bird flu, fear of a cosmic event such as a catastrophic asteroid strike. Fear fear and more fear, a pedophile on every corner, dont let your kids play out now will you, fear of being shot or raped walking out of your front door, dont go out, stay inside and be "safe". 1984 Orwellian style by default.

Keep folk in fear and you keep them supressed,they are in effect "your zombies"
As far as Terror goes, One thing at a time,
Lets take genocide. over 60 million indigenous "first nation " slaughtered, Apache, Sioux, Blackfoot,Cheyenne, Need I go on?
Torture; Guantanamo Bay....
Bio weapons:... Agent orange and Napalm in Vietnam.
And Nuclear weapons;, the only country that has ever used them, and not just once but twice, they were diferent types of bomb, so both needed to be tested.....
And who did all of the above, The good old Government of the USA....
The real "Terrorist" here might not be too hard to spot.
There is a glimmer of hope; even the Roman empire fell,
and in financial terms,the USA has had its time.

I can't really comment on any of the things that have been said on this thead because, well, many of them don't seem to be coherent. But the above point is factually incorrect and, even though it might not be relevant, facts are important.

Tony Blair stopped claiming that 'weapons of mass destruction' were to be found in Iraq at least as long ago as 2004. That's seven years ago. In fact, he made a speech to the 2004 Labour Party Conference in which he apologised for being too willing to believe that such weapons would be found.

"Too willing to believe" is not the same as admitting he was wrong and they will not be found. He has never admitted to being wrong or mistaken.
The "coherence" in the thread is this.
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of using nuclear weapons,
regardless of the Rights and wrongs of using bio weapons,
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of torture (guantanamo)
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of genocide (first nation)

You cannot do these things and then say on the world stage, we have done these things, You cant. ie we have nuclear weapons you cant. etc because that is hypocrisy.

The folk of the USA are in my opinion amongst some of the Kindest, most caring, charitable folk in the world.

Their government however, is dangerous and callous, forcing it's "Brand" of democracy upon the world. It's our way or no way. You are either with us or against us.
This in itself is the opposite to democracy.
True democracy recognises the rights of different folk to have different ways.

As an example, an innocent unarmed person in Pakistan was suddenly shot dead, their life taken away for no crime.
This was allegedly Bin Ladens son, Murdered by the USA government. Why? what had he done.
Even the most hideous of Natzis were afforded due process, the right of a trial, and many of them killed far more people than BIn laden was alleged to have done.

Stomping into foreiegn countries, committing murder and being judge and jury but with no trial is a dangerous prescedent.

Oh, for Heaven's sake ....

Here is a direct quote from Mr Blair's submission to the Butler enquiry in 2004.



This information is on public record, for anybody who actually takes the trouble to find it and read it. There could hardly be a clearer admission that he was mistaken.

As I said, I don't want to get into a discussion about politics, but if you make a strong statement that contains a factual error, I feel I have to point it out so that others are not misled.

"But I have to except" is again not the same as "I was wrong" "I was misinformed by the USA gov" "I am so sorry for taking this country to a war on a false premise"
"And in my mistaken stupidity I misled the house"
"I apologise for my mistake to the British electorate/public and to the wifes, children , mothers and fathers of those poor souls who are not alive today due to my arrogance"
"I am so sorry for spending millions of pounds of taxpayers money for nothing save making the world a much more dangerous place"


Culpability? Apology? He should be charged with war crimes.

I suspect we are using the word 'wrong' differently. I'm pretty sure the Mr Blair admitted to being factually wrong. Whether he did, or ever will, agree that his actions were _ethically_ wrong is a different matter.

But what you actually wrote earlier was:



and that suggests to me that you were claiming that he is persisting in making a _factually_ incorrect claim. His own words do no support such an interpretation.