What a strange mob we’ve become, we in the ‘Western world’. On holidays in Europe the past few weeks I found I myself with a few days to fill in and began to watch a bit too much Western TV coverage of the biggest story in roughly nine and a half years - the death of bin Laden.

Says here I'm dead. Image: AP

It got me down more with each passing hour. If the USA and its President thought to earn the world’s gratitude and praise for this astonishing operation, they must have been scratching their heads.

Let’s see, the cave dwelling, messianic mass murderer and his animal cronies declared war on America (and the rest of us in the ‘West’  while they were at it).  They did it formally, with an announcement on TV - and a press release for all I know.

They backed up the declaration, lest anyone think they were all talk, with ghastly, large scale, massacres of innocent men, women and children - in New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Bali and other populations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Those they didn’t strike, they successfully convinced that they might, so even in a backwater like Sydney we got to share in the paralysing fear for our skins and the safety of our own loved ones, going about their lives. 

So they weren’t kidding. They were waging war. It’s like we’ve all enjoyed the luxury of forgetting what that is. It’s war - bloody, brutal, killing and maiming war. If someone declares and commences to practise that on you, you can stand by and conduct a moral philosophy hypothetical about it on the BBC, or you can engage.

If you choose the former, you can be certain only that your people are going to receive 100 per cent of the brutality and that nothing will be done to inhibit much less disable those waging the war. So the war on your innocent people, will proceed apace indefinitely because there’s no rationality or real objective governing the attackers, just fathomless hatred.

There’s no logical end point bar universal adoption of Sharia law, the utter destruction of every human advance of the past 1,000 years and the deaths of most of us - along with our kids.

Yet in the wake of this astonishing defensive strike, it seems President Obama, far from deserving our thanks or admiration, has a great many questions to answer.  I’ve had the benefit of a great deal of the hand-wringing, questioning and moral high-ground occupation by everyone from a pompous formerly Australian London legal shill called Geoffrey Robertson, to the Archbishop of Canterbury (who, to be fair, may have been speaking mainly out of solidarity with religious zealots and bearded fools worldwide) to pretty much everyone on the BBC. It all made the Bishop ‘uncomfortable’. Conceivably less so than the feeling President Obama experienced and certainly less so than the target.

Fortunately all this holiday time has not been entirely wasted, for I have condensed all the breast-beating and mindlessly anti-American hectoring into a handy all-purpose response which I am happy to offer the President, his spokespeople or really any citizen or, in this particular scrap, friend of the USA.

“Just f*** right off. All of you. And shut up too.”

It seems to me that when you have facilities to hand such as Navy Seal Battalion 6 or whatever it is they are not officially acknowledged as being called, this response is completely open to you in reply to each and every idiot who demands more answers, more photos, more video, more evidence of what was obviously the most high-security, top secret operation undertaken in most our life-times. 

And to those questioning whether you shouldn’t, really, have gone the ‘read him his rights’, legal representation, counselling, multimillion dollar, five year celebrity trial and a jury of his sickening, murderous peers route.

People over here - at least those on TV - have lost all perspective. A BBC report I watched showed video ‘purported’ or ‘rumoured’ to be of the room in which old ObL has been sleeping, praying, impregnating his 20 something 7th wife he got as a gift from an admirer, like a lucky meat raffle prize,  and planning his next bloodbath of our innocents for the past five or six years. The reporter called it “his bedroom, or perhaps, his prison cell”.

I am not making this up. I haven’t taken a hallucinogenic drug since the 1980s, yet the Devil himself is coming through very much like a figure of sympathy in much of this reporting and commentary.

You have to conclude that these people would have raised the same concerns if there had been a fatal shooting at the arrest of Adolf Hitler. Or Hannibal Lecter. How much of a global, hate-driven murder cult do you need to establish before the Western ‘intelligentsia’ acknowledges that all the normal rules of engagement have been suspended? You know, until we make things safe again.

I personally abhor capital punishment. The state executing any citizen, no matter how criminal or deranged is, to me, sad, sickening, barbaric. Yet I once watched a grainy film of Red Army soldiers over-running a Nazi concentration camp, shoving those who had run it out in the yard at rifle-point, standing them on a small stool with some fast noose-work and, with palpable disgust, with revulsion, with hatred, kicking the stool away so they dangled twitching just inches from the ground and died badly. 

It’s hard to imagine anything more brutal or inhumane and even as I felt like I would throw up watching it, I thought ‘that’s about right’.  There’s limited work for barristers in it, I’ll grant you.

The world’s experience of Nazism shows us there is a measure of horror, criminality and sheer scale beyond which the niceties of due process, right to trial and even rule of law cease to be sensible or apt. It’s war, you see.

Bin Laden?

The spoiled, sick, son of a billionaire, who invented a novel, obscene way to squander daddy’s petro-fortune, more shockingly inhuman, degenerate and diseased than anything concocted in the worst excesses of Western mega-wealth turned on itself. Imagine Charles Manson with a heavily armed international army - armed both with modern weaponry and a genuinely held suicide fantasy of pathetic glory, adulation and eternal sexual gratification approved by God himself.

He conceived his very own twisted, murderous interpretation of one of the world’s great religions - a religion grounded in notions of devout observance, self-denial, charity and - here’s the thing - love. Just like the best parts of it’s nursery-mates Christianity and Judaism.

From these same antecedents and essential scripts, our man ObL and his gang construed a licence to murder children. Murder, burn or dismember me, you, anyone going about their business, going to work, taking care of our families.

Their preferred targets of public buildings and public transport say it all. It’s ordinary citizens they seek to slay and maim and terrify, not some imagined Western imperial elite that has gear like Navy Seals to deploy for protection and which would require a soldier’s courage to attack. These gutless vermin much prefer to bomb a bus with your mother on it or attack Afghani school girls who dare to hope for a basic education in 2011.

In announcing this strike back, President Obama told the world this is a death that should be welcomed by everyone who values peace and human dignity.  Like pretty much everything I’ve ever heard him say, I couldn’t express it better.

We have witnessed a breathtaking exercise of power - overwhelming, surgical, deadly force, bristling with warrior acumen and technological potency. Compare the available options in cost, risk, ‘co-lateral damage’  and plain old morality. The US gambled the lives of a few score elite troops who blew off a faulty helicopter worth, what?, $50 million?, in minutes when they had to. Close enough to zero innocent bystander harm.  The cancer removed by key-hole surgery.

Thirty two 2,000 pound laser guided bombs or a fleet of unmanned drones (on the Pentagon menu put before the President) might have done the trick just as well with none of the risk. How much of this quibbling would we be enduring now, given the context of Iraq and the Afghani killing fields?  The BBC would not be interviewing the neighbour over the road or demanding to know if the monster actually had his hand on an assault rifle when the house evaporated.

Compare the sheer courage required, by those abseiling down ropes in the dark and the political variety from those giving the ‘go’ order.

The force we witnessed was deployed - courageously - by a super-power. A super-power at war - under attack for a decade. As it happens it’s also a modern democracy, massively flawed though it may be.  Also the source of much of our finest musical, literary, dramatic, visual arts and cinematic culture.

Would these perpetual ‘well, America is, actually, a kind of great Satan’ chattering class moral philosophers have berated the armies liberating Europe in 1945 - Russian or American - with anxieties about their unseemly use of force? 

Force will always be used. We can count ourself blessed to live in an age when we got to see it used so potently, precisely and successfully by people so intelligent, educated, humane - and elected. People who somberly weighed their moral imperatives, gave free reign to their consciences and balanced all this with their heavy responsibility to act, to insert a scalpel, to remove a hideous tumour growing around the heart of humankind, nourished by and revelling in its blood.

Just personally, I don’t believe in God. But if I did, I would urge him, just now, to bless America. And a bit extra for President Obama, truly a leader for our times.

160 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Erick says:

      06:01am | 25/05/11

      Well said indeed!

      The greatest danger currently faced by Western civilisation is the moral corruption that is exuded by the intellectual classes. The hand-wringing over bin Laden is just the tip of the iceberg.

      Beneath all this is an underlying attitude that *we* are the bad guys of the world - which in turn fosters the idea that anyone who is our enemy must be one of the good guys. This is the result of decades of political indoctrination at all levels by leftists, determined to paint our society in the worst possible light.

      Those responsible are at best hoping their constant criticism will lead to improvement, but what it actually does is empower the worst dregs of humanity to harm the innocent. The smug, warm inner glow of the self-righteous is paid for in blood.

    • acotrel says:

      06:39am | 25/05/11

      ‘The greatest danger currently faced by Western civilisation is the moral corruption that is exuded by the intellectual classes.’

      That would have to be the most luddite statement I’ve seen in recent times.  I suggest the answers to the world’s problems lie in education!

    • paulW says:

      08:07am | 25/05/11

      @erick
      If Bin Laden had detonated a dirty bomb in a white city he would be painted as even worse. Yet that is what Coalition forces did by spraying tons of depleted uranium weapons around urban areas - for no apparent reason. just because they could and God was on their side. (not to mention the young soldiers that had to handle the munitions without any protection). Thousands of kids are now sentenced to a lifetime of deformity, disability in third world conditions or at the mercy of the tightarsed US Military veterans schemes etc. Gloat on.

