"Freedom Watch" calls the President a criminal for killing Bin Laden

[Vast LWC]

And stand up to them is what we BETTER start doing.

Okie doke, whatever you say Ostephanie Bin Laden.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Excuse me Vern, did the events occurr on the battlefield or at his residence?

.

A safe house.

Are you going to tell us now that the military isn't justified in raiding a safe house to go after a key AQ figure?

Are you going to tell me that the executive branch should be allowed to murder suspects?

.

Are you trolling or are you mentally handicapped?

 

[Vast LWC]

And stand up to them is what we BETTER start doing.

Yeah, you BETTER start standing up to people who kill Osama Bin Laden...

or else all your terrorist buddies might get shot too...

and then how would you fools be able to scare the American Public into voting you into office?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why are people claiming it was illegal under international law? Which law, specifically. Or agreement, or whatever you wish to call it.

Well we basically violated another country's sovereignty, and killed someone that was wanted, but unarmed, and pretty much did instant justice. A lot of rumors are going around, and so a lot of details about the whole operation is unclear. So to be honest there isn't anything that could be said with certainty that its factual. With that being said we are wrong to have just killed him like that on the spot. And we should have brought him into our custody, and put him on trial. That is how you deal with war criminals and terrorist. We've done this to people in the past that have done more heinous crimes than OBL.

So do you agree with what the rest of the righties here are tacitly admitting with taking that position...i.e....

that our invasion of of the sovereign nation of Afghanistan violated international law in 2001??

Really??

this is very new stuff from the Right...fascinating!

 

[NYcarbineer]

And, again, I'm not even sure why we are having this conversation.

The only reason to bother to bring this subject up is to try and defend Osama Bin Laden in order to score some political points.

Because, in order for Obama to be prosecuted for a "crime" in this case, there would have to be a party that was harmed. That party would be Osama Bin Laden.

So it would behoove OBAMA to get his story straight and Cease PLAYING POLITICS with it for his Re-election BID...

Make sense?

Are you disappointed that the President didn't put on a flight suit and land at ground zero in a helicopter??

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So when did the left start supporting the government? OH thats right when Obamush became president. Gotr it. I hoipe the government views me as a TERRORIST and fears me I honestly do. When the government no longer fears you it's because you have become a subject.

And when did the right become a bunch of traitors that side with Osama Bin Laden?

Oh, that's right, when their side lost an election.

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

But we can't just fly into Pakistan and kill someone who lives there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej8HpXcR6_s]YouTube - Obama Will Kill Bin Laden[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"Freedom Watch" calls the President a criminal for killing Bin Laden

Where HAS The DICK; Armey been hiding (since the '10 election), ANYhow?????



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XapEwziBd8]YouTube - OBAMA ON CBS: BIN LADEN MUST BE CAUGHT[/ame]​

 

[Vast LWC]

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

FALSE? LOL.

Who is the injured party here?

That's right, Osama Bin Laden.

Attempting to accuse Obama of a crime here is defending the rights of Osama Bin Laden.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

FALSE? LOL.

Who is the injured party here?

That's right, Osama Bin Laden.

Attempting to accuse Obama of a crime here is defending the rights of Osama Bin Laden.

Do you have a memory loss problem? Here's your false claim post

So when did the left start supporting the government? OH thats right when Obamush became president. Gotr it. I hoipe the government views me as a TERRORIST and fears me I honestly do. When the government no longer fears you it's because you have become a subject.

And when did the right become a bunch of traitors that side with Osama Bin Laden?

Oh, that's right, when their side lost an election.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What does any of that have to do with Bush's going after Bin Laden?

As usual, you are trying to include Iraq in the hunt for Bin Laden, as if it were somehow part of the same action.

Follow the post in order it answers the original comment

1

2


3

Bush in Jail? A Possibility?

Just for chits and grins

May Day '05 in New York (Soviet Union Square)

Raymond Velencia Released from OCA to Go to GOA with JP’s Blessing… Justice Denied! « Voices from Russia

Try as you might to educate these cetins? You only push your joints toward carpel tunnel my friend...they are too ensconsed in thier alternate Universe...

NO. I would like the NAMES OF LIBERALS who attacked Bush FOR GOING AFTER BIN LADEN.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So when did the left start supporting the government? OH thats right when Obamush became president. Gotr it. I hoipe the government views me as a TERRORIST and fears me I honestly do. When the government no longer fears you it's because you have become a subject.

And when did the right become a bunch of traitors that side with Osama Bin Laden?

Oh, that's right, when their side lost an election.

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

Contumnacious said that the President murdered Bin Laden. Whose side is he on?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just for clarification in this long thread, which ones of you believe that what the President did was unconstitutional?

 

[NYcarbineer]

But I guess, what this whole thread comes down to is this one thing:

Even if there are any questions of legality surrounding Osama Bin Laden's death...

