The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on May 08, 2011, 12:23:55 PM
-
steve2470 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 12:29 PM
Original message
U.N. rights investigators seek facts on bin Laden death
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators called on the United States on Friday to disclose whether there had been any plan to capture Osama bin Laden and if he was offered any "meaningful prospect of surrender and arrest."
Principles of engagement in such operations require the possibility of surrender, firing warning shots and if necessary wounding a suspect, rather than killing him, they said.
Failure to comply could amount to a "cold-blooded execution" but the overall situation must be taken into account, including whether U.S. forces were under attack, said Martin Scheinin, U.N. special rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism.
"We are just saying the U.S. government should answer questions concerning whether a meaningful prospect of surrender and arrest was given by the U.S., but perhaps not taken by Osama bin Laden," Scheinin told Reuters in a telephone interview.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/06/us-binladen-u...
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Protecting human rights while countering terrorism. Lol.
It's a joke.
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Human rights abuse is a form of terrorism.
Terrorism is NOT by definition something only the political opposition does.
Terrorism is a characterization of lawless individual and/or institutional behavior intended to instill fear.
It would be helpful to have a guide to the use of the term "terrorism" in written laws and, comparatively, in political propaganda discourse.
DUmbasses lie.
The definition of terrorism is: acts or war perpetrated against civilians and their institutions to achieve political or ideological ends.
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. What about defending yourself from people who wish you dead?
What types of human rights are afforded to attackers?
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat May-07-11 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #15
29. I've done that after being attacked, after taking a few stab wounds I was certain
about who was guilty of attacking me, of course, so I kicked him squarely in the groin, of course.
I did not go around killing other suspects, of course.
:jerkit:
Try this analogy: you're attacked and stabbed and there are no police, period, and your attacker is determined to stab you again.
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. It is one thing to not torture people...another thing to protect people from harm.
If Clinton had killed OBL in the "aspirin factory" bombing, would you have been outraged?
Yes, because obviously Clinton would only have done so to deprive Obama of his moment in the spotlight which just goes to show what a racist Bill Clinton really is!
erikdane (24 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
21. Yeah
those pesky principles of Rule of Law, Justice and conventions are just in the way when we know someone is guilty. Funny how it's only the US who seems to be able to justify actions like this. I wonder how the US would view it if Cuba had a death squad on American soil hunting down people who had killed civilians in Cuba. I guess that would be OK too?
Actually Cuba would love nothing better.
It's called war and the commies ran a half-century war-by-proxy against those who refused to submit.
Now it's Is-slums turn at bat.
nonperson (236 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Here, let me help them with those facts
bin Laden is DEAD thanks to a strong leader, President Barack Obama, and the Navy Seals who got the job done and got out safely, again thanks to President Obama.
But thanks to that short attention span idiot, George W. Bush, bin Laden had far too much time on this earth.
E.O.S.
bin Laden gladly took credit for killing thousands of Americans. What did the UN expect would happen? JUSTICE?
That's exactly what did happen, finally, after ten long years. JUSTICE.
orly?
I hear Obama raced out of the NSC SitRoom, hopped a SR-71 to Abbottabad--which he personally piloted--and pulled out 3 wounded SEALs under a hail of gunfire.
Then he caught the biggest fish you ever saw but it got away.
Zhade (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. No, that was revenge. Let's at least be honest about it.
go west young man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. This is the definition of justice.
Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity.
True justice would have been better served in a court of just law. Eradicating the person doesn't help us learn anything.
Thereby leaving us destined to repeat the same mistakes. Justice wasn't served. Moral righteousness wasn't administered.
We lowered ourselves for the sake of revenge. In essence Bin Laden has actually made us look weak in his dying. We could
have stood for something much bigger.
Of course we have a reason for permanently silencing him. (Providing we actually did. There has been no evidence released yet.
Just the government story.) Dead men tell no tales.
I like them better this way; the breast-beating is more genuine than their fabricated chest-thumping.
nonperson (236 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Justice in this case
Dealing with a known dangerous criminal hiding in plain sight in a nation that is SUPPOSEDLY an ally, a nation we send BILLIONS of dollars in aid yearly. This is a complicated and dangerous situation. Ask yourselves this; if the Seals who risked their lives to bring JUSTICE to the nearly 3,000 people who died on 9/11 had attempted to capture and return bin Laden to the USA had been delayed by that effort, surrounded, captured, held prisoner, or DIED trying to bring bin Laden in, what would your reaction be?
Now ask yourselves what would the Republican reaction be?
In this case, a quick surgical strike with a quick and final outcome was not only the right thing to do but the only sensible thing to do when dealing with the likes of bin Laden.
DID BIN LADEN GIVE THE PEOPLE IN TOWERS I AND II OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER A CHOICE BETWEEN DEATH AND CAPTURE?
**** NO HE DIDN'T AND THEREFORE HE DIDN'T DESERVE OR GET THAT CHOICE EITHER.
GREAT JOB, PRESIDENT OBAMA, SEAL TEAM 6, AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION INVOLVED IN BRINGING JUSTICE FOR THE FAMILIES AND FRIENDS OF THOSE BIN LADEN MURDERED. THANK YOU.
go west young man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Nice verbal jackoff.