      Narcissist versus the Narcissists. You are the moral winner Erick. Just as Bin Laden thinks he is by being martyred. You gave a tyrant exactly what he wanted and no doubt added to the list of freaks lining up for martyrdom. Gloat on.

      Society has more to fear from smug self-righteous bogans with pitchforks, than any fantasy-class that gets in the way of your psychopathic narcissism.

      Remind me next time to buy more Halliburton shares.

    • TChong says:

      08:23am | 25/05/11

      Agree acotrel.
      Erick old son, you do realise that attacking the “intellectuals” puts you in the same mindset as Pol Pot, and Stalin?, and every other murderous dictator, Right or Left .?
      But , in order to be fair, can you explain why you find educated people so frightening?
      I hope you dont really believe ‘ignorance is bliss’, do you?

    • Erick says:

      08:28am | 25/05/11

      @acotrel - not when “education” means indoctrination into self-loathing anti-Western propaganda. That is the problem, not the solution.

    • majority says:

      08:32am | 25/05/11

      Agree, like the standing ovation given to that idiot David Hicks at the Sydney Writers Festival

    • fml says:

      10:07am | 25/05/11

      Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight because education and introspection has done alot of bad in this world. Lets just call everyone pseudo-intellectuals and tell them they are too stupid to answer any questions so dont even bother!

      “The smug, warm inner glow of the self-righteous is paid for in blood.” Are you talking about yourself?

    • John says:

      10:16am | 25/05/11

      Utter rubbish, Osama Bin Laden didn’t hard wire WTC 1,2 and 7 with explosives. Anyone who believes that Osama Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks and that Al-Qaeda exists is an absolute mental inferior who lives in fictional reality’s. That includes you Erick, You only see half the picture but can’t see the other half because of you EGO.

    • andy says:

      10:23am | 25/05/11

      The greatest danger is in fact the overwrought response current conservatives have to any disagreement. I am in no way agreeing with any of the idiots who applaud Hicks and so on… but I also don’t think these people construe a huge threat, or even a mainstream view. If you are upset that our society allows fringe views, maybe you should move to a country more your style? There should be quite a few in the middle east who share your hatred for free speech and “intellectuals”.

    • james says:

      10:43am | 25/05/11

      @John

      Didn’t you already lose your 9/11 conspiracy theory argument the other week? The way I remember it you were unable to reply to any of the established facts pointed out that blew holes in your “explosives brought down the twin towers” theory. You say we live in fictional reality? Can you point out to me one single established fact that points to 9/11 being an inside job? Because I can point out many that proves that it was not. As your inane paranoid rants about CIA and marxist conspiracy theories demonstrate, you have no grounding in reality, no interest in objective rational analysis and a seriously impaired intellect.

    • Barry says:

      11:55am | 25/05/11

      @John
      Last time this argument occurred, I posted you several links explaining using “SCIENCE”(remember that word I tried to teach you), what had occurred.  Have you forgotten what I taught you so quickly!?  I also posted you a video that clearly shows the WTC 2 building collapse starting at the area, where the plane hit.  You can see the structural damage, which has occurred, due to the crash.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SSS0DDqfm0&feature=related
      The weight of the top half and inertia ensure that the only one to go is straight down.  Unless you have evidence, which is backed up strongly with something substantial, please be quiet.  Your ranting has gone on long enough, without you supplying any kind of reliable evidence.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:27pm | 25/05/11

      I would replace “intellectual classes” with “religious” and “Western civilization” with “Western culture”. I don’t see much intelligence in the ruling classes who, are mostly religious. The greatest threat to our civilization is peak oil.

    • John says:

      12:45pm | 25/05/11

      Barry says:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RzwmD8uB8g&feature=related

      simpleton view on the how the towers collapsed. Notice he talks how the trusses were pulled inward which caused THIK STEEL to bend and then to snap! cause a building to collapse, this guy also forgot about the inner core! How did that go! The pan cake theory was replaced with this one..insane…

    • Jdm says:

      07:14am | 25/05/11

      Why on earth would you wantt o bring him to trial? and give his cooky follwers a chance to do more damage trying to rescue him? you poor disillusioned man, he had no right to trial, all that would have gotten you was a telivised death sentence, a waste of time.

      People need to start backing themselves, the attitude of “we are the monsters here, we killed him in cold blood rah rah rah”, is silly. are you forgetting how many Osama, and others like him have killed? clearly.

    • acotrel says:

      08:00am | 25/05/11

      @JDM have a read up on the Nuremberg trials of the Nazis.  They effectively killed the ideology for a few years.  Even though there has been a resurgence in recent times, things like denying the holocaust, don’t hold water.  Those trials ended poisonous crap such as espoused by the British Eugenics Society, which involved killing off the weak, and the politically incorrect in the interests of a better society.  Bin Laden should have been given sufficient air time to expose his own idiocy.  His actions over 9/11 were indefensible, and the rhetoric can be demonstrated to be unacceptable to civilization,  in dozens of ways. I believe the west has missed an opportunity to cut the balls off Al Qaida!

    • Willie Mac says:

      08:12am | 25/05/11

      This is America we’re talking about. They execute their own citizens who have ordered murders, let alone declared enemies. This operation just delayed the inevitable, and avoided the delay and circus of a trial, and any possible rescue efforts. Capturing him served no purpose.

    • noguaranteeofsanity says:

      08:44am | 25/05/11

      If he was brought to trial and found guilty, his followers and others would then claim the trial was rigged.  But have you considered an even worse outcome?  What if he was brought to trial and found not-guilty due to lack of evidence?  As It would seem to me to be quite likely, given that most of his co-conspirators in the 9/11 attacks are dead, so cannot give evidence against him and given that the attack occured 10 years ago, I imagine it would be quite hard to find any eveidence, especially evidence you could actually use in a court of law, that he ordered or planned the attacks, despite his admissions of guilt in the past.  Basically a trial would be a huge risk and I would think that Osama walking free after a trial would not really be an acceptable outcome to anyone, but his own followers.

    • RyaN says:

      09:45am | 25/05/11

      @acotrel: ifs, buts, whatever, the murderous terrorist (and sounds like your hero) is dead. He deserved to die, get over it.

    • John says:

      10:24am | 25/05/11

      The difference between the NAZI’s and Al-Qaeda is that the NAZI’s had the support of 50 Million Germans. Al-Qaeda had the support the CIA, MI6, US government and the UK Government. Also the NAZI’s existed in reality, where Al-Qaeda didn’t exist in reality, but only in fictional sense. So esstional all that Al-Qaeda was, was just a fictional, fabricated enemy who were made to look like they were real using the creditability of the US government, intelligence agency’s and the media. There is more evidence of aliens then there is of al-qaeda.

    • Missy says:

      10:26am | 25/05/11

      @noguaranteeofsanity,

      Its hard to not find him guilty when he has already made admissions of guilt in multiple videos showing his face.

      Not to mention the evidence found by the assassins when they searched the place.

    • John says:

      10:42am | 25/05/11

      You people are talking about a fictional novel. The story feed into your easily manipulated brains. Where is the creditability of news media?, where is the creditability of Obama? The guy is a liar, the media are liars. It’s been a lie since day one. Why do you waste your entire lives discussing and thinking in a fictional reality. Thats whats happened with politics and the government, it has turned into a Hollywood movie.

    • stevem says:

      10:59am | 25/05/11

      The problem is that a trial would have taken years. In that time his followers would have a rallying point and constant publicity whipping them into a fervour. It would have given them a focus to recruit more members. It would have precipitated a series of attacks against the public and judicial system of the US.
      A trial would certainly have been correct from a legal point of view but the outcome was a certain guilt verdict, given his very public confessions. Killed in the heat of battle was certainly the most practical result.

    • marley says:

      11:30am | 25/05/11

      @John - so, you’re arguing that Al Qaeda had the support of the CIA, MI5, the American and British governments - but that at the same time it didn’t exist.  Brilliant.  I couldn’t come up with a theory as incoherent as that one in a month of Sundays.

    • John the Zombie says:

      11:43am | 25/05/11

      John, Let me ask you a question first, If AQ and Islamic terrorists are a fairy tale then what has been and is happening in India. Do not forget Kashmir is a part of India but since and including 1947 the Islamic terrorist have been attacking and killing innocent ppl in Kashmir.

      Now the second part sunshine. First of all the Taliban was not a creation of the US or Western countries and it is about time you notice the difference between the Mujahidin during the soviet invasion and Taliban. The US did support the Mujahidin fighting the soviets and why was this. To stop the mascara of the innocent Muslims in the country and also for revenge on the soviets helping of the Viet Long.

      I hope you realise during this period of war with the soviets, Pakistan sent thousands of soldiers to fight on the side of the Mujahidin in the holy war but that was not the true reason for their help. These soldiers were been sent to get battle experience as Pakistan was organising another war with India. After the soviet war was over and a new govt was installed they looked for new economic partners and they found one in the form of India. When Pakistan found this out they sent the Taliban, a force they had created through their backed Madrasas for the war with India into Afghan to take over and ensure that no relation with India occurred.

      Also just to let you know, long before 9/11 or the Somalia wars OBL sent a letter to the president of the US. In the letter he stated that if the US did not accept Allah as the true god and all Americans converted to Islam then the US would be at war with AQ and Islam. This sir can’t be taken as a declaration of war upon the USA and in turn the West.

