A long time ago there were two groups of people, the technologically advanced humans and the tribal Homo suffuscus. I was born of the latter, raised among the former, and later rejoined the latter.
To the humans, the Homo suffuscus had little of merit. They were crude, amoral killers who were never interested in negotiations. If a human tried to approach one, he'd be shot at long before he ever got within earshot. Homo suffuscus had no respect for life - plus, they walked around naked like so many animals, hunted and gathered for their food, and behaved generally savagely. Even worse, they'd invade the humans' encampments, sabotage mining and/or lumbering equipment, and wipe out the entire staffs of such encampments. They did so, most importantly, entirely unprovoked.
To the Homo suffuscus, the humans were alien invaders. They looked funny, smelled funny, and had very strange customs. But besides all that, they destroyed everything they touched. Acre after acre of pristine virgin forest were decimated as they cut paths of destruction into the land. They polluted rivers and the air itself. Valuable food resources were lost forever. Life was disrupted in village after village as these aliens burned and cut their way further inland. Many fine warriors lost their lives defending their families, and for what? Thousands of people died, even ones who tried to run away. There was no safe place to run to. Every human killed was only replaced by ten more.
I find Bin Laden despicable because he arranged for an attack on the enormous, powerful USA, knowing that in retaliation we would wipe out an entire people to ensure our safety. I find the USA despicable because we're doing it. I have no sympathy for Bin Laden, but I relate to the anti-US Muslims who have now become our targets in the attempt to kill the bastard(s) responsible. I also relate to the US.
Morality is subjective. Cutting down trees for profit is not amoral to humans, and protecting their land and families by killing humans is not amoral to Homo suffuscus. The current situation only works as a parallel if you take Bin Laden as an individual out of the picture and replace him with all the Middle Eastern peoples who have recently become the West's sworn enemies. But if you do that, it works beautifully.
The Shawnee are another example. Honorable warriors they were, always attacking and killing under a strict moral code. Lying, however, was always inexcusable. It was such a horrible sin that their language didn't even have adequate words to describe it - everyone simply knew better. When White man showed up, the Shawnee were introduced to a new moral code: to kill a White man was a capital crime, and lying was ordinary, acceptable behavior.
It's easy for us here in Western Civilisation to say we know the difference between right and wrong, and that it's instinctual. We don't have anything different to compare our code to. Suicide is another example: in the West it's bad, and in the East it's honorable. Westerners found the Kamikazes outrageous; to the Japanese, they used a viable wartime tactic.
Who's right, then, and who's wrong? I think that's an inappropriate question. A better one is more along the lines of, why does each side believe in what they do? I find that in most situations, both (or all) sides are neither right nor wrong, but a little of each, depending on how well they balance honor, compassion, selfishness, and good and poor judgment.
Even the angelic system seems to work this way. I've talked to a few angels who seemed to have a less than compassionate attitude, and did their jobs by following the rules. I'm only familiar with a handful of the rules, but in ways some seem counterintuitive from my own moral perspective. If angels do things that I place firmly in the "wrong" category, what does that say for morality?
There is objective truth, of course. I'd never deny that. But the only way to see objective truth for what it is is to see everything. Not a single one of us can do that. I'm reminded again of my metaphor of the mile-long wall mural, and how each of us is looking at it through a carboard toilet-paper tube. What we see through that tube is our own subjective reality. And very few of us will see the same things in the same way.