Justice Stevens: Bin Laden killing legal

Justice Stevens: Bin Laden killing legal

There are 16 comments on the CNN story from May 14, 2011, titled Justice Stevens: Bin Laden killing legal. In it, CNN reports that:

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has voiced support for the killing of al Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. forces, saying it was legally justified.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#1 May 14, 2011
This liberal judge would eat a sh!t sandwich if Obama told him it tasted good.
911 was an inside job

Pflugerville, TX

#2 May 14, 2011
Alzheimers?

Stevens, remarking on the "legality" of the murder: "It was not merely to do justice and avenge September 11."

Well, Justice Johnny, don't you normally need to present proof of guilt before you jump to the execution phase? According to FBI Chief of Investigative Publicity Rex Tomb,“The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/ar...

These 9/11 victims' families have questions about some fairly significant evidence that completely undermines the official 9/11 fiction:

&

.

.

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#3 May 14, 2011
911 was an inside job wrote:
Alzheimers?
Stevens, remarking on the "legality" of the murder: "It was not merely to do justice and avenge September 11."
Well, Justice Johnny, don't you normally need to present proof of guilt before you jump to the execution phase? According to FBI Chief of Investigative Publicity Rex Tomb,“The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/ar...
These 9/11 victims' families have questions about some fairly significant evidence that completely undermines the official 9/11 fiction:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =eHo5hNCvLb4XX&
.
.
Damn, I just knew some dumbass truther would show up.
noonan

Werlte, Germany

#4 May 14, 2011
legal according to who? its funny how the u.s. goes into pk to murder people, and then try to apply u.s. laws.
Rico

Guatemala City, Guatemala

#5 May 14, 2011
Let's be clear here, EX-Justice Stevens condons 'Extra-Judicial-Killings', grasping for straws to support the criminal acts perpitrated against a foreign nation...
Arrogance doesn't even start to describe his mental condition...
Wall Street Government

Vero Beach, FL

#6 May 14, 2011
Rico wrote:
Let's be clear here, EX-Justice Stevens condons 'Extra-Judicial-Killings', grasping for straws to support the criminal acts perpitrated against a foreign nation...
Arrogance doesn't even start to describe his mental condition...
No, he said it was legal, which means he has the authority over..... NOTHING. Our supreme court, outside of the U.S. has the power over....... NOTHING. "Criminal acts"? Osama was wanted by everyone except maybe Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. If the Paki's want to press charges, so be it then it would be "criminal". Then again billions of dollars we give them would be at stake, so criminal charges would be out of the question. U.S. corruption $$$$ at work.
I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#7 May 14, 2011
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text> No, he said it was legal, which means he has the authority over..... NOTHING. Our supreme court, outside of the U.S. has the power over....... NOTHING. "Criminal acts"? Osama was wanted by everyone except maybe Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. If the Paki's want to press charges, so be it then it would be "criminal". Then again billions of dollars we give them would be at stake, so criminal charges would be out of the question. U.S. corruption $$$$ at work.
Read the article.

According to it he didn't even say the raid was legal, the headline writer did.
Wall Street Government

Vero Beach, FL

#8 May 14, 2011
I can read wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the article.
According to it he didn't even say the raid was legal, the headline writer did.
Correct. Washington (CNN)-- Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has voiced support for the killing of al Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden by U.S. forces, saying it was legally justified. Nowhere in the article but as I stated before what he says means ....NOTHING. Legal or not.
Badtothebone

Miller Place, NY

#9 May 14, 2011
noonan wrote:
legal according to who? its funny how the u.s. goes into pk to murder people, and then try to apply u.s. laws.
Be nice now, I see you're in Germany. Let's not forget the number 6 million, do you know what I mean?
Shiloh

Conroe, TX

#10 May 14, 2011
Who cares what this pooh-for-brains says!
Austin TX spammer

United States

#11 May 14, 2011
I was INSIDE your mother doing a job. lol You zit face punk morn.

So far everything Obama said about the raid has been a lie so why should we believe this?

Okay WTF?? Obama now says he wants to drill for oil and give oil companies more oil leases, exaclty opposite of what Obama said before. Is Obama bipolar or nutso? Obama hs continued all of the Bush policies that were in place, even though Obama ran of change and mocked all of the Bush policies and the war on terror.

This Jack Davis thing is insane. It's obvious to anyone that Jack Davis ran as a Democrat three times and is running as a fake Tea Patry member that he made up only to take away votes from Corwn the Republican and give tax and spend Kathy Do nothing Hochel a Democrat victory. The liberal Artvoice had a story about white people running black candidate so that he or she could take votes away from the other black candiate and let the white guy, who is also running win. No information on what race they're talking about, but it's hypocrital that is exaclty what Jack Davis, the hothead drunk who can't handle a simple question about his cowardice on dropping out of a Cha 2 WGRZ debate is doing to Corwin against Hochel. So if you like Nancy Pelosi, then Kathy Hochel is your gal. You fool.
----------
So Obama wants to take away the 2.1 billion tax subsidies going to the oil companies. Many would agree, but that amount is like a small grain of sand in the desert.

Obama and the liberal Democrats want to increase taxes on the rich who are not rich but mainly small business that employ people.

The savings would be a pittance of just 11 billion dollars a year out of Obama's spending, which has been in excess over a trillion dollars a year, 1.3, 1.43, 1.65 and 1.1 trillion dollars.

