a) even a broken watch is accurate twice a day, though I usually view fox commentaries to be slanted and near ridiculous, it doesn't mean their information is always false

b)I agree, that picture looks an AWFUL lot like pictures I have seen of Bin Laden, but Im not sure if it is photoshopped or not

c) I am in agreement that it matters little what type of 'trial' occurs so long as the law is followed and justice is served on all sides. I also think , even though 9/11 was an act of terrible consequence, no war was actually declared upon us (not by legal definition anyhow, which requires a nation to declare war upon a nation). I think we needed to respond but not in the manner which we did.

d) As far as Daniel Pearl, we have to disagree on this. I do believe it was a real beheading and I think that is an awful way to die. Yes, we must be careful where we tread but if someone were to walk in a high crime area and be killed, it would still be a crime in the eyes of the law. That being said, death is death and everyone is mourned by someone. We are not without responsibility for the deaths of many people in our own history and whether someone dies headless or gassed, or burned, or so disassembled that the parts cant even be put back together, or have ann open casket,,,,HOWEVER horrible way people die during 'national arguments' , someone is mourning them and it is unfortunate whenever they are people who had nothing to do with the argument in the first place.

ummm..no i am not wrong about the picture. the picture is osama bin laden not KSM..if you don't believe me google it

Yeah, I browsed through several photos of Khalid, and you are right, that pic looks nothing like him but ALOT like Osama

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/09/khalid-sheikh-mohammed-photos


the above.. is a link that has the KSM 2003 photo and the 2009 photo..

the article states that KSM's family released the new picture..

its not al jazeera or the pali telegraph, but...

Considering that the OP is completely invalid to any concern at all the pic being wrong would be of no consequence to who wrote it.

You have to be pretty arrogant and stupid not to believe a terrorist would behead anyone who is their enemy.They kill women and children on a daily basis so I find it hard to believe they would find beheading a Jew or a Christian from the United states or Israel or anyone else who gets in their way morally objectionable.

Pictures say a little but videos show a whole lot more.You can watch the beheading from start to finish and draw your own conclusion.Video is very gruesome so watch at own risk.


http://www.angelfire.com/ill/haiter/

There are gruesome videos of Americans doing awful things too. Makes no difference to this discussion nor the invalidity of the OP.

READ THE ORIGINAL POST.........I DO BELIEVE THE AP KNOWS MORE THAN YOU.

PICTURES OF OSAMA BIN LADEN:










THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO (2) MALES IS EXTREMELY OBVIOUS.

BUT...........WHAT REALLY DISTURBS ME IS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL ON THIS THREAD REFERS TO OSAMA BIN LADEN AS "OSAMA"................MAKES ONE WONDER IF THAT INDIVIDUAL IS CLOSELY RELATED IN SOME FORM OR FASHION TO BIN LADEN AS, IN GENERAL, PEOPLE ONLY REFER TO OTHER INDIVIDUALS BY THEIR FIRST NAME IF THEY ARE ON A SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR BASIS WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL...........

using first names in a thread where the full name is already mentioned is cause for distress?,,,,,,hmmmmm

these threads could stand to lighten up on times

You posted one correct photo of KSM..the second which may i add was taken after he was captured. You can clearly see the differences in the nose structure but more importantly, how could anyone grow a beard of that length and thickness in just a few years. The first is clearly that of Sheik bin Laden. btw if you're going to insinuate that just because i'm an arab muslim that i'm a terrorist go ahead and say my name instead of "someone on this thread".
thanks and peace

please provide your proof of this occurring on an everyday basis.

Had no idea what religious affiliation you were till now.....

ALL the pictures are accurate................like it or not......

You just do not want to believe the truth thrown right in your face....UNBELIEVABLE

But your attitude certainly does not surprise me..........so SAD....

Why do you defend the terrorists?

the same reason you support the terrorism of both america and israel, however i don't support terrorists, i support freedom fighters....and how is the truth thrown in my face? i told you facts. All but one of your pictures are that Osama Bin Laden but this debate's getting old and irrelevant to the topic.

That is an excerpt from wikipedia online. By that definition, anyone who is being tried as a terrorist, or for terrorism related issues, needs to be tried by a military tribunal, not a civilian court, as terrorism is directed towards non-combatants (non-military).

If I broke a civilian law while I was in the Army, I would be tried and punished through a civilian court. If I broke a military law, or did something that involved the military, then I would be tried and punished under UCMJ (Uniform Code of MILITARY Justice).

in regards to a non-American being tried in military tribunal or civilian court and receiving the same benefits as an American citizen, I disagree vehemently. Certain HUMAN rights, yes, but not AMERICAN rights.

You do not have to stand up and verbally declare war in order to declare war. Look back to Pearl Harbor. When japan attacked us, it was considered an act of war, even though they attacked PRIOR to verbally declaring war. This is but one example. Do you need someone to stand there and TELL you that they are going to hit you before they hit you, for it to be considered an assault?

Who effin' cares ... ? Time for him to die. Only after a 'fair trial', tho' - you know, like the one they gave to Daniel Perl ... if KSM is lookin' for 'sympathy', it's in the dictionary between 'shiiit' and 'syphilis' ...

then please explain to me why the soldier that raped a 14 year old iraqi and murdered her family in cold blood was tried in a civilian court and not a military court. Bush's explanation was..."he wasn't in the military when the charges were brought against him" so...it's ok to try criminals that are middle eastern in military courts but not US soldiers? Might i add...this guy got off for his crime.