Pres. memo--execute Americans without due process

[Uncensored2008]

If you had bothered to read the white paper, you will see the court decisions and precedents that support this action.

Again, in this nation, a white paper does not overrule the Constitution, regardless of the contempt you, your shameful party, and the administration have for it.

 

[1Templar]

Whats the problem? I've known that America has been eliminating "Americans", since I was 17 years old, and on my 1st tour in Vietnam. If you think about it, the government was eliminating Americans in the Revolution... Before and After the Constitution was written.
For all of the bluster about "rights"... The rights end when one becomes a traitor to the nation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You dare soil Jefferson's doctrine with the misreading of the father who used his son as a human shield? No wonder your rantings will never be accepted by the American people.

No one has EVER suggested the son was used as a human shield, you're just making up absurd lies to cover for your little tin god. Crawl back to Communist Dreams, troll.

The father was responsible for his son's lack of security, UncensoredFascist. Quit sounding like a Nazi Big Lie.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So it is your contention that if Al is overseas and engaged in plots or acts of war against us in time of war, he can be sanctioned?

Of course not, that is absurd.

We used to be a nation of laws. If those laws are violated, we have a system of justice to deal with them. I oppose the banana republic we've become with this tin horn pile of shit dictator who ignores the constitution and kills as he pleases.

IF an American is in a combat zone while an operation is underway and is killed, bummer. BUT the deliberate targeting of American citizens in nations we are NOT at war with (unless we declared war on Yemen and no one told me) is simple murder. Obama is a murderer and should be impeached.

But if he does the same thing HERE, then he has to be treated as though all he's doing is engaging in some mere criminal behavior?

Or maybe I am not understanding your answer.

My answer is simple, under the constitution, all are bound by the law, even Dear Leader is restrained by 5th and 14th amendment prohibitions to kill citizens sans due process.

The correct course of action is to impeach Obama and put him on trial for murder.

Your interpretation of the law is wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If you had bothered to read the white paper, you will see the court decisions and precedents that support this action.

Again, in this nation, a white paper does not overrule the Constitution, regardless of the contempt you, your shameful party, and the administration have for it.

You are not a law unto yourself. As a part of the social compact of this country, you are bound by Congress and SCOTUS. If you violate the law, then you will pay the price.

 

[Sallow]

Whats the problem? I've known that America has been eliminating "Americans", since I was 17 years old, and on my 1st tour in Vietnam. If you think about it, the government was eliminating Americans in the Revolution... Before and After the Constitution was written.
For all of the bluster about "rights"... The rights end when one becomes a traitor to the nation.

Yes and no.

 

[1Templar]

So it is your contention that if Al is overseas and engaged in plots or acts of war against us in time of war, he can be sanctioned?

Of course not, that is absurd.

We used to be a nation of laws. If those laws are violated, we have a system of justice to deal with them. I oppose the banana republic we've become with this tin horn pile of shit dictator who ignores the constitution and kills as he pleases.

IF an American is in a combat zone while an operation is underway and is killed, bummer. BUT the deliberate targeting of American citizens in nations we are NOT at war with (unless we declared war on Yemen and no one told me) is simple murder. Obama is a murderer and should be impeached.

But if he does the same thing HERE, then he has to be treated as though all he's doing is engaging in some mere criminal behavior?

Or maybe I am not understanding your answer.

My answer is simple, under the constitution, all are bound by the law, even Dear Leader is restrained by 5th and 14th amendment prohibitions to kill citizens sans due process.

The correct course of action is to impeach Obama and put him on trial for murder.

Now you are getting to the crux, of your love for law... Obama.

If the secret service knows that an American expatriate is giving any kind of help to the enemy, it doesn't matter where the hell this person is. In military terms... He or she is "oft"... No more" on ".

 

[Uncensored2008]

The father was responsible for his son's lack of security, UncensoredFascist. Quit sounding like a Nazi Big Lie.

You're a mindless troll with an IQ under 40.