      You think Australia is safe. You do realise JI and also the AQ of shoots in Indonesia see as Australia as an Islamic country as they believe that Aboriginals came from Indonesia and are Muslims. In turn Australia is there country and we all should convert, leave or be ready to die.

    • John says:

      12:08pm | 25/05/11

      I don’t mean they support al-qaeda in a physical sense, but in a fictional sense. The tapes, web sites are most likely coming from western intelligence agencys. There are Islamic rebels out there, but they have nothing to with targeting the west. The majority of power resides in the states in the middleast, not Islamic rebels. Iran, Syria, Lybia are states which are not even threat to the US, which could easily break the neck of Islamic radicals. Islamic radicals are just marketed, played up in order to manipulate the west into invading the middleast for WESTERN foreign policy state reasons, not Islamic rebel reasons. Just look at the aggressive attitude to Iran, Libya and Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s always been about taking over states, not really anything to with Islamic rebels. Al-Qaeda is meaning less, so is the Taliban. The real reason why there are force’s in Afghanistan and Iraq have more to do with surrounding Iran, then it is to keep away Islamic Rebels. The 9/11 attacks, were created just to create this scenario, but it was not the work of an Islamic organization, but more to do with those who benefit from the US toppling middleast states. If the US attacks Iran and overthrows the Government, you watch all the forces leave Afghanistan and allow the Taliban to return.

    • John says:

      12:19pm | 25/05/11

      @John the Zombie

      Your just shallowing propaganda. You must understand that the Western Military forces must justifie invasions and occupations. They have done this by playing up and marketing the Islamic threat. Just look back the New reports when the US was occupying and fighting in Iraq, They stated they were fighting al-qaeda, in aftganstian it’s the taliban and al-qaeda, it all links back to 9/11, since most believe it, they support it. There is never a genuine Resistance to US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, they all labeled al-qaeda fictional organization and the Taliban. Why is that the fighters in Afghanistan, live on Aftgan soil, but are called insurgents. There is a lot of propaganda going on. Lets say if the US decided to invade France tomorrow, they would most likely state that the entire Resistance, was made of al-qaeda fighters in order to justifie their situation. The entire war in middleast is based on lies. The entire west has been manipulated by the Islamic threat.

    • John the Zombie says:

      01:10pm | 25/05/11

      John sorry to burst your buble but I am in no fairy land as the true nature of Islamic fundmentalists. Thier hatred and spew has been seen before but cover up by ppl like you. If you dont believe me do a liltle bit of research of the Muslim league during the period of 1947 when India was partationed.  See for yourself that even before the USA got involved the Islam was killing and murdering non muslims. Lets even go further back to the rule of the Islam in India were forced conversion and killing were seen.

      Fast fwd to now and the hatred is still around. Just read the artilces of what is happening in the UK. Recently it came to head that muslim men were forcing young girls of Christian background (so targeted) on to drugs and making them prostitutes. Well guess what John this is not old. These groups have been doing this to young Hindu and Sikhs girls. This is been done by drugging thier drinks in clubs or even kidnapping them. These guys even have gone to the extent of converting thier names to sikh names, growing thier beards, wearing the Kara and turban and other things that symbilise sikhs just to try to marry Sikhs girls for conversion.

      Here is a youtube for you

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5rzkngqztU

    • John says:

      01:39pm | 25/05/11

      “OBL sent a letter to the president of the US. In the letter he stated that if the US did not accept Allah as the true god and all Americans converted to Islam then the US would be at war with AQ and Islam”

      What makes you think OBL wrote this? It could of been anyone, including script writers in the CIA, Mi5, War Propagandists or who ever. You need realize who standards to benefit from such words? The Warmongers of course. Think about this also if OBL hated US troops so much and wanted them removed from Saudi Arabia, then why did commit 9/11? He would be calling for an entire US forces to invade the middleast, which is something he would of never wanted.

    • james says:

      03:17pm | 25/05/11

      John
      It wouldn’t matter if you heard the words come from the ghost of Osama himself, I don’t think that any amount of evidence could ever possibly convince you. Obviously your hunch that western intelligence agencies have somehow created a mass fabrication of Islamic terrorism (as well as the Libyan civil conflict) is much more convincing to yourself that any objective, substantuated facts. It is the height of egotistical mania to think that you somehow know more about the suppossedly concocted group Al-Qadea than those people who devote their entire lives to researching and analysising such things. Please, if you can, find me one expert in the field of terrorism research or Afghan history who supports your views. I think you will have a very difficult time finding any as your ideas are totally deviod of fact and based purely upon your own random, delusional thoughts. Or maybe they are all part of this elaborate CIA, MI6, Mossad, marxist, fascist conspiracy that you seem to think rules the world?

    • John says:

      04:14pm | 25/05/11

      Of course James,

      Next time you hear a politician speak, military general and news reporter, ask your self, are they doing this because they believe in truth and justice, or is because they want their pay check at the end of the week. Ever heard of the party line? If you go against what the party states, you get kicked out, just imagine if the western media all contradicted each other, imagine if the western intelligence agency’s contradicted each other.

      “those people who devote their entire lives to researching and analysising such things”

      Well It’s there job to talk about fictional enemy’s, someone needs to the do the propaganda work, or the TAX papers will withdraw support for wars in the middleast. What people hear and see is what the party wants people to hear and see. A few weeks ago, i opened the papers and clearly seen the war propaganda on the front pages new on the Libyan War. On 9/11, just like an hour after the attack, they stated it was osama bin laden was behind it. It’s all scripted, ingrained to brainwash the mass’s into following the party’s agenda. Same thing with the death of so called Osama Bin Laden. Lies, Lies and More Lies.

    • John says:

      04:24pm | 25/05/11

      Well I think i saying things that intelligence agency’s know, but are not allowed to say. These nations are most likely have some kinda of clause for National Security Reasons, they must lie to the populations, or that the intelligence agency officer’s, are submitting conclusions to the heads of the intelligence agency’s and the government who are just ignoring those facts for the sake of economical reasons and world wide pressure for war. I don’t think Obama believes in everything that comes out his mouth, he knows what he go himself into, and that politics is all about serving the influential masters where lying is part of the job. The very first step is not take part in US wars, the next step is to speak out against them. I believe Germany took the first step, with the Libyan conflict.

    • james says:

      05:44pm | 25/05/11

      John

      So what your saying is that all of the political establishment, bureacuracy, media, academics and other people who research terrorism are part of some mega conspiracy so that they can get their pay check at the end of the week? And not one single person involved in this mega conspiracy has had the balls to speak out against it? Seriously John, think about what you are saying. Is it really plausible that this could be the case? You would have to be seriously disconnected from reality to entertain such an idea even for a second.

    • John the Zombie says:

      06:11pm | 25/05/11

      Yawn John. It gets old after a while. You have been rebuked more then once on this site yet you still cant acknowledge your wrong. Well enjoy living in your own world and if war ever breaks out I hope your first in line to sign up to fight as by your reckoning we should split from our ANZUS treaty and most likely sign one with China right a great deplomatic country.

    • mikeymike says:

      06:30pm | 25/05/11

      @ John

      What evidence would you need for any of the Al Qaeda attacks to be proven to you?  Pick one: USS Cole, Dar es Salaam, Nairobi, Madrid, London, New York (WTC 1 and WTC 2), Madrid.

      And by the way, if you’re going to say it’s all (ALL!?!) a conspiracy, where is your proof?  You make the statement, you back it up.

    • John says:

      06:45pm | 25/05/11

      “political establishment, media” The intelligence agency’s work for government, so they are kinda in on it to, even if they said something the political establishment and media would made sure they were not heard. Then you have financial establishment who also could have their hand in on it. The way i see it, the banking and media establishment put the political class’s on a lot of pressure, which forces them to take internal and foreign policy’s. So when taking about the intellectual class’s, those in university, you don’t hear too much about those, if sure they don’t want oppose the cabal (media,banker and politician class) in which they could get fired from their positions. So yes, there seems to be cabal, party who have a lot of influence on the western media, bankers who seem to setting the foreign policy’s, which western politicians must follow. You need to look at politicians like this, they have their advisers, their supporters. I’m sure connected into the cabal who influence and push politicians into certain directions, in a sense directing them where to go and what to say. Western nations and government work too cohesively, seem to be they are lead by influential body rather then their own citizens.

    • John says:

      08:06pm | 25/05/11

      mikeymike says

      Well 9/11 i know for sure, 7/7 London is very suspicious (Watch the ripple effect) I’m also Suspicious of Madrid, But its possible that Islamic radicals from Morocco were behind it. The big question who funded these Moroccan groups, where did the money come from?  Interesting wiki read

      “Spanish Judiciary determined the attacks were directed by an al-Qaeda-inspired terrorist cell[2][3] although no direct al-Qaeda participation (only “inspiration”[4][5][6]) has been established.”

      “The September 2007 sentence established no known mastermind nor direct al-Qaida link.[23][24][25][26][27]”

      I’m suspicious, it should be re-investigated. It’s possible those behind the 9/11 attacks 7/7 attacks could be behind the Madrid attacks also.

    • acotrel says:

      03:32am | 26/05/11

      @stevem The trial of Adoplh Eichmann didn’t ‘take years’, and it served a very good purpose!

