Liberal Forum

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 2:14 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:14 pm

I posted something proving you entirely wrong.

kneel before your conqueror.

Opinions are worthless and so is fake news

that leaves you unarmed

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:23 pm

====================

• Violation of International Law: Critics argue the actions may violate international law and U.S. laws against murder and assassination because drug cartels do not fit the traditional definition of non-state armed groups. International law permits force in self-defense against an imminent armed attack, a rationale experts say falls short in these cases.
• Civilian Targeting: Under international law, even criminal suspects are considered civilians and cannot be deliberately targeted with lethal force unless they pose an imminent threat. Experts suggest the administration has not provided evidence of such immediate threats, and historical precedent for maritime drug interdiction has focused on non-lethal seizure and arrest.

Psssst. 

*******.

The UNITED STATES OF AMERCA DOESN'T GO BY ANY "International Law". WE did away with that **** back in 1776. July 4th of that year to be exact. We enacted a CONSTITUTION in 1788 and told the "International" **** TO GO **** ITSELF!!

NOw, SHUT THE **** UP YOU BLATHERING IDIOT!!
 

Beekeeper » 25 Nov 2025, 2:40 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:40 pm

Psssst. 

*******.

The UNITED STATES OF AMERCA DOESN'T GO BY ANY "International Law". WE did away with that **** back in 1776. July 4th of that year to be exact. We enacted a CONSTITUTION in 1788 and told the "International" **** TO GO **** ITSELF!!

NOw, SHUT THE **** UP YOU BLATHERING IDIOT!!

dumb ***-- america goes by international law to protect american boats from being attacked by other countries.

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 2:51 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:51 pm

dumb ***-- america goes by international law to protect american boats from being attacked by other countries.

YOU **** IDIOT!!

The United States has a 50 mile US WATERS and outside of that, it's "International".

ALL MARITIME CRIMES ARE TRIED UNDER US LAWS IN THIS NATION FOR ACTS AGAINST US SHIPS YOU **** IDIOT!!

U.S. Jurisdiction

• The U.S. Constitution grants federal courts jurisdiction over "all cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction".
• The U.S. has established its "special maritime and territorial jurisdiction," which includes the high seas, other navigable waters, and places outside any nation's jurisdiction when the offense is committed by or against a U.S. national.

 

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 12:10 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:10 pm

a reading test for you-----------

President Donald Trump last week accused Kelly and other Democratic lawmakers of seditious behavior for urging U.S. troops to refuse any illegal orders. Trump, in a social media post, said the crime was "punishable by DEATH!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

trump admits the orders are illegal.

That's a quote, ****, from the "seditious six", not an admission from DJT...project much?

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 12:20 pm

dumb *** he is commander in chief-----

I'm a very very dumb poster here on LFO.

FIFY...my words exactly...
 

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 2:18 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:18 pm

if jane is skinny and jack says all fat girls are dumb did jack say jane is dumb?

Pull up an actual factual quote from one of the seditious six that proves what he's doing is illegal...oh, and not some **** opinion...
 

ROG62 » 25 Nov 2025, 4:04 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 4:04 pm

That's a quote, ****, from the "seditious six", not an admission from DJT...project much?

-----------------------------------------------Trump: Telling troops to refuse illegal orders is 'seditious behavior'


https://www.govexec.com/defense/2025/11 ... rs/409710/

 

ROG62 » 25 Nov 2025, 4:11 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 4:11 pm

Pull up an actual factual quote from one of the seditious six that proves what he's doing is illegal...oh, and not some **** opinion...

-------------Trump: Telling troops to refuse illegal orders is 'seditious behavior'

MR-7 » 24 Nov 2025, 5:14 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 5:14 pm

When will you show us the unlawful order TRUMP gave?

-----------------------------

A military superior giving an illegal order to kill is a serious matter where the service member has a legal and moral obligation to refuse it, and a superior could be held responsible for the illegal order. Refusing a manifestly illegal order, such as one to commit a crime or a war crime, is not grounds for punishment and can be used as a defense in court. International law and the rules of armed conflict make it clear that a service member cannot be excused from criminal responsibility for following such an order

ROG62 » 25 Nov 2025, 4:11 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 4:11 pm

Pull up an actual factual quote from one of the seditious six that proves what he's doing is illegal...oh, and not some **** opinion...

