Assassinating American Citizens ... for or against?

[bigrebnc1775]

Had Bush done it...the liberals would have had him impeached.

That said, I have one question.

Was he found guilty of any crime in absentia?

and yet he wasn't impeached for lying about WMD's?

i'm thinking... nah on the impeachment thing.

Bush got his information from opertives in eroupe, if the lie was told it came from eroupe Bush did go dig the information up it was handed to him. Did he lie no, IT'S NOT AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE TO GO WITH FALSE INTELL

 

[The Gadfly]

Look, no matter who the POTUS is, killing tis guy was the right thing to do. He made himself into an enemy commander, and that makes him a military target, not a criminal to be sought by law enforcement.

Now, that said, Obama, his Attorney General, and some other liberals have to take some responsibility for the confusion on this point. I seem to remember them saying that terrorism was "a law enforcement matter". That made for pretty good campaign talk (especially with the anti-war crowd), but as I think we have ALL learned by now, that is not an effective way to fight what is essentially a war. Hopefully, this administration, as evidenced here, has wised up on that point.

There is no violation of anyone's constitutional rights here. If I believed there was, I'd be complaining, loudly. I swore an oath to "support and defend" that same constitution, "against all enemies, foreign and domestic". This individual, by the act of assuming a command position with an armed foreign enemy of the United States, became an enemy of that constitution, and by extension, a legitimate target for the U.S. Armed Forces. These, it appears, have now dealt with the matter, permanently.

 

[BlindBoo]

Sets a bad precedent that could come back at some future point to bite citizens in the ass. Who knows what the future holds as to what extent our government morphs towards tryanny?
Hell, even one day 'The T', or any freedom-loving outspoken citizen could be targeted as deemed by our government in the aforementioned scenario; as a precedent, afterall, has been set.

You don't think the guy was that, do you?

He was wanted dead or alive in Yeman. He was an illegal belligerent operating illegally in a forgien land. The action was taken to put a halt to future attacks on Americans.

 

[Si modo]

Had Bush done it...the liberals would have had him impeached.

That said, I have one question.

Was he found guilty of any crime in absentia?

and yet he wasn't impeached for lying about WMD's?

i'm thinking... nah on the impeachment thing.

Looks like someone is pretty ignorant about the 9/11 report.

But, you post like you know what was in it.

Funny.

 

[Mr. H.]

Looks like we got 2 for the price of one:
Top Saudi bomb maker.

Officials: Drone likely killed Saudi terrorist - Yahoo! News

 

[Si modo]

The guy was indicted in a US court and that's where his due process ended.

The decision for his guilt was decided based on unchallenged evidence provided by the federal government, the Executive Branch.

And the decision for his execution was decided by the administration, the Executive Branch.

Now, that's power.

I hope others ponder that for a minute or two.

 

[Intense]

I don't know .... Maybe they have a point.... we can deploy the Lawyers and the circuit Courts to Iran, Pakistan, Yemen armed with pencils and I Pads to track down and give fair Trials to the Enemy Combatants. They can wear "Don't Kick Me, I come in Peace and don't mean to Offend" signs on their backs. That will work.

 

[Big Fitz]

Are you in favor of America's policy of assassinating its citizens?

An American citizen who was a traitor, working for the enemy. Not only am I for it, I wish we could have recovered the body and hung it on a pike in front of the Pentagon till only a husk remains.

Traitors deserve no better

 

[Dune]

Fifth Amendment:

No person shall .... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ....

What does it say about Declaration of War, idiot.

He was killed in Yemen. When did we declare war against Yemen?

 

[Missourian]

Had Bush done it...the liberals would have had him impeached.

Yes, if Bush had done it there would be riots.

That said, I have one question.

Was he found guilty of any crime in absentia?

He being Bush? Or Awlaki?


I do not believe that Awlaki was found guilty of any crime in absentia. Not by a U.S. court.

Awlaki.

It's been the liberals position that terrorists should be treated as criminals.

It seems like hypocrisy to hand down a death sentence under those circumstances without due process.

 

[Dune]

This is not a law enforcement matter; this is a WAR, and in war, you don't arrest the enemy, you kill the enemy. In this case the object of the exercise had not only allied himself with an armed enemy of the United States, he had become a part of the enemy's command structure. He is thus an enemy combatant, NOT an American (regardless of where he was born) and subject to being taken out whenever and wherever the situation permits. I see no problem with ordering the elimination of an enemy command target, none whatsoever.

What is the name of the war he was killed in?

 

[Amelia]

The guy was indicted in a US court and that's where his due process ended.

The decision for his guilt was decided based on unchallenged evidence provided by the federal government, the Executive Branch.

And the decision for his execution was decided by the administration, the Executive Branch.

Now, that's power.

I hope others ponder that for a minute or two.