What you spew is nonsensical shit intended to cover for your little god. The ones responsible for killing a 16 year old American riding in a car in a suburban housing tract in a country at peace with the USA, are those who fired a ******* missile into the car, and fuckwad (your god, Obama) who ordered the murder.

 

[Sallow]

No.

It's not the violation of the law.

And that's the point.

While I grasp that you of the left have utter contempt for the constitution, the fact is that it remains the supreme law of the land. A white paper does not have the power to render the constitution null and void, even if our current ruler ignores said constitution.

So yes, it is a violation of the law, a violation of the United States Constitution.

And you wonder why those who still support constitutional governance feel the need to arm ourselves.

No.

It's not a violation of the law.

The congress passed the AUMF and the Patriot Act. The US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in 2007 upheld the Enemy Combatant status.

This was done during the Bush administration.

And it's only NOW that you feel you have to arm yourself. You guys weren't opposing this when a different president wielded this power.

But feel free. Arm yourself.

Have a party.

 

[Sallow]

While I grasp that you of the left have utter contempt for the constitution, the fact is that it remains the supreme law of the land. A white paper does not have the power to render the constitution null and void, even if our current ruler ignores said constitution.

So yes, it is a violation of the law, a violation of the United States Constitution.

And you wonder why those who still support constitutional governance feel the need to arm ourselves.

If you had bothered to read the white paper, you will see the court decisions and precedents that support this action.

Uncensored is driven off balance by his hatred for this administration.

Basically yeah.

He has no ******* idea what he's talking about.

The very day a President is impeached AND THEN put on trial for ANYTHING..will be the end of the Nation.

The US will be over.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The father was responsible for his son's lack of security, UncensoredFascist. Quit sounding like a Nazi Big Lie.

You're a mindless troll with an IQ under 40.

What you spew is nonsensical shit intended to cover for your little god. The ones responsible for killing a 16 year old American riding in a car in a suburban housing tract in a country at peace with the USA, are those who fired a ******* missile into the car, and fuckwad (your god, Obama) who ordered the murder.

Personal accountability, little one, is the issue here. The child was placed in danger by the father.

As a commander of the drones, I would have no trouble taking out an enemy of the USA, particularly one who hid among human shields.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Now you are getting to the crux, of your love for law... Obama.

If the secret service knows that an American expatriate is giving any kind of help to the enemy, it doesn't matter where the hell this person is. In military terms... He or she is "oft"... No more" on ".

Nations can be governed by law, or ruled by men. Scumbags and thugs like Jakematters and others here promote the capricious rule of dictators, who decide life and death on their mood or whim.

But civilized men prefer the rule of immutable law. Particularly within a representative government that has a governing constitution.

Unlike the dictatorship the leftist shitpiles yearn for and push, a constitutional republic clearly defines what is expected and permissible, as well as what is not. To a pile of puke like Jakematters, what is permissible is that which pleases Obama. That which is prohibited is that which displeases Obama. As a mindless sycophant, he scurries about fawning on his lord to please him. Rodents like him love a dictatorship, where they can curry favor with the dictator.

But the rule of law puts into words the statutes and codes that are to govern all, from our ruler in Washington D.C. to the miscreant in Yemen publishing demagoguery.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No.

It's not a violation of the law.

Again, I understand that to you, Obama's word is law.

But in fact, it is not.

The congress passed the AUMF and the Patriot Act. The US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in 2007 upheld the Enemy Combatant status.

And Hamdi v. Rumsfeld made clear that jurisprudence was not suspended by these acts.

This was done during the Bush administration.

At that time, the very leftist who now praise the ability of Obama to piss on the constitution cried foul.

Clearly you of the left have no standards, only a lust for power.

And it's only NOW that you feel you have to arm yourself. You guys weren't opposing this when a different president wielded this power.

You know full well that what you claim is false, but lack the integrity to keep silent.

But feel free. Arm yourself.

Have a party.

We will, until your god and your shameful party make that impossible.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Basically yeah.

