It lists no evidence. It merely states that the U.S. government reached a conclusion. And I do not accept this conclusion without something more concrete. I notice that our government is indiscriminately shutting down internet access and money transfer capabilities of those who have absolutely no relationship in fact to Al Quada or bin Laden.
I know that it is just to kill civilians in Afghanistan under the circumstances explained in the article.
No you don't. Civilians are not responsible for what a Saudi National planned while inside their borders (if in fact he really did).
It lists no evidence. From the White Paper:
62. From intelligence sources, the following facts have been established subsequent to 11 September; for intelligence reasons, the names of associates, though known, are not given.
- In the run-up to 11 September, Bin Laden was mounting a concerted propaganda campaign amongst like-minded groups of people - including videos and documentation - justifying attacks on Jewish and American targets; and claiming that those who died in the course of them were carrying out God's work.
- We have learned, subsequent to 11 September, that Bin Laden himself asserted shortly before 11 September that he was preparing a major attack on America.
- In August and early September close associates of Bin Laden were warned to return to Afghanistan from other parts of the world by 10 September.
- Immediately prior to 11 September some known associates of Bin Laden were naming the date for action as on or around 11 September.
- A senior associate claimed to have trained some of the hijackers in Afghanistan.
- Since 11 September we have learned that one of Bin Laden's closest and most senior associates was responsible for the detailed planning of the attacks.
- There is evidence of a very specific nature relating to the guilt of Bin Laden and his associates that is too sensitive to release.
Civilians are not responsible
Some are and some, perhaps, most, are not. Quoting myself:
As we've seen, strikes against civilians are nearly always unjust. However, in the context of an overall just war, tactical strikes against civilian population are permissible whenever the enemy forces mingle with it. In such case, the victimization is initiated by the enemy's soldiers who, in effect, take civilians as hostages. The combatants on the just side may strike at civilians as long as the primary target is the enemy combatants. The difference between this situation and a criminal hostage crisis being resolved by police is that the police has a contractual responsibility to protect the hostage, and the soldier's don't have any special responsibilities toward the enemy's civilians.