When was he indicted? I read that he didn't even get that much.

 

[Si modo]

The guy was indicted in a US court and that's where his due process ended.

The decision for his guilt was decided based on unchallenged evidence provided by the federal government, the Executive Branch.

And the decision for his execution was decided by the administration, the Executive Branch.

Now, that's power.

I hope others ponder that for a minute or two.

When was he indicted? I read that he didn't even get that much.

Shit, he wasn't even indicted.

You're right.






Holy shit.

 

[Dune]

I don't like the idea at all - I can understand the decision in this case, but it's an awful precedent to set.

We set the precedent in the 1860's.

Mike

We "set" it during the war of 1812. But that doesn't mean we need to follow or confirm it in 2011.

Everyone's ra-rah about killing US citizens...until the government decides to use such authority to kill an American citizen we like.

I'd prefer they not have such authority. Due process has treated us well for 220 years.

Why is this so hard for most people to understand?

 

[Intense]

Had Bush done it...the liberals would have had him impeached.

Yes, if Bush had done it there would be riots.

That said, I have one question.

Was he found guilty of any crime in absentia?

He being Bush? Or Awlaki?


I do not believe that Awlaki was found guilty of any crime in absentia. Not by a U.S. court.

Awlaki.

It's been the liberals position that terrorists should be treated as criminals.

It seems like hypocrisy to hand down a death sentence under those circumstances without due process.

There may be more to Presidential Powers than even Obama knew before being Sworn in. I mean besides learning how to do normal things. Things we take for granted.

 

[Dune]

I've been reading about Anwar al-Awlaki for almost an hour now, and his behavior seems to shadow a character who was linked to 3 9/11 hijackers, a Christmas 2010 wannabe bomber, a lot of training of alQaeda to take out American targets, and Hasan the Ft. Hood shooter who murdered 12 people at Ft. Hood in 2009.

He was lying, sneaky, intelligent, the great pretender, and traitor all rolled into one. He became a target after phone calls between him and Hasan took place shortly before. Someone bought into his case pleading his own innocence in 9/11, but he knew 3 of the hijackers, and it is now believed he helped them and had lied about not helping them.

We need to review our citizenship requirements of people who are hostile to the USA, and revoke their citizenship when they become enemies. This creep has been our enemy for many years, long before 9/11. He hated us, lived among us, disowned us, participated in killing thousands of Americans, trained others to do likewise, and encouraged yet others to commit mass murders in America.

He's the Charles Manson of the Muslim world.

No, all we had to do was try him in absentia, convict him of treason, then his killing would be legal.

 

[Intense]

I've been reading about Anwar al-Awlaki for almost an hour now, and his behavior seems to shadow a character who was linked to 3 9/11 hijackers, a Christmas 2010 wannabe bomber, a lot of training of alQaeda to take out American targets, and Hasan the Ft. Hood shooter who murdered 12 people at Ft. Hood in 2009.

He was lying, sneaky, intelligent, the great pretender, and traitor all rolled into one. He became a target after phone calls between him and Hasan took place shortly before. Someone bought into his case pleading his own innocence in 9/11, but he knew 3 of the hijackers, and it is now believed he helped them and had lied about not helping them.

We need to review our citizenship requirements of people who are hostile to the USA, and revoke their citizenship when they become enemies. This creep has been our enemy for many years, long before 9/11. He hated us, lived among us, disowned us, participated in killing thousands of Americans, trained others to do likewise, and encouraged yet others to commit mass murders in America.

He's the Charles Manson of the Muslim world.

No, all we had to do was try him in absentia, convict him of treason, then his killing would be legal.

Again, we don't know for sure that the act was above Presidential Jurisdiction. There really may be more to this than what we see.

 

[Dune]

Sets a bad precedent that could come back at some future point to bite citizens in the ass. Who knows what the future holds as to what extent our government morphs towards tryanny?
Hell, even one day 'The T', or any freedom-loving outspoken citizen could be targeted as deemed by our government in the aforementioned scenario; as a precedent, afterall, has been set.

True, and anyone who doesn't realize this is stupid.

 

[BlindBoo]

Fifth Amendment:

No person shall .... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ....

What does it say about Declaration of War, idiot.

He was killed in Yemen. When did we declare war against Yemen?

I think he was still wanted dead or alive by Yemen.

Anwar al-Awlaki Wanted Dead or Alive in Yemen

 

[BlindBoo]

Sets a bad precedent that could come back at some future point to bite citizens in the ass. Who knows what the future holds as to what extent our government morphs towards tryanny?
Hell, even one day 'The T', or any freedom-loving outspoken citizen could be targeted as deemed by our government in the aforementioned scenario; as a precedent, afterall, has been set.

True, and anyone who doesn't realize this is stupid.

So you believe he was just a freedom-loving outspoken citizen?