Is Barack Obama guilty of murder?

Originally posted by Danbones
lovely pic of you and Einstien

Obama watched the murder of an innocent man on a special TV
Osama started shooting?
linky please
to be guilty you have to be charged and convicted of a crime
If Osama was guilty you would have a link
linky or stinky there pal

Do you start off all your replies with an avatar insult?

I have no interest in debating this, I simply stated that the reports said that Usama had picked up a weapon and was "engaged in a firefight" which is why he was shot. Is it true? Probably not, I imagine their orders were to go in and shoot to kill, but those orders, nor the gun camera footage with audio will ever see the light of day or a court, so as far as "the law" is concerned, no "murder" took place and is as commonplace as when a police officer shoots someone who draws a weapon on them.

That's all I was trying to say - that they have a cover story. There is no doubt to me and probably anyone else that this was an assassination, just like the U.S. will do to Ghaddafii.

Originally posted by Juanxlink
reply to post by JakeLeMaster

 

And still they gave him the peace Nobel prize, now that was hilarious...
I would say yes, but not just murder hes guilty of...

War at times is acheiving peace believe it or not. Objective 1 has been Priority 1 outside of the economic recovery. This objective is the only one that mattered. It's tying up loose ends from the previous administration.

The latest report now changes the story and says that he was NOT armed, and did NOT use his wife as a shield:

www.politico.com...

Originally posted by yeti101
yep its been a terrible week for republicans. The release of the long form birth certificate & total humiliation at the press dinner . Then a few days later OBL gets smoked under orders from Obama.

You couldnt really get a much worse week. Obama is now the hero president who took care of OBL and re-election next year is guaranteed.

Your post seems like sour grapes

Obam is the most unclassy Prez I've ever seen in my lifetime.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by civilchallenger

 

Osama was wanted before 9/11, you know? If 9/11 is such a sticking point, then take it off the table. Osama was already a wanted man. I know everyone wants to hate Obama as much as possible but I guess I am wondering when you are going to go after every president that ever sat over a war and every war vet that ever took a life without a trial. Go for it.

edit on 5/3/11 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Since I started this thread the story has now changed so that Osama bin Ladin didn't even have a weapon at the time of his release! (sourceA: www.freetalklive.com May 3 2011 edition). So at this point clearly we have a fairly straight-forward murder case.

Your point is what... that a person becoming "wanted" is grounds to shoot them dead in cold blood? Think again. Osama bin Ladin was murdered, and all murderers should go to prison for the rest of their lives for the safety of others. Whoever was willing to shoot bin Ladin without a death penalty verdict would also be willing to shoot your or me without such a verdict. Therefore, they need to be locked up in a cage forever with the key thrown in the garbage.

If Osama bin Ladin did in fact say he intended to "attack American interests" in 1998 as another poster has said, then waiting until 2011 to kill him is absolutely unacceptable unless their is actual evidence he had acted on those claims. If someone made a death threat against you, you'd be locked up in prison for killing them in response in many cases. If someone made a death threat against you and you killed them 13 years later, you'd be locked up in prison and the verdict would actually be completely correct! The idea of a 13 year old death threat being the basis of killing someone over a decade later is something I don't understand... is that what you are saying? That because a dozen or so years back Osama was wanted for questioning under his hostile press release that its okay to knock him off 13 years later?

Hopefully I'll never be wanted for questioning with you as my police officer because you'd shoot me in cold blood rather than capture me for questioning, then you'd be mystified as to why anyone would object or complain about it.

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by civilchallenger

 

Osama was wanted before 9/11, you know? If 9/11 is such a sticking point, then take it off the table. Osama was already a wanted man. I know everyone wants to hate Obama as much as possible but I guess I am wondering when you are going to go after every president that ever sat over a war and every war vet that ever took a life without a trial. Go for it.

edit on 5/3/11 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Since I started this thread the story has now changed so that Osama bin Ladin didn't even have a weapon at the time of his release! (sourceA: www.freetalklive.com May 3 2011 edition). So at this point clearly we have a fairly straight-forward murder case.

Your point is what... that a person becoming "wanted" is grounds to shoot them dead in cold blood? Think again. Osama bin Ladin was murdered, and all murderers should go to prison for the rest of their lives for the safety of others. Whoever was willing to shoot bin Ladin without a death penalty verdict would also be willing to shoot your or me without such a verdict. Therefore, they need to be locked up in a cage forever with the key thrown in the garbage.

If Osama bin Ladin did in fact say he intended to "attack American interests" in 1998 as another poster has said, then waiting until 2011 to kill him is absolutely unacceptable unless their is actual evidence he had acted on those claims. If someone made a death threat against you, you'd be locked up in prison for killing them in response in many cases. If someone made a death threat against you and you killed them 13 years later, you'd be locked up in prison and the verdict would actually be completely correct! The idea of a 13 year old death threat being the basis of killing someone over a decade later is something I don't understand... is that what you are saying? That because a dozen or so years back Osama was wanted for questioning under his hostile press release that its okay to knock him off 13 years later?

Hopefully I'll never be wanted for questioning with you as my police officer because you'd shoot me in cold blood rather than capture me for questioning, then you'd be mystified as to why anyone would object or complain about it.

He was always considered to be "Extremely Armed and Dangerous" and should never be accosted or confronted without arms, heavy arms. No one knew going in weather or not he was armed to the "T" or if he had the building wired to explode or have a suicide vest sitting nearby. These are just simply things The US Navy Seals do not question nor second guess. This was a highly successful campaign as there was no damage nor destruction to the surrounding neighbourhood and all death was limited to just the compound. The Seals are trained to "get in, do the deed, and get out". The fact they landed and were back in the air in about 15 mins tells me unequivocally that this operation was a resounding success.

In previously issued videos always showed him with a fully loaded and cocked AK-47 at his side and at the ready, this is one of the contingencies they were planning for. It was HIS AK47.

www.christophervlapa.com.au...

regmedia.co.uk...

media.englishrussia.com...