    • james says:

      09:35am | 26/05/11

      John

      Herein lies the problem with you argument, you say “the way I see it” and “I’m sure”. These are just your ideas, they have no basis in any fact whatsoever. The idea that there is a gigantic global cabal that has manufactured terrorism to serve there own purposes has to be one of the ludicrous arguments I have ever seen on this site (and that is really saying something!). You say you are sure about 9/11 being an inside job, but we are still waiting for you to present one single piece of evidence that supports this claim.

    • acotrel says:

      07:18am | 25/05/11

      Erick, how do you feel about intellectual women?  I think I’ve just discovered I’m married to an oxymoron! (hope she doesn’t read this!).

    • mike j says:

      11:52am | 25/05/11

      acotrel, does your oxymoron know she’s married to a sycophantic attention-whore who has a man-crush on Erick?

      Stay on-topic.

    • acotrel says:

      03:40am | 26/05/11

      @mike J You are right!  I really like Erick.  He’s the sort of guy who got right behind Hitler, and persecuted dissenters of an ‘intellectual’ persuasion!

    • Sony B Goode says:

      07:51am | 25/05/11

      If Bin Laden had been brought to trial, how many hostage would have Al’quaeda taken and killed to ensure his release?  How many beheadings can we stand to watch on nightly news?

      Think about it

    • TChong says:

      08:40am | 25/05/11

      Sony B - its a funny ( peculiar) way that the ‘west’ views things.
      We are quite rightly appalled at beheading vids making it to the news, but many of the same people who object to such a barbaric act appear to have no problem cheering vids of western firepower hitting targets, and killing many.
      Death up close like the beheading , is unacceptable, but even greater numbers of deaths delivered by a jet fighter is some how acceptable ?

    • Sony B Goode says:

      09:48am | 25/05/11

      People have less aversion to watching “others” die, then one of their “own”.

      I am not privy to the reasoning behind the decision to kill or capture Bin Laden, neither is anyone here, however imo an understanding of the Muslim agenda makes capturing him a very dangerous proposition, probably much more so killing him.

      There is no comparison to the Nuremberg trials, they occurred after the fall of Nazi Germany. AQ and the fundamentalist agenda are still alive and kicking. There is no winning in this war as it’s in the cults DNA to wage jihad, there is always a pretext to for someone to step into the fundamentalist role.

    • Macon Paine says:

      10:18am | 25/05/11

      @ T.Chong

      When did this “cheering vids of western firepower hitting targets, and killing many” happen? I find it hard to believe that we in the west are cheering the deaths of innocents killed in air strikes whilst at the same time being appalled at the beheadings of innocents.
      What it seems your trying to do is draw a false moral equivalence and say that we are really no better than the 7th century medieval head choppers. You know thats not true, you know better than that.

    • Mouse says:

      10:48am | 25/05/11

      My only problem with the way OBL died was that it was too quick.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:30pm | 25/05/11

      And more bombs. So what did killing OBL achieve besides a feel good factor for a bunch of morons.

    • Tyler says:

      07:57am | 25/05/11

      wow, you’re really rattling the swords now!

      Whatever your argument might be, execution without trial is not justice. Trial would have been complicated and messy, and quite a painful process, but that didn’t stop the Nuremberg trials - or is Bin Laden worse than the Nazi’s? Obviously a trial would not have been the triumph that Obama needed.

      The warrior looks for wins and victories, but also looks for wars.

    • L. says:

      08:44am | 25/05/11

      “Whatever your argument might be, execution without trial is not justice.”

      Execurtion?

      Aren’t they claiming self defence?

    • Mahhrat says:

      09:02am | 25/05/11

      Tyler, with respect, that’s incorrect.

      First of all, Osama was not “executed” he was “killed”

      The OP uses the word “hatred” which I disagree with.  Osama was a murderous tyrant.  He deserved to die because of his own admitted actions.

      It is not hatred in which we killed him, it was simple justice.  Showing “mercy” to such a person would be treasonous to the people he afforded no such luxury for.

      In fact, the whole debate post-death is quite tasteless.  He shouldn’t get the amount of coverage he does - he was evil, he is dead, this is good, let’s move on.

    • michael j says:

      10:57am | 25/05/11

      @L-the first thing the yanks claimed was he pulled his wife in front of him ? a Cowardly move to avoid being Shot in the Back of the Head ?
      A forty minute fire-fight , yet he was unarmed ?
      Of course he was Executed , and good on em,,,,,,,,
      the most interesting hasn’t cum out yet ,will the CIA release the PORNO tapes or are they of National Security ?,,,,,,

    • Peter says:

      07:59am | 25/05/11

      In regards to Western Left progressives siding with fanatical Islam, I like how Martin Amis put it:
      “People of liberal sympathies, stupefied by relativism, have become the apologists for a creedal wave that is racist, misogynist, homophobic, imperialist, and genocidal. To put it another way, they are up the arse of those that want them dead.”

    • fml says:

      10:31am | 25/05/11

      Its funny how you correlate asking the governments of today to uphold the values the democracy they created as siding with fanatical islam.

      Since when has not criticising the government when acting on your behalf become patriotic and freedom supporting? In that case, if you dislike anything our current government does, then your ” racist, misogynist, homophobic, imperialist, and genocidal.” and dont forget un-australian.

    • Peter says:

      03:46pm | 25/05/11

      @fml What’s not funny is how completely you could misinterpret my point. Nothing in your comment relates to my criticism of what - in my opinion only - are the twisted sympathies of some Western Leftists. Perhaps you have attached your reply to my post by mistake. I certainly hope so. No sane person could come to the conclusions you have from any fair minded and objective reading.

    • Richard Koser says:

      08:17am | 25/05/11

      Tough choice: make a martyr of him, or put him in the dock and expose him as the dill he is. I think he should have been brought to account. Yes, there would have been revenge killings but there have been in any case. I don’t buy the “success at any cost” argument. Take that far enough and you’re driving planes into buildings.

    • rajend naidu says:

      08:18am | 25/05/11

      The writer has written this piece to convince himself of the righteousness of the summary execution of bin laden. many civilised modern men and women remain unconvinced that the killing was consistent with contemporary norms of state conduct and with international law. for the writer these are obviously minor issues not worth bothering about. I disagree.And I thank the writer for the invitation to “F—- off’ and to shut up but I am afraid I will have to turn it down. My own humanity is at stake here.

    • Joel B1 says:

      08:24am | 25/05/11

      If you think having half your head blown off as you stand there unarmed isn’t being a victim of aggression then I have pity for your soul.

      We’re supposed to be the good guys, not be as bad as Osama undoubtedly was.

    • James1 says:

      11:23am | 25/05/11

      I understand the philosophical distinction you identify, but I still cannot apply it to this case.

    • Anne71 says:

      12:52pm | 25/05/11

      So, Joel, OBL was unarmed, was he? Well, so were all the people he and his fellow fanatics murdered in New York, London, Bali, Madrid etc.

    • James1 says:

      01:51pm | 25/05/11

      His point, Anne, (if you will indulge me Joel) is that the West purports to hold itself to a higher standard, in that while OBL and AQ may happily kill civilians and the unarmed, we deplore such things and endeavour to do our best not to.  If we truly hold this standard to be absolute, then we must be definition extend it to even our worst and most hated enemies.  If we don’t, we look hypocritical.

      I would not argue that we do hold this standard myself, because I believe that state actions are not conditioned or motivated by what is right or moral, and is instead dictated by interest and the anarchic structure of the international system.  However, I understand the motivations behind the sort of argument I outlined above.  Still, I cannot apply it in this particular case.

    • Simon says:

      08:27am | 25/05/11

      global, oil-driven murder cult , but we call them great mates. next story should be dedicated to the defence of pre-emptive strikes, non core promises and planking.

    • Max Redlands says:

      08:34am | 25/05/11

      I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed in this article.

    • L. says:

      08:37am | 25/05/11

      Perhaps they should have gone through the motions of trying Osama in absentia.. found him guilty, then sentence him to death. That way all the leagl boxes would have been checked. WOuld have been the same outcome however.

    • f**kuall says:

      08:42am | 25/05/11

      anyone who supports violence and murder deserves violence and murder to be brought to them, wether it’s terrorists or the USA i really don’t care; osama lived by the sword and died by it, hopefully the USA follows suit.

    • marley says:

      11:38am | 25/05/11

      Well now, since you seem to be all in favour of violence yourself, at least where terrorists and the US are concerned, I guess you’re not exactly standing on high moral ground, are you?

    • Harquebus says:

      12:33pm | 25/05/11

      The pendulum keeps swinging until the last humans beat each other to death.

    • bella starkey says:

      08:52am | 25/05/11

      Hey Ross, you realise Hannibal Lector is a character, not a real person right?

    • Dark Horse says:

      08:53am | 25/05/11

      It’s a good thing that OBL is gone, but if he was unarmed and assassinated when he could have been taken alive, that’s unfortunate and not a precedent we should support. However, he’s not a victim. Islamism rolls on and it’s the ideological aspects of Islam that is killing people worldwide in and out of war. If the Islamists stopped trying to kill us off or convert us to Islam, we’d no doubt stop killing them and their kin. Somehow I think it’s all just at the beginning rather than near the end. A very sad state for humanity.

    • fml says:

      10:36am | 25/05/11

      I like to know who is calling Osama a victim?

