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

[geauxtohell]

I'm sorry , but at THIS point I must point and laugh at your hypocrisy. For eight years we listened to the left bitch and moan about illegal wars and cry that Bush was a killer every time a civilian was killed in an unfortunate incident. I have ZERO doubt that chastised NONE of them for doing so.

I didn't hear anyone bitching and moaning about Afghanistan.

And what did Iraq have to do with terrorism?

And I never said either war was illegal. Bush shucked and jived his way into legality with Iraq, and Afghanistan was always legal as far as I know.

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

 

[iggy pop]

Mr S is so completely stupid that he is the only poster on the board that I have on ignore... (I believe I am not alone in having him on ignore).

You are absolutely correct. Mo chara is gaelic, and I use it only in response to posters that are actually friends.

Apparently, Mr S is too fucking stupid to insert his brain before posting and, hence, makes himself look ridiculous. I find that very funny.

I thought maybe he was handicapped so I left him alone.

He is, mentally.

That's what I meant. Retarded. But I was being PC for a change.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

 

[iggy pop]

I didn't hear anyone bitching and moaning about Afghanistan.

And what did Iraq have to do with terrorism?

And I never said either war was illegal. Bush shucked and jived his way into legality with Iraq, and Afghanistan was always legal as far as I know.

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Every birther is a conservative? You're kidding me, right?

 

[R.D.]

Why are they doing it?

24 hour news. Have to squeeze every drop of juice out of this lemon, even if it makes us retarded.

This is why I don't watch cable news anymore.

My question was directed at the trying to demonize FOX and conservatives when many liberals are making the same suggestions.

The same trashing attempt could be made that only the liberals making these claims are the honest liberals.

Do you by chance get any garbage from Move On. Org? OMG what a bunch of left wing loons.

I just googled and many sources came up - CNN, Olberman, MSNBC and tons more.

 

[Trajan]

I didn't hear anyone bitching and moaning about Afghanistan.

And what did Iraq have to do with terrorism?

And I never said either war was illegal. Bush shucked and jived his way into legality with Iraq, and Afghanistan was always legal as far as I know.

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Hey RB, I would be careful with that....

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

the comparison that begs to be made is;

For instance, while every Terrorist is a Muslim, not every (or even most) Muslims is a Terrorist.

 

[iggy pop]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

Shooting an unarmend man. That may do it. Entering another country illegally. That could do it too. Breaking and entering into someone's private home

 

[The Rabbi]

I didn't hear anyone bitching and moaning about Afghanistan.

And what did Iraq have to do with terrorism?

And I never said either war was illegal. Bush shucked and jived his way into legality with Iraq, and Afghanistan was always legal as far as I know.

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Hmm. Saddam had a 20 year career of supporting terrorism. We discovered terrorist training bases in Iraq. We discovered actual terrorists hiding there. And Saddam was funding Palestinian terrorists in the middle east. He had a history of invading neighbors. He hatched a plot to assassinate Pres Bush. He was under UN sanctions, which he uindermined through bribery. He broke cease fire agreements.
At what point do you think we should have taken action, given all that? Never?
Iraq is now the most stable country in the Middle East among the Arabs. What does that suggest?

 

[iggy pop]

My question was directed at the trying to demonize FOX and conservatives when many liberals are making the same suggestions.

The same trashing attempt could be made that only the liberals making these claims are the honest liberals.

Do you by chance get any garbage from Move On. Org? OMG what a bunch of left wing loons.

I just googled and many sources came up - CNN, Olberman, MSNBC and tons more.

Subscribe to them for a laugh. You get to hear all about our progressive heros.

 

[TheBrain]

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

Proof that some people, quite a few actually, are stupid.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

Agreed

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

Untrue, as proven by the many quotes from the liberal Hillary Clinton .

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

We will have to disagree on this one. Sure he didn't believe in their cause, but that doesn't mean he couldn't use them as useful tools. The Russians did the exact same thing once upon a time

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Since the Monroe Doctrine our nation has told the world that our military stands ready to fight for the cause of democracy.

That being said, even if you disagree with that policy, would you disagree with the policy of using our military to take out a mass murderer? I mean certainly Seal Team Six could have just as easily went in and killed his ass without a war, but that wasn't my call.

 

[geauxtohell]

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Hey RB, I would be careful with that....

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

the comparison that begs to be made is;

For instance, while every Terrorist is a Muslim, not every (or even most) Muslims is a Terrorist.

I was thinking that when I typed it.

 

[geauxtohell]

That being said, even if you disagree with that policy, would you disagree with the policy of using our military to take out a mass murderer? I mean certainly Seal Team Six could have just as easily went in and killed his ass without a war, but that wasn't my call.

No. Not a mass murderer. A mass murderer of Americans. That's an important distinction. Bin Laden was far more than a scary Muslim terrorist. He was responsible for killing Americans.

That justifies our actions. I do not think we are justified in using our military to go and kill every other scumbag in the world.

 

[California Girl]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

There are international laws governing this kind of shit. I watched a discussion on the BBC about it. They had a panel of International Law Specialists, and they were all pretty convinced that we - technically - acted outside of international law. However, they all agreed with the action and none of them were critical of what we did.

