• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.N. rights investigators seek facts on bin Laden death

ReverendHellh0und

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
U.N. rights investigators seek facts on bin Laden death

U.N. rights investigators seek facts on bin Laden death | Reuters


(Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators called on the United States on Friday to disclose the full facts surrounding the killing of Osama bin Laden, in particular whether there had been any plan to capture him.

Christof Heyns, U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and Martin Scheinin, special rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism, said that in certain exceptional cases, deadly force may be used in "operations against terrorists."

"However, the norm should be that terrorists be dealt with as criminals, through legal processes of arrest, trial and judicially-decided punishment," the independent experts said in a joint statement.

"In respect of the recent use of deadly force against Osama bin Laden, the United States of America should disclose the supporting facts to allow an assessment in terms of international human rights law standards," they said.

"It will be particularly important to know if the planning of the mission allowed an effort to capture bin Laden."
Click to expand...


As I said in the other thread...


Bring... It.... On..... :gunsmilie:


What are they going to do? File an indignant letter? :lamo

Lefties..... Welcome to our world friends. :mrgreen:
 
When are we going to stop funding this idiot organization?
 
tessaesque said:
When are we going to stop funding this idiot organization?
Click to expand...

Did they send a sternly worded letter to Qaddaffi asking him to describe his plans and the results during this civil outbreak of protest?
 
From 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.
Click to expand...

U.N. rights investigators seek facts on bin Laden death | Reuters

To a reasonable person, the notion that the UN implies that some kind of international law might have been violated in the United States' bringing Osama Bin Laden to justice, might seem surreal. Unfortunately, if one takes a closer look at the UN's often novel interpretations of international law, usually in a fashion aimed at depriving that body's target of its inherent right of self-defense, this latest development is not too surprising.

Under the Laws of War, Bin Laden was not a civilian. He did not enjoy protected status. Indeed, evidence seized during the raid revealed that he continued to plot new attacks. Hence, he was continuing to serve in a command-and-control capacity making him a legitimate military objective.

The U.S. should reject the UN's request, much as Israel correctly rejected cooperation with the highly-politicized and increasingly discredited Goldstone mission. Such political exercises that have little to do with concrete principles of international law can only undermine the inherent right of sovereign states to defend themselves. In doing so, rather than safeguarding human rights and international peace and stability, they endanger them.
 
Screw that heavily biased anti US money sucking organization. Their opinion on this means exactly nothing to me, and as it should to the nation.
 
Just another reason to withdraw from the UN. Think of the savings.
 
I have a message for the UN and would be very happy to deliver it to the General Assembly or the Security Council.

I am prohibited from using the terms needed to properly express my distain of the UN, and I have managed to avoid getting in trouble and I hope to remain so.

:censored :censored :moon:
 
Last edited:
Just doing their job fellas...
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
As I said in the other thread...


Bring... It.... On..... :gunsmilie:


What are they going to do? File an indignant letter? :lamo

Lefties..... Welcome to our world friends. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

ROTFLOL... One good thing about this UN stunt is it just might get a few Leftists to see the organization as many on the right do. A useless bit of corrupt dung that costs us hundreds upon hundreds of millions.

After WWII it was a nice idea, a Kumbaya moment after years of death and destruction, but it's become nothing more than The League of Nations II.

.
 
This the minor price we pay for keeping around useful idiots like these guys. They come in quite handy when we need to demonize someone for human rights abuses to gain an advantage. They add legitimacy if you want to take military action ala the gulf war or Kosovo. Sure they sometimes whine about the U.S., but it hardly costs anything. They have no real power and international opinion is pretty much fine with killing OBL. Next week they'll probably go after Syria and play right back into our hands.
 
Now look y'all just because y'all dont understand things like laws and countries and wars and bureaucracy and the structures of human behavior and agreements that drive the motion of our race on earth doesnt mean the UN has to go.

Keep this up and they'll euthanize your grandchildren when were forced to survive during an impending alien invasion, NaziCommiestyle.
 
rathi said:
This the minor price we pay for keeping around useful idiots like these guys. They come in quite handy when we need to demonize someone for human rights abuses to gain an advantage.
Click to expand...
We do not need the UN for this.

