Assassinating American Citizens ... for or against?

[Ravi]

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.

You did say the marine could shoot him. But that isn't true. You don't shoot someone that surrenders. THAT would violate due process.

 

[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.

You did say the marine could shoot him. But that isn't true. You don't shoot someone that surrenders. THAT would violate due process.

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

 

[Si modo]

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?



>>>>

Still lame.

It probably stems from your inability to read what I wrote.

 

[High_Gravity]

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.


>>>>

Exactly, he could have turned himself in to the US Embassy in Yemen and he would have recieved due process, Anwar was not interested in due process he just wanted to kill Americans.

 

[High_Gravity]

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.

If Anwar was really interested in due process he could have turned himself in to a neautral party like the Swiss embassy, Anwar was not interested in due process though.

 

[High_Gravity]

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

RIF.

You did say the marine could shoot him. But that isn't true. You don't shoot someone that surrenders. THAT would violate due process.

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

That US Marine Embassy Guard is still subject to the UCMJ, if he fired on Anwar and he was unarmed he would face a US Military court martial.

 

[Ravi]

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

RIF.

You did say the marine could shoot him. But that isn't true. You don't shoot someone that surrenders. THAT would violate due process.

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

 

[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.

If Anwar was really interested in due process he could have turned himself in to a neautral party like the Swiss embassy, Anwar was not interested in due process though.

Maybe he could have. With a kill order on me, I would not because there would be a good possibility that I could end up in the hands of those who had placed the kill order on me.

Maybe he wasn't interested in it. I don't know. I do know that the Executive Branch unilaterally suspended the Bill of Rights. No check. No balance.

The integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this POS.

 

[Si modo]

You did say the marine could shoot him. But that isn't true. You don't shoot someone that surrenders. THAT would violate due process.

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

 

[Valerie]

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Pretty hilarious how I see posts from you splattered all over this board calling others IDIOT.

 

[Amelia]

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.


>>>>

Exactly, he could have turned himself in to the US Embassy in Yemen and he would have recieved due process, Anwar was not interested in due process he just wanted to kill Americans.

Okay ... I'm sucked in again and it's only 11:33 in the morning. Alright. Okay ... if I can stick with one post on this today, I'll be okay. Here goes:



Why should he turn himself into the U.S. Embassy? There were no charges against him. On what grounds would he turn himself in?

And why would he want to turn himself in and commit his safety to a government which ordered him assassinated without so much as filing a charge?






Would YOU trust a country which put you on an assassination list without filing a single charge against you? Would you turn yourself into them - when they still hadn't said what crimes you committed but had already declared you worthy of death - and trust that you would be treated fairly?

 

[Si modo]

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Pretty hilarious how I see posts from you splattered all over this board calling others IDIOT.

Why is that funny to you?

The Executive Branch did suspend his right to due process. Fact. The executive is the President. Fact. He is also the CiC. Fact. Marines are part of the military. Fact.

See if you can connect the dots.

As I said, the integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this man. That's where I stand. I know many don't like it, but I like my position.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.


>>>>

Exactly, he could have turned himself in to the US Embassy in Yemen and he would have recieved due process, Anwar was not interested in due process he just wanted to kill Americans.

Okay ... I'm sucked in again and it's only 11:33 in the morning. Alright. Okay ... if I can stick with one post on this today, I'll be okay. Here goes:



Why should he turn himself into the U.S. Embassy? There were no charges against him. On what grounds would he turn himself in?

And why would he want to turn himself in and commit his safety to a government which ordered him assassinated without so much as filing a charge?






Would YOU trust a country which put you on an assassination list without filing a single charge against you? Would you turn yourself into them - when they still hadn't said what crimes you committed but had already declared you worthy of death - and trust that you would be treated fairly?

Don't beat yourself up I tryed to ask that yesterday.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Pretty hilarious how I see posts from you splattered all over this board calling others IDIOT.

Why is that funny to you?

The Executive Branch did suspend his right to due process. Fact. The executive is the President. Fact. He is also the CiC. Fact. Marines are part of the military. Fact.

See if you can connect the dots.

As I said, the integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this man. That's where I stand. I know many don't like it, but I like my position.

the integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this man. That's where I stand.

I know many don't like it, but I like my position

I'm with you,

 

[Valerie]

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Pretty hilarious how I see posts from you splattered all over this board calling others IDIOT.

Why is that funny to you?

The Executive Branch did suspend his right to due process. Fact. The executive is the President. Fact. He is also the CiC. Fact. Marines are part of the military. Fact.

See if you can connect the dots.

As I said, the integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this man. That's where I stand. I know many don't like it, but I like my position.

Yeah, as if those who disagree with you don't care about the Bill of Rights.




Again, the executive order was "kill or capture".


Several people have explained here what that means, and how due process applies, so see if YOU can connect those dots, huh...?

 

[WorldWatcher]

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Pretty hilarious how I see posts from you splattered all over this board calling others IDIOT.

Why is that funny to you?

The Executive Branch did suspend his right to due process. Fact. The executive is the President. Fact. He is also the CiC. Fact. Marines are part of the military. Fact.

See if you can connect the dots.

As I said, the integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this man. That's where I stand. I know many don't like it, but I like my position.

Fact, you forgot one.

Fact, the Legislative Branch is the one that authorized the use of military force.



>>>>

 

[Ravi]

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.

If Anwar was really interested in due process he could have turned himself in to a neautral party like the Swiss embassy, Anwar was not interested in due process though.

Maybe he could have. With a kill order on me, I would not because there would be a good possibility that I could end up in the hands of those who had placed the kill order on me.

Maybe he wasn't interested in it. I don't know. I do know that the Executive Branch unilaterally suspended the Bill of Rights. No check. No balance.

The integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this POS.

This was not done on the whim of one person. And there was no suspension of the Bill of Rights. No where in the bill of rights does it even imply that Americans can join the enemy and not be treated as the enemy.

I do believe your extreme hatred of Obama has clouded your mind.

 

[Ravi]

The Marine cannot violate a right that no longer exists.

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Now you've simply started to sputter and lie.

Sad.

 

[Si modo]

If Anwar was really interested in due process he could have turned himself in to a neautral party like the Swiss embassy, Anwar was not interested in due process though.

Maybe he could have. With a kill order on me, I would not because there would be a good possibility that I could end up in the hands of those who had placed the kill order on me.

Maybe he wasn't interested in it. I don't know. I do know that the Executive Branch unilaterally suspended the Bill of Rights. No check. No balance.

The integrity of the Bill of Rights is more important to me than this POS.

This was not done on the whim of one person. And there was no suspension of the Bill of Rights. No where in the bill of rights does it even imply that Americans can join the enemy and not be treated as the enemy.

I do believe your extreme hatred of Obama has clouded your mind.

Ummm, the right to due process is the 5th. That's smack dab in the middle of the Bill of Rights.

 

[Si modo]

Once you are in custody you are entitled to due process.

It's really pretty simple.

His right to that no longer existed, per the Executive Branch. It's really pretty simple.

Now you've simply started to sputter and lie.

Sad.

Oh? Who do you think suspended his right to due process?