Why register with the Steelers Fever Forums?
 • Intelligent and friendly discussions.
 • It's free and it's quick. Always.
 • Enter events in the forums calendar.
 • Very user friendly software.
 • Exclusive contests and giveaways.

 Donate to Steelers Fever, Click here
 Our 2013 Goal: $400.00 - To Date: $00.00 (00.00%)
 Home | Forums | Editorials | Shop | Tickets | Downloads | Contact Pittsburgh Steelers Forum Feed Not Just Fans. Hardcore Fans.

Go Back   Steelers Fever Forums > Miscellaneous > Locker Room


Steelers Fever Fan Shop

Doc's Sports Get FREE NFL Picks and College Football picks as well as Football Lines like live NFL Lines and updated NFL Power Rankings all at Doc's Sports Service.

Steelers Steelers - Bills Bills
August 16th, 2014, 7:30pmET

CBS
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-14-2011, 07:26 AM   #81
Atlanta Dan
Resigned
Supporter
 
Atlanta Dan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,264
Member Number: 728
Thanks: 1,945
Thanked 6,135 Times in 2,826 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardisimo View Post

I'm eager to hear what part of Chomsky's comment is actually controversial.
I bold faced it for you - if Chomsky and you think W is a greater criminal than OBL that is an opinion, not an "uncontroversial" fact

As far as the UN being the decider as to what governs the conduct of sovereign nations, the Hamdan majority and dissenting opinions provide a pretty good analysis of that issue with regard to what the U.S. does and does not buy into when it signs an international agreement
Atlanta Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 10:36 AM   #82
SteelersinCA
Team Owner
Supporter
 
SteelersinCA's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,537
Gender: Male
Member Number: 9302
Thanks: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Cohn is a nut. That being said, I think killing Osama as a "commander in the field" is quite a stretch when he's in another sovereign nation. However, i don't have a problem with it.
SteelersinCA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 02:09 PM   #83
Atlanta Dan
Resigned
Supporter
 
Atlanta Dan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,264
Member Number: 728
Thanks: 1,945
Thanked 6,135 Times in 2,826 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead



Pornography found in bin Laden hideout: officials

A stash of pornography was found in the hideout of Osama bin Laden by the U.S. commandos who killed him, current and former U.S. officials said on Friday.

The pornography recovered in bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, consists of modern, electronically recorded video and is fairly extensive, according to the officials, who discussed the discovery with Reuters on condition of anonymity.


http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...74C4RK20110513
Atlanta Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 05:03 PM   #84
ricardisimo
Administrator
 
ricardisimo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lalaland
Posts: 5,426
Gender: Male
Member Number: 15369
Thanks: 318
Thanked 867 Times in 418 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan View Post
I bold faced it for you - if Chomsky and you think W is a greater criminal than OBL that is an opinion, not an "uncontroversial" fact

As far as the UN being the decider as to what governs the conduct of sovereign nations, the Hamdan majority and dissenting opinions provide a pretty good analysis of that issue with regard to what the U.S. does and does not buy into when it signs an international agreement
It's not just an opinion. It's a completely uncontroversial assessment of reality. George Bush launched two thoroughly illegal wars (wars of aggression, the war crime numero uno) against the wishes of the majority back home in what is supposedly a democracy, and in complete contravention of international law. The most conservative bodycount numbers produced by those two wars are in the hundreds of thousands, while others put it in the millions.

Bin Laden, on the other hand, was involved in the USS Cole attack, and was probably involved in 9/11 as well (although now we will never know for sure.) Even assuming that bi Laden's status within al Qaeda is the equivalent of Bush's Commander-in-Chief position, thereby putting all responsibility for the attacks squarely on his shoulders, the numbers still lean heavily against Bush.

All of these people all monsters. We don't need to quibble about that. The comment from Chomsky was that Bush's crimes far exceeded bin Laden's, which is 100% true. And yet it would still be unacceptable for al Qaeda to launch a commando attack in the US to grab Bush, kill him in his home, and then dump his body in the ocean. Nothing Chomsky said qualifies as the ravings of a fanatic... unless one simply never, ever questions the right of the United States government to do whatever it wants to whomever it wants wherever they want to do it, and especially when it is clearly flatly illegal.