-------------------------------------------------------

While they don't specify which orders could be considered unlawful, it is a concern that Kelly, a former captain in the U.S. Navy, has raised for several weeks in interviews with reporters, in the wake of the series of deadly strikes the U.S. military has launched on boats in Caribbean and eastern Pacific waters that the administration alleges are carrying drugs.

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 4:38 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 4:38 pm

-----------------------------

A military superior giving an illegal order to kill is a serious matter where the service member has a legal and moral obligation to refuse it, and a superior could be held responsible for the illegal order. Refusing a manifestly illegal order, such as one to commit a crime or a war crime, is not grounds for punishment and can be used as a defense in court. International law and the rules of armed conflict make it clear that a service member cannot be excused from criminal responsibility for following such an order

Tell us jerrab....were you this upset when obama droned innocent civilians? Whole **** families. Were you?
 

I will most certainly keep this up to date. 

Hourly Escalation Tracker — Mark Kelly vs Pentagon

Nov 23 (PM)
- Video released: Kelly + 5 Dems urge troops to refuse unlawful orders. Sparks immediate backlash.

Nov 24 (AM)
- Pentagon review announced: DoD cites “serious allegations of misconduct.” Trump calls video “seditious… punishable by DEATH.”

Nov 24 (PM)
- Kelly responds: On Maddow, calls threat “absurd.” Says he won’t be silenced.

Nov 25 (AM)
- Conservative backlash: Rep. Don Bacon + Rod Dreher slam Pentagon’s move as “amateur hour.”

Nov 25 (PM)
- Pentagon escalates: Military.com reports review could recall Kelly to active duty; FBI interviews planned.

Nov 25 (Evening)
- Kelly defiant: TIME & CBS note Kelly reiterates “I will not be intimidated.”
 
 

MR-7 » 25 Nov 2025, 5:11 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 5:11 pm

I will most certainly keep this up to date. 

Hourly Escalation Tracker — Mark Kelly vs Pentagon

Nov 23 (PM)
- Video released: Kelly + 5 Dems urge troops to refuse unlawful orders. Sparks immediate backlash.

Nov 24 (AM)
- Pentagon review announced: DoD cites “serious allegations of misconduct.” Trump calls video “seditious… punishable by DEATH.”

Nov 24 (PM)
- Kelly responds: On Maddow, calls threat “absurd.” Says he won’t be silenced.

Nov 25 (AM)
- Conservative backlash: Rep. Don Bacon + Rod Dreher slam Pentagon’s move as “amateur hour.”

Nov 25 (PM)
- Pentagon escalates: Military.com reports review could recall Kelly to active duty; FBI interviews planned.

Nov 25 (Evening)
- Kelly defiant: TIME & CBS note Kelly reiterates “I will not be intimidated.”

Well?

*Roshambo » 10 Oct 2025, 5:17 pm » wrote: ↑

10 Oct 2025, 5:17 pm

I have bookmarked this and will remind you as appropriate.    
How many children did you look at today    

https://i.postimg.cc/yY4vYDbG/WS530750-16103.jpg

nefarious101 » 25 Nov 2025, 2:34 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:34 pm

Opinions are worthless and so is fake news

that leaves you unarmed

I posted a fact.

nefarious101 » 25 Nov 2025, 2:34 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 2:34 pm

Opinions are worthless and so is fake news

that leaves you unarmed

show where  'seditious behavior' is addressed in a law.

go.

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 5:45 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 5:45 pm

show where  'seditious behavior' is addressed in a law.

go.

why...you're not all that bright....it would be a waste of time

nefarious101 » 25 Nov 2025, 5:50 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 5:50 pm

why...you're not all that bright....it would be a waste of time

it does not exist  motherducker

jerrab » 25 Nov 2025, 6:20 pm » wrote: ↑

25 Nov 2025, 6:20 pm

it does not exist  motherducker

Since we won and you lost we decide what the facts are....

you're dealing with the consequences of losing

LGBTP progressivism is dead...it's a rotting corpsemen as the majik negro would say

MR-7 » 24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm » wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2025, 4:01 pm

Calling for mutiny or coup based upon political ideological differences alone should be prosecuted, especially when leadership being the source.

He clearly broke the law and should have known better. 18 U.S.C. § 2387 — Activities Affecting Armed Forces General: (a)Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States: (1)advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or (2)distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States—

Pentagon threatens to prosecute Senator Mark Kelly by recalling him to Navy service

**** kelly. He is a treasonous piece of ****.

No...but you are one dumb ****.