Assassinating American Citizens ... for or against?

[WorldWatcher]

Valerie, so we attempt to take him into custody to charge him with treason...we don't just make him an assasination target...that is the solution our enemies would take with their citizens that is not something as Americans that we should ever approve of. If we are so certain he is guilty of treason, capture his butt and try him..if he gets killed in the attempt to capture him well that is just the breaks but if he is captured he is tried...but hell we don't do what we did it just cheapens who we are as a country and our belief in justice.

How are we supposed to do that? you make capturing Anwar sound so easy.

It is, just give Jack Bauer 44 minutes and he could have done it.

I know that for a fact as I saw it on TV.


>>>>

 

[Valerie]

WFT?

Again. Two countries, the USA and Yemen, didn't have a dead or alive order on Lindh.

Yeah, it makes perfect sense to turn yourself into a government that has a kill order on you, if you have a desire to remain breathing.

Especially if you intend to end up a martyr for the Jihad cause in order to create more fodder for the spread of anti-America propaganda...

....

And, it sure would be nice if there was any evidence of that.

.... He would have received his due process if he had surrendered.

Or he would have been killed on sight. That's how 'dead or alive' and 'kill or capture' orders work.

Keep pretending there was no evidence.


Just because you aren't personally privy to certain intel, doesn't mean it didn't exist and wasn't properly reviewed by the legal authorities. He was a KNOWN entity considered an imminent threat. He evaded being "on sight" by initially failing to face his charges in Yemen, so why do you continue to project a complete fabrication as if were true? He CHOSE to not avail himself of the opportunity to due process by failing to show up which THEN prompted the dead or alive warrant. Fact not opinion. Even then they tried to negotiate and gave him a chance to surrender, but IMO he preferred to die a martyr for his cause...

 

[WorldWatcher]

Valerie, so we attempt to take him into custody to charge him with treason...we don't just make him an assasination target...that is the solution our enemies would take with their citizens that is not something as Americans that we should ever approve of. If we are so certain he is guilty of treason, capture his butt and try him..if he gets killed in the attempt to capture him well that is just the breaks but if he is captured he is tried...but hell we don't do what we did it just cheapens who we are as a country and our belief in justice.

It wasn't an "assassination" list it was a "kill or capture" list and that (in BIG type) ^^ is exactly what happened...So really we agree and you are only speculating or imagining that it didn't happen that way...


He failed to show up in Yemeni court and continually evaded capture. He refused to surrender himself and chose to hide away. The US Military, in cooperation with the Yemeni government who had a warrant on his head, tried to negotiate with those who were harboring him and they continually refused to turn him in. Meanwhile, our soldiers on the ground were under fire in the process. The decision was made to target with a drone and the operation was ultimately successful.

Not that I take any pride in thinking like a likely terrorist, I sure as hell wouldn't try to turn myself in to any government who had standing orders to kill (or capture) me. If I wanted to stay breathing, that is.

If he was interested in obtaining due process for himself (something his organization was not interested in as it was responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans BTW) - he could have walked up to the US Embassy in Yemen with his hands raised and tell the Marine he wasn't armed. They would have searched him and he'd have been just fine.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not that I take any pride in thinking like a likely terrorist, I sure as hell wouldn't try to turn myself in to any government who had standing orders to kill (or capture) me. If I wanted to stay breathing, that is.

Yeah, that worked out so well for him, huh...?





Johnny Walker Lindh is still breathing, BTW.........




Walker Lindh was sentenced to 20 years in prison as part of an agreement reached in July under which he pled guilty to one count of supplying services to the Taliban and a criminal information charge that he carried a rifle and two hand grenades while fighting against the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance.

As part of the plea deal, the government dropped all other counts in a lengthy criminal indictment, including one of the most serious charges -- conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals. CIA officer Johnny Michael Spann was killed in the Mazar-e Sharif uprising.

"He was a soldier in the Taliban. He did it for religious reasons. He did it as a Muslim, and history overcame him," his attorney, James Brosnahan, said in July.



Federal prosecutors have told the judge they have no objections to Walker Lindh's request to serve his prison time near his family.


CNN Programs - People in the News

WFT?

Two countries, the USA and Yemen, didn't have a dead or alive order on Lindh.