I'm at a bit of a loss to draw the connection between Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld and assassinations overseas. The UN and the World Court adjudicate international law. International laws and treaties which the US has signed automatically become the law of the land. What's the complication here?
__________________
Why does God hate amputees?
ricardisimo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 06:22 PM   #85
Atlanta Dan
Resigned
Supporter
 
Atlanta Dan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,264
Member Number: 728
Thanks: 1,945
Thanked 6,135 Times in 2,826 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardisimo View Post
It's not just an opinion. It's a completely uncontroversial assessment of reality. George Bush launched two thoroughly illegal wars (wars of aggression, the war crime numero uno) against the wishes of the majority back home in what is supposedly a democracy, and in complete contravention of international law.

I'm at a bit of a loss to draw the connection between Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld and assassinations overseas. The UN and the World Court adjudicate international law. International laws and treaties which the US has signed automatically become the law of the land. What's the complication here?
I had a lengthy discourse on this board in 2008 (primarily with Preacher) in which I contended W was a war criminal with regard to "enhanced interrogations" (aka torturing) of detainees in violation of the Geneva Convention - so I am not defending W

But as far as the two wars launched by W - both of them were supported by a majority of the American public and Congress when they were launched - if you have any polling data to the contrary feel free to link to it - do not confuse your views (or mine with regard to Iraq) with "the wishes of the majority back home"

And as far as international treaties, I agree the treaties are the law of the land once ratified (whether certain treaty provisions governed treatment of detainees was a big part of what Hamdan was about). I do not understand those treaties to require UN approval before the U.S,.commences military action - the US may go to the UN for PR purposes but if the UN wants to stop the US from declaring war or having Congress otherwise authorize military action (something notably missing from our current excellent adventure in Libya) I doubt the US has signed a treaty that gives the UN the right to do something about it

You and I have a different view as to what constitutes uncontroversial assessments of reality on this point insofar as you contend George W. Bush is clearly a greater criminal than Bin Laden
Atlanta Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 07:49 PM   #86
MasterOfPuppets
Living Legend
Supporter
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,074
Gender: Male
Member Number: 1990
Thanks: 856
Thanked 3,508 Times in 1,523 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Ron Paul is the ONLY one in DC who has the balls to tell the truth

Ron Paul Enters Evidence of Bush War Crimes in Congressional Record



Rep. Ron Paul read the text below into the Congressional Record earlier this year. Paul’s statement provides additional evidence to the established fact the globalist, bonesman, and former CIA director George Bush Senior duped Saddam Hussein, exploited his dispute with Kuwait – accusing Kuwait of slant drilling its oil – and gave Hussein a green light to attack Kuwait.
From the Congressional Record, January 26, 2011, Page H503. It was posted on the Veterans Today website.
The SPEAKER pro tempore.
Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, how did the 20-year war get started?
It had been long assumed that the United States Government, shortly before Iraq invaded Kuwait in August of 1990, gave Saddam Hussein a green light to attack. A State Department cable recently published by WikiLeaks confirmed that U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie did indeed have a conversation with Saddam Hussein one week prior to Iraq’s August 1, 1990, invasion of Kuwait.
Amazingly, the released cable was entitled,
Saddam’s Message of Friendship to President Bush.” (published below)
In it, Ambassador Glaspie affirmed to Saddam that “the President had instructed her to broaden and deepen our relations with Iraq.” As Saddam Hussein outlined Iraq’s ongoing border dispute with Kuwait, Ambassador Glaspie was quite clear that, “we took no position on these Arab affairs.”
There would have been no reason for Saddam Hussein not to take this assurance at face value. The U.S. was quite supportive of his invasion and war of aggression against Iran in the 1980s. With this approval from the U.S. Government, it wasn’t surprising that the invasion occurred. The shock and surprise was how quickly the tables were turned and our friend, Saddam Hussein, all of a sudden became Hitler personified.
The document was classified, supposedly to protect national security, yet this information in no way jeopardized our security. Instead, it served to keep the truth from the American people about an event leading up to our initial military involvement in Iraq and the region that continues to today.
{time} 1440
The secrecy of the memo was designed to hide the truth from the American people and keep our government from being embarrassed. This was the initial event that had led to so much death and destruction–not to mention the financial costs–these past 20 years.
Our response and persistent militarism toward Iraq was directly related to 9/11, as our presence on the Arabian Peninsula–and in particular Saudi Arabia–was listed by al Qaeda as a major grievance that outraged the radicals (sic) who carried out the heinous attacks against New York and Washington on that fateful day.
Today, the conflict has spread through the Middle East and Central Asia with no end in sight.
The reason this information is so important is that if Congress and the American people had known about this green light incident 20 years ago, they would have been a lot more reluctant to give a green light to our government to pursue the current war–a war that is ongoing and expanding to this very day.
The tough question that remains is was this done deliberately to create the justification to redesign the Middle East, as many neo- conservatives desired, and to secure oil supplies for the West; or was it just a diplomatic blunder followed up by many more strategic military blunders? Regardless, we have blundered into a war that no one seems willing to end.

