If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Obama administration weighing targeted drone strike on unnamed American citizen in unknown country doing unrevealed things   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 404
    More: Scary, American citizens, Obama, Americans, United States, Obama administration, Gadahn, Anwar al-Awlaki, risk aversion  
•       •       •

5060 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Feb 2014 at 7:00 AM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



404 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-11 07:36:53 AM  

lohphat: Yes. That's all it takes to have your freedom taken from you. A single bald accusation.


So you think our military and intelligence agencies are so inept that they simply take the word of any random camel lord, and will take out American citizens with no evidence at all.
 
2014-02-11 07:37:13 AM  

Mean Daddy: So, where is all the outrage with Mr. Rule of Law?  Oh, that's right, he's a wiberal, he knows what's best for the country.  Remember this when a Republican takes over.


Due process as determined by several acts of Congress and SCOTUS deem what he is doing is the rule of law, whether you agree with it or not.

Go find your hoe, potato farmer.
 
2014-02-11 07:37:56 AM  

irate vegetable: Do you think the administration would be coordinating drone strikes if they were capable of detaining the suspects in question?


Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of these guys that sees this as an all-or-nothing kind of thing, but I'm just not terribly comfortable with the notion of "It's too hard to get him within the confines of the Constitution" as a means to shift legal precedent.

phenn: Remember that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' bit?


Exactly, can't they even go through a show-trial-in-absentia?
 
2014-02-11 07:38:24 AM  

ReverendJasen: lohphat: Yes. That's all it takes to have your freedom taken from you. A single bald accusation.

So you think our military and intelligence agencies are so inept that they simply take the word of any random camel lord, and will take out American citizens with no evidence at all.


pretty sure that's how most of the people in Guantanamo Bay ended up there, so it isn't much of a stretch.
 
2014-02-11 07:39:12 AM  

irate vegetable: DrPainMD: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

The Fifth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

 Ummm... that's not what the Constitution says.

Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?


Police can only kill you in self defense.

Hahaha, yeah, that's a good one!
 
2014-02-11 07:40:56 AM  

phenn: Remember that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' bit? Without that particular test being met, that's precisely what this sounds like to me. And, that should frighten you, IMO.


It would if there were any indication it was used in any cases where apprehension without a significant loss of life were possible.  When it's occurring in places where we can't bring them to trial, I really don't find it that scary.
 
2014-02-11 07:40:59 AM  
We have already droned an American for work place violence.
 
2014-02-11 07:41:47 AM  

gfid: "That's the good thing about being president.  I can do whatever I want." - Obama

Funny I should hear him say that just as I was reading this thread.

/yes, he actually said that.
//no, he was not referring to the subject of this thread.


No president would ever say anything like that!

"I'm the commander, see. I don't need to explain - I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." - Bush
 
2014-02-11 07:42:28 AM  

stoli n coke: Wait a sec. About a decade ago, I remember folks saying that anyone who is actively working with terrorist organizations is an enemy combatant and should be treated as such.

Wonder what changed. Hmmm.


That would make 75% of Congress a target. They seem to hate Americans more than El Diablo Qaeda.
 
2014-02-11 07:43:10 AM  

GoldSpider: phenn: Remember that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' bit?

Exactly, can't they even go through a show-trial-in-absentia?


that actually is unconstitutional IIRC
 
2014-02-11 07:44:39 AM  

ReverendJasen: lohphat: Yes. That's all it takes to have your freedom taken from you. A single bald accusation.

So you think our military and intelligence agencies are so inept that they simply take the word of any random camel lord, and will take out American citizens with no evidence at all.


They've been doing it with foreign nationals at Gitmo what makes you think Americans are immune from government incompetence?
 
2014-02-11 07:46:44 AM  

badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.


And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
 
2014-02-11 07:47:25 AM  

phenn: And, that should frighten you, IMO.


No, it really doesn't.  Because I'm not planning a trip to Pakistan to hang out with terrorists.  And even if I was crazy enough to take a vacation in the middle east right now, I still wouldn't be frightened of being mistaken for a terrorist.  Because I'd be checked into a hotel on the beach.  If the CIA had any questions about my intentions, they could come ask me over a Mai Tai at the Dubai Hilton.  They wouldn't need to send a drone to find me hiding in a cave with Bin Laden.

And so far, not one person has been hit by a drone in America yet.  I'm saving up my fright for that day.
 
2014-02-11 07:48:11 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're operating as part of a terrorist network


As determined by whom?
 
2014-02-11 07:51:40 AM  

MugzyBrown: TuteTibiImperes: If you're operating as part of a terrorist network

As determined by whom?


Wasn't that one of the more contentious parts of the PATRIOT Act that a large number of people used to have a major problem with?
 