      I think people in this blog are saying that we have diverted from our core values of democracy and that sets a dangerous precedent when we create fair and democratic laws, which we expect others to follow but not ourselves.

    • David C says:

      09:01am | 25/05/11

      the issue is “are we at war with al qeda”? If yes then the recent actions are totally within reason.
      The writer makes the case we are, I agree

    • The Badger says:

      09:03am | 25/05/11

      Personally, I hope Bin Laden is still alive hanging upside down experiencing death by slow torture as anything of value is extracted from him.
      And when he is finally dead, I hope what is left of him is fed to the pigs.

    • the BlessedVirgin says:

      12:11pm | 25/05/11

      ...with the 72 gorgeous virgins, that he’ll never be able to have, dancing in front of him and rubbing porcine oil all over their nubile bodies

    • John the Zombie says:

      12:30pm | 25/05/11

      Its not written the 72 Virgins are female

    • theBlessedVirgin says:

      04:20pm | 25/05/11

      hahahahahah. Love your mind JtZ

    • Sony B Goode says:

      09:06am | 25/05/11

      @peter:

      The cognitive dissonance of the left is best understood as a conflict between their desires for material equality versus freedom. Freedom of choice and trade yields vast inequality; it can be no other way. The cognitive dissonance manifests on one hand whilst pursuing material equality and freedom from the oppression of inequality on the other. Yet both freedom and material equality are in a state of complementarity to each other.

      Inequality creates a perception of fear and jealousy in leftists, they fear for needy and they fear the power of the greedy, they side with the “victims” of inequality and seek freedom from repression of the greedy.

      When their attempts at creating material equality will fail under freedom, as it must since it is freedom that creates inequality, they suspect forces at play, specifically ‘elites’ are undermining their agenda and they swing towards hatred.

      The failure of socialist policy is invariably blamed on sabotage, it’s always some ‘elite’ who are interfering with egalitarian outcomes. The complementarity of equality and freedom evades their powers of observation.

      There can be no stability in leftist politics, because they can only move towards outcome of material equality by increasingly violating freedom and through authoritarian means becoming the repressive elites they despise, entering a stage of self-loathing.

      Material Egalitarianism is a subtle and often not so subtle form of collective insanity.

    • sludger says:

      09:10am | 25/05/11

      I don’t think this is such an easy issue as the writer tries to paint.  I am a returned serviceman, so I have a particular bias - which I acknowledge.  However, I must admit I was suprised and a little disturbed when first hearing of the assasination.  The trouble is, bringing him to trial really would have opened a huge can of worms, with possible hostages and hordes of fanatics.  Maybe, maybe not.  I don’t have any answers but I think something was just wrong about the way it was handled.  You remember what that Judge said about pornography?  Something like ” I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.”  Well same here for me.  I can’t tell you why it was wrong, I just feel it.

    • fml says:

      10:43am | 25/05/11

      Funny thing with having a hunch, when we are right we shout about it like we knew it all along, when we are wrong we rationalise and forget straight away how we came to that conclusion. That why i thank my lucky stars that law in Australia is based on evidence and not “hunches”, well atleast i hope.

    • sludger says:

      11:01am | 25/05/11

      @fml, good point, summed up what I was trying to say in my mixed up pre-coffee haze.

    • Adam says:

      09:18am | 25/05/11

      If OBL had been taken trial, the handwringers would have complained that he didn’t get a *fair* trail. And even if he had they’d have whinged about how he as being treated in jail and expected him to be frequently released to talk at rubbish events like the Sydney writers festival so intellectuals could get their jollies. He’d have probably also released a book and poisoned the minds of many more people.

      Let’s be honest, shooting him as an enemy combatant on the battlefield was the best option for everyone. OBL’s family weren’t all obliterated by a cruise missile and no innocent civilians were killed. The right whingers were happy because he got a bullet in the head. The lefties were happy because they got to whinge about him not getting a trial. The military were happy because they got rid of an enemy general and terrorist leader. Even the conspiracy theorists were happy because he got buried at sea so they had something to yell conspiracy about. Great work and a win all round I say!

    • Mahhrat says:

      09:33am | 25/05/11

      Here come the Brigade (yes, I did that deliberately) of “killing is always wrong”.

      Well, I beg to differ.  Killing is not always wrong.  It is always tasteless and vulgar and shouldn’t be necessary, but it is not always “wrong”.

      If we capture Bin Laden, what system to we try him under?  America’s?  He has stated he holds no truck with U.S. Law.  Since he refused to exercise it, why should he be asked to stand trial under it?

      He declare war on you, me, everyone.  He wanted either a bended knee or a broken skull.  He offered no third option.

      At the point where an idealist refuses to negotiate or compromise, you can either stop him or not.  At that point, removing the threat becomes not about what is “right”, but what is expedient.

      It really is this simple:  His mob killed thousands on his order.  They had no trial, no jury, no opportunity to “argue” their cases.  He admitted to this, and he admitted he did it deliberately.

      It is no crime to see that threat to the Western way of life removed, and as the OP says, it is a celebration of our civilisation that we could remove the threat with such precision.

      Now, the “war or terror” on the other hand is a disgraceful piece of work.  There is no “justice” in that, only a war over the control of the world’s oil reserves.  That the petromagnates of the world can convince governments to fight their battles for them is what we really should be worried about.

    • Adam says:

      10:05am | 25/05/11

      I hate the “killing is always wrong” brigade. Such pacifists are a hollow moral joke who’s freedom to exude such views is only possible because others are willing to fight on their behalf. Check out this link
        about the moral problems with pacifism.

    • Clare says:

      09:34am | 25/05/11

      I was at about para 3 when I thought ‘he’ll be mentioning Hilter soon’ and sure enough. Trouble with the whole Hitler thing is that we have created a special category of evil which is beyond the realms of any normal moral code. He was so bad anything would have been justified to stop him. We step outside or moral code, our justice system and come down to his level, survival, at any costs. But we don’t stop at that. We, by some sort of rationalising sleight-of-hand, slip another one, and yet another one alongside Hitler, as another example of a kind of evil that can’t be responded to through the justice system or normal rules of engagement. This time it was OBL, but there will be another and then another. It is like the Lurnea Hydra, (the Gorgon), cut off one head, and another will appear.
      Whatever you like to think about it, the killing of OBL was an assassination. There was an outcry when the US plot to assassinate Castro in the 60’s was uncovered. Not so much today.
      Without the rule of law we are no different from the ‘infidels’ (so called) we want to destroy. As previous posters have stated (see@paulW) there have been atrocities perpetrated by both sides.

    • Sodapoppy says:

      02:48pm | 25/05/11

      Why don’t you join the army and get to meet a few Taliban suicidal sociopaths. Take em out to lunch, eat dogs’ guts and feel good about about your miserable soul.

    • Dee says:

      09:57am | 25/05/11

      The rumor is the Osama is the new STIG

    • Dieter Moeckel says:

      10:13am | 25/05/11

      Osama bin Laden is dead - that’s good for the world (perhaps).
      The way Osama bin Laden met his death is bad.
      The question still remains “Is murdering a murderer murder?”
      I happen to think that it is. Some may not agree.
      Was it right? perhaps. Was is it justice? perhaps. Was it legal? No! There is an immense gulf between what is just and what is legal. The very first issue that was addressed when I studied law was the law and justice should not be confused.

    • AdamC says:

      10:19am | 25/05/11

      I don’t think there was ever any prospect of bringing Osama to trial in the United States. What on earth would be the point of that? And I haven’t picked up on any great concern about Obama assassinating him. (Mind you, I am sure on the Pilger fringe, there would have been some grumblers.)

      The incident seems to have been handled pretty well.

    • Missy says:

      10:23am | 25/05/11

      Sorry, but you don’t kill any criminal without a trial.

      Osama was a mass murderer at its worse, but was made out as a scape goat in the farcical ‘war against terror’ which has seen nothing except political interests get in the way of actual affirmative action against the seed of terrorism being sown in religious institutions all over the world.

      He should have been imprisoned and made to stand trial for the crimes committed.

      No one country has the right to barge in another country, guns blazing, and shoot down a perp. That’s murder.

      Osama was a religious, delusional zealot. The “genius” in his ideology was to turn fundamentalist Islam into something viable, believable, to the impoverished, to the resentful, to the insecure, muslim masses around Mid-East and other countries.

      By killing him in such a manner (i.e. war, assassination) you have made him a martyr and it only serves to glorify his twisted ideology to insecure muslims around the world who are fed from day 1 their ‘glorified’ islamic history and their ‘rightful’ place as rulers and rightful owners of the land they have sullied but made modern, liveable and lawful by non-muslims.

      Emotion plays a part when sending propaganda to the masses. But we must be objective and see things for what they are if we are to consider ourself separate from the ‘masses’.

    • marley says:

      11:40am | 25/05/11

      You don’t kill criminals without a trial.  You do kill enemy combatants without trial though, even if they’re unarmed.  There are different rules for wars and I would argue that they apply in this case.

    • Clare says:

      12:14pm | 25/05/11

      @marley Playing round with words and labels doesn’t change things. You can find a benign definition (collatoral damage anyone?) for anything. The term enemy combatants was termed by the US precisely for this reason: to allow them to get away with things that would be considered war crimes ...torture, rendition etc etc.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:38pm | 25/05/11

      George Dubbya said it is a war so, no trial is necessary. Who’s gonna argue with the president of the United States?
      I totally agree with you Missy.
      “Emotion plays a part when sending propaganda to the masses.” I like this. Emotional stimulation for brain dead morons.