Julian Assange, the publisher of the WikiLeaks memo, is now considered an enemy of the state. Politicians are calling for drastic punishment and even assassination; and, sadly, the majority of the American people seem to support such moves.
But why should we so fear the truth? Why should our government’s lies and mistakes be hidden from the American people in the name of patriotism? Once it becomes acceptable to equate truth with treason, we can no longer call ourselves a free society.”
Historian Mark Zepezauer notes that the equipment to slant drill Iraq’s oil illegally was bought from National Security Council chief Brent Scowcroft’s old company. Kuwait was pumping out around $14-billion worth of oil from beneath Iraqi territory. “Even the territory they were drilling from had originally been Iraq’s. Slant-drilling is enough to get you shot in Texas, and it’s certainly enough to start a war in the Mideast,” writes Zepezauer.
Iraq invaded Kuwait after it broke off negotiations.
Bush and the United Nations ordered the systematic destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity throughout Iraq on January 16, 1991, at 6:30 p.m. EST.
Bush ordered 110,000 air sorties against Iraq, dropping 88,000 tons of bombs, nearly seven times the equivalent of the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima, according to a report sent to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal.
“The intention and effort of the bombing of civilian life and facilities was to systematically destroy Iraq’s infrastructure leaving it in a preindustrial condition. Iraq’s civilian population was dependent on industrial capacities,” Ramsey Clarke and others wrote in 1992. “The U.S. assault left Iraq in a near apocalyptic condition as reported by the first United Nations observers after the war.”
The invasion, enforced blockade of Iraq and the international sanctions which decimated the war-ravaged country for over a decade prepared the people of Iraq for the transformation their modern state into a hellhole now wracked by sectarian violence.
Over 500,000 people were slaughtered in Bush’s war. Between 1991 and 1998, there were 500,000 deaths among Iraqi children under five years of age due to brutal sanctions imposed by the United States and the United Nations. “If you include adults, the figure is now almost certainly well over a million,” Hans Von Sponeck said. Sponeck was a UN Assistant Secretary-General and UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq.
Bush’s son re-invaded Iraq under completely bogus circumstances. George Bush Junior killed or contributed to the death of more than 1.4 million human beings, according to Just Foreign Policy. “Iraq deaths. The number is shocking and sobering. It is at least 10 times greater than most estimates cited in the US media, yet it is based on a scientific study of violent Iraqi deaths caused by the U.S.-led invasion of March 2003,” they write.
The Lancet, estimated that over 600,000 Iraqis had been killed as a result of the invasion as of July 2006. Iraqis have continued to be killed since then. The death counter provides a rough daily update of this number based on a rate of increase derived from the Iraq Body Count… The estimate that over a million Iraqis have died received independent confirmation from a prestigious British polling agency in September 2007. Opinion Research Business estimated that 1.2 million Iraqis have been killed violently since the US-led invasion. This devastating human toll demands greater recognition. It eclipses the Rwandan genocide and our leaders are directly responsible. Little wonder they do not publicly cite it.
And yet Bush and his son are considered by the establishment and millions of Americans to be esteemed elder statesmen, not war criminals.


http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-ent...sional-record/
__________________
“If tyranny and oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” ― James Madison

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." -Thomas Jefferson

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." - Thomas Jefferson

MasterOfPuppets is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2011, 10:18 PM   #87
MasterOfPuppets
Living Legend
Supporter
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,074
Gender: Male
Member Number: 1990
Thanks: 856
Thanked 3,508 Times in 1,523 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

interesting read...

