Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So I guess if Boehner and the Republican Congress don't impeach the President for the high crime of murdering Osama Bin Laden, they will be what?
...accessories after the fact?
lol, how great would that be? The GOP impeaches Obama for getting Bin Laden.
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
US Constitution 5th Amendment
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
After serving with the United States Air Force in Korea, Robert W. Toth was honorably discharged. He returned to his home in Pittsburgh and went to work in a steel plant. Five months later he was arrested by military authorities on charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder while an airman in Korea. 1 At the time of arrest he had no relationship of any kind with the military. He was taken to Korea to stand trial before a court-martial under authority of a 1950 Act of Congress. 2 The Court of Appeals sustained the Act, rejecting the contention that civilian ex-servicemen like Toth could not constitutionally be subjected to trial by court-martial. 94 U.S. App. D.C. 28, 215 F.2d 22. We granted certiorari to pass upon this important constitutional question. 348 U.S. 809 . 3
The 1950 Act cannot be sustained on the constitutional power of Congress "To raise and support Armies," "To declare War," or to punish "Offences against the Law of [350 U.S. 11, 14] Nations." 4 And this assertion of military authority over civilians cannot rest on the President's power as commander-in-chief, or on any theory of martial law. See Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124-127. The Government's contention is that the Act is a valid exercise of the power granted Congress in Article I of the Constitution "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces," as supplemented by the Necessary and Proper Clause. 5
U.S. Supreme Court
TOTH v. QUARLES, 350 U.S. 11 (1955)
.
Kenneth Roth opined on bin Laden’s death via his Twitter account (@KenRoth), taking aim at comments made by the U.N.’s secretary-general: “Ban Ki-moon wrong on #Osama bin Laden: It’s not “justice” for him to be killed even if justified; no trial, conviction”.
So he's just playing word semantics... But the headline says he "CONDEMNS" the killing.
The Executive Director of Human Rights Watch is criticizing the U.S. for killing Terrorist Leader Osama Bin Laden without Due Process. What do you think of this criticizm?
Human Rights Watch chief condemns bin Laden killing | The Daily Caller
????
The New York-based Human Rights Watch has been relatively mum on the Al Qaeda leader’s death, issuing a terse statement quoting Mr. Roth: “At a time when citizens around the world have engaged in peaceful demonstrations in the name of freedom and democracy, bin Laden’s death is a reminder of the thousands of innocents who suffer when terrorist groups seek political change through brutal means.”
UPDATE: In a press release Wednesday afternoon, Human Rights Watch clarified that the organization has taken no official position on the legality of bin Laden’s killing.
No-one wants to hear a few idiots make accusations about the 'illegality' of Osama's death, except a few insane partisans on the right.t.
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
US Constitution 5th Amendment
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
After serving with the United States Air Force in Korea, Robert W. Toth was honorably discharged. He returned to his home in Pittsburgh and went to work in a steel plant. Five months later he was arrested by military authorities on charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder while an airman in Korea. 1 At the time of arrest he had no relationship of any kind with the military. He was taken to Korea to stand trial before a court-martial under authority of a 1950 Act of Congress. 2 The Court of Appeals sustained the Act, rejecting the contention that civilian ex-servicemen like Toth could not constitutionally be subjected to trial by court-martial. 94 U.S. App. D.C. 28, 215 F.2d 22. We granted certiorari to pass upon this important constitutional question. 348 U.S. 809 . 3
The 1950 Act cannot be sustained on the constitutional power of Congress "To raise and support Armies," "To declare War," or to punish "Offences against the Law of [350 U.S. 11, 14] Nations." 4 And this assertion of military authority over civilians cannot rest on the President's power as commander-in-chief, or on any theory of martial law. See Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124-127. The Government's contention is that the Act is a valid exercise of the power granted Congress in Article I of the Constitution "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces," as supplemented by the Necessary and Proper Clause. 5
U.S. Supreme Court
TOTH v. QUARLES, 350 U.S. 11 (1955)
.
No-one wants to hear a few idiots make accusations about the 'illegality' of Osama's death, except a few insane partisans on the right.t.
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
US Constitution 5th Amendment
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
After serving with the United States Air Force in Korea, Robert W. Toth was honorably discharged. He returned to his home in Pittsburgh and went to work in a steel plant. Five months later he was arrested by military authorities on charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder while an airman in Korea. 1 At the time of arrest he had no relationship of any kind with the military. He was taken to Korea to stand trial before a court-martial under authority of a 1950 Act of Congress. 2 The Court of Appeals sustained the Act, rejecting the contention that civilian ex-servicemen like Toth could not constitutionally be subjected to trial by court-martial. 94 U.S. App. D.C. 28, 215 F.2d 22. We granted certiorari to pass upon this important constitutional question. 348 U.S. 809 . 3
The 1950 Act cannot be sustained on the constitutional power of Congress "To raise and support Armies," "To declare War," or to punish "Offences against the Law of [350 U.S. 11, 14] Nations." 4 And this assertion of military authority over civilians cannot rest on the President's power as commander-in-chief, or on any theory of martial law. See Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124-127. The Government's contention is that the Act is a valid exercise of the power granted Congress in Article I of the Constitution "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces," as supplemented by the Necessary and Proper Clause. 5
U.S. Supreme Court
TOTH v. QUARLES, 350 U.S. 11 (1955)
.