I can see why your a fan of this kind of "justice". An eye for an eye however equals total blindness.
We could have gleaned much more info if he was taken alive. Seal Team 6 let us down in this regard.
If they had the opportunity to take him alive and just shot him that was foolish. The world would have
been more on America's side if they handed down true justice instead of military might only. This was an
opportunity lost for a nation that professes to be a moral compass for the rest of the world. An
enlightened society doesn't celebrate death. Not even the death of their worst enemy. An enlightened
society learns as much as they can so the same mistakes don't happen again. Of course if we did that
our 25% of GDP military budget would end up paying for social programs that save citizens lives at home.
We can't have that now can we? Instead we waste a trillion on an idiot like BIn Liner and people like yourself
continue to buy the bullshit diatribe the government throws at ya. Meanwhile a lot more than 3000 people
have died right here at home while we throw our tax money down a hole in the desert. Sadly Bin Laden
(should he actually exist) seems to win a victory even in death.
So many fallacies.
"Eye-for-an-eye"? What ddo *YOU* do with someone trying to blind both your eyes and cut out your heart?
25% GDP military budget? You idiot, the DoD budget is 25% of pre-Obama fed spending. Now that Obama larded up the budget with crony payoffs it's less than that.
Waste money on UBL? What is the price on stopping thugs? I know how much your life is worth but what about decent civilized people?
And **** the victims of 9/11 until you get your federally-subsidized marijuana Rx, right?
die asshole. just die
iandhr (901 posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. The UN can SHOVE IT
Edited on Fri May-06-11 01:25 PM by iandhr
They have no credibility on human rights when they have countries such as Bahrain, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and China on the so called human rights council. This is just a small sampling of the brutal dictatorships who have the worst human rights records who sit in judgment of the United States. We owe the United Nations nothing. There are consequences for harboring terrorists.
heretic
erikdane (24 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
22. But the US has
the US lost it moral credibility a long time ago. especially considering all of the countries you just mentioned are all supported by the US. And what are the consequences in the US when we harbor terrorists?
:stoner:
Unless he by "harboring terrorists" he means "haven't arrested all TEA partiers"...which he probably does.
christx30 (449 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. I forgot
when it was that the UN human rights council demanded answers from Bin Laden and his people about subduing the people on the flights with box cutters? Or the bombings in Africa? Or the USS Cole?
Bin Laden was a problem for the world. The UN wasn't solving it. The US did. The SEALS are heroes. None of them should ever have to buy another beer for the rest of their lives.
You're on thin ice, pal.
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1368
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1368, adopted unanimously on September 12, 2001<snip>
christx30 (449 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. And then sat on their hands
for the next 10 years. it's the US that has been doing it, until that litter detour into Saddam's backyard. But it was the US that led the fight. And it was American sailors that hunted down that bastard and gave him justice. Now the US has to answer to the UN about the "rights" of that asshole? We should tell them to perform a physical impossibility. We don't owe them a damn thing.
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Since the US controls the security council, it's a little silly to fault them
for anything.
LOL
So the US controls the UNSC? Then Bush was silly not to have his lap dogs sanction his imperialist war against Iraq...right?
laylah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May-06-11 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
25. Just out of curiousity,
where were the cries of "seeking facts" when *dumbass invaded a sovereign nation, using lies to do so, capturing and murdering their sovereign leader? Caveat: So damned insane was one evil bastard, one we helped to create. I was not sorry to see him gone; HOWEVER, again, I pose the question...where were the cries of "seeking facts" when *dumbass invaded a sovereign nation, using lies to do so, capturing and murdering their sovereign leader?
Now that you mention it...
There's a lot of northern European names in the OP.
Obviously this is a racist attack on Obama.
:fuelfire:
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun May-08-11 03:52 AM
Response to Original message
30. Prediction: The UN will find the US acted properly. Side issue: this could be kabuki. nt
hack89 (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun May-08-11 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
31. While he is waiting, maybe he can help the Syrians
but then this is the UN - so they will do nothing.
If we are smart, we can use this incident to further marginalize the UN.
heretic
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4842079
-
"Human rights investigators" are out-of-work communist community organizers.
They're supported by communist-front groups funded by democrat labor unions, so they're treading on thin ice when they criticize the jug-eared Kenyan.
-
Which Islamic bastion of Sharia Law is heading up the UN Human Rights Committee this week? :whatever:
-
There is no such requirement in the Law of Land Warfare, an enemy who is not incapacitated by wounds or attempting to surrender is a legitimate target without any requirement for a call to surrender or attempt to subdue him. Screw those guys.
-
There is no such requirement in the Law of Land Warfare, an enemy who is not incapacitated by wounds or attempting to surrender is a legitimate target without any requirement for a call to surrender or attempt to subdue him. Screw those guys.
Yes, but the DUmbasses think 9/11 is a law enforcement issue; they're just being magnanimous by allowing the military to be used as international PIs serving warrants.
To call it war would be to concede too much philosophical ground to *.