It Begins: US Starting the Baluchi Insurrection

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Bangkok, Thailand May 13, 2011 – In the shadow of the “Bin Laden” media circus and increasingly aggressive rhetoric between Washington and Islamabad, the corporate-financier funded NGOs that fomented the “Arab Spring” are now cultivating a united Baluchi front ahead of a proposed US-funded Baluchistan insurrection. As early as 2006, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace identified Pakistan’s Baluchistan province as a potential point of leverage against Islamabad and an opportunity to assert foreign intervention.

In a 2006 report by the corporate-financier funded think tank titled, “Pakistan: The Resurgence of Baluch Nationalism,” violence starting as early as 2004-2005 is described. According to the report, 20% of Pakistan’s mineral and energy resources reside in the sparsely populated province. On page 4 of the report, the prospect of using the Baluchi rebels against both Islamabad and Tehran is proposed. In Seymour Hersh’s 2008 article, “Preparing the Battlefield,” US support of Baluchi groups operating against Tehran is reported as already a reality. In Brookings Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” the subject of arming and sending Baluchi insurgents against Tehran is also discussed at great depth.


Pipelines, ports, and petroleum: destabilizing and carving off a “free Baluchistan” would hobble the development of 4 nations – Pakistan, Iran, India, and China. With Pakistan’s plans to use the Baluchi port of Gwadar to give Central Asian countries access to the sea facing a failure, it may disrupt their development as well. The globalists then get more time to implement their “international system” in the face of a weakened Asia.

The 2006 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace report makes special note of the fact that above all, the Baluchistan province serves as a transit zone for a potential Iranian-India-Turkmenistan natural gas pipeline as well as a port, Gwadar, that serves as a logistical hub for Afghanistan, Central Asia’s landlocked nations as well as a port for the Chinese. The report notes that the port was primarily constructed with Chinese capital and labor with the intention of it serving as a Chinese naval station “to protect Beijing’s oil supply from the Middle East and to counter the US presence in Central Asia.”

This point in particular, regarding China, was described in extricating detail in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute’s report “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral.” Throughout the report means to co-opt and contain China’s influence throughout the region are discussed.


The Carnegie Endowment report goes on to describe how the Baluchi rebels have fortuitously begun attacking the development of their province over concerns of “marginalization” and “dispossession.”
In particular attacks were launched against the Pakistani military and Chinese facilities. The question of foreign intervention is brought up in this 2006 report, based on accusations by the Pakistani government that the rebels are armed with overly sophisticated weaponry. India, Iran, and the United States are accused as potential culprits.

The report concludes that virtually none of Pakistan’s neighbors would benefit from the insurgency and that the insurgency itself has no possibility of succeeding without “foreign support.” The conflict is described as a potential weapon that could be used against Pakistan and that it is “ultimately Islamabad that must decide whether Baluchistan will become its Achilles’ heel.” This somewhat cryptic conclusion, in the light of recent reports and developments can be deciphered as a veiled threat now being openly played.

Quite clearly when Islamabad accused foreign governments of fueling and arming the unrest in Baluchistan, they were absolutely correct.
Seymour Hersh’s report lays to rest any illusions over whether or not America is arming Baluchi rebels. Brookings’ “Which Path to Persia?” report also openly calls for arming and sending Baluchi rebels out against Tehran. More recently, longtime proponent of a Baluchi insurgency, Selig Harrison of the Soros funded Center for International Policy, has published two pieces regarding the “liberation” of Baluchistan itself.

Harrison’s February 2011 piece, “Free Baluchistan,” calls to “aid the 6 million Baluch insurgents fighting for independence from Pakistan in the face of growing ISI repression.” He continues by explaining the various merits of such meddling by stating, “Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Baluchistan would serve U.S. strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces.”