If we broke international law - frankly, who gives a shit?

 

[geauxtohell]

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Hmm. Saddam had a 20 year career of supporting terrorism. We discovered terrorist training bases in Iraq. We discovered actual terrorists hiding there. And Saddam was funding Palestinian terrorists in the middle east. He had a history of invading neighbors. He hatched a plot to assassinate Pres Bush. He was under UN sanctions, which he uindermined through bribery. He broke cease fire agreements.
At what point do you think we should have taken action, given all that? Never?
Iraq is now the most stable country in the Middle East among the Arabs. What does that suggest?

Hussein might have sponsored terrorism. As far as anyone can prove, he didn't sponsor terrorism against us.

Also, that yellow cake thing was false too (since you appear to be reading from 7 year old talking points).

 

[TheBrain]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

Do you think the US would take kindly to France sending a special forces team into our country to kill a terrorist without permission?

Now it is my opinion that Pakistan can't be trusted, and I therefor don't give a shit if they are upset that we violated their sovereignty, but nonetheless we DID so.

 

[edthecynic]

Here's the specific clip, for people who don't don't have much time:

Fox Business' Napolitano: Bin Laden "Killed On The Illegal Whim Of The President" | Media Matters for America

(And yes, its from "Media Matters", but it's just video of the intro of the show).

and here's the full show:

YouTube - Freedom Watch - Killing The Rule Of Law 5/2/2011

"Freedom Watch" starts about 50 Seconds into the video.

Judge Napolitano specifically states that Osama Bin Laden was assassinated "on the illegal whim of the president".

The CON$ are totally pissed that their hero and St Ronnie's Freedom Fighter was killed. Their MessiahRushie has even elevated his idol, OBL, to a "FOREIGN LEADER."

May 3, 2011
RUSH: So, again, to review, an American president, with admittedly incomplete intelligence, invades a foreign and supposedly friendly nation without that nation's knowledge or consent. Using information extracted from Guantanamo detainees subjected to allegedly illegal enhanced interrogation methods, i.e., waterboarding, the president gives a kill order for a target in a private residence where there are women and children present. And in the course of this attack, upwards of 22 foreign nationals are either killed or captured, including the illegally targeted unarmed foreign leader.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

There are international laws governing this kind of shit. I watched a discussion on the BBC about it. They had a panel of International Law Specialists, and they were all pretty convinced that we - technically - acted outside of international law. However, they all agreed with the action and none of them were critical of what we did.

If we broke international law - frankly, who gives a shit?

Again I ask: how?

 

[NYcarbineer]

oh people were bitching and moaning when civilians were killed in Afghanistan, it's bullshit to deny that.

No sane person honestly believes that Saadam wasn't funding terrorists against the US. and that totally ignores the fact that he was butchering his own people by the tens of thousands and thumbing his nose at UN sanctions for YEARS before we finally said enough. That son of a bitch needed to go

Bush didn't shuck and jive shit, the POTUS doesn't need ANY excuse for waging war dunderhead.

Some people believe that the moon landing was staged.

At some point, you have to divorce the beliefs of the lunatic fringe and the rest of the world.

For instance, while every birther is a conservative, not every (or even most) conservative is a birther.

I don't believe that, prior to our invasion, Saddam Hussein had any involvement in terrorism directed at us. If he did, the involvement was minuscule and not enough to justify military action. Saddam Hussein was secular. Radical Islam was not his friend.

I certainly don't believe that installing a democracy in the middle east is an appropriate mission for our military.

Hmm. Saddam had a 20 year career of supporting terrorism. We discovered terrorist training bases in Iraq. We discovered actual terrorists hiding there. And Saddam was funding Palestinian terrorists in the middle east. He had a history of invading neighbors. He hatched a plot to assassinate Pres Bush. He was under UN sanctions, which he uindermined through bribery. He broke cease fire agreements.
At what point do you think we should have taken action, given all that? Never?
Iraq is now the most stable country in the Middle East among the Arabs. What does that suggest?

Then you must believe we need to invade Iran, Syria, Libya, and North Korea.

 

[geauxtohell]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

There are international laws governing this kind of shit. I watched a discussion on the BBC about it. They had a panel of International Law Specialists, and they were all pretty convinced that we - technically - acted outside of international law. However, they all agreed with the action and none of them were critical of what we did.

If we broke international law - frankly, who gives a shit?

No one with half a brain.

The other option would be to request permission to fly into Pakistan, wait for 48 hours for them to clear us to do that, and then be dissapointed as we found another empty compound.

Aw shucks!

Obama was smart enough not to be that stupid.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not 'defending' Bin Laden, and I support the President 100%. Does not change the fact that we could well have broke international law to do it. If we did, I don't care. But.... we probably did break it.

How?

Do you think the US would take kindly to France sending a special forces team into our country to kill a terrorist without permission?

Now it is my opinion that Pakistan can't be trusted, and I therefor don't give a shit if they are upset that we violated their sovereignty, but nonetheless we DID so.

We have already been acting, in agreement with Pakistan, to conduct military action in their country.