They add legitimacy if you want to take military action ala the gulf war or Kosovo.
Click to expand...
This was a war Leftists cried and protested for us to get involved with. In the Euros backyard and where we had zero national interest. We didn't need the UN to go there and assist; and the Euros should have taken responsibility for all of it. They couldn't manage it.

Sure they sometimes whine about the U.S., but it hardly costs anything.
Click to expand...
3 billion annually is hardly "hardly anything".
How the U.S. Funds the UN

They have no real power
Click to expand...
Then let's get rid of them.

and international opinion is pretty much fine with killing OBL.
Click to expand...
Interesting how flexible they have become on rules and "law".

.
 
The UN is a topic that touches my conservative side. The UN is bloated and corrupt... I mean, Libya is on the Human Rights Commission, for crap sake... a completely inept bureaucracy that causes more problems in the world that it has ever solved. Other than giving a few international soldiers a blue hat and a license to rape the locals, it has no reason for being. I wish the USA would simply drop out, kick its headquarters across the pond and ignore it completely.
 
I actually find it kinda funny that Obama is being investigated by the UN. He was the one that was going to make the world love us after all. He actually set himself up for this by saying terrorist have rights and then having one shot in cold blood. He may have some “splainin” to do and I will enjoy seeing him squirm.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I actually find it kinda funny that Obama is being investigated by the UN. He was the one that was going to make the world love us after all. He actually set himself up for this by saying terrorist have rights and then having one shot in cold blood. He may have some “splainin” to do and I will enjoy seeing him squirm.
Click to expand...

The one thing this was not was a "cold blood" killing. It may have been an assassination...but it was not in cold blood.
 
Hmmmm...what about, the UN's committee against torture or agreements
on human rights?

Do we also dump that?
 
ksu_aviator said:
The one thing this was not was a "cold blood" killing. It may have been an assassination...but it was not in cold blood.
Click to expand...

Killing a rebel/insurgent in combat would be one thing. Outright assassinating one in cold blood will evoke an entirely different response....a UN response

Just sayin'
 
ric27 said:
Killing a rebel/insurgent in combat would be one thing. Outright assassinating one in cold blood will evoke an entirely different response....a UN response

Just sayin'
Click to expand...

Cold Blooded:

cold-blooded - definition of cold-blooded by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

1.
a. Lacking feeling or emotion: a cold-blooded killer.
b. Executed without feeling or emotion: a cold-blooded crime; a cold-blooded performance of the concerto.
Click to expand...

There is no way there was no emotion involved. You clearly didn't know the definition of cold-blooded so I supplied it.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I actually find it kinda funny that Obama is being investigated by the UN. He was the one that was going to make the world love us after all. He actually set himself up for this by saying terrorist have rights and then having one shot in cold blood. He may have some “splainin” to do and I will enjoy seeing him squirm.
Click to expand...

you know, those are very valid points. He did essentially set himself up for this kind of thing. Of course, I'd have had Bin Laden killed without hesitation as well.
 
Did they try to investigate Bin Laden's assassaination of 3,000 American civilians to see if he offered them a chance to surrender by buzzing the towers with air planes?
 
If Bush would have had a chance to do this I think he would of opted for capture not killing. Of course Bush would of then water boarded UBL, broke him like an old wore out wild horse and gleaned lots of info from him. Obama on the other hand had a problem. First he would have had to put him in Gitmo which he promised to shut down. Second he would have had to give him a fair trial at which time UBL could spout his crap to a worldwide audience. Ubl would tell us nothing and get lots of publicity. Obama had to have him killed no other choice really, not for Obama anyway. He has himself painted into a corner with all his stupid rhetoric.
 
My opinion about the UN and what they want is...throw them out of NYC, tell them to pack up and haul arse and go somewhere else...and oh you dont get another dime from us. This has gone beyond absurd with them being against us and costing us billions in the process
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom