I know a troll when I see one

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/world/asia/11binladen.html?_r=1&hp

5/10/2011 2:17:49 PM

AMERICA!

FUCK YEAH!

5/10/2011 2:18:59 PM

I don't give a good goddamn what they think.

I also don't give a dirty rat fuck who gets the blame/credit for offing the bastard. It's done. Hoorah. Move on.

5/10/2011 2:19:14 PM

Well I mean. If bin ladens son said it, it must be true!

5/10/2011 2:20:20 PM

LAW: everything's illegal.

5/10/2011 2:20:21 PM

Hello. My name is Omar bin Laden. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

5/10/2011 2:21:48 PM

Darth Vaden

5/10/2011 2:22:29 PM

Why you killed ma De De?

5/10/2011 2:23:13 PM

"Your honor, if I was speeding then the cop who pulled me over had to be speeding also. He should get a ticket!"

5/10/2011 2:25:19 PM

Osama Bin Laden Violated International Law

5/10/2011 2:25:42 PM

5/10/2011 2:27:39 PM

DEATH TO AMERICA*























*except Calvin Klein

5/10/2011 2:28:46 PM

Do you think they ever came back for the people on the plane??

5/10/2011 2:29:29 PM

5/10/2011 2:37:54 PM

Quote :

"2 wrongs dont make a right you dumb motherfuckers"

Fuck you bitch, I'll slit your throat

5/10/2011 3:12:19 PM

then send team six to double tap dat ass

5/10/2011 3:20:34 PM

"You know what you should do? You should sanction me. Sanction me with your army. Oh!! Wait a minute! You don't have an army! I guess that means you need to shut the fuck up! That's what I'd do if I don't have no army. I would shhhhh, the fuck up."

5/10/2011 3:26:20 PM

Thread needs more nationalism

5/10/2011 3:36:42 PM

5/10/2011 3:38:38 PM

I'd still bwn the right.

5/10/2011 3:40:31 PM

Quote :

"He broke more than man's law. He broke God's law, he broke Seth's law, Murphy's Law ... Law and Order"

[Edited on May 10, 2011 at 4:29 PM. Reason : ...]

5/10/2011 4:28:56 PM

Quote :

"I'd still bwn the right."

She'd suck the meat off your dick like she sucks the meat off a chicken wing.

5/10/2011 4:30:01 PM

^but she probably chews threw the bone for that marrow, so you might literally have your dick chewed through

5/10/2011 4:32:49 PM

I've never seen evidence that those women are from where it says they are from.

Also I've never understood why they compare a happy meal with some sort of overpriced winery gift basket.

5/10/2011 4:35:53 PM

I'm AstralAdvent and i approved this message.

5/10/2011 4:39:24 PM

I for one have seen many a fine ass with a whale tail in these United States.

5/10/2011 4:41:03 PM

why are we interviewing these people? he's lucky we didn't kidnap him and use him as hostage to lure bin laden

5/10/2011 4:48:54 PM

Quote :

"We want to remind the world that Omar bin Laden, the fourth-born son of our father, always disagreed with our father regarding any violence and always sent messages to our father, that he must change his ways and that no civilians should be attacked under any circumstances"

HmmmmmMMMMmmmmmmMMMMmmmmmmMMMMMmmmmmmMMMMMMmmm...

How do you send a message to someone if you don't have an address?

5/10/2011 6:26:37 PM

by courier of course!

5/10/2011 6:30:36 PM

Quote :

"accusing the United States of violating its basic legal principles by killing an unarmed man"

In all reality, unless the man that often called for suicide bombers wearing explosive vests, was completely nude.... you can't just assume he's unarmed.

Quote :

"but the principles of presumption of innocence "

OBL took credit for numerous attacks

Quote :

"and the right to a fair trial were ignored."

Ok... .... as far as I know, that's right provided to U.S. citizens. Moreso, OBL has already displayed his non-conformance to any U.S. laws. I say that to not mean that we shouldn't abide by our own laws. But rather to say how could OBL possibly expect to be protected under U.S. law in Pakistan?

5/10/2011 6:35:10 PM

Hey EMCE,

Quote :

"But rather to say how could OBL possibly expect to be protected under U.S. law in Pakistan?"

Nobody is alleging that he was protected under US law...

Quote :

"Bin Laden Sons Say U.S. Violated International Law"

Now give me your admin for my victory.

5/10/2011 6:55:17 PM

I think you need to go back and read that article again, son....

Aside from that, military combatants and command and control centers aren't required to withstand trial before death

5/10/2011 6:59:37 PM

Quote :

"I think you need to go back and read that article again, son...."

