billcoe Posted September 30, 2011 Posted September 30, 2011 Due process? We don't need no steenkin due process or constitution. http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/30/awlaki/index.html Thought crime fellas, can't have it. So STFU or you'll be next. I've seen some of your mutinous posts right on this web site. missing an ass I guess. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted September 30, 2011 Posted September 30, 2011 Holy shit! He was assinated!! Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 1, 2011 Posted October 1, 2011 I'm torn. No due process, but that's one less preacher... ...and one who really knows his Hellfire. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 1, 2011 Posted October 1, 2011 I only wish the Equal Protection Clause would kick in, here. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 1, 2011 Posted October 1, 2011 Thousands of preachers spurt over the idea of wiping out the whole world every damn day, and do they get a missile up their asses? Guess you gotta stick with the right brand of crazy. Quote
ivan Posted October 1, 2011 Posted October 1, 2011 I'm torn. No due process, but that's one less preacher... ...and one who really knows his Hellfire. yeah, been trying to get worked up over it all day but not really gotten anywhere - you got dude on video calling for the death of his countrymen, makes it pretty hard to feel sorry for him - seem to recall a # of americans joining the nazzzis prior to ww2, can't imagine them getting much sympathy back then either? Quote
billcoe Posted October 1, 2011 Author Posted October 1, 2011 I'm torn. No due process, but that's one less preacher... Well, as they say, "that's progress". All of the progressives oppressives should be proud at this moment of change. We've made a significant milestone in the change of the way we have operated since 1776. As Barak said: the CIA drone strike described by President Barack Obama as "another significant milestone" Well, it's always nice to see a significant milestone achieved. That's "progress", that's progressive". This man, actually they got a 2 for 1 and killed 2 US citizens, were murdered without due process for thought crime. Alwaki never touched a gun. As for all the trash talkin he was accused of, last year in an interview he said that many of the things that the US claims that he said, he never even said them. He denied it. Of course, he claimed to be a man of God too, so perhaps we shouldn't believe him eh? Now I'm not saying that he wasn't a scumbag and the world isn't a better place, and he may be lying and he did say bad things - but I'm torn just like you Pat. If there was an indication he was planning an attack on innocents and this was the only way to stop that it would be a different thing. That doesn't appear to be the case here. Fortunately, President Obama, whom we can all trust cause he's on our side, instead of that nasty Geo Bush or some other evil republican, made the decision to kill him. So that's all good cause we can trust him. We have hope and change now, and not all that "Rupublicunt" (as you say) oppression that you and jb are always going on over. What everyone wanted is change and this is certainly a significant change in the way we've done things in this country since about 1776, so congrats on change: But I worry about the future this fait accompli will bring. Look on death row. Why do we give evil ***ass*l$es 15 years of appeals. These are known killers getting way too much resources given to them and it's often 15 years of legal maneuvering and too many court dates to count before justice is delivered. It is beyond me and my pay grade as a lowly citizen...subject why this is. Alwaki was tried and convicted in the court of public opinion and the minds of those in power and he had no recourse at all. They said he was guilty and so it must be true eh? Although it's likely all he needed was his ass kicked, much like you Pat. Cest le vie eh? Thought crime and trash talkin. Best be stopping that crap right now dudes. I've read your shit on these very threads and you've been way over the line trash talkin our country and our glorious President(s). So at least they know to come for YOU next. There's no appeal if you are convicted in the minds of the goverment. You'll be offed and that's that. Nothing this citizen...subject, can do. If this asswipe can be erased on authoritarian hearsay say so in the media, why not you and yours? And as 112's video notes: "you can take that to the bank: of Barak too I suppose.....We got us some change. Woot? Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 1, 2011 Posted October 1, 2011 Some men go through life begging to be killed. Quote
billcoe Posted October 2, 2011 Author Posted October 2, 2011 Some men go through life begging to be killed. I'm sure you'd be upset if he was gay. Well, maybe he has the 72 virgin deal going now. Kathleen Turner not one of them no doubt. Jewel of the Nile no mo. [img:center]http://images.smh.com.au/2011/10/02/2664715/al-narrow-200x0.jpg[/img] God rescinds the 72 virgin deal Quote
prole Posted October 3, 2011 Posted October 3, 2011 [img:center]http://images.smh.com.au/2011/10/02/2664715/al-narrow-200x0.jpg[/img] God rescinds the 72 virgin deal So they all look the same, huh? Why R U so racist? Quote
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Uhm. He is an enemy combatant who has declared was on the United States. In doing so, his citizenship is little more than another piece of asswipe, not a shield. Would you prefer that we risk dozens of lives to capture him, allow his to plead his case in a court wasting millions while lawyers mire the case in semantics for two years so we can put him in jail for the rest of his life in maximum security solitary confinement? The title of this thread is misleading and inflamatory. Just because this asshat didn't think to renounce his citizenship OFFICIALLY, doesn't mean he can hide behind the protections that this country provides its citizens. How do you fellas think Walker was treated. I can tell you he was treated better than he needed to be... Quote
