Osama Dead

[mylestheslasher]

28 pages in this thread. I cant read all that.

Can someone list the good guys and bad guys here (and I mean posters, not international terrorists)

Of course.

Moderates = Tyrones Own and Mike Sheehy. The moderates are in favour of invading countries, blowing the shite out of people in the middle east and take their cue from George Bush and Fox news.

Extremists = Pretty much everyone else. The extremists are anti semites, Anti american, rascists and *insert slur here" maniacs who oppose blowing the shite out of people in the middle east and oppose the invasion of countries for false reasons. These sick bastards try to point out the slaughter that mostly goes unreported in the west and some of these cretins even went to the middle east and didn't take Fox news word for it.

PS- Some Moderates can be detected by their abuse of little yellow faces in their posts and their unwillingness to answer any questions to back up their opinions.

[deiseach]

Lord God....ah sure ye lads just continue with
the conveyor belt of insults, I'm sure its fairly clear
To most on here that it's all ye have going at this stage.
It doesn't make ye look childish at all...really! 

Bit rich coming from someone who dismissed those who disagreed with you on the oh-so-grown-up basis that they must be unemployed

And how right was I...anyone with time to go digging posts up from last year in
An attempt to substantiate an argument has clearly too much time on his hands   

Check who has the most posts out of the two of us

[johnneycool]

Do you think this is a war crime TO?

Wouldn't really consider myself an expert on international law AZ but conducting a Military assassination of an unarmed man within the confines of a Sovereign nation without permission and without reading him his Miranda rights or any chance at all at a fair trial, then disposing of his body/evidence into the ocean so quickly would seem to me that yes, it could easily be viewed as a war crime.

I was simply interested in the expert views from the choir here that were soiling themselves whilst singing from the rafters about war crimes when Bush was in office...but nope, surprisingly  not a cheep!

On this point I'm in total agreement with TO. It was a war crime and should be called as such irrespective of who the recipient of the 'justice' was and who gave the order.

I'm away to lie down in a darkened room now.

[deiseach]

On this point I'm in total agreement with TO. It was a war crime and should be called as such irrespective of who the recipient of the 'justice' was and who gave the order.

I'm away to lie down in a darkened room now.

I wouldn't call it a war crime. It was murder. Murder of a very bad man, but still murder

[Declan]

Interesting article from Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past President of the National Lawyers Guild,

The Targeted Assassination of Osama Bin Laden
by Marjorie Cohn
When he announced that Osama bin Laden had been killed by a Navy Seal team in Pakistan, President Barack Obama said, "Justice has been done." Mr. Obama misused the word, "justice" when he made that statement. He should have said, "Retaliation has been accomplished." A former professor of constitutional law should know the difference between those two concepts. The word "justice" implies an act of applying or upholding the law.

Targeted assassinations violate well-established principles of international law. Also called political assassinations, they are extrajudicial executions. These are unlawful and deliberate killings carried out by order of, or with the acquiescence of, a government, outside any judicial framework.

Extrajudicial executions are unlawful, even in armed conflict. In a 1998 report, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions noted that "extrajudicial executions can never be justified under any circumstances, not even in time of war." The U.N. General Assembly and Human Rights Commission, as well as Amnesty International, have all condemned extrajudicial executions.

In spite of its illegality, the Obama administration frequently uses targeted assassinations to accomplish its goals. Five days after executing Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama tried to bring "justice" to U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, who has not been charged with any crime in the United States. The unmanned drone attack in Yemen missed al-Awlaki and killed two people "believed to be al Qaeda militants," according to a CBS/AP bulletin.

Two days before the Yemen attack, U.S. drones killed 15 people in Pakistan and wounded four. Since the March 17 drone attack that killed 44 people, also in Pakistan, there have been four drone strikes. In 2010, American drones carried out 111 strikes. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan says that 957 civilians were killed in 2010.

The United States disavowed the use of extrajudicial killings under President Gerald Ford. After the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence disclosed in 1975 that the CIA had been involved in several murders or attempted murders of foreign leaders, President Ford issued an executive order banning assassinations. Every succeeding president until George W. Bush renewed that order. However, the Clinton administration targeted Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, but narrowly missed him.

In July 2001, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel denounced Israel's policy of targeted killings, or "preemptive operations." He said "the United States government is very clearly on the record as against targeted assassinations. They are extrajudicial killings, and we do not support that."

Yet after September 11, 2001, former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer invited the killing of Saddam Hussein: "The cost of one bullet, if the Iraqi people take it on themselves, is substantially less" than the cost of war. Shortly thereafter, Bush issued a secret directive, which authorized the CIA to target suspected terrorists for assassination when it would be impractical to capture them and when large-scale civilian casualties could be avoided.