Quote :

"the propriety of such assassination where not only international law has been blatantly violated"

5/10/2011 8:04:35 PM

I guess it's somewhat cute how you only quoted the part of the sentence that validates your silly little point. However, there was more. Allow me to go on

Quote :

".....but the principles of presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial were ignored"

those principles, falling OUTSIDE of international law. Do I really have to hold your hand when you read?

5/10/2011 8:06:58 PM

Principles != Law.

Yes. He alleges that we violated our own principles, but now our own laws.

5/10/2011 8:23:32 PM

that IS our U.S. law O______o

just keep typing man. the odds are you'll come up with something remotely intelligent one day. I'll bother responding to you again whenever that happens...

5/10/2011 8:25:24 PM

admit it emce, this was a ploy to try to hold mrbig's hand.

5/10/2011 8:28:01 PM

I've been fount out

[Edited on May 10, 2011 at 8:29 PM. Reason : a]

5/10/2011 8:28:52 PM

26668 Posts

5/10/2011 8:33:20 PM

You said that he is accusing us of violating our laws. He never made such a statement. He said we violated international laws. He also accused us of violating our principles. Look. Laws are generally based on a principle, but a principle is not based on a law.

All of the articulate legal bullshit is contained in a law. The qualifications of who it applies to, when it applies, ect is all contained in a law. Meanwhile, a principle is universal.

An example:

One of our founding principles was Freedom of Speech. This principle is universal, we believe that it is something all humans have a right to. However, the law differs greatly from the principle. Courts have interpreted the law to only apply to political speech within the confines of the US border. Us going over to Libya and suppressing the speech/protest of demonstrators would not be in violation of US law, and accusing us of violating our law would be a wrong accusation. However, if someone accused us of violating our principles (that freedom of speech is a universal right for all humans), that would be a perfectly valid assertion.

In case you want to fire back that law=principle, the legal definition of a law != principle. Depending on the usage of the word "law," the two can be synonymous with each other. However, your usage of the word indicates that you are referring to a legal law, and his usage of the word "principle" indicates that he's talking more along the lines of a moral guideline... I assume I don't have to explain to you why moral guidelines and laws are not the same...

[Edited on May 10, 2011 at 8:44 PM. Reason : .]

5/10/2011 8:43:05 PM

Damn, I was hoping the odds would be in your favor there. All of those words, and you still didn't get an intelligent point off. You realize the bill of rights is a statutory law, right?

5/10/2011 8:49:47 PM

Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw airplanes at buildings.

5/10/2011 9:47:12 PM

You must be trolling...

Quote :

"You realize the bill of rights is a statutory law, right?"

You realize that the principle of "Freedom of Speech" and the law found in the Bill of Rights are different? You realize that the Bill of Rights, specifically the first amendment, place limitations on the very same principles that the law is based off of? You realize that the principle of "Freedom of Speech" is not one that is unique or exclusive to the US.

If a country doesn't grant freedom of speech as a right to its citizens, is the country not in violation of that principle? Are the people incapable of holding such a principle if it is not a law.

You clearly missed Omar's point. He was saying that a country (the US) who has a core value of presumption of innocence failed to live up to their own principles. He never accused us of violating our own laws, just International Laws.

If your only argument is that a law (legal definition) is the same as a principle, not only do you not understand what he is saying, but you are unable to differentiate between morality and legality, and that is sad on so many levels.

[Edited on May 10, 2011 at 9:54 PM. Reason : .]

5/10/2011 9:53:05 PM

5/10/2011 10:00:27 PM

ok, you're a moron. If a law is later elaborated on and defined by other laws, does not then become what you're calling a principle.

keep on typing man...you'll get it one day.

5/10/2011 10:02:42 PM

Wow you're an idiot. You're telling me that I can't break my own principle without breaking the law? Because that's what Omar is saying about us. We broke our own fucking principle but not necessarily our own law... He made no mention of us breaking our own law.

But if you are telling me that it is not possible for me to break my own principles without breaking the law, then you are most certainly an idiot...

5/10/2011 10:29:24 PM

merbig is getting troll0lol0led hard, ITT

5/10/2011 10:31:14 PM

meh


Sounds like they can dish it out, but cant take it. (referring to murder that is)

The fair and just thing for his father (obl) would have been to take him alive, torture him for months until all information that could be extracted from him had been extracted. Then stage a painful "accidental" death for thim that would avoid us bothering with a trial.

I think the US has been more than humane in this instance by using the "double tap"

5/10/2011 10:41:57 PM