2014-02-11 07:51:54 AM  

Headso: We can't trust our government to feed poor people but we can trust it to kill citizens based on secret information.


Obama, yes.

Clinton, yes.

Bush, no.

see how simple that is?
 
2014-02-11 07:52:44 AM  

lohphat: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

Who gets to determine that is accurate instead of a bald accusation with no proof?


FTA: "a step that would require Justice Department approval under new counterterrorism guidelines adopted by President Obama last year. "

Yes, I too would prefer it to be a court.
 
2014-02-11 07:54:32 AM  

ReverendJasen: phenn: And, that should frighten you, IMO.

No, it really doesn't.  Because I'm not planning a trip to Pakistan to hang out with terrorists.  And even if I was crazy enough to take a vacation in the middle east right now, I still wouldn't be frightened of being mistaken for a terrorist.  Because I'd be checked into a hotel on the beach.  If the CIA had any questions about my intentions, they could come ask me over a Mai Tai at the Dubai Hilton.  They wouldn't need to send a drone to find me hiding in a cave with Bin Laden.

And so far, not one person has been hit by a drone in America yet.  I'm saving up my fright for that day.


It bugs me because it's thin end of the wedge, toe in the door kind of crap. And, no, I don't trust DOJ to do the proper things at all times because that agency - like all others - is run by people and people make bad decisions some times.

You seem to be among those who feel that, if you're not breaking any laws, you have nothing to hide. But how soon will some of these 'authorities' be used to squash dissenters on American soil? That's the part that is most worrisome to me.

Now, you may have faith in this particular administration to do the proper things. But, what about the next one? The one after that?

I don't think they should have any authority or power to end the life of a US citizen without the appropriate due process and, by that, I mean a court, conviction and sentencing.

I would think most Americans wouldn't really want this can of worms opened up any farther.
 
2014-02-11 07:56:56 AM  

badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki



You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.
 
2014-02-11 08:01:45 AM  

ReverendJasen: And so far, not one person has been hit by a drone in America yet.  I'm saving up my fright for that day.


So it has to be a drone?  What about LAPD cops burning down a house with a suspected murderer inside?
 
2014-02-11 08:02:29 AM  

the801: al-Qaeda terrorist! why didn't we think of this before?

[static-secure.guim.co.uk image 460x276]


He's not AQ, but he and his co-conspirators are just as much of a threat.  Since they're outside the US and at least one of them is not interested in due process, fark 'em.  Repeat until the information dies out.


ReverendJasen: Dorner, anyone? That was an unabashed, unapologetic assassination. There were never any orders to capture him, it was "shoot to kill."


Shame that such efforts aren't being expounded on Snowden and his helpers.  Endangering the country, aiding a couple of hostile countries, and constantly refusing due process means that you're not interested in the law.  Had there been a similarly aggressive hunt against those in the US (albeit quietly), nobody would even want to touch information that would result in their death - just for touching it.
 
2014-02-11 08:02:45 AM  

stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.


Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.
 
2014-02-11 08:03:20 AM  
Democrat bombs are good bombs.

// bush would have been called a murderer. Obama, worshiped as all congregations worship a vengeful god.
 
2014-02-11 08:05:41 AM  

MugzyBrown: ReverendJasen: And so far, not one person has been hit by a drone in America yet.  I'm saving up my fright for that day.

So it has to be a drone?  What about LAPD cops burning down a house with a suspected murderer inside?


The guy in a stand off refusing to surrender?

no, burning the building to get him to evacuate wasn't the correct choice, if that was actually the reasoning, but when a guy sets up in a house and starts shooting cops...
 
2014-02-11 08:06:02 AM  

lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.



And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?
 
2014-02-11 08:10:21 AM  

MugzyBrown: ReverendJasen: And so far, not one person has been hit by a drone in America yet.  I'm saving up my fright for that day.

So it has to be a drone?  What about LAPD cops burning down a house with a suspected murderer inside?


I thought he was going to be the first to get droned. It will happen sooner than later.
 
2014-02-11 08:11:11 AM  

stoli n coke: lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.


And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?


How many innocent people are going to die because some remote drone operator makes a mistake or chooses a public area where civilians don't know he's around them?
 
2014-02-11 08:12:43 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.


That's really not an accurate statement of the law, and I'm somewhat surprised to see you post that. The Bill of Rights and due process requirements are restrictions on the power of the state and one need not be within US borders for them to apply.
 
2014-02-11 08:13:33 AM  
The Brown Bomber strikes again.  Heck, I'm just happy that this time they're considering whether it's right or wrong.  Progress of a sort.
 
2014-02-11 08:14:54 AM  
Because the government would never make an unfounded accusation before screwing someone over. And absolutely everything we're told about The Global War on Terror™ is completely and 100% true.