In November 2002, Bush reportedly authorized the CIA to assassinate a suspected Al Qaeda leader in Yemen. He and five traveling companions were killed in the hit, which Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz described as a "very successful tactical operation."

After the Holocaust, Winston Churchill wanted to execute the Nazi leaders without trials. But the U.S. government opposed the extrajudicial executions of Nazi officials who had committed genocide against millions of people. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, who served as chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, told President Harry Truman: "We could execute or otherwise punish [the Nazi leaders] without a hearing. But undiscriminating executions or punishments without definite findings of guilt, fairly arrived at, would ... not set easily on the American conscience or be remembered by children with pride."

Osama bin Laden and the "suspected militants" targeted in drone attacks should have been arrested and tried in U.S. courts or an international tribunal. Obama cannot serve as judge, jury and executioner. These assassinations are not only illegal; they create a dangerous precedent, which could be used to justify the targeted killings of U.S. leaders.

[heganboy]

conducting a Military assassination of an unarmed man within the confines of a Sovereign nation without permission and without reading him his Miranda rights or any chance at all at a fair trial, then disposing of his body/evidence into the ocean so quickly would seem to me that yes, it could easily be viewed as a war crime.

I was simply interested in the expert views from the choir here that were soiling themselves whilst singing from the rafters about war crimes when Bush was in office...but nope, surprisingly  not a cheep!

freedom fighter/ terrorist type discussion that is purely subjective IMHO

War crime- or act of war?

As we know well from growing up in the North, the rules are not the same for both sides in the engagement. In order to "win" the only thing you court is the good will of your supporters and the maximum damage to the other side

[gallsman]

Just wait, soon Marjorie Cohn will be an anti-American anti-Semite.

[Tyrones own]

Lord God....ah sure ye lads just continue with
the conveyor belt of insults, I'm sure its fairly clear
To most on here that it's all ye have going at this stage.
It doesn't make ye look childish at all...really! 

Bit rich coming from someone who dismissed those who disagreed with you on the oh-so-grown-up basis that they must be unemployed

And how right was I...anyone with time to go digging posts up from last year in
An attempt to substantiate an argument has clearly too much time on his hands   

Check who has the most posts out of the two of us

I have only the one alias on here though! 

[Tyrones own]

Just wait, soon Marjorie Cohn will be an anti-American anti-Semite.

Agh sure your just frustrated by how your love and admiration for
Obama has gotten in the way of the vitriol filled agenda ye have for the US.
Keep it up...makes for comedic reading 

[Tyrones own]

On this point I'm in total agreement with TO. It was a war crime and should be called as such irrespective of who the recipient of the 'justice' was and who gave the order.

I'm away to lie down in a darkened room now.

I wouldn't call it a war crime. It was murder. Murder of a very bad man, but still murder

Of course you wouldn't....had it happened 3 years ago you would
undoubtedly have seen it differently though!

[deiseach]

On this point I'm in total agreement with TO. It was a war crime and should be called as such irrespective of who the recipient of the 'justice' was and who gave the order.

I'm away to lie down in a darkened room now.

I wouldn't call it a war crime. It was murder. Murder of a very bad man, but still murder

Of course you wouldn't....had it happened 3 years ago you would
undoubtedly have seen it differently though!

No, I wouldn't. To call the death of one person a 'war crime' cheapens the concept. Besides, how does saying this was murder fit in with your cherished belief that we all think Obama's shat don't stank?

[deiseach]

Lord God....ah sure ye lads just continue with
the conveyor belt of insults, I'm sure its fairly clear
To most on here that it's all ye have going at this stage.
It doesn't make ye look childish at all...really! 

Bit rich coming from someone who dismissed those who disagreed with you on the oh-so-grown-up basis that they must be unemployed

And how right was I...anyone with time to go digging posts up from last year in
An attempt to substantiate an argument has clearly too much time on his hands   

Check who has the most posts out of the two of us

I have only the one alias on here though! 

As do I.

[tyssam5]

This is for MikeSheehy

Welcome to a higher state of consciousness. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9gWA491H4U&feature=related

BTW I think his use of the name of a GAA legend is well out of order considering what he does under the name.

you are a very dangerous individual seafoid and I will continue to call you for what you are, if that irks you and some others on here then so be it.
A lot of bad things can happen when one race , religion or nationality is demonized and all right thinking people should speak up when they see it happen.

This from the man who's favorite insult to his fellow Irishmen on the board is 'Brit-boy'. Good man Mike, you're a joke and hypocrite!

[deiseach]

This from the man who's favorite insult to his fellow Irishmen on the board is 'Brit-boy'. Good man Mike, you're a joke and hypocrite!

You must have missed the memo. When you're a moderate, you can be as extreme as you like

[deiseach]