Check out some similar questions!

tomder55 · May 18, 2011, 05:24 AM

Yes indeed . I've watched the Libyan thing closely and I see no indication of an embrace of Islamism. They sound like liberty loving people to me .Not sure how all this will pan out ;but I'm hopeful.

speechlesstx · May 18, 2011, 08:32 AM

Not sure what this means for Iran and their liberty loving people, but the top ayatollah thinks the Mahdi Hatter is "under a spell."

smoothy · May 18, 2011, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Not sure what this means for Iran and their liberty loving people, but the top ayatollah thinks the Mahdi Hatter is "under a spell."

Gee... its taken them this long to start to grasp Adolf's elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor?

tomder55 · May 18, 2011, 10:20 AM

When the Mahdi-hatter spoke at the UN and saw the glow of the 12th Imam ;and the attendees transfixed not even blinking their eyes ,I knew he had a screw loose.

speechlesstx · May 18, 2011, 10:57 AM

Back on the Jihadistan front, the Pakistani Taliban vowed to fight on...

"After the martyrdom of Sheik Osama, the mujahideen will continue jihad to complete his mission with a new zeal," Rehman said, referring to his fighters.

"We have the same target, program and mission," he added. "Our enemies are NATO, Jews and Christians."

Alty · May 18, 2011, 07:45 PM

now you are carrying the thought too far, I said nothing about abandoning the laws for ordinary people but my view is that those who don't respect the law should not be protected by it. It is my belief that those who step outside the law forfeit its protection.

That makes no sense. So, you're saying that everyone that's suspected of murder doesn't have the right to have the law defend him/her? I'm saying innocent until proven guilty. That's the law. If we just go by what people assume, start killing everyone we think is "evil" or "don't respect the law", then my post was accurate. We're abandoning the law.

If we waive the rights of even one person, then that's going to far IMO.

smoothy · May 18, 2011, 08:00 PM

Problem is there is a declared war. Its not simply an action to arrest a criminal to bring to justice like a deadbeat dad or even a bank robber.

That takes it to a whole different level, and according to the international rules of war.. it IS legal to not only target, but to kill the leaders of the enemy... as well as the enemy that is encountered.

Al Qaeda isn't a ring of car thieves, or even human traffickers. They have declared war, and waged attacks to that end.

Otherwise... WWI, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and in fact every war that was ever waged in history would be considered the very same thing.

paraclete · May 19, 2011, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Altenweg

That makes no sense. So, you're saying that everyone that's suspected of murder doesn't have the right to have the law defend him/her? I'm saying innocent until proven guilty. That's the law. If we just go by what people assume, start killing everyone we think is "evil" or "don't respect the law", then my post was accurate. We're abandoning the law.

If we waive the rights of even one person, then that's going to far IMO.

No I didn't say you didn't have a right to a defense. The French long ago abandoned the pretense of innocence and so have the Chinese. If there is enough evidence to bring you to trial then it is for you to make the defense not the state's obligation to defend you. But there are people who don't respect the law, the Mafia, the gangs, the drug cartels, terrorists, seriel killers, people trafficers such people have set up their own law and our system allows them the pretense of innocence. Where I come from we have modifed the concept a little, if you are a member of a proscribed organisation you are guilty of an offense.

BMI · May 20, 2011, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

But there are people who don't respect the law, the Mafia, the gangs, the drug cartels, terrorists, seriel killers, people trafficers such people have set up their own law and our system allows them the pretense of innocence.