Again. Yeah, it makes perfect sense to turn yourself into a government that has a kill order on you, if you have a desire to remain breathing.

"Kill OR CAPTURE" - turning yourself falls under the "OR CAPTURE" part.


>>>>

 

[Si modo]

Especially if you intend to end up a martyr for the Jihad cause in order to create more fodder for the spread of anti-America propaganda...

....

And, it sure would be nice if there was any evidence of that.

.... He would have received his due process if he had surrendered.

Or he would have been killed on sight. That's how 'dead or alive' and 'kill or capture' orders work.

Keep pretending there was no evidence.

....

That's not what I am doing, but keep trying to say that it is.

The evidence is sole-sourced by those who indicted, tried, convicted, sentenced, and ordered a kill of him.

I am not OK with that.

.... Just because you aren't personally privy to certain intel, doesn't mean it didn't exist and wasn't properly reviewed by the legal authorities. He was a KNOWN entity considered an imminent threat. He evaded being "on sight" by initially failing to face his charges in Yemen, so why do you continue to project a complete fabrication as if were true? He CHOSE to not to avail himself of the opportunity to due process by failing to show up which THEN prompted the dead or alive warrant. Fact not opinion. Even then they tried to negotiate and gave him a chance to surrender, but IMO he preferred to die a martyr for his cause...

Thankfully, and usually, opinions are not enough to execute an American without due process. It's an inherent right guaranteed to all Americans by the Bill of Rights.

The integrity of our Bill of Rights is far more important to me.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>


After getting nailed by a missile, Anwar made his way to the pearly gates. There, he is greeted by George Washington.

"How dare you attack the nation I helped conceive!" yells Mr. Washington, slapping Anwar in the face. Patrick Henry comes up from behind: "You wanted to end the Americans' liberty, so they gave you death!" Henry punches Anwar on the nose. James Madison comes up next, and says, "This is why I allowed the Federal government to provide for the common defense!" He drops a large weight on Anwar's knee.

Anwar is subject to similar beatings from John Randolph of Roanoke, James Monroe and 65 other 18th-century American revolutionaries. As he writhes on the ground, Thomas Jefferson picks him up to hurl him back toward the gate where he is to be judged.

As Anwar awaits his journey to his final very hot destination, he screams, "This is not what I was promised!"

An angel replies: "I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you. What did you think I said?"



>>>>

 

[Si modo]

Yeah, that worked out so well for him, huh...?





Johnny Walker Lindh is still breathing, BTW.........




Walker Lindh was sentenced to 20 years in prison as part of an agreement reached in July under which he pled guilty to one count of supplying services to the Taliban and a criminal information charge that he carried a rifle and two hand grenades while fighting against the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance.

As part of the plea deal, the government dropped all other counts in a lengthy criminal indictment, including one of the most serious charges -- conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals. CIA officer Johnny Michael Spann was killed in the Mazar-e Sharif uprising.

"He was a soldier in the Taliban. He did it for religious reasons. He did it as a Muslim, and history overcame him," his attorney, James Brosnahan, said in July.



Federal prosecutors have told the judge they have no objections to Walker Lindh's request to serve his prison time near his family.


CNN Programs - People in the News

WFT?

Two countries, the USA and Yemen, didn't have a dead or alive order on Lindh.

Again. Yeah, it makes perfect sense to turn yourself into a government that has a kill order on you, if you have a desire to remain breathing.

"Kill OR CAPTURE" - turning yourself falls under the "OR CAPTURE" part.


>>>>

OR KILL. The 'or' implies both are possible. I bet you knew that, though.

 

[Liability]

I understand what he stood for and, to me, that makes him a terrorist pig and a piece of shit. Apparently, HE did not want to be a martyr, he recruited others for that.

Yes, he is a POS. Yes, he did have ugly rhetoric toward the USA. As far as I know, ugly rhetoric is not a capital crime, in the USA, that is.

If it is now, I need to know. As a citizen, I value free speech and living.

Hes the one who trained and equipped the underwear bomber who landed in Detroit, and he had conversations with Nidal Hassan and inspired him to kill Soldiers on Fort Hood, those are crimes.