    • marley says:

      12:55pm | 25/05/11

      @Clare - the term “enemy combatant” was not coined by the US - nor was the term “unlawful combatant.”  Both have been in use for over a century, and the subject of international debate.  Contrary to popular opinion, there is indeed such a thing as an unlawful combatant (mercenaries; fighters who don’t wear identification and who don’t carry their arms openly;  fighters who violate the rules of war by, oh, specifically targetting civilians).  Such people are excluded from the protections that apply to uniformed soldiers captured in a theater of war.

      That doesn’t mean that they can be summarily executed, nor that they can be subjected to torture.  They do have rights, but not the same ones as a soldier.

      But that’s not the point.  The point is, if this is a war (and I think it is) then soldiers have the right to shoot other soldiers.  That’s what happens in war.

    • Tbowler says:

      07:20pm | 25/05/11

      @MARLEY: Normally I find you to be an insufferable lefty but top marks awarded in this instance. I fail to understand any of the logic from the peacenik brigade; at what point in our fictional histoy did we NOT, in cold-blood and with not remorse, execute those who would perpetuate total and unrestricted warfare on our way of life?

      We have ideals and they are theoretical and by no means perfect. We recognize that our system is not perfect and not equipped to deal with the rare externalities and it is not a matter of policy to go ‘outside the system’ but a necessity to the preservation of such…

      War has always been the manifestation of the struggle between ideal-world theory and cold, ruthless reality and this hasn’t changed fro thousands of years. We iced the prick and quite frankly I woulda pulled the trigger on the piece of shit myself and taken an admittedly perverse pleasure in doing so.

      Those that rabbit on about ‘killing is never okay’ are totally divorced from even the slightest pragmatic outlook on life and are doomed to hand-wring and bleat about theoretical morality without the benefit of any real-world influence or experience. Others such as Robertson QC are so blinded by their own sense of self-righteousness that they lose sight of the truth.

      As a lawyer I will , of course, defend anyone who can put sufficeint money into trust and believe they are entitled to a trial as our imperfect but time-tested system dictates. I will do so competently and dispassionately. I will be equally dispassionate if I hear the kiddie fiddler I am defending got shanked while in remand awaiting trial and died painfully. It’s not my role to pass judgment.

      Osama: cest la vie…

    • Missy says:

      11:02am | 26/05/11

      @marley,

      Enemy combatants? Who decides this?
      The U.S soldiers, defense civilians and contract workers could be ‘enemy combatants’ as well to every terrorist in that sense then, right?

      One country’s terrorist could be another’s freedom fighter.
      (disclaimer: I am NOT condoning what Osama did btw. Murder is murder no matter the person who instigated it and deserves trial.)

      While I understand what you mean, (i.e. it is a war, anything goes), the term is used so loosely that I fear that soon ‘war’ basically becomes a free-for-all bashing exercise without rules, conventions and laws to govern it.
      Those are what (helps) stops every country from engaging in all out battles against one another, at least, they will know the established ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ rules (not that they are right or wrong in any sense of the word, which is subjective.).

      But lets agree with you for argument’s sake. What will the U.S do when Osama becomes a martyr (which is why they dropped off his body into the ocean so no one could dig him up and have his physical body turned into a shrine for martyrs), who will face the consequences then?

    • Tchom says:

      10:26am | 25/05/11

      I don’t have a problem with Osama Bin Laden being killed. He was a dangerous man and if he was killed in combat, thats just how war works. The problem I have is with people’s reaction to his death. Revelling in the death of an old man, dangerous as he was, exposes our own blood-thirstyness and lust for revenge, traits we should strive to avoid in order maintain a moral high-ground. There will be more OBLs; chest-beating and collateral damage won’t help that

    • Kika says:

      01:08pm | 25/05/11

      At the end of the day, we’re all human and share 99.7% of our DNA with Chimpanzees.


      “Recent studies have shown that *blank*  engage in apparently altruistic behaviour within groups but are indifferent to the welfare of unrelated group members. However it has been shown that *blank* have adopted an orphan *blank*, sometimes ones that come from other unrelated groups. And in some rare cases even male *blank*  have been shown to take care of abandoned infant *blank* of an unrelated group, however in most cases they would normally kill the infant.

      Evidence for “*blank* spirituality” includes display of mourning, “incipient romantic love”, “rain dance”, appreciation of natural beauty such as a sunset over a lake, curiosity and respect towards wildlife (such as the python, which is neither a threat nor a food source to *blank*), empathy toward other species (such as feeding turtles) and even “animism” or “pretend play” in *blank* cradling and grooming rocks or sticks”

      Adult Common *blanks*  particularly males, can be very aggressive. They are highly territorial and are known to kill other *blank* *Blank* also engage in targeted hunting of lower order *blank* such as the *blank*  and *blank*  and use the meat from these kills as a “social tool” within their community.

    • Tchom says:

      02:24pm | 25/05/11

      @Kika True,  but we also have introspection and ethics. Should we just abandon those and live entirely of animal impulse?

    • The Vivid Writer says:

      10:27am | 25/05/11

      Not sure about Osama Bin Hidin’ being a ‘victim’ of aggression. Definitely a CIA asset though. And you, Ross Neilson, sound like one of those Political Officers in communist countries. Having endured such a system for 10 years, I can smell you from miles away. Your “angle” is that you try to sound like an every day man with a few swear words and getting your team 6/“battalion 6” details wrong.. ..but deep down inside, you’d like to have a swipe at Sharia Law, because that’s the last gasp of Islamophobia left in White Australia’s fear- and warmongering. Propbably because some sorry-ass hardworking Muslim is trying to appropriate his/her possession in their will by Islamic custom, etc.

      But anyway, write your little “article” to Langley and ask them if they would like to provide some imagery to the global public after Associated Press and Judicial Watch are done with their Freedom of Information Act moves.

      Word of advice: use “reportedly” & “allegedly” (and similar words) a bit more frequently. This still is a f—-ing DEMOCRACY.

      http://thevividwriter.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/americas-frankenstein-is-finally-dead-edited-version-for-the-punch/

    • marley says:

      12:59pm | 25/05/11

      Oh I dunno, if you can say Bin Laden was “definitely” a CIA asset, I don’t see why Ross has to pull his punches.  What’s good for the goose ought to be good for the gander, after all.

    • marley says:

      07:03pm | 25/05/11

      As I said, you’re making a definitive statement, based on the uncorroborated statement of a politician with many axes to grind.  Ross is doing much the same, Either both of you sprinkle your statements with “reportedly” and “allegedly” or neither of you do.

    • The Vivid Writer says:

      12:04am | 26/05/11

      Keep the sprinkling for your private life. As for “corroborating”, a former Foreign Secretary IS a source of corroboration. WHOM do you expect to corroborate it for us? Fox News?

      Have good read of what you wrote and explain to me how exactly is Robin Cook not an AUTHORITY on the matter. Your bias can also be smelt from a mile away.
      I often ask myself what kind of personnel part take in these “comments” to alleged “articles”..

    • Christopher Brown says:

      11:08am | 25/05/11

      Well said Rosco!  There are so many things in the world that require me to consider the moral dimension and that are genuinely ambiguous.  This ain’t one of them.  Osama’s gone. Better, safer world for children. Game over!

    • Tchom says:

      11:46am | 25/05/11

      Is it a better, safer world? Was OBL the sole architect of every terrorist act and the root of all animousity towards the West? Its not like the fall of Berlin.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:40pm | 25/05/11

      OBL is gone but, religion still lives. There will never be peace until it is defeated.

    • rajend naidu says:

      11:30am | 25/05/11

      The elimination of al-Qaida figurehead Osama bin laden earlier this month was widely celebrated. But was it the right thing for the US to do? International law expert Professor Kai Ambos argues that killing was both illegal and morally dubious. I agree. I prefer to go with the clear thinking of this international law expert then with the bombastic view of Ross Nielson.
      Interested people can go to Spiegel Online 05/13/2011 to read Kai Ambos article : ’ Terrorists Have Rights Too: What International Law Says About The Killing of Bin Laden”.

    • Brian B says:

      12:13pm | 25/05/11

      Oh! I love it. “Terrorists have rights too”.

      What garbage..not in my country they don’t.

    • marley says:

      02:26pm | 25/05/11

      I read the article.  Interesting stuff - but, as the author himself says, some of his arguments (that there is no war with Al Qaeda, that bin Laden should have been immune from military attack because he wasn’t engaged in hostilities) are subjects of legal contention.  I don’t believe things are as cut and dried as he is making them out to be.

    • rajend naidu says:

      04:50pm | 25/05/11

      @Brian B : Prof Kai Ambos contends in his article (which you have obviously not read) that Terrorists have rights too. You sau ” not in my country they don’t”. What is your country?
      @ Marley: Yes, you don’t believe things are as cut and dried as Ambos is making them out to be. Contentious legal matters usually aren’t. But seem quite happy to accept the American stance on the killing as “cut and dried”. I suppose it is if you accept that the US president can issue a “fatwa” = a warrant to kill on sight like the Muslim fanatics did on Salman Rushdie. I don’t.

