Bin Laden's Dead.

I no longer read Karl, or Klimmer, both live in a world of their minds own creation and both need to study something besides what they choose to believe.

There's no reasoning with those two, they just spew, the same crapola, over and over

Coz wrote


I have to hope you're kidding on this. I mean, if you're willing to advocate invading a country and violently dominating it to control resources, you're advocating killing thousands of innocent people in the process. How is that so different from Bin Laden advocating killing thousands of innocent people to push them out of dominating Muslim Countries? It this just plain cold selfishness without any morality? We only hate evil when it's directed against us?

He is EXACTLY the person who campaigned. I recall all the stary eyed bullshit on this forum during the election - dumbasses painting President Obama to be the 2nd Coming of the Mahatma or something.

Those people were not actually listening to what the candidate was saying...

DMT

"WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe....

Klimmer said

"You seem to think that all Dems, Progressives, Liberals, and Independents are enthralled with Obama. Got news for you, we aren't. He has turned out to be someone else other than the person who campaigned and made all those wonderful promises."


Which promises? I have several friends who have this attitude and most of their complaints are about things that he promised TO do (like commit more troops to Afghanistan and make the Afghanistan/Pakistan border our focus in the "war on terror") or about things that he has little power to actually control (like trying Guantanamo detainees in the States). If you actually respond to this post, please leave anything sourced at Infowars or about Arks on the moon. Thanks.

A group of web-organized Democrats calling itself the New Progressive Alliance has rallied together in the hopes of challenging Barack Obama in the 2012 Democratic presidential primaries. They are looking for a candidate who will support the following values:

1) Full Employment
2) Medicare for All
3) Civil Rights/Human Rights/Civil Liberties
4) Fair Trade
5) End the Wars Now

Steal money from the productive, redistribute to those that do not produce.

Vote Fattrad/Walling 2012

Endorsed by John Long (you guys trust him, right??)

Anyone who still falls for the media fed stories, has not paid attention in a long time.

A group of web-organized Democrats calling itself the New Progressive Alliance has rallied together in the hopes of challenging Barack Obama in the 2012 Democratic presidential primaries. They are looking for a candidate who will support the following values:

1) Full Employment
2) Medicare for All
3) Civil Rights/Human Rights/Civil Liberties
4) Fair Trade
5) End the Wars Now

You know what else is funny?

People turning to Alex Jone$ and other tin foilers while bitching that the MSM feeds us crap for profit. Alex Jone$ is laughing hi$ way to the bank. Where would he be without the kooks?

Quick question:
Does anyone know why "we" killed Osama, instead of keeping him under perpetual surveillance?
All we needed to do is bug his compound, follow his couriers and bug their residences/phones/computers, etc., and AQ could have been so thoroughly compromised that the "war on terror" may actually have been won.

My theory: Obama would rather have the political gain from having killed Osama than the benefit of spying on him, as the spying can't be publicized.

Weak sauce, but I can't think of any other rational explanation.

The Targeted Assassination of Osama Bin Laden
http://mwcnews.net/focus/editorial/10602-assassination-of-bin-laden.html

http://mwcnews.net/component/comprofiler/userprofile/MarjorieCohn.html
"Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and immediate past president of the National Lawyers Guild. She is the author of Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law."
See http://www.marjoriecohn.com



The Targeted Assassination of Osama Bin Laden
Monday, 09 May 2011 19:24
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.