Bin Laden was not protected by the Constitution please do not try going there with that.
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
US Constitution 5th Amendment
MR. JUSTICE BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
After serving with the United States Air Force in Korea, Robert W. Toth was honorably discharged. He returned to his home in Pittsburgh and went to work in a steel plant. Five months later he was arrested by military authorities on charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder while an airman in Korea. 1 At the time of arrest he had no relationship of any kind with the military. He was taken to Korea to stand trial before a court-martial under authority of a 1950 Act of Congress. 2 The Court of Appeals sustained the Act, rejecting the contention that civilian ex-servicemen like Toth could not constitutionally be subjected to trial by court-martial. 94 U.S. App. D.C. 28, 215 F.2d 22. We granted certiorari to pass upon this important constitutional question. 348 U.S. 809 . 3
The 1950 Act cannot be sustained on the constitutional power of Congress "To raise and support Armies," "To declare War," or to punish "Offences against the Law of [350 U.S. 11, 14] Nations." 4 And this assertion of military authority over civilians cannot rest on the President's power as commander-in-chief, or on any theory of martial law. See Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, 124-127. The Government's contention is that the Act is a valid exercise of the power granted Congress in Article I of the Constitution "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces," as supplemented by the Necessary and Proper Clause. 5
U.S. Supreme Court
TOTH v. QUARLES, 350 U.S. 11 (1955)
.
Bin Laden was not protected by the Constitution please do not try going there with that.
Obama was the President of a Constitutional republic where his powers are specifically enumerated., so I"ll go there with that.
.
Why are we in Pokeestann when Pokeestann never even attacked us!
Well it does look like Bin Laden was unarmed when they shot his face off. So it very well could have been illegal. But we'll never know for sure because the U.S. Government will always lie about what happened. And unfortunately,we have almost no independent and credible Media in the U.S. The U.S. Media have become mere Mouthpieces for the Government at this point. So unless Wikileaks or another Wikileaks-type organization comes along to investigate,we'll likely never know what really happened. We are all now being crushed under the boot of the Government/Media/Corporate Complex. They're worse than the Military Industrial Complex. There is no more truth in America. It's very sad.
I figured it would be right wing ass wipes like neo-con teabagging repigs that would call it murder . they are the ones that love bin laden .
I figured it would be right wing ass wipes like neo-con teabagging repigs that would call it murder . they are the ones that love bin laden .
Well it does look like Bin Laden was unarmed when they shot his face off. So it very well could have been illegal. But we'll never know for sure because the U.S. Government will always lie about what happened. And unfortunately,we have almost no independent and credible Media in the U.S. The U.S. Media have become mere Mouthpieces for the Government at this point. So unless Wikileaks or another Wikileaks-type organization comes along to investigate,we'll likely never know what really happened. We are all now being crushed under the boot of the Government/Media/Corporate Complex. They're worse than the Military Industrial Complex. There is no more truth in America. It's very sad.
Well that's what I heard in the (independent and credible part of the) press! (as opposed to the mouthpiece)
I hope we get to see the helmet cam video of the head shot on Wiki. Wouldn't supprise me if OBL was begging for his life like a scared little girl ......
Well it does look like Bin Laden was unarmed when they shot his face off. So it very well could have been illegal. But we'll never know for sure because the U.S. Government will always lie about what happened. And unfortunately,we have almost no independent and credible Media in the U.S. The U.S. Media have become mere Mouthpieces for the Government at this point. So unless Wikileaks or another Wikileaks-type organization comes along to investigate,we'll likely never know what really happened. We are all now being crushed under the boot of the Government/Media/Corporate Complex. They're worse than the Military Industrial Complex. There is no more truth in America. It's very sad.
Well that's what I heard in the (independent and credible part of the) press! (as opposed to the mouthpiece)
I hope we get to see the helmet cam video of the head shot on Wiki. Wouldn't supprise me if OBL was begging for his life like a scared little girl ......
Really?
Aren't those folks the same ones who kamikaze against the WTC? Aren't those folks Islamic Fundamentalists, who that their god will reward them for engaging in jihad?
.
Well that's what I heard in the (independent and credible part of the) press! (as opposed to the mouthpiece)
I hope we get to see the helmet cam video of the head shot on Wiki. Wouldn't supprise me if OBL was begging for his life like a scared little girl ......
Really?
Aren't those folks the same ones who kamikaze against the WTC? Aren't those folks Islamic Fundamentalists, who that their god will reward them for engaging in jihad?
.
not the leadership. the leadership hide. they send children and idiots to do their bidding. you won't ever see someone like bin laden make themselves into martyrs.
bin laden was a coward just like arafat before him.
It's no surprise that the CON$ are calling the military Seals coldblooded murders. CON$ only pretend to support the military for political purposes.I figured it would be right wing ass wipes like neo-con teabagging repigs that would call it murder . they are the ones that love bin laden .
What do you Goose Steppers call shooting & killing an unarmed man? Please enlighten us.
This man needs to be fired.
I agree. I support the President 100% on this. We did the right thing, absolutely. But... was it legal under international law? Probably not.
