Osama Bin Laden is dead. - Page 47 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-08-2011, 09:31 PM   #691
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Isn't that interesting? Not exactly St Jude Children's Research Hospital is it?


i find it interesting that you immediately believe the "North Orange County Conservatives" and believe their rationalizing for verbally assaulting Muslim children. but then, you like politicians who think their president would "pall around" with known terrorists like Bill Ayers.

you'll also note that they weren't protesting the two men who supposedly said they liked Hamas once, but they were spewing vile, bigoted things through megaphones at Muslim families who were attending an event to raise money for women's shelters and fighting homelessness in Orange county. because that's a "patriotic protest."

i know, i know ... it's just a splinter protest. well, let's look at what the OC politicians had to say:

YouTube - Hate Comes to Orange County

and, for actual news, rather than propagandic news releases, we can look to the Orange County Register:

Quote:
U.S. flags, signs at protest of Muslim event
By JAN NORMAN
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
Story Highlights

YORBA LINDA – Several hundred people from as far away as Corona and the San Fernando Valley filled the lawn outside the Yorba Linda Community Center Sunday afternoon and lined Imperial Highway in response to a fundraising event by a Queens, N.Y.-based Muslim group Islamic Circle of North America Relief USA.

People started gathering about 3 p.m., two-and-a-half hours before the fundraiser began. Many in the crowd waved U.S. flags and carried signs saying, "God Bless America" and "No Sharia Law," in reference to Islam's sacred law. In the afternoon, the event had the atmosphere of a July 4 picnic. Many brought lawn chairs and blankets, sang patriotic songs and tied red, white and blue bandanas on their dogs.

As the fundraiser started, a splinter group of about 100 stood about 50 yards from the community center entrance and booed, yelled "go home" and chanted "no Sharia law" as attendees entered the building. Among their signs were ones that said "ICNA supports Hamas and Hezbollah."

ICNA spokesman Syed Waqas said the protesters "should know the facts. We have no links to any overseas organization. We absolutely denounce violence and terrorism."

He said the group started in Southern California about eight months ago and is trying to raise $350,000 to start social programs such as women's shelters, fighting hunger and homelessness in the area.

About 300 were expected to attend the event. Admission was $25.

One of the attendees, Khwaja Ahmad, said he was surprised by the protests. "I am supporting the group because they are raising money for the beggar women."

A woman attendee who declined to give her name said, "It is surprising, but everyone has a right to express their opinion."

Many in the crowd outside the event said they were concerned about past anti-American statements by the event's two keynote speakers, Imam Siraj Wahhaj and Amir Abdel Malik Ali. Wahhaj is an imam at a mosque in Brooklyn. A U.S. attorney named him and 169 others as co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Wahhaj was never charged and has denied involvement.

Malik Ali is a Bay Area Islamic activist who spoke at "Israeli Apartheid Week" at UC Irvine in 2010. There he said he supports Hezbollah, which the CIA labels a terrorist group.

Chandler Endresen of Yorba Linda stood on Imperial Highway with about 30 others waving American flags. "I had seen what had gone on at UCI in 2010 when (Malik Ali) spoke. He caused trouble there. I don't want that here."

"This is not about hate. We are not hate mongers," said Karen Lugo, one of the speakers outside the community center. Several people said they had sent out thousands of e-mails about the ICNA Relief USA fundraiser and encouraged people to show up for a pro-America rally.

One organizer, Steven Amundson of Huntington Beach said, "A week and a half ago I would have been happy to have six people show up. It's not right for terrorism to come to Yorba Linda. I always stress the need to be peaceful and positive."

About 11 police officers were near the community center entrance, keeping an eye on the crowd, and at one point asked non-attendees to move back.

The fundraiser was not sponsored by the city. The city's attorneys said the city cannot block the ICNA from using the building. The group has rented the community center many times, according to member Shahid Hussain.

Hundreds protest Muslim event in Yorba Linda | america, fundraiser, wahhaj - News - The Orange County Register
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 09:39 PM   #692
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:14 AM
If those protestors were genuinely committed to secularism then they wouldn't be discriminating against one theocracy.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 10:02 PM   #693
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
I think Krammy and Earnie meant 'Hijab' rather than burka.

