PDA

View Full Version : Pakistani General Gul: OBL's body should have been displayed at ground zero!




jmdrake
05-02-2011, 11:01 AM
I don't have a link yet, but I just heard this on Alex Jones. So much for the "We had to dump it into the sea to please the Muslim world" argument.

Jeremy
05-02-2011, 11:04 AM
One guy from Pakistan is suddenly the pope of Islam?

Aratus
05-02-2011, 11:06 AM
they claim there are a slew of photos and of course RECENT dna samples.
is there something about the remains in and of the state of age and decay
that perhaps for politeness sake the burial at sea is more appropiate all the
way around? lets assume it is either him or close kin, and that despite a
head wound the man was easy rather than difficult to identify. there has been
speculation about the levels of health + illness he had let alone bodily injuries.

Brian4Liberty
05-02-2011, 11:06 AM
One guy from Pakistan is suddenly the pope of Islam?

It appears he represents the Barbarian wing... ;)

Original_Intent
05-02-2011, 11:07 AM
Yeah, the Muslim world isn't going to be upset with us for killing the guy, just so long as we dispose of the body properly.

/facepalm

and 95% of the U.S. populace will swallow hook, line and sinker

/double facepalm

jclay2
05-02-2011, 11:08 AM
It appears he represents the Barbarian wing... ;)

Just heard this as well on AJ. I think the thing we can all agree on is that this "burial at sea" cover up is complete bull.

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 11:09 AM
One guy from Pakistan is suddenly the pope of Islam?

I'm sorry. Barack Obama said burial at sea is the proper way, and despite the fact that it's already been shown that's against Islamic law, you're going to believe Obama. :rolleyes: Really, what's Obama's expertise on Islam? Obama's a Hawaiian born Christian right?

RM918
05-02-2011, 11:18 AM
Crucified on the national mall, then head on a pike at Ground Zero. Or maybe drawn and quartered!

RyanRSheets
05-02-2011, 11:20 AM
I'm okay with the burial at sea, but the absence of any independently-verified evidence is absolutely unacceptable. His corpse should have been treated with decency just like any other corpse. Displaying his corpse at Ground Zero would be disgustingly barbaric.

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 11:23 AM
I'm okay with the burial at sea, but the absence of any independently-verified evidence is absolutely unacceptable. His corpse should have been treated with decency just like any other corpse. Displaying his corpse at Ground Zero would be disgustingly barbaric.

The point is that we didn't need to bury Osama and sea in order to "protect Muslim sensibilities".

Freedom 4 all
05-02-2011, 11:26 AM
I'm sure the neocons would be right behind him, if we actually killed him/had the body.

doodle
05-02-2011, 11:38 AM
One guy from Pakistan is suddenly the pope of Islam?

He's not just any guy though, former chief of powerful ISI who helped US/CIA wage Afghan Jihad against Russian infidels in Afghanistan couple of decades ago. Although, lately there has been some split between him and US.

Had seen a poll of young people from there earlier most of whom believed OBL to be a CIA creation and didn't care for him.

Jeremy
05-02-2011, 11:39 AM
I'm sorry. Barack Obama said burial at sea is the proper way, and despite the fact that it's already been shown that's against Islamic law, you're going to believe Obama. :rolleyes: Really, what's Obama's expertise on Islam? Obama's a Hawaiian born Christian right?

I read that thread and it said you CAN do a burial at sea.

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 11:44 AM
I read that thread and it said you CAN do a burial at sea.

You can only bury at sea if you're worried about the body decaying (we have refrigeration now) or you're worried about an "enemy" digging up the body and cutting off the nose and ears. Since were are the "enemy" in this case all we'd have to do is promise not to cut off the nose and ears.

See:
623. * If a person dies on a ship and if there is no fear of the decay of the dead body and if there is no problem in retaining it for sometime on the ship, it should be kept on it and buried in the ground after reaching the land. Otherwise, after giving Ghusl, Hunut, Kafan and Namaz-e-Mayyit it should be lowered into the sea in a vessel of clay or with a weight tied to its feet. And as far as possible it should not be lowered at a point where it is eaten up immediately by the sea predators.