He has no ******* idea what he's talking about.

The very day a President is impeached AND THEN put on trial for ANYTHING..will be the end of the Nation.

The US will be over.

Right, the President MUST be above the law...

The small of mind have a desire to be ruled.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now you are getting to the crux, of your love for law... Obama.

If the secret service knows that an American expatriate is giving any kind of help to the enemy, it doesn't matter where the hell this person is. In military terms... He or she is "oft"... No more" on ".

Nations can be governed by law, or ruled by men. Scumbags and thugs like Jakematters and others here promote the capricious rule of dictators, who decide life and death on their mood or whim.

But civilized men prefer the rule of immutable law. Particularly within a representative government that has a governing constitution.

Unlike the dictatorship the leftist shitpiles yearn for and push, a constitutional republic clearly defines what is expected and permissible, as well as what is not. To a pile of puke like Jakematters, what is permissible is that which pleases Obama. That which is prohibited is that which displeases Obama. As a mindless sycophant, he scurries about fawning on his lord to please him. Rodents like him love a dictatorship, where they can curry favor with the dictator.

But the rule of law puts into words the statutes and codes that are to govern all, from our ruler in Washington D.C. to the miscreant in Yemen publishing demagoguery.

The Rule of Law by our country as opposed to the Rule of Man by Uncensored are obvious.

I will live in a free society that is accountable, but never a society of Uncensored's where each may do as he wishes despite the damage he does.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Uncensored's disdain for the Rule of Law sanctioned by We the People's Congress and SCOTUS is obvious.

 

[Trajan]

No one has ever before said that they had the right to kill an American Citizen anywhere in the world without judicial process simply because they, by themselves, felt that someone was a danger to the Country.

That is until Obama became President.

Sure they have.

What do you think the AUMF, Enemy Combatants and the Patriot Act were all about?

fisa hello.....

 

[Sallow]

No.

It's not a violation of the law.

Again, I understand that to you, Obama's word is law.

But in fact, it is not.

The congress passed the AUMF and the Patriot Act. The US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in 2007 upheld the Enemy Combatant status.

And Hamdi v. Rumsfeld made clear that jurisprudence was not suspended by these acts.



At that time, the very leftist who now praise the ability of Obama to piss on the constitution cried foul.

Clearly you of the left have no standards, only a lust for power.

And it's only NOW that you feel you have to arm yourself. You guys weren't opposing this when a different president wielded this power.

You know full well that what you claim is false, but lack the integrity to keep silent.

But feel free. Arm yourself.

Have a party.

We will, until your god and your shameful party make that impossible.

Again..you have no idea..what you are talking about.

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court recognized the power of the government to detain enemy combatants, including U.S. citizens, but ruled that detainees who are U.S. citizens must have the rights of due process, and the ability to challenge their enemy combatant status before an impartial authority.

It reversed the dismissal by a lower court of a habeas corpus petition brought on behalf of Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen who was being detained indefinitely as an "illegal enemy combatant" after being captured in Afghanistan in 2001. Following the court's decision, on October 9, 2004, the US government released Hamdi without charge and deported him to Saudi Arabia, where his family lived and he had grown up, on the condition that he renounce his US citizenship and commit to travel
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hamdi was a "capture". And there was NO remedy for his imprisonment..he was kicked out of the country.

And all these new powers came about UNDER BUSH..not Obama.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The attackers of those who defend America would reverse their position if their candidate had been elected.

Bush, Obama, or Romney, if he had been elected, are sanctified by Constitution and law to defend our country. The only ones who are engaged in treason are those who denigrate the POTUS for lawfully defending our nation.

 

[Sallow]

No one has ever before said that they had the right to kill an American Citizen anywhere in the world without judicial process simply because they, by themselves, felt that someone was a danger to the Country.

That is until Obama became President.

Sure they have.

What do you think the AUMF, Enemy Combatants and the Patriot Act were all about?

fisa hello.....

What about FISA?