I find hijabs kinda sexi myself. Nice to have another form of personal expression out there for women, ya know?



But whatever, they're all extremist sand niggers trying to convert our kids to orthodox religious radicals, right?
I think that holding this type of religious clothing as an example of free expression is a very modern take on something derived from a time when women were treated as chattel. Obligatory modesty codes that says women must cover themselves because men cannot help themselves should be problematic for liberals.

As a matter of free expression and religious I oppose bans, but I don't think that it's a good thing. And please take this line of thinking and apply it to many other forms of religiously required fashion.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 10:34 PM   #694
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

My God.

That's horrifying. They're the direct descendants of those who were screaming at the high schoolers trying to get educated in Little Rock. How do they sleep at night?



Ed Royce is my Congressman. Now I despise him even more, if that was possible.
__________________
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 11:55 PM   #695
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,883
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I know, radical isn't it?
What does that have to do with anything we're talking about? You somehow made a statement about polygamy about homosexuality, which is 1) retarded and 2) unrelated to the quote you cited.
__________________
PhilsFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 11:58 PM   #696
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
YouTube - Burka and Treadmill = Funny Video

Women in burkas on the treadmill next you is a common occurrence. Really?
I meant Burka.

And as I said, it is almost as common as a guy in tight running shorts.

Hijabs are more common than guys in tight shorts at my Y.

We have a huge Somali population in Minneapolis.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 12:00 AM   #697
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
A good argument to retain DOMA.
Don't you believe in biblical marriage?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 10:00 AM   #698
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 12:14 PM
(CNN) -- Was the killing of Osama bin Laden legal under international law?

The administration says yes, absolutely. Experts are unsure.

Attorney General Eric Holder told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the U.S. raid on bin Laden's compound was lawful "as an act of national self-defense."

Bin Laden "was the head of al Qaeda, an organization that had conducted the attacks of September the 11th," Holder said. "It's lawful to target an enemy commander in the field."

The raid "was conducted in a manner fully consistent with the laws of war," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters. Carney declined to offer specifics, but said "there is simply no question that this operation was lawful. ... (Bin Laden) had continued to plot attacks against the United States."

Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama had all issued orders to kill or capture the al Qaeda leader.

"The authority (during the raid) was to kill bin Laden," CIA Director Leon Panetta said Tuesday during an interview with PBS. "Obviously, under the rules of engagement, if he had in fact thrown up his hands, surrendered, and didn't appear to be representing any kind of threat, then they were to capture him. But they had full authority to kill him."

A number of experts have told CNN the question of actual legality may come down to bin Laden's response at the moment U.S. Navy SEALs burst into his room.

"If a person has his hands in the air, you're not supposed to kill him," said Steven Groves, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Navi Pillay, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, told reporters she wants a "full disclosure" of the key facts.

U.S. officials have revised their account of the assault on the compound in Pakistan. Bin Laden was not armed during the 40-minute raid, they now say, but he put up resistance to U.S. forces.

The al Qaeda leader was moving at the time he was initially shot, according to a U.S. official who has seen military reports of the incident. The official declined to describe the movements more specifically.

Asked if bin Laden tried to grab a weapon or physically attack a commando, the official would say only that "he didn't hold up his hands and surrender."

Officials earlier claimed that bin Laden was an active participant in the firefight that erupted, implying that he was armed and gave the SEALs little choice but to shoot him.

Groves, citing the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law, told CNN that, based on the most recent White House account, "there is nothing to indicate anything illegal happened."

Bin Laden, considered a combatant by virtue of his position as head of al Qaeda, needed to immediately make clear a desire to surrender, if that was his decision, in order to avoid being shot. That apparently didn't happen, Groves said.

"The United States offered bin Laden the possibility to surrender, but he refused," Martin Scheinin, the United Nations' special rapporteur for human rights, said Tuesday. "Bin Laden would have avoided destruction if he had raised a white flag."