You forgot certain presidents, administrations, etc.

tomder55 · May 20, 2011, 07:20 AM

The flaw in this line of thinking is the belief that this was a law enforcement event. Smoothy is right... OBL is KIA

paraclete · May 20, 2011, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

The flaw in this line of thinking is the belief that this was a law enforcement event. Smoothy is right ...OBL is KIA

Of course it was a law enforcement event, the original victims were 100% civilian. Only a dingaling like George Bush could think it was a war. There are two different things OBL and Afghanistan, linked but different. The reason it took so long to prosecute OBL is the military were used to do the police work, and for the record OBL was killed in inaction

smoothy · May 20, 2011, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

of course it was a law enforcement event, the original victims were 100% civilian. Only a dingaling like George Bush could think it was a war. There are two different things OBL and Afghanistan, linked but different. The reason it took so long to prosecute OBL is the military were used to do the police work, and for the record OBL was killed in inaction

Any country in the world would consider that an act of war. Besides, they committed other acts of war prior to that. Some of those WERE against the US Military... Some were US Federal Employees. It wasn't one single act or limited to one single day. It was just the one that finally opened the proverbial "can of whoopass."

Personally... If "I" was the president... he would have been dismembered on VIDEO. And then fed to hungry hogs for the world to see, no Muslim funeral at all. But then, I wasn't in the position to do that. That's not talk... that's EXACTLY how I feel about it.

Osama Declared war on the USA, he actually announced it on video and audio recordings... he and his minions committed SEVERAL acts of war against the USA. We were within our rights.

And besides even IF that didn't apply... WE have, believe in and practice capital punishment in this country (and it applies to everyone). Thank god. He was simply shot and killed while resisting arrest if that makes you feel better about it. End of story. There was NO way he was getting out of this alive. No matter HOW it was approached.

paraclete · May 20, 2011, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Any country in the world would consider that an act of war. Besides, they committed other acts of war prior to that. Some of those WERE against the US Military...Some were US Federal Employees. It wasn't one single act or limited to one single day. It was just the one that finally opened the proverbial "can of whoopass."

Personally....If "I" was the president...he would have been dismembered on VIDEO. And then fed to hungry hogs for the world to see, no Muslim funeral at all. But then, I wasn't in the position to do that. That's not talk....that's EXACTLY how I feel about it.

Osama Declared war on the USA, he actually announced it on video and audio recordings.......he and his minions committed SEVERAL acts of war against the USA. We were within our rights.

And besides even IF that didn't apply....WE have, believe in and practice capital punishment in this country (and it applies to everyone). Thank god. He was simply shot and killed while resisting arrest if that makes you feel better about it. End of story. There was NO way he was getting out of this alive. No matter HOW it was approached.

Look I could declare war, what would it mean? Not much, since I don't possess the resources of a country and an organised military. Al Qaeda was as much an idea as a paramilitary force. They made a didn't in a few places and a hole in New York but really it was a few spectacular events, terrorist acts, and they succeeded because they had the world living in terror for ten years. What was needed to catch them was good sound police work, not thousands of soldiers kicking down doors in the middle of the night.

As far as OBL is concerned, good riddance, he died as he lived, that is justice and so may all of his ilk perish

smoothy · May 20, 2011, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Look I could declare war, what would it mean? Not much, since I don't possess the resources of a country and an organised military. Al Qaeda was as much an idea as a paramilitary force. They made a dint in a few places and a hole in New York but really it was a few spectacular events, terrorist acts, and they succeeded because they had the world living in terror for ten years. What was needed to catch them was good sound police work, not thousands of soldiers kicking down doors in the middle of the night.

As far as OBL is concerned, good riddance, he died as he lived, that is justice and so may all of his ilk perish

Personally, I think killing as many of the wastes of human flesh that thought like they did as well was appropriate and justified. In fact there are still too many of them still drawing breath to suit me.

Of course I also a big believer in not picking a fight with someone that can kick your butt. Unless you are ready to get it kicked.

paraclete · May 21, 2011, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Personally, I think killing as many of the wastes of human flesh that thought like they did as well was appropriate and justified. In fact there are still too many of them still drawing breath to suit me.

Of course I also a big believer in not picking a fight with someone that can kick your butt. Unless you are ready to get it kicked.

Usually the only people who do that are religious extremists or fanatics.

It will be interesting to see the outcome in Yemen, that's where al qaeda seems to have boots on the ground at the moment. Interesting how they can only thrive in these backwards places