    • John says:

      05:17pm | 25/05/11

      Well we are discussing a fictional killing, I don’t believe the international law has any platform for fictional events. Many have been killed in Hollywood movies and famous novels, never once has the international law intervened.

    • stephen says:

      05:36pm | 25/05/11

      Der Spiegel you mean ? It’s a rag.
      The killing of Bin Laden, (call it whatever you like) was the perfect utilitarian act : it made the rest of us live a bit more peacably.
      Justice had nothing to do with it. And nor should it, for, at every moment of an act, why should we reach for the verdict of a Jurist to decide if an action is worthwhile ?
      Is life a Courtroom ?
      His death does not even have to be a Moral one, in that we should not have to deduce the extent of our own guilt if he was not, somehow, as bad as we wanted.
      In life and from his actions we know he was the worst.
      Sometimes, Justice and High Moral Tones are best left in check for Fiction.

    • marley says:

      07:18pm | 25/05/11

      @rajend - nope, I don;‘t accept what the American president says at face value, but neither do I accept what an academic tells me at face value.  I like to thing about things, do a bit of research, and come to my own conclusions.  And the good professor’s article is based on the argument that what we have is not a war. 

      To be sure, what’s going on now doesn’t fit the old models of war - but does that mean it’s’ not a war? Just because some academic has determine that war only involves states, doesn’t make it so.  I argue that our models are past their use-by date, and that this is indeed a war, but one without boundaries or nationaities. 

      And if one accepts that perspective, most of the rest of the professor’s argument fails.  It’s a war, and combatants have the right to kill other combatants.  And sorry, but bin Laden was a combatant - boasted about his prowess and his influence - and paid the price that soldiers sometimes pay.

    • Jay76 says:

      11:36am | 25/05/11

      The issue for me is about to which principles we hold ourselves accountable as much as whether ObL deserved what he got.

      We may have eliminated any enemy, but there are many ways to do so, and I don’t know if we do ourselves justice by claiming that shooting an unarmed man was the correct one.

    • mark says:

      11:47am | 25/05/11

      @jOHN…re your posts ...you really must be joking…..you couldn’t be that stupid

    • Brian B says:

      12:05pm | 25/05/11

      Great article.

      My congratulations to Seal Team 6 for ridding the World of Osama Bin Laden, with whom we were at war. No more analysis needed really….........now lets get after the rest of the Islamic fundamentalists.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:41pm | 25/05/11

      How ‘bout we make that all religious fundamentalists?

    • Liam says:

      12:50pm | 25/05/11

      Brian - have you been hearing the predictions about the end of the world, or do you live under a rock? Those predictions are made by “Family Radio” in the US, led by the truly evil extortionist Harold Camping. Some Americans believe it - that hurts my brain. If you’re going after religious fanatics, be sure to get all of these freaks.

    • Brian B says:

      01:02pm | 25/05/11

      Yep Harq. and Liam - lets get ‘em all.

    • Harquebus says:

      12:22pm | 25/05/11

      We have descended to being no different from those that we are fighting. That means, it doesn’t matter if we win or lose. We have already lost.

    • Markus says:

      12:31pm | 25/05/11

      Yep, we have descended to stoning women for being caught in public unescorted, beheading innocent civilians on video, and persecuting everyone not belonging to a particular sect of a religion.

      Wait, no we haven’t, at all.
      Grow the f**k up.

    • RB says:

      01:59pm | 25/05/11

      spot on Markus.well said mate.

    • fml says:

      03:09pm | 25/05/11

      Markus,

      Other than the stoning, are you saying (not beheading specifially) that we as people within a country do not film attacking others? that there is no religious persecution in australia?

      Two out of three aint bad.

    • Harquebus says:

      11:49am | 26/05/11

      Markus.
      Sharia law is a religious thing. Religion is the real enemy. Only when that is defeated will their be peace. Those of us with a brain can see the difference.
      How many kiddies has B.O. killed using his drones?

    • Monty says:

      12:37pm | 25/05/11

      Bin Laden was a terrorist, he lived by the sword and died by the sword, whats new about that you only have to read history…the US far out uses any other country in oil consumption and its economy is virtually based on oil…losing its connections to the Middle East will bring about a volatile and violent reaction from the US…as its doing that already….its time that the US cleaned up on its dependency on oil…the death of Bin Laden was revenge…but it does get rid of terrorism, it does not provide security, or a positive answer to gaining peace and freedom in the Middle East.

    • Kika says:

      12:54pm | 25/05/11

      No… but it certainly made a very good excuse to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan saving them trillions.

    • Ray says:

      12:38pm | 25/05/11

      Erick you disappoint me. The greatesy danger to Western civilisation is feminim. Such as the article by Oryana Angel in Career One today on ‘Glass ceilings’ and ‘cracks don’t make us equal.

      The article advises of another legislated forum of discrimination called Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency.

      This automatically assumes that the other half of the workforce (or population) requires no guarantees. Above all this idea is formed on the basis of some magical 17.2% which is supposed to represent the difference. Well the 17.2% figure of convenience is the difference in taxable income. Taxable income is conditional to your ability, time at work and performance. It IS NOT conditional upon some discrimination that needs correcting.

      So please Erick get back on to the subject matter. Forget Osama. He’s history. We (men) are being done over.

      Any one consider that the other half f the workforce may feel agrieved.

      Read Andrew Bolt’s article on ‘reverse racism’ in today’s sporting pages for relevence..

    • Ray says:

      01:09pm | 25/05/11

      Bugger I did a typo on feminism.

    • marley says:

      01:13pm | 25/05/11

      Ray, when the feminists start hijacking planes and bombing exclusive men’s clubs or football games, then you can start worrying.  As long as they are writing articles and lobbying a male-dominated parliament, the end is not nigh.

    • Ray says:

      02:40pm | 25/05/11

      Marley they need to start on the female only clubs first. Which one are you a member of. I’ll move it up the list.

      What’s more Erck is losing his ‘bottle’. Time to rev up Erick.

    • Lisa H. says:

      11:34pm | 25/05/11

      Get over it Ray. Good ol’ primordialism means that most women are still desperate to (‘eventually’) have a baby… and that means co-operating with a man at pretty much any price, including self-respect, money, and a hefty chunk of independent thought.

      Or perhaps you have another reason why women rule the universities…and men rule the workforce…?

    • Ray says:

      10:38am | 26/05/11

      Lis, ‘co-operating with a man’.

      Well I’m afraid you’ve defined yourself. Saves us the trouble.

      I do have ‘another reason why women rule universities’. aka Society took a culpable path to educate women better than men ,and hase been successful.

      Likewise with the workforce with the intent of affirmative action, quotas, and the education, ensures that mens position is only temporary. And their recognition for carrying the burden is dicredited.

      I also have a reason why men ruke the workforce. successful

    • Liam says:

      12:41pm | 25/05/11

      This would have to be the worst piece of writing i’ve read on The Punch. I realise this is an opinion piece, but apparently you don’t. I’ve never read such an ignorant, head-up-your-own-ar*e mess in my life. Do you accept everything you hear as absolute truth? Or are you simply a sad case of handonappendageitis?

      I don’t like bad things. I don’t like the idea that people’s lives or autonomy could be taken for the sake of oil, I don’t like thinking about the Vietnam War, and I don’t like any bombings or violence. But as far as I know (see how i’m qualifying my opinion), Bin Laden was trained by the US Government. And I understand he gave up an inherited fortune to be a leader in the third-world. I’m not saying he was a decent man or Satan’s spawn. Ross, I didn’t realise you knew him so intimately!

      Here are a few of my favourite par’s:

      * “Let’s see, the cave dwelling, messianic mass murderer and his animal cronies declared war on America (and the rest of us in the ‘West’  while they were at it).” - Gee, Ross, I wish I could live in a cave and be called an animal.

      * “They backed up the declaration, lest anyone think they were all talk, with ghastly, large scale, massacres of innocent men, women and children - in New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Bali and other populations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.” - Are you still talking about Osama Bin Laden? When you talk about massacres of innocent men, women and children - these are the reasons for anti-US sentiment in the Arab world.

      * “Those they didn’t strike, they successfully convinced that they might, so even in a backwater like Sydney we got to share in the paralysing fear for our skins and the safety of our own loved ones, going about their lives.” - Ok just plain WTF. We obviously don’t live in the same backwater.

      * “So the war on your innocent people, will proceed apace indefinitely because there’s no rationality or real objective governing the attackers, just fathomless hatred.” - So these ‘others’, or cave-dwelling animals as you call them, they are inherently evil? And I thought Tony Abbott liked to over-simplify things! It scares me that you were a political advisor.

      * “Thirty two 2,000 pound laser guided bombs or a fleet of unmanned drones (on the Pentagon menu put before the President) might have done the trick just as well with none of the risk.” - Therein lies the problem. This smorgasbord of destruction has oft been the item of choice for the US Government/God’s army.

      * “Also the source of much of our finest musical, literary, dramatic, visual arts and cinematic culture.” - Stay with us, Ross.

      I don’t even want to re-read the last few par’s. I hope this is you trolling, otherwise it’s plain embarrassing.

    • Kika says:

      12:52pm | 25/05/11

      Are we still talking about this rubbish?
      The single greatest threat to Western Civilisation is Western Civilisation. As the Buddhists say all things are temporary. Perhaps the dominance of the West was temporary too. We had our time in the sun, we’ve collapsed under our own stupidity so it’s time to move on and accept it and let China and India take over the show.

