Posted on 05/08/2011 9:03:35 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion admitted on Thursday that he felt “very uncomfortable” with the killing of Osama bin Laden when he was unarmed.
Contrary to initial reports that bin Laden had engaged in a 40-minute gun fight with U.S. Navy Seals, it emerged on Wednesday that the al-Qaida leader had been unarmed when he was shot dead in his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on Sunday.
Answering a question about the killing at a press briefing, Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams also criticized conflicting reports coming from the White House about the events surrounding bin Laden’s death.
“I think the killing of an unarmed man is always going to leave a very uncomfortable feeling because it doesn’t look as if justice is seen to be done,” he said. “In those circumstances I think it’s also true that the different versions of events that have emerged in recent days have not done a great deal to help.”
White House and Defense Department officials have come under fire after admitting that initial briefings on bin Laden’s final hours were wrong.
The legality of the killing has been called into question, with U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay calling for a “full disclosure of the accurate facts.”
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder came out in defense of the Navy SEALs' actions. "The operation against Bin Laden was justified as an act of national self-defense," he said.
Further controversy has been fueled by U.S. President Barack Obama’s decision not to publish photos of bin Laden’s body as proof of his death.
Graphic images have been released of three men in bin Laden’s inner circle who were also shot dead in the raid.
There had been some pressure on Obama to release the photos in order to put an end to conspiracy theories that bin Laden is still alive.
Speaking to CBS’s 60 Minutes program, Obama defended his decision.
“It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence," he said. “You know, we don’t trot out this stuff as trophies. The fact of the matter is this was somebody who was deserving of the justice that he received.
“But we don’t need to spike the football.”
Gee, that’s too bad.
More liberal insanity. Were the 3000 ghosts of 9/11 armed ??
War is uncomfortable. If they haven’t learned that by now, they’ll never learn it. Leave it up to those that are willing to defend this country.
Hey, ARchbishop Williams, go pound sand.
Dr. Williams is a bit far from the White House, apparently he didn’t get Obama’s talking points timely enough to defend the action effectively.
The good archbishop makes me uncomfortable as well. That is why I left his church.
Gee, if I remember correctly. THE 3000 MURDERED IN THE TWIN TOWERS WERE UNARMED.
I see nothing wrong here. I do think the Archbishop is an idiot and an AlQaida syncophant.
Put him on the same list.
Who was it who had the florescent green hand gun then?
Archbishop of Canterbury, just another liberal politician with a fancier wardrobe.
I wonder if the beheading of Coptic Christians makes him the least a bit uncomfortable?
Osama Bin Laden put himself in the category of "may be armed, considered dangerous" by his actions and displays. He was seldom pictured without an AK47, in his hands or next to him.
Only a fool would allow Bin Laden a chance to fire first
Dr. Williams is supposed to be the “defender of the faith”. But he is just an appeaser both internally (gay clergy) and externally (Muslim encroachment). He is a disgrace and should resign.
“Contrary to initial reports that bin Laden had engaged in a 40-minute gun fight with U.S. Navy Seals”
The reports I saw said the SEALS were there for 45 minutes. I figure two minute gunfight, 43 minutes gathering info
These are the very people who just love hopey changey.
Next thing we know they’ll be demanding he give back his Nobel PP.
How did this man get to be an Archbishop? He needs to read the Bible, so that he can learn what true justice is.
Whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed (Gen.9:6)
He who kills a man shall be put to death (Exod.21:12;Num.35:30)
He who takes the life of another human being must be put to death (Lev.24:7)
I would be uncomfortable if the usual far leftists were not uncomfortable.
The Archbishop was asked about the above verses some time back if I remember correctly.
Rowan Williams believes that all of the above verses refer to Israel as a theocracy. It no longer applies to Christians today when they dispense justice today. In other words they are as inapplicable as requiring babie boys born in Chrisian families to be circumsized or requiring animal sacrifices.
Not saying I agree with him, just telling you his attempt at rationalizing his beliefs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.