Why, for fucks sake, would you take the time and effort to try to draw attention to them???

Everyone knows what needed to be done, and it was done. End of story.

Was it legal, Mr Napolitano? Who the fuck cares?

You know it was the RIGHT thing to do, so shut the fuck up about it, and move on.

wow, so EVERYONE should just shut up and not QUESTION the Decisions by our Elected boyking. funny shit, People didn't have a problem questioning EVERYTHING Bush did.
can you believe this folks???

Who HERE questioned Bush going into Afghanistan after Bin Laden?

Please name some or yes, shut the fuck up and quit embarassing yourself.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me help some of you doosh sacks out:

The vote to authorize the action in Afghanistan was

420 to 1 in the House.

98 to 0 in the Senate.

Now, let's get back to those claims about how most liberals were against Bush going after Bin Laden.

Let's hear some of you big mouth fucks elaborate on your claim.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And when did the right become a bunch of traitors that side with Osama Bin Laden?

Oh, that's right, when their side lost an election.

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

Contumnacious said that the President murdered Bin Laden. Whose side is he on?

According to the laws and standards OF conduct for the U.S. Who's side is Obammush on?

3. Civilian Internees
According to Joint Pub 1-02, a “civilian internee” is a
civilian who is interned during armed conflict or occupation
due to$
_ Operations security considerations of the armed
force that took the civilian into custody.
_ A need to protect the civilian.
_ Alleged unauthorized participation in hostile acts
such as sabotage, attacking U.S. forces, and storing
weapons in their home. These people are
sometimes called “unprivileged combatants.” Civilian
internees are not entitled to EPW status;
however, they still are protected to a lesser degree
by the Geneva Conventions. (There is a
separate Geneva Convention concerning the protection
of civilians.)

http://www.hqmc.usmc.mil/PP&O/PS/psl/corrections/Policies/mcr4118c.pdf

I thought the left wanted to mirandize anyone captured by U.S. Forces? What changed?

 

[paperview]

Let me help some of you doosh sacks out:

The vote to authorize the action in Afghanistan was

420 to 1 in the House.

98 to 0 in the Senate.

Now, let's get back to those claims about how most liberals were against Bush going after Bin Laden.

Let's hear some of you big mouth fucks elaborate on your claim.

*ouch*

 

[The T]

False claims are hard to pin on someone who on this board is siding with Bin Laden?

Contumnacious said that the President murdered Bin Laden. Whose side is he on?

According to the laws and standards OF conduct for the U.S. Who's side is Obammush on?

3. Civilian Internees
According to Joint Pub 1-02, a “civilian internee” is a
civilian who is interned during armed conflict or occupation
due to$
_ Operations security considerations of the armed
force that took the civilian into custody.
_ A need to protect the civilian.
_ Alleged unauthorized participation in hostile acts
such as sabotage, attacking U.S. forces, and storing
weapons in their home. These people are
sometimes called “unprivileged combatants.” Civilian
internees are not entitled to EPW status;
however, they still are protected to a lesser degree
by the Geneva Conventions. (There is a
separate Geneva Convention concerning the protection
of civilians.)

http://www.hqmc.usmc.mil/PP&O/PS/psl/corrections/Policies/mcr4118c.pdf

I thought the left wanted to mirandize anyone captured by U.S. Forces? What changed?

"Unprivileged Combatants"? Really? What the HELL does that even mean?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Follow the post in order it answers the original comment

1

2


3

Try as you might to educate these cetins? You only push your joints toward carpel tunnel my friend...they are too ensconsed in thier alternate Universe...

NO. I would like the NAMES OF LIBERALS who attacked Bush FOR GOING AFTER BIN LADEN.

Here's the statement in context so let's keep it real.

That's exactly what a large portion on the left are, they praise Obamush for exactly the samething they wanted to jail Bush for.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

January 13, 2008​

"The recession-deniers were muzzled by a horrendous last two weeks of December, and the gloom-and-doomers are now out in force. Their key arguments:

* Plummeting housing will now drag down the rest of the economy.

*The "bad debt" problem is not just "sub-prime" folks who should never have have taken out mortgages in the first place. It includes credit card debt, "high quality" mortgages, car loans, and other leverage that have recently become a consumer way of life.

*Pressure on consumers is leading to a reduction in consumer spending (70% of economy), which, in turn, will lead to a reduction in spending by companies that sell stuff to consumers.

*The question now is not "will there be a recession?" but "how bad will it get?"

*The most optimistic forecasts in a NYT gloom-and-doom round-up are for three crappy quarters, regardless of what the Fed does. Less optimistic forecasts suggest that we are, well, screwed.

After blowing the last downturn, we've been worried this one since last summer (see below). We also suspect that, given the importance of housing to the economy and debt to consumer spending, the recession will be deeper and more prolonged than people think."

"U.S. Economy Screwed"​

​