Geoffrey Robertson, a human rights lawyer who has defended WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange among others, made clear that international law requires any killing to be done in self-defense.

If members of the SEAL team "reasonably (believed there was) a risk to themselves, then the killing was justified," Robertson asserted. But given the changing White House account of the raid, "there needs to be an inquiry," he said.

Cherif Bassiouni, head of DePaul University's International Human Rights Law Institute and a former U.N. war crimes investigator, said that the "killing of any individual sought by law enforcement in the course of a lawful arrest is always a question of facts. Did the person resist? Did the person have a deadly weapon? Were the arresting officers in fear of their lives? These are all pertinent questions."

Bassiouni stressed that any "extrajudicial execution of an unarmed person is in violation of international law."

"It is necessary for the Navy to conduct an internal investigation into the appropriateness of the use of armed force," Bassiouni told CNN. "However, it is also important not to make the Navy SEALs be the scapegoats for (any) secret orders which the public is unaware of to simply kill bin Laden no matter what."

Was the incursion of U.S. forces into Pakistani territory without the clear permission of Islamabad legal?

In response to that question, the U.S. intelligence official echoed Holder's and Carney's remarks, asserting that "since 9/11, the U.S. has had the authority to kill Osama Bin Laden."

"The operation was the subject of a rigorous legal review and was planned in strict accord with American law," the official said. "As a matter of international law, al Qaeda has attacked the United States and continues to pose an imminent threat to the United States. As such, the United States may use force against al Qaeda consistent with its inherent right to national self-defense under international law."

The operation "was conducted under the CIA's authorities contained in federal law, unlike most military operations which are under the control and legal authority of the Defense Department," the official noted.

Bin Laden was an indicted international criminal who had evaded all attempts to apprehend him, Robertson said. As a consequence, he asserted, the operation was legal.

Groves argued the use of the SEALs in Pakistan does "present complications," though he noted that there has been a "kind of a wink and a nod game (the U.S. government has) been playing with the Pakistanis for years" in terms of predator drone strikes and other attacks against Islamic extremists on Pakistani soil.

Bassiouni argued that "the mission to capture was legal, even though there are some questions under international law about one state sending its forces into another state to kidnap a person wanted for trial."

The issue first arose in the early 1960s, Bassiouni noted, when notorious Nazi Adolf Eichmann was kidnapped by Israeli agents in Argentina and subsequently brought to Israel for trial.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 10:18 AM   #699
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 01:14 PM
Public international law doesn't really matter, to be honest.

Everything from a big superpower sending drones into your airspace, down to softwood lumber disputes, is not realistically enforceable.
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 10:38 AM   #700
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
A good argument to retain DOMA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post

Isn't that interesting? Not exactly St Jude Children's Research Hospital is it?
American Exceptionalism at it's finest
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 10:44 AM   #701
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
What does that have to do with anything we're talking about? You somehow made a statement about polygamy about homosexuality, which is 1) retarded and 2) unrelated to the quote you cited.


don't you see? we have to destroy the gays to save us from the Muslims.

(though, ironically, hating gays is something Republicans and Muslims have in common)
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 08:45 PM   #702
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
What does that have to do with anything we're talking about? You somehow made a statement about polygamy about homosexuality, which is 1) retarded and 2) unrelated to the quote you cited.
DOMA is a legal protection of traditional marriage including not recognizing polygamy, hence the reason I put one man and one woman in bold. I'll now add underlining, one man and one woman to make it clearer.

DOMA protects Americans from having polygamy legally recognized by courts or agencies without a change of law. If you've been reading the thread English citizens apparently have no such protection. I'm glad we do.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 08:55 PM   #703
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:14 PM
nm
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 08:59 PM   #704
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:14 AM
There is little wrong with having between two and only two people.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 09:01 PM   #705
Blue Crack Supplier
 
coolian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hamilton (No longer STD capital of NZ)
Posts: 42,920
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
If you've been reading the thread English citizens apparently have no such protection. I'm glad we do.
why? it's not like they'd force you to marry a bunch of people anyway.
__________________

__________________
coolian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com