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Thought crime fellas, can't have it. So STFU or you'll be next. I've seen some of your mutinous posts right on this web site. missing an ass I guess. Thought crime is a long jump to treason, terrorism, murder and genocide dontchya think? Quote
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 the constitution defines treason as making war on your country - doesn't seem too much of a stretch to define what homeboy was doing as such - the lack of a trial can't help but be troubling, bu the world is a messy place... Quote
rob Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Is travelling abroad and publicly joining and assisting an enemy army during a time of war really a "thought crime," bill? LOLZ you make me laugh. Do you still think the world is ending in 2012? Maybe you should post some more pictures of dead kids to clear this up. Quote
akhalteke Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 the world is a messy place... 'tis indeed Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Uhm. He is an enemy combatant who has declared was on the United States. In doing so, his citizenship is little more than another piece of asswipe, not a shield. Would you prefer that we risk dozens of lives to capture him, allow his to plead his case in a court wasting millions while lawyers mire the case in semantics for two years so we can put him in jail for the rest of his life in maximum security solitary confinement? The title of this thread is misleading and inflamatory. Just because this asshat didn't think to renounce his citizenship OFFICIALLY, doesn't mean he can hide behind the protections that this country provides its citizens. How do you fellas think Walker was treated. I can tell you he was treated better than he needed to be... Says you. How do we know what his 'crimes' were? Due process. That's one of the handful of central principles that define our democracy. You know...the one you've spent your life fighting for. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 There is no clear evidence that he ever took up arms against the United States. Words are not arms, amigo. That's another principle you (supposedly) fight for. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 (edited) And last time I checked, the US wasn't in the business of summarily executing its citizens for treason. There's usually a trial involved. If the US can target a citizen with a Hellfire, it can arrest and try him...and maintain the rule of law rather than what essentially is a monarchy. Edited October 7, 2011 by tvashtarkatena Quote
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 the basic principles/objectives stated in the preamble are fucking annoying though b/c they can step on each others toes - sure "establish justice" but also "provide for the common defense" - eternal vigilance, right? each admin gets to kill X number of folks under shady circumstances before a vigiliant public goes batshit - better make'em count! Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Few folks side with the American Nazi Party, Larry Flynt, or Westboro Baptist, but the strength of our values depends on separating the people from the principle. The fact that our government 'claims' that certain terrorist acts were 'inspired' by our man in Yemen may constitute treason, but it certainly doesn't make him an enemy combatant in any sense of the word...even the modern one. Now, the government may claim that he had an 'operational role'. Really? Prove it by due process. Any of you trust the government that much? God, I certainly hope not at this point. Quote
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 If the US can target a citizen with a Hellfire, it can arrest and try him... sure can't do it as easily, and i prefer the predator approach to the take over the whole fucking country to put a base in every village idea... Quote
ivan Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Few folks side with the American Nazi Party, Larry Flynt, or Westboro Baptist, but the strength of our values depends on separating the people from the principle. The fact that our government 'claims' that certain terrorist acts were 'inspired' by our man in Yemen may constitute treason, but it certainly doesn't make him an enemy combatant in any sense of the word...even the modern one. Now, the government may claim that he had an 'operational role'. Really? Prove it by due process. Any of you trust the government that much? God, I certainly hope not at this point. sure, i'd prefer a trial to an assassination from the obama-lama point of view though, i imagine i'd rather be damned for what i did, instead of what i didn't do... Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted October 7, 2011 Posted October 7, 2011 Clearly, the government invoked the 'easier to ask forgiveness' principle in this case. We all do it. We don't all do it after killing someone, however. Is that the way we want our government to operate...in the eyes of the rest of the world, no less? So much for being the beacon of liberty and all that PR rot. Countries, like people, with true balls stand by their most basic principles even when they're scared or threatened. That's real strength. That's true honor. That's playing the long game. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.