    • Pete says:

      01:43pm | 25/05/11

      Yes Kika, lets let the Americans retreat into thier Fortress and shun the rest of the world. They did it once before they can do it again. they’ll say f&^k you all, we’ll look after us. I’m damn sure we will be treated extra specially well by our new owners Comunist China. There is something seriously messed up with a communist regime participating in a free market economy & owning assets in our country don’t you think? But back to the topic. Gee arrest him or shoot him? Tough decision. Luckily for us it was never going to be our decision, but don’t let that stop us from criticising America for having the guts to make a hard decision and follow through. Western democracy is far from perfect but the alternatives make me sick!

    • Kika says:

      02:39pm | 25/05/11

      But Pete wouldn’t you say that it’s morally and financially bankrupt to fight a war you can’t win? They’ve driven us to the brink of complete and utter financial collapse pursuing this idiot and they are carefully balancing at the moment. It probably will collapse again. Meanwhile China and India have both played it very safe. They’ve hitched on our back during the free market explosion by flooding our consumerist needs with cheap products paying their workers jack so while we have reached the pinnacle of our golden age and high incomes in the west the east will rise and be the world leaders of the future. It will happen.

      The US has often been compared with Ancient Rome. They were the biggest power of their day but slowly but surely they couldn’t keep up with the constant barbarian hordes which crippled them from the outside and at the far reaches of their territories until they finally collapsed and sent Europe into the dark ages.

      History is not perpendicular but circular. What has happened will happen again. Times change, people don’t.

    • Steve says:

      02:46pm | 25/05/11

      You are right Kika. People rarely know it when they are in the middle of great history being made. I don’t doubt that every great civilisation of the past believed that they were different and special and would not fall.

      The USA and Europe are broke. The West is focusing on assylum seekers rights, gay rights, green rights, China and India are slowly overtaking us. I don’t despair it I accept it.

      Australia has a unique opportunity to be taken along with China and India so i think we will be OK.

    • Sean says:

      03:07pm | 25/05/11

      Lol, China take over the world? In their (and your) dreams. I guess you’ve never heard of “China’s population bomb” and “peak oil”, huh?

    • Craig says:

      01:41pm | 25/05/11

      Wow. Reading that piece was pure awesome. It has mad flow. It’s correct and on point even when it went hyperbolic. There are folks (usually white), who seem to have this magical ability to ‘walk in someone else’s shoes’. Even if those shoes are of that degenerate (thanks Ross) Bin Laden’s. They are defeatist, self-loathing and ruthlessly castigate the West but overlook the flaws of creeds and ideologies that are directly opposed to them (us mob in the West). They do not recognise that the causes they support and internalise are antithetical to their own well-being. Not that should taken as a form of selflessness - it’s not. Just lack of vision thinking,  sheeple mentality (West = evil - even though they directly benefit from it) and hypocrisy. One commentator here, even looks forward to China’s day in the sun. If that were to come to fruition, they’d get a nasty shock. No doubt they would pine for the days of western hegemony… probably as they’re applying the vasso.

    • Tchom says:

      02:29pm | 25/05/11

      “There are folks (usually white), who seem to have this magical ability to ‘walk in someone else’s shoes’”

      Do you mean empathy? There’s a medical term for people who don’t have this ‘magical ability’. What is it again? Wait, that’s right… ‘psychopathy’

    • John says:

      04:53pm | 25/05/11

      I have empathy, I’m white. I also don’t believe that Osama Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks.

    • Craig says:

      05:41pm | 25/05/11

      @Tchom:  No Geezah, I can’t find it in my heart to empathise with ObL. (or serial killers/dictators/mass murderers for that matter) Strangely enough, far too many in the West do. Sigh. White people. They’ve internalised feelings of guilt and self-hatred to such an extent that they even feel alienated from their fellow citizen (finding them repellent) - unless that fellow citizen happens to represent the ‘other’ or someone who reinforces their narrow minded views. It doesn’t matter whom that other is, so long as they aren’t mainstream and they are fundamentally opposed to the West. This is viewed as being ‘enlightened’. It represents a failure of modern society and those who dwell and glory in it, are ignorant to the consequences.  And now a break from interrupting a self-flagellating apologist.  Australia is awesome brah!  Loved growing up here!

    • Steve says:

      07:18pm | 25/05/11

      It is called white guilt syndrome. They are usually greens voters.

    • Sean says:

      02:36pm | 25/05/11

      Sorry, you lost my vote when you expressed support for the Red Army. It must be nice to be on the same side as people who pack-rape little German girls?

    • lee enfield says:

      03:10pm | 25/05/11

      Bin laden was angry because he watched to many smut movies. Some of the movies found on his computer were
      You mecca me horny, suicide blondes, assghanistan, twins in towers and wham bam taliban

    • Steve B says:

      04:39pm | 25/05/11

      So let me get this straight; you “personally abhor capital punishment” ... except where people deserve it. And then you will attack anyone who suggests any other avenue for justice ... hmmm.

      But we do know he deserved it, and we know exactly what happened and all the reasons behind it - because we saw it all on National Nightly Network News. The same place where we learned that Sadddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and Bill Clinton “did not have sexual relations with that woman” and that Muammar Gaddafi was was worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.

      Keep up this kind quality journalism and you may get your own prize - my money is on you for Ignoramus of the Year.

    • bikinis on top says:

      07:33pm | 25/05/11

      Is Obama Osama?
      Was Obama the victim of aggression when his car stalled in Eire?
      How did Obama escape the aggression of the Duke of Edinburgh’s tongue?

    • bikinis on top says:

      07:38pm | 25/05/11

      Your comment:osama died just before the invisible spiritual end of the world.
      he is old news!

    • S. Morris says:

      09:52pm | 25/05/11

      choose which side you want to be on. islamic religio-fascism or the right side. Simple really. When buildings are sprayed with the hot bloody meat of innocent commuters by aforementioned IRFs in your town then you may make the right decision. OBL? good frikkin riddance. next one please?

    • rajend naidu says:

      07:03am | 26/05/11

      To Marley: Isn’t that what US President George W Bush had pronounced? That we are now in a state of war without boundaries and nationalities - so it’s okay to set aside conventional laws - to fight it ? That torture was therefore acceptable?  Marley you accept this kind of thinking. And like Bush and his mob you are free to do that but don’t make out that the rest of humanity should accept it as a “universal truth”. Because it isn’t. And between prof, Ambos and your thinking I have no problem in favouring the professors. It’s the thinking reflective of the civilised modern world and not that of the Neanderthals.

    • marley says:

      09:11am | 26/05/11

      No, I do not accept that torture is acceptable under any circumstances. I think I’ve already said so in my reply to Clare above.

      What I do accept is that there is a war on, and the rules of war apply in combat situations -  those are different from peacetime rules, because otherwise, every time a soldier shoots a Taliban fighter, he’d be liable to be charged with murder.  The rules of war allow soldiers to kill enemy combatants, and arguably, bin Laden could have been so classified.  However, the rules of war most certainly do not allow summary execution, torture, rendition, or the intentional targeting of civilians. 

      I don’t think the Americans are necessarily wrong to believe they are engaged in a war.  And if it is a war, then they are not bound by the rules of civil society.  However, they remain bound by the rules of war, and some of their actions are certainly prohibited by the Hague and Geneva Conventions.  Whether bin Laden’s killing is one of those, I’m not so sure.

      The thing is, agreeing with Bush that there is a war, doesn’t mean I agree at all with the manner in which he and his successor are pursuing it.  So, to say that I “accept this kind of thinking” is a complete distortion of what I’ve actually said.

    • rajend naidu says:

      07:38am | 26/05/11

      @ Macon Paine : Thank you for directing me to that You Tube “analysis” of the bin Laden Killing which questions whether justice was done notwithstanding the American claims that justice has been done.Now , that’s critical thinking. The kind of thinking that Marley does not display despite his claims to being a free thinker. Paine ,you are the reason I engage in this forum. Gives me a chance to pick up something useful.

    • rajend naidu says:

      08:29am | 26/05/11

      @ Liam : You also make it worthwhile engaging in this forum because you show you use a good clear head to think through an issue such as the one under discussion here and not accept what’s presented as gospel. It’s a rare quality these days. You are the true free thinker unlike Marley who lays a false claim to being one.

    • marley says:

      11:09am | 26/05/11

      rajend - maybe you should read what I actually said,  not what you think I said, before tossing around accusations.  Hint:  I said that, in war, soldiers shoot one another.  You might think that implies that it’s okay to torture enemy soldiers, but I don’t, and neither do the Geneva Conventions.

    • Harquebus says:

      11:35am | 27/05/11

      How do you declare war on ‘unlawful’ combatants?

    • marley says:

      06:49pm | 27/05/11

      Ummm. You don’t.  They’ve declared war on you.

    • Jake Sanchez says:

      04:07pm | 07/01/12

      Do you think that Syria spying on dissidents?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Malcolm Farr

@AndrewCatsaras Agreed. Kills more people than AIDS. Yet tolerated. Meanwhile: Good Insiders piece again Andrew.

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @JamieTravers: I'm in Europe and don't care for Eurovision, why is my twitter feed filled with Aussies recounting the bloody thing!?

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter