# Osama Bin Laden’s Shrine



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

No such a thing, it appears…

But anyway, given a chance, now or anytime in the future, would you pay a visit to it?

Just two options: Yes or No. Either way, why?


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2011)

I'm sorry, huh? Why would there be one? Who would build it? Sorry, the whole premise of the poll is just bizarre to me.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

The sole reason that his body was dumped at the sea and not buried someplace aground, as normally a body would, was so that there wouldn’t be a shrine to Bin Laden. I don’t know how anyone could have missed that nugget of the news. Who would build such a shrine? Plenty of people, obviously. To suggest otherwise is even more of a ridiculous premise, as implied by the US government. And plenty others would definitely attend it, no doubt, if for various of reasons.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

I would, just to spit on his grave!


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

You see, what did I tell ya?


----------



## dandylion (Dec 9, 2010)

Samurai is right. Only to spit on it.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

Wouldn't waste my time ... 

Besides, he's dead now ... let's get on with life.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I grew up in New York and had friends die in the Trade Towers. He's dead. Good riddance. Let's move on. I would never visit his shrine.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I wouldn't even dignify this poll with a vote, much less his shrine.


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2011)

Anybody who knows me on here knows there isn't much about this administration that I like. But I think turning bin Laden into fish food was an excellent idea. Let him now fade into oblivion, where he belongs . . . and dare anybody to erect a shrine to him. The fact that over the last 10 years he has helped kill more Muslims than Americans, I think, suggests that nobody will be in a hurry to erect any shrines.


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

DrMike said:


> The fact that over the last 10 years he has helped kill *more Muslims than Americans*, I think, suggests that nobody will be in a hurry to erect any shrines.


I realize this is a bit nitpicky and not directly in response to the main point of your post (with which I can't say I disagree), but I do feel it should be pointed out that the categories of "Muslim" and "American" are not mutually exclusive. And I know you weren't necessarily implying that they are.

The association in the minds of many between Muslims and terrorism (an association Bin Laden helped create) has made life pretty unpleasant for a lot of Muslim Americans.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Excellent idea ............ why don't we have shrines for David Koresh and Jim Jones? Let's start a new poll for them while we are thinking about shrines.


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2011)

Serge said:


> The sole reason that his body was dumped at the sea and not buried someplace aground, as normally a body would, was so that there wouldn't be a shrine to Bin Laden. I don't know how anyone could have missed that nugget of the news. Who would build such a shrine? Plenty of people, obviously. To suggest otherwise is even more of a ridiculous premise, as implied by the US government. And plenty others would definitely attend it, no doubt, if for various of reasons.


I still don't see how suggesting otherwise is a ridiculous premise. How many similar people have had shrines erected to them in the past? What past experience suggests that there would have been such a shrine in this case? How many other terrorists and mass murderers have had shrines erected in their honor? Explain to me why my suggestion is the more ridiculous one.


----------



## KJohnson (Dec 31, 2010)

Don't patronize the punishment of Bin Laden. He was just another criminal who got killed. There are many other criminals... Some are worse. A lot of them are in suits and ties. Don't patronize a single one of them - a disadvantaged, superstitious rebel.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

I would rather visit Ainola. Sorry, criminals and mass-murderers don't mean terribly much to me. I didn't celebrate his death; there was no point. Why visit the shrine of someone I care nothing for?


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

Aren't there more interesting places to visit? I couldn't care less about that person to be honest.


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

I would, has some contemporary historical value


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

DrMike said:


> I still don't see how suggesting otherwise is a ridiculous premise. How many similar people have had shrines erected to them in the past? What past experience suggests that there would have been such a shrine in this case? How many other terrorists and mass murderers have had shrines erected in their honor? Explain to me why my suggestion is the more ridiculous one.


Here's a nice read that should bring you up on the issue:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13264959


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

I had pretty much already agreed that burying him at sea was a mistake.
Now, reading your interesting text, I'm not as sure.
The bottom line is that there were pros and cons in burying him at sea within 24 hours.
Obviously the administration thought that the pros outweighed the cons.
But the pros and cons may be quite balanced and equivalent so either way of dealing with his body would have had advantages and disadvantages.


----------



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

There is only one group of people who would want to visit a Shrine like that. Extremist Muslims. If such a Shrine were to be built I can imagine a thick film of saliva on it!

On a lighter note, police in South London have arrested 3 out of 4 terrorist suspects: Bin Snortin, Bin Dealin and Bin Thievin. There was no sign of Bin Workin.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

Not after my unfortunate incident while I was diving near the coast of Pakistan.


----------

