GOODBYE 6th Amendment!

[Darkwind]

I thought I made that pretty clear. Immediate means 'right this very second'.

Using the example given, if a sniper is killing people from a bell tower, that IS an immediate need.

Using your example, that is a deliberative process. People gather and discuss whether or not to use a drone, how to use it, and who will be the target. To come to the decision to target an American, (whether or not he is abroad or on our soil) is a deliberative process. That means that the government is limited in its actions and must meet certain steps prior to just killing an American.

I am not saying that they can't in a time of war, but I AM saying that they have to follow the rules, and those rules are set forth by the Constitution.

The President is, as usual, dead wrong.

What is about a congressional authorization for use of force do you not understand. Enemy combatants can be engaged, who ever or where ever they are, under that authorization, I see no constitutional conflict. By your standards the American captured on the battle field in Afghanistan would have had his rights violated had he been killed instead of being captured. It's time to let some common sense prevail here.

Show Me were the use of force says that the government can violate the Constitution. I'll not wait.

 

[Darkwind]

My question isnt whether its right or wrong, my question is where does it stop. Where is the line. Is there a line? If there is one does it matter if we cross it? If we cross it are there consequences? If there are no consequences then why should the line even be there? Our constitution is the line. We stepped over it. We crossed the line, for maybe even a good reason. But all the same, we crossed the line. We did. Now the question is how far over it are we allowed to go?

Your contention that we crossed a constitutional line is incorrect. The administration killed enemy combatants, which they were authorized by congress to do, that were actively waging war from Yemen, citizenship is irrelevant.

You are wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Strawman, no comparison to reality.

Seriously?

The soldier you mentioned was killed in London by a Nigerian who claimed that it was justified by the fact that soldiers are killing people in his country. I guess that means that you are the one that has no connection to reality.

England is hardly an inaccessible third world country, had the asshole we offed in Yemen been there we could have extradited him. But sending troops into Yemen would have had unacceptable risks and cost a hell of allot more than one missal. I take you as a person with very little or no military experience, which might excuse part of your ignorance.

Why do you keep moving around? You are the one that brought up the soldier in Britain, why are you blathering about Yemen? Is your argument so incoherent you can't even keep track of what you are saying?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wow, the FBI assassinated John Dillinger and violated his 6th Amendment.

Yes, they did. Good of you to admit it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Active enemy combatants, operating in third world countries, neither get or deserve a day in court. Also you can get off your duff and find your own damn links to prove me wrong.

I don't look for things that don't exist simply because people issue ridiculous challenges.

How about you start here for a small insight to the scum you are trying to defend.

Anwar al-Awlaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Be sure and read all the way through the "Other connections" section.

You mean this?

To the American people … Obama has promised that his administration will be one of transparency, but he has not fulfilled his promise. His administration tried to portray the operation of brother Nidal Hasan as an individual act of violence from an estranged individual. The administration practiced to control on the leak of information concerning the operation, in order to cushion the reaction of the American public.
Until this moment the administration is refusing to release the e-mails exchanged between myself and Nidal. And after the operation of our brother Umar Farouk, the initial comments coming from the administration were looking the same – another attempt at covering up the truth. But al-Qaeda cut off Obama from deceiving the world again by issuing their statement claiming responsibility for the operation.[

Damn, he deserves the death penalty for that alone.

At least you admit that it comes down to him saying things Obama doesn't like, which is what I said in the first place. Why did you go to all that trouble if you actually agreed with me?

 

[JakeStarkey]

QWB, of course the government has the right if We the People give it the right. Are you a pacifist? That is not a trick question, just trying to get a handle on understanding you.

Hey, idiot, I said power, not right. Learn to read.

You have not answered the question: are you a pacificst?

 

[JakeStarkey]

If the battlefield is the streets of London should be flying drones and targeting random Nigerians who think that Britain is invading their country?

Strawman, no comparison to reality.

Seriously?

The soldier you mentioned was killed in London by a Nigerian who claimed that it was justified by the fact that soldiers are killing people in his country. I guess that means that you are the one that has no connection to reality.

Seriously, your argument is made of straw, with no connection to reality. ". . . random Nigerians who think that Britain is invading their country?" Really.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Show Me were the use of force says that the government can violate the Constitution. I'll not wait.

You shouldn't, because the use of force says nothing of the sort. The law is valid, drones are technology, and your argument is false.

 

[OKTexas]

Seriously?

The soldier you mentioned was killed in London by a Nigerian who claimed that it was justified by the fact that soldiers are killing people in his country. I guess that means that you are the one that has no connection to reality.

England is hardly an inaccessible third world country, had the asshole we offed in Yemen been there we could have extradited him. But sending troops into Yemen would have had unacceptable risks and cost a hell of allot more than one missal. I take you as a person with very little or no military experience, which might excuse part of your ignorance.

Why do you keep moving around? You are the one that brought up the soldier in Britain, why are you blathering about Yemen? Is your argument so incoherent you can't even keep track of what you are saying?

I brought it up only because you said the scum in Yemen was not operating on a defined battlefield. My point was there is NO defined battlefield. They choose when and where they try to kill us, we have that same right if they are hiding in a third world country and continuing terrorist activities.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't look for things that don't exist simply because people issue ridiculous challenges.

How about you start here for a small insight to the scum you are trying to defend.

Anwar al-Awlaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Be sure and read all the way through the "Other connections" section.

You mean this?

To the American people … Obama has promised that his administration will be one of transparency, but he has not fulfilled his promise. His administration tried to portray the operation of brother Nidal Hasan as an individual act of violence from an estranged individual. The administration practiced to control on the leak of information concerning the operation, in order to cushion the reaction of the American public.
Until this moment the administration is refusing to release the e-mails exchanged between myself and Nidal. And after the operation of our brother Umar Farouk, the initial comments coming from the administration were looking the same – another attempt at covering up the truth. But al-Qaeda cut off Obama from deceiving the world again by issuing their statement claiming responsibility for the operation.[

Damn, he deserves the death penalty for that alone.

At least you admit that it comes down to him saying things Obama doesn't like, which is what I said in the first place. Why did you go to all that trouble if you actually agreed with me?

Now you're acting like a lefty, posting out of context blurbs that appear to support your position. The article in it's entirety supports mine. I'm done with this, you chose to remain naive and ignorant if you want.