Yes, they are. And, the evidence is sole-sourced evidence from those who convicted, sentenced, and killed him.

Now that's some scary power - no balance, no check - that the Constitution was designed to prevent.

That's not exactly true. Maj. Hassan WROTE to al-Awlaki about joyfully anticipating joining him in the afterlife.

Further:

On Dec. 23, 2008, days after he said Hasan first e-mailed him, Aulaqi also posted online words encouraging attacks on U.S. soldiers, writing: "The bullets of the fighters of Afghanistan and Iraq are a reflection of the feelings of the Muslims towards America," according to the NEFA Foundation, a private South Carolina group that monitors extremist Web sites.

-- Cleric says he was confidant to Hasan

 

[WorldWatcher]

WFT?

Two countries, the USA and Yemen, didn't have a dead or alive order on Lindh.

Again. Yeah, it makes perfect sense to turn yourself into a government that has a kill order on you, if you have a desire to remain breathing.

"Kill OR CAPTURE" - turning yourself falls under the "OR CAPTURE" part.


>>>>

OR KILL. The 'or' implies both are possible. I bet you knew that, though.

Either or is possible depending on the scenario. If he refused to turn himself in he could be killed, if he could not be captured he could be killed. If he was captured or turned himself in (a form of capture) he would have been just fine.

It was not a "CAPTURE AND KILL" list, one OR the other as opposed to kill AND capture.

I bet you knew that, though.



>>>>

 

[Si modo]

It wasn't an "assassination" list it was a "kill or capture" list and that (in BIG type) ^^ is exactly what happened...So really we agree and you are only speculating or imagining that it didn't happen that way...


He failed to show up in Yemeni court and continually evaded capture. He refused to surrender himself and chose to hide away. The US Military, in cooperation with the Yemeni government who had a warrant on his head, tried to negotiate with those who were harboring him and they continually refused to turn him in. Meanwhile, our soldiers on the ground were under fire in the process. The decision was made to target with a drone and the operation was ultimately successful.

Not that I take any pride in thinking like a likely terrorist, I sure as hell wouldn't try to turn myself in to any government who had standing orders to kill (or capture) me. If I wanted to stay breathing, that is.

If he was interested in obtaining due process for himself (something his organization was not interested in as it was responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans BTW) - he could have walked up to the US Embassy in Yemen with his hands raised and tell the Marine he wasn't armed. They would have searched him and he'd have been just fine.


>>>>

I adore Marines. However, the Marine would have been perfectly right to shoot him on sight.

If I were him and interested in turning myself in, I would have rallied as many reporters as I could to accompany me on my surrender. Of course, with a 'kill order' on me by the US government, as soon as I got inside anyone could have executed me with no ramification whatsoever. If I were betting with my life, I would not take that bet.

 

[Si modo]

"Kill OR CAPTURE" - turning yourself falls under the "OR CAPTURE" part.


>>>>

OR KILL. The 'or' implies both are possible. I bet you knew that, though.

Either or is possible depending on the scenario. If he refused to turn himself in he could be killed, if he could not be captured he could be killed. If he was captured or turned himself in (a form of capture) he would have been just fine.

It was not a "CAPTURE AND KILL" list, one OR the other as opposed to kill AND capture.

I bet you knew that, though.



>>>>

Yep. That's why I wrote 'or'. Kill or capture - both equally possible.

It's fun typing the same thing over again.

 

[Ravi]

I really don't understand the mindset that believes an American can join forces with the enemy and be treated as if he or she were not the enemy nor a military target.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Not that I take any pride in thinking like a likely terrorist, I sure as hell wouldn't try to turn myself in to any government who had standing orders to kill (or capture) me. If I wanted to stay breathing, that is.

If he was interested in obtaining due process for himself (something his organization was not interested in as it was responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans BTW) - he could have walked up to the US Embassy in Yemen with his hands raised and tell the Marine he wasn't armed. They would have searched him and he'd have been just fine.


>>>>

I adore Marines. However, the Marine would have been perfectly right to shoot him on sight.

If I were him and interested in turning myself in, I would have rallied as many reporters as I could to accompany me on my surrender. Of course, with a 'kill order' on me by the US government, as soon as I got inside anyone could have executed me with no ramification whatsoever. If I were betting with my life, I would not take that bet.