Right?

i.imgur.com
 
2014-02-11 08:16:06 AM  
Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.
 
2014-02-11 08:16:21 AM  

sethstorm: and constantly refusing due process means that you're not interested in the law.


I love seeing this argument hurled from the safety of a mother's basement.
 
2014-02-11 08:18:17 AM  

lohphat: stoli n coke: lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.


And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?

How many innocent people are going to die because some remote drone operator makes a mistake or chooses a public area where civilians don't know he's around them?


He does not care. Those people deserve it if Obama decides someone needed to die. Obama's will is all that matters to him. He was probably shouting Bush and Cheney should have stood before the Hague a few years ago, but he'll defend a program Amnesty International has branded a "war crime" until the cows come home now.
 
2014-02-11 08:18:30 AM  

stoli n coke: lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.


And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?


He was the first American specifically targeted with a drone. He was not killed on a "battlefield". I also wanted to note the Orwellian twist that the American that inspired terrorism was droned and the American that committed the terrorism was charged with work place violence.
 
2014-02-11 08:20:27 AM  

gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.


Or some of us understand the difference between being in a foreign country and obeying local laws vs being a US citizen and expecting the constitution to apply between them and their own government not the local government.

The Constitution does. It have a caveat as to locale of the citizen it protects.

Remember that this country was founded to protect the individual from THEIR OWN government.
 
2014-02-11 08:21:17 AM  

gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.


I'll give you a pass since you clearly have no legal education whatsover, but while Barhain is not constrained by US law to do what it wants yo US citizens within its borders, the US is still bound by US law when carrying out actions of foreign soil. For example, courts have excluded evidence in drug prosecutions that the DEA obtained in violation of US law even though it was on foreign soil. Again, that's the sort of thing I would not expect you to know, but people with knowledge of the law would have at least a working familiarity with that.
 
2014-02-11 08:21:36 AM  

gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.



The topic is an action by the US government against a US citizen, not a foreign government against a visiting US citizen. Try to keep up.
 
2014-02-11 08:22:06 AM  

MugzyBrown: So it has to be a drone? What about LAPD cops burning down a house with a suspected murderer inside?


Or cops giving you hours-long enema sessions?
Or fingering women they pull over while "looking for drugs"?
Or shooting your handicapped child after you called because you feared for his safety?
Or killing every dog they encounter?
Or arresting an employee of your store 300 times in a year for trespassing at work?
Or busting the scrotum of some kid during an uncalled for stop'n'frisk?
Or shooting a subdued, handcuffed suspect while he lays on the ground?

Those are all examples of horrible abuses of the law perpetrated by local law enforcement.  It needs to be fixed.  I'd love to see all those cops roasted.

However none of them were done by the federal government, the administration, or the military--which is what we're really discussing now.  I think that the idea that the CIA's tactics against terrorists in foreign countries will somehow trickle down and encourage local police forces to use the same tactics is a bit tenuous.  Unlike Afghanistan, we do have easy ways to track down and capture suspects here, and we are supposed to still have due process.
 
2014-02-11 08:22:06 AM  

lohphat: gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.

Or some of us understand the difference between being in a foreign country and obeying local laws vs being a US citizen and expecting the constitution to apply between them and their own government not the local government.

The Constitution does. It have a caveat as to locale of the citizen it protects.

Remember that this country was founded to protect the individual from THEIR OWN government.


the same government they are taking up arms against?
 
2014-02-11 08:22:27 AM  
Farking autocorrect. "The Constitution doesn't have..."
 
2014-02-11 08:23:09 AM  

Nabb1: lohphat: stoli n coke: lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.


And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?

How many innocent people are going to die because some remote drone operator makes a mistake or chooses a public area where civilians don't know he's around them?

He does not care. Those people deserve it if Obama decides someone needed to die. Obama's will is all that matters to him. He was probably shouting Bush and Cheney should have stood before the Hague a few years ago, but he'll defend a program Amnesty International has branded a "war crime" until the cows come home now.


I don't like these drone strikes either, but this is why republicans can't be taken seriously when they do comparisons, come on man, W invaded a whole country based on lies, hundreds of thousands of people died or were permanently disabled. These targeted strikes while creepy and gross are atleast a move away from invading countries.
 
2014-02-11 08:24:02 AM  

gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.


The Constitution is a set of restrictions on the power of the United States government. As you have correctly pointed out, it has no bearing on the actions of other governments, but we aren't talking about another country executing this person without trial, are we? We're talking about the United States doing it.

It's an incredibly mendacious argument.
 
2014-02-11 08:25:01 AM  

Headso: Nabb1: lohphat: stoli n coke: lohphat: stoli n coke: badhatharry: badhatharry: We have already droned an American for work place violence.