624. If it is feared that an enemy may dig up the grave and exhume the dead body and amputate its ears or nose or other limbs, it should be lowered into sea, if possible, as stated in the foregoing rule.

pcosmar
05-02-2011, 11:44 AM
Crucified on the national mall, then head on a pike at Ground Zero. Or maybe drawn and quartered!

Shouldn't there be a mock trial first?
:rolleyes:

at least a show of one ?

doodle
05-02-2011, 11:47 AM
Shouldn't there be a mock trial first?
:rolleyes:

at least a show of one ?

So how come Saddam got a trial but OBL didn't.

Jeremy
05-02-2011, 11:49 AM
You can only bury at sea if you're worried about the body decaying (we have refrigeration now) or you're worried about an "enemy" digging up the body and cutting off the nose and ears. Since were are the "enemy" in this case all we'd have to do is promise not to cut off the nose and ears.

See:
623. * If a person dies on a ship and if there is no fear of the decay of the dead body and if there is no problem in retaining it for sometime on the ship, it should be kept on it and buried in the ground after reaching the land. Otherwise, after giving Ghusl, Hunut, Kafan and Namaz-e-Mayyit it should be lowered into the sea in a vessel of clay or with a weight tied to its feet. And as far as possible it should not be lowered at a point where it is eaten up immediately by the sea predators.

624. If it is feared that an enemy may dig up the grave and exhume the dead body and amputate its ears or nose or other limbs, it should be lowered into sea, if possible, as stated in the foregoing rule.


So just say you're worried an American will dig it up (which is actually possible) and it's okay.



So how come Saddam got a trial but OBL didn't.
Because OBL didn't surrender and was killed while resisting.

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 11:54 AM
So just say you're worried an American will dig it up (which is actually possible) and it's okay.

BS. If that was your concern you could just turn the body over to the Saudis after he's body was confirmed to be OBL. Further Muslim scholars have already come out and said the burial at sea is unacceptable. That's the closest you're going to get to a "Muslim pope". Using Islam as an excuse for destruction of evidence in this case is just lame.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/international/middle_east/view/20110502islamic_scholars_criticize_bin_ladens_sea_ burial/srvc=home&position=recent

devil21
05-02-2011, 01:20 PM
Because OBL didn't surrender and was killed while resisting.

It's either put your hands up or just get shot in the head? I really can't imagine that they weren't directed to capture him alive if at all possible!

Jeremy
05-02-2011, 01:24 PM
It's either put your hands up or just get shot in the head? I really can't imagine that they weren't directed to capture him alive if at all possible!
Because after a decade of trying to capture or kill him, after he escapes multiple times, they're going to be extra cautious about not killing him?

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 01:53 PM
Because after a decade of trying to capture or kill him, after he escapes multiple times, they're going to be extra cautious about not killing him?

They weren't just told to "not be extra cautious about not killing him". They were ordered to kill him. On the one hand I don't have a problem with that. On the other it means the intelligence value of the target was pretty much ignored.

low preference guy
05-02-2011, 02:03 PM
They were ordered to kill him.

Didn't he die 10 years ago?

devil21
05-02-2011, 02:36 PM
Because after a decade of trying to capture or kill him, after he escapes multiple times, they're going to be extra cautious about not killing him?

It's really no different than Saddam's capture. Saddam had a gun, yet he wasn't killed. He was captured alive to be paraded in front of the cameras and publicly executed. Im really not understanding why OBL would have been treated any differently. These gov't sources say they knew where he's been hiding since last year! The other top AQ leadership has also been captured alive and paraded in front of cameras and deposited at Gitmo and Bagram, etc. Why was OBL allegedly treated differently than every other boogieman?

tropicangela
05-02-2011, 03:37 PM
These gov't sources say they knew where he's been hiding since last year!

source please?

jmdrake
05-02-2011, 03:47 PM
Didn't he die 10 years ago?

I don't know. Did he? Yeah that was reported. But since you apparently believe only "official" reports he was "officially" alive until yesterday. But if you're going with the "official" report, you shouldn't note that the "official" report is that it was a kill order and not a "capture if you can" order.