Harrison would follow up his frank call to carve up Pakistan by addressing the issue of Chinese-Pakistani relations in a March 2011 piece titled, “The Chinese Cozy Up to the Pakistanis.” He begins by stating, “China’s expanding reach is a natural and acceptable accompaniment of its growing power—but only up to a point. ” He then reiterates his call for extraterritorial meddling in Pakistan by saying, “to counter what China is doing in Pakistan, the United States should play hardball by supporting the movement for an independent Baluchistan along the ******* Sea and working with Baluch insurgents to oust the Chinese from their budding naval base at Gwadar. Beijing wants its inroads into Gilgit and Baltistan to be the first step on its way to an ******* Sea outlet at Gwadar.”

Harrison has made calls for the carving up of Pakistan for years. In 2009 he insisted that Pakistan should grant Baluchistan autonomy, citing a laundry list of technicalities that justified such a devolution of power. Quite clearly, Mr. Harrison has become more blunt as of late. And while endless papers and covert support for the Baluchi insurgency have been going on for years, more overt calls, echoing with equal, self-serving hollowness as those for Libya’s foreign-funded rebellion, are being made.

During the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace sponsored “Balochistan International Conference 2011” held in Washington D.C., calls were made for “international intervention.” Most of the Baluchi opposition leaders live in exile in the US, UK, and France, amongst the myriad of Libyans, Egyptians, Syrians, Thais, Chinese, Iranians, all working with foreign aid to subvert and overthrow the governments in their homelands.
A presentation (shown below) gives us a verbatim rehash of the same antics that led up to a military attack on Libya, and similar rhetoric being used to set the ground work for intervention in Syria.
Change Baluchistan to Libya, change the Baluchi names to Libyan names and you can see the same US-funded propaganda that led to Western military operations in North Africa.

Selig Harrison is also a regular attendee at the “Balochistan International Conference” and frequently reiterates his calls for a “free Baluchistan.” With him is Washington lobbyist Andrew Eiva, a former special forces operator who took part in supporting the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan. He proposes a vision of a bright future where Baluchis will enjoy their gas and oil wealth one day in their own autonomous, free nation. Such encouragement from Harrison, whose Center for International Policy is funded by the Ford Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and Rockefeller Family and Associates, or Eiva’s flights of petroleum-fueled fancy at a Carnegie Endowment function – funded by Exxon, Chevron, BP Corporations of North America, the GE Foundation, Shell International, as well as the globalist mainstays of Soros, Rockefeller, and the Smith Richardson Foundation – would be almost laughable if real people weren’t dying and Pakistan’s entire future being put at risk.

There is no question that a concerted effort is being made to build-up a Baluchi front with which to menace Pakistan. With the Chinese already present inside the province and their base at Gwadar completed, and as tensions between Washington and Islamabad escalate, this low intensity rebellion might just get the “foreign support” needed to carve itself off from Pakistan. This would interrupt Pakistan’s use of this resource rich, strategically located province, prevent Iran from sending a pipeline to India, as well as eject the Chinese from the region. For those wondering why America is attempting to escalate tensions in Pakistan over the “Bin Laden” hoax instead of using it as an excuse to leave the region, the Balkanization of Pakistan and the permanent disruption of Pakistan’s, Iran’s, and China’s development is your answer. It isn’t a matter of if, it is now only a matter of how big the insurrection can be grown.

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at
Land Destroyer Report.
__________________
“If tyranny and oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” ― James Madison

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." -Thomas Jefferson

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." - Thomas Jefferson

MasterOfPuppets is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2011, 04:22 AM   #88
ricardisimo
Administrator
 
ricardisimo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lalaland
Posts: 5,426
Gender: Male
Member Number: 15369
Thanks: 318
Thanked 867 Times in 418 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan View Post
I had a lengthy discourse on this board in 2008 (primarily with Preacher) in which I contended W was a war criminal with regard to "enhanced interrogations" (aka torturing) of detainees in violation of the Geneva Convention - so I am not defending W

But as far as the two wars launched by W - both of them were supported by a majority of the American public and Congress when they were launched - if you have any polling data to the contrary feel free to link to it - do not confuse your views (or mine with regard to Iraq) with "the wishes of the majority back home"