And his 16 year old American son was killed by accident. Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki


You mean the guy that had been connected to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers and corresponded with both the Underwear Bomber and the guy that killed 13 U.S. soldiers on our own soil? The guy who was hanging out with an Al Qaeda cell in Yemen.

It's common knowledge that if you regularly hang out in a crackhouse run by gangbangers, you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot by police during a raid. And you probably shouldn't put your kid in that environment.

Chalk that one up to lousy parenting.

And given what that asshole convinced other 16-year old boys to do in the name of religion, you're not going to get any sympathy.

Yeah. Oops. Wedding party incorrectly targeted by drone. 16 dead, 10 injured.


And this has to do with Anwar Al-Alawi how?

How many innocent people are going to die because some remote drone operator makes a mistake or chooses a public area where civilians don't know he's around them?

He does not care. Those people deserve it if Obama decides someone needed to die. Obama's will is all that matters to him. He was probably shouting Bush and Cheney should have stood before the Hague a few years ago, but he'll defend a program Amnesty International has branded a "war crime" until the cows come home now.

I don't like these drone strikes either, but this is why republicans can't be taken seriously when they do comparisons, come on man, W invaded a whole country based on lies, hundreds of thousands of people died or were permanently disabled. These targeted strikes while creepy and gross are atleast a move away from invading countries.


So, perception of Republicans is more important to you than the rule of law. It's not what's right or wrong?
 
2014-02-11 08:25:07 AM  

gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.


I'm not following this... the US Constitution defines, enumerates and limits powers of the US Government.  If you're arrested overseas by a foreign government for speech, your free speech rights have not been impinged as written in the Bill of Rights.  If you were arrested and imprisoned for that speech in the US, that would constitute a violation of those rights.

Similar to the example given up thread of the rape case in Okinawa... I don't see how being arrested by the government of Japan could consitute any violation of due process as defined by the US Constitution just because the military declined to arrest and try them under UCMJ.  Doesn't make sense.
 
2014-02-11 08:26:23 AM  

irate vegetable: lohphat: gothelder: Aww, its cute how many of these assholes posting think the constitution protects our citizens when they are abroad.

Try insulting the king in Bahrain while in his domain and see how long you manage to be out of their prisons for expressing your 1st amendment rights.

Or some of us understand the difference between being in a foreign country and obeying local laws vs being a US citizen and expecting the constitution to apply between them and their own government not the local government.

The Constitution does. It have a caveat as to locale of the citizen it protects.

Remember that this country was founded to protect the individual from THEIR OWN government.

the same government they are taking up arms against?


"No Person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Which of these terms is giving you difficulty?
 
2014-02-11 08:26:32 AM  
Headso:I don't like these drone strikes either, but this is why republicans can't be taken seriously when they do comparisons, come on man, W invaded a whole country based on lies, hundreds of thousands of people died or were permanently disabled. These targeted strikes while creepy and gross are atleast a move away from invading countries.

It's less important to me whether the current President is more or less of a criminal than Bush. There are two options: the President can be a criminal, or the President can not be a criminal.

Obama is a criminal, and saying "BOOOSH!" is irrelevant to that point. Bush was a criminal too.
 
2014-02-11 08:27:00 AM  

irate vegetable:
the same government they are taking up arms against?


Yes, that government. They can be charged with treason, captured, and brought before a court to stand trial by their accusers instead of being called a criminal and executed without due process.

Remember the old white guys who wrote a document in protest against this and similar gripes against a monarch who could disappear you for any reason?
 
2014-02-11 08:28:10 AM  
Nabb1:"No Person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Which of these terms is giving you difficulty?

Apparently they think that "due process of law" means "the President says so".
 
2014-02-11 08:29:16 AM  

YixilTesiphon: Headso:I don't like these drone strikes either, but this is why republicans can't be taken seriously when they do comparisons, come on man, W invaded a whole country based on lies, hundreds of thousands of people died or were permanently disabled. These targeted strikes while creepy and gross are atleast a move away from invading countries.

It's less important to me whether the current President is more or less of a criminal than Bush. There are two options: the President can be a criminal, or the President can not be a criminal.

Obama is a criminal, and saying "BOOOSH!" is irrelevant to that point. Bush was a criminal too.


Well, in this age of hyperpartisanship, I'm afraid you'll find some people would rather let a war crime continue rather than be the party to admit the policy is wrong and pay for it politically.
 
2014-02-11 08:29:56 AM  

YixilTesiphon: Nabb1:"No Person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Which of these terms is giving you difficulty?

Apparently they think that "due process of law" means "the President says so".


Well, not any President. Just this one.
 
Displayed 50 of 404 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report