I call bullshit on the idea that a Marine would have shot an unarmed man in the process of surrendering himself to lawful authorities.

Once detained (and no longer able to lead an organization that slaughtered thousands of Americans) there would be no need to have killed him and then he could have exercised his due process rights because that point it would have been a criminal case.



>>>>

 

[Si modo]

If he was interested in obtaining due process for himself (something his organization was not interested in as it was responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans BTW) - he could have walked up to the US Embassy in Yemen with his hands raised and tell the Marine he wasn't armed. They would have searched him and he'd have been just fine.


>>>>

I adore Marines. However, the Marine would have been perfectly right to shoot him on sight.

If I were him and interested in turning myself in, I would have rallied as many reporters as I could to accompany me on my surrender. Of course, with a 'kill order' on me by the US government, as soon as I got inside anyone could have executed me with no ramification whatsoever. If I were betting with my life, I would not take that bet.

I call bullshit on the idea that a Marine would have shot an unarmed man in the process of surrendering himself to lawful authorities.

Once detained (and no longer able to lead an organization that slaughtered thousands of Americans) there would be no need to have killed him and then he could have exercised his due process rights because that point it would have been a criminal case.



>>>>

I didn't say he would. Read what I said.

RIF.

 

[WorldWatcher]

OR KILL. The 'or' implies both are possible. I bet you knew that, though.

Either or is possible depending on the scenario. If he refused to turn himself in he could be killed, if he could not be captured he could be killed. If he was captured or turned himself in (a form of capture) he would have been just fine.

It was not a "CAPTURE AND KILL" list, one OR the other as opposed to kill AND capture.

I bet you knew that, though.



>>>>

Yep. That's why I wrote 'or'. Kill or capture - both equally possible.

It's fun typing the same thing over again.

"OR" dictates one of two options, not both. If he had turned himself in then the "Capture" clause would have been complete eliminating the "Kill" clause which would then go to criminal proceedings for adjudication.


The difference between your typing and mine though is that mine is logical and makes sense, your's stretches imagination to try to make a failing point arguing about "OR" (selection of one of two options) and "AND" (a conditional requiring the completion of both options).


>>>>

 

[Si modo]

I really don't understand the mindset that believes an American can join forces with the enemy and be treated as if he or she were not the enemy nor a military target.

I know. You are not alone. One man is not worth the integrity of our Bill of Rights.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I adore Marines. However, the Marine would have been perfectly right to shoot him on sight.

If I were him and interested in turning myself in, I would have rallied as many reporters as I could to accompany me on my surrender. Of course, with a 'kill order' on me by the US government, as soon as I got inside anyone could have executed me with no ramification whatsoever. If I were betting with my life, I would not take that bet.

I call bullshit on the idea that a Marine would have shot an unarmed man in the process of surrendering himself to lawful authorities.

Once detained (and no longer able to lead an organization that slaughtered thousands of Americans) there would be no need to have killed him and then he could have exercised his due process rights because that point it would have been a criminal case.



>>>>

I didn't say he would. Read what I said.

RIF.

RIF says the poster not understanding the difference between "OR" and "AND".



>>>>

 

[Si modo]

I call bullshit on the idea that a Marine would have shot an unarmed man in the process of surrendering himself to lawful authorities.

Once detained (and no longer able to lead an organization that slaughtered thousands of Americans) there would be no need to have killed him and then he could have exercised his due process rights because that point it would have been a criminal case.



>>>>

I didn't say he would. Read what I said.

RIF.

RIF says the poster not understanding the difference between "OR" and "AND".



>>>>

Seriously, that's just lame.

 

[Liability]

I really don't understand the mindset that believes an American can join forces with the enemy and be treated as if he or she were not the enemy nor a military target.

I know. You are not alone. One man is not worth the integrity of our Bill of Rights.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

Targeting an enemy leader does not implicate the Bill of Rights.

Unfortunately, the mistake you make in that regard is shared by lots of people.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I didn't say he would. Read what I said.

RIF.

RIF says the poster not understanding the difference between "OR" and "AND".



>>>>

Seriously, that's just lame.

Then why did you go down the road where you needed the difference explained to you?



>>>>