And as far as international treaties, I agree the treaties are the law of the land once ratified (whether certain treaty provisions governed treatment of detainees was a big part of what Hamdan was about). I do not understand those treaties to require UN approval before the U.S,.commences military action - the US may go to the UN for PR purposes but if the UN wants to stop the US from declaring war or having Congress otherwise authorize military action (something notably missing from our current excellent adventure in Libya) I doubt the US has signed a treaty that gives the UN the right to do something about it

You and I have a different view as to what constitutes uncontroversial assessments of reality on this point insofar as you contend George W. Bush is clearly a greater criminal than Bin Laden
The war in Afghanistan was largely opposed here at home... until it became clear that it was an inevitability, and then good Americans all, we rah-rahed all the way to Kabul, and then downward ever since. We see the exact same arc with the war in Iraq. I mention it's popularity (or lack thereof) in passing, and only to underscore how truly undemocratic we are. The more important the decision, the less we are consulted, either directly or via our elected representatives, who are clearly in office to rubber stamp anything the king - Oops! I mean, the president - wants to do. None of this has anything to do with war crimes, however.

We're discussing two different things here. The first is the reality that the US is the Big Don on the block, the capo di tutti capi, and they can do as they please, ignoring the United Nations at will. I'm not contesting that at all. Ours is a rogue state, a criminal state that does as it pleases without regard to international law, individual lives, or any other considerations.

The second thing we're discussing here is what international law actually says. What it says is that:
  • A war of aggression, sometimes also war of conquest, is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense usually for territorial gain and subjugation;
  • Wars without international legality (e.g. not out of self-defense nor sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council) can be considered wars of aggression;
  • Waging such a war of aggression is a crime under the customary international law. Nuremburg, Tokyo, the Rio Pact, Resolution 3314 and the Rome Statute all clarify this;
  • And these laws are adjudicated by the United Nations, and tried in the ICC.
So, will Obama or Bush ever see the inside of a jail cell? No, of course not. Well, maybe Obama, but only because he's lying about his birth certificate. But no Tea Partier in his right mind would ever question Obama's prerogative - nay, duty - to assassinate anyone and everyone he sees fit to kill, so long as it boosts his reelection chances. That includes, by the way, American citizens. It's good to see that the Right has its priorities in order.

As far as Chomsky's fanatical views, though... Look, let's put it in grotesque terms: Who's commited the greater crime? Someone who murders one person, or someone who murders one hundred? Just because one of them is "our" criminal, we're not allowed to do the most basic math? That's exactly how Stalin got a pass for so long in this country and around the world, despite being by far the greater criminal than Hitler; he was "our criminal". Don't fall for it.

And MoP: Ron Paul is a bad ass, no doubt about it. There used to be one or two on the other side of the aisle I held in high regard, but no longer. Paul is just about the only guy with any spine left in Washington worth mentioning.
__________________
Why does God hate amputees?
ricardisimo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 04:23 PM   #89
stb_steeler
Living Legend
Supporter
 
stb_steeler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pa
Posts: 3,567
Gender: Male
Member Number: 14315
Thanks: 173
Thanked 313 Times in 183 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan View Post


Released photo of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad watching a game between his two favorite teams, the New England Patriots and Baltimore Ravens, on NFL Sunday Ticket
LMFAO.....thats just good stuff right there, i dont care who u are.....
You'd think with all the money that poor bastard had he'd have a bigger TV...lol
__________________

Might as well dress em in skirts!
stb_steeler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2011, 06:06 PM   #90
MasterOfPuppets
Living Legend
Supporter
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,074
Gender: Male
Member Number: 1990
Thanks: 856
Thanked 3,508 Times in 1,523 Posts
Default Re: Osama Bin Laden is Dead

Quote:
Originally Posted by stb_steeler View Post
LMFAO.....thats just good stuff right there, i dont care who u are.....
You'd think with all the money that poor bastard had he'd have a bigger TV...lol
he doesn't even have an xbox....
__________________
“If tyranny and oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” ― James Madison

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." -Thomas Jefferson

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." - Thomas Jefferson

MasterOfPuppets is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum
no new posts