What would that do besides decrease the work force by hurting small business? Jobs wold be lost, none would be created, tax revenue would go down, investing by small business would go down and the loss in tax revenue would far exceed the small 11 billion dollar saving by taxing the so called rich. Ignorant liberals don't understand this. Any money received from this would be immediately spent by the tax and spend Democrats and NOT be used to reduce the deficit/debt, so what's the point?

Liberals, you can always pay MORE to the IRS if you wanted to. Nothing is stopping you. How about the IRS have a box that liberals can chcek off and pay more to the federal government. How many liberal Democrat hypocrites would do that?
Badtothebone

Miller Place, NY

#12 May 15, 2011
Austin TX spammer wrote:
I was INSIDE your mother doing a job. lol You zit face punk morn.
So far everything Obama said about the raid has been a lie so why should we believe this?
Okay WTF?? Obama now says he wants to drill for oil and give oil companies more oil leases, exaclty opposite of what Obama said before. Is Obama bipolar or nutso? Obama hs continued all of the Bush policies that were in place, even though Obama ran of change and mocked all of the Bush policies and the war on terror.
This Jack Davis thing is insane. It's obvious to anyone that Jack Davis ran as a Democrat three times and is running as a fake Tea Patry member that he made up only to take away votes from Corwn the Republican and give tax and spend Kathy Do nothing Hochel a Democrat victory. The liberal Artvoice had a story about white people running black candidate so that he or she could take votes away from the other black candiate and let the white guy, who is also running win. No information on what race they're talking about, but it's hypocrital that is exaclty what Jack Davis, the hothead drunk who can't handle a simple question about his cowardice on dropping out of a Cha 2 WGRZ debate is doing to Corwin against Hochel. So if you like Nancy Pelosi, then Kathy Hochel is your gal. You fool.
----------
So Obama wants to take away the 2.1 billion tax subsidies going to the oil companies. Many would agree, but that amount is like a small grain of sand in the desert.
Obama and the liberal Democrats want to increase taxes on the rich who are not rich but mainly small business that employ people.
The savings would be a pittance of just 11 billion dollars a year out of Obama's spending, which has been in excess over a trillion dollars a year, 1.3, 1.43, 1.65 and 1.1 trillion dollars.
What would that do besides decrease the work force by hurting small business? Jobs wold be lost, none would be created, tax revenue would go down, investing by small business would go down and the loss in tax revenue would far exceed the small 11 billion dollar saving by taxing the so called rich. Ignorant liberals don't understand this. Any money received from this would be immediately spent by the tax and spend Democrats and NOT be used to reduce the deficit/debt, so what's the point?
Liberals, you can always pay MORE to the IRS if you wanted to. Nothing is stopping you. How about the IRS have a box that liberals can chcek off and pay more to the federal government. How many liberal Democrat hypocrites would do that?
Are you for real you friggin tard? Hahahahahahahahaha You need a good bitch slapping.
I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#13 May 15, 2011
Badtothebone wrote:
<quoted text>
Be nice now, I see you're in Germany. Let's not forget the number 6 million, do you know what I mean?
Ooooh, I know this!!!

6 million refers to the holocaust victims ignored by the USA right? All those people murdered by the most evil regime in history and America tried all it could to avoid getting in the Germans way.

Hell, even after axis forces attacked you at pearl harbour you still tried to avoid conflict with Germany. They declared war on you.

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#14 May 15, 2011
I can read wrote:
<quoted text>
Ooooh, I know this!!!
6 million refers to the holocaust victims ignored by the USA right? All those people murdered by the most evil regime in history and America tried all it could to avoid getting in the Germans way.
Hell, even after axis forces attacked you at pearl harbour you still tried to avoid conflict with Germany. They declared war on you.
Well just what did the UK and Nevil Chamberlain do? You should tell your kids everynight that the reason they are not speaking German is because of the brave men in the USA.
I can read

Edinburgh, UK

#15 May 16, 2011
MSO4 wrote:
<quoted text>Well just what did the UK and Nevil Chamberlain do? You should tell your kids everynight that the reason they are not speaking German is because of the brave men in the USA.
What did we do?

We single handedly fought the Germans and had stopped them in Europe and had them in retreat in Africa while you scum were war profiteering.

Incidentally you joined the war after Russia did. They were important to the war effort. You weren't.

Your usual practice of turning up at the end of a world war once the victors had already been decided and pretending you won doesn't wash. It just shows you up as cowards.

“Unions are still scum ”

Since: Dec 07

Atlanta

#16 May 16, 2011
I can read wrote:
<quoted text>
What did we do?
We single handedly fought the Germans and had stopped them in Europe and had them in retreat in Africa while you scum were war profiteering.
Incidentally you joined the war after Russia did. They were important to the war effort. You weren't.
Your usual practice of turning up at the end of a world war once the victors had already been decided and pretending you won doesn't wash. It just shows you up as cowards.
I guess you happened to forget about all the supplies we provided you ingrates.

BTW slick, why should we have gone to war with Germany sooner? It is not they were bombing us.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Northwestern University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colorado emergency rooms are a hot spot for mar... Aug 17 BigDaddy2010 4
News To Serve God and Wal-Mart: The Making of Christ... (Jun '09) Jul '16 Sam 92
News LANL discovery could launch next generation of ... Jul '16 Solarman 1
News Kids born 'late' perform better in elementary a... Jun '16 LineDazzle 3
News Illinois withdraws from federal immigration pro... (May '11) Jun '16 Teresa W 2
News Yale OKs gender-neutral bathrooms, joining 150+... May '16 Three Days Paleo 1
News Muslim woman claiming anti-Islam bigotry story ... (Jun '15) May '16 Three Days Paleo 4
More from around the web