My Point Was... In Response To... "here is your justification"

[WillyT]

This video was proffered up as proof of the "wisdom" of extra-judicial killings...

It doesn't really matter what he has to say. I heard it, it pissed me off. but so what ???

See... Osama Bin Laden used to tell his followers that the American story of the beacon of freedom, the shining city on a hill, the Declaration of Independece, and the U.S. Constitution... was just talk. He theorized that if you attacked the right targets (NYC and D.C. (Read money and power)) in a devastating way, that Americans would allow all of our cherished values to be subsumed by our own fear for our lives.

And... he may just have had it right...

[Renew Deal]

1. He could have turned himself in

He knew he was wanted. How is he different than any other violent criminal on the loose other than he was waging war against the US?

[WillyT]

4. He Was A U.S. Citizen... Like It Or Not...

And we are told that the details are secret, and that we just have to trust them.

As an American Citizen... I will ALWAYS have a problem with THAT. NO MATTER WHO IS THE PRESIDENT!!!

It's my job as an American Citizen.

[Renew Deal]

5. How does that make him different than any other violent criminal that won't turn themselves in?

I fail to see how he's different than an armed bank robber, mass murderer, etc.

[WillyT]

6. Did We Machine Gun Down Al Capone ???

No... we sent him to Alcatraz on tax evasion.


]

[Renew Deal]

7. Yes, because he was caught

We don't exactly have law enforcement authority in Yemen.

I think there is an argument to be had about what qualifies as treason and war making against the US and what should be done about it. I understand why the issue is important to you. I just fail to see a better outcome for Al Awlaki and guys like him.

[WillyT]

10. And We're NOT Supposed To Have Law Enforcement Authority In Yemen !!!

Yemen is recognized member of the UN, and a sovereign nation.

I used to believe in this country.

But apparently... we're just a piece of land with a flag.

So... disappointing...

[Renew Deal]

12. Sorry, I'm not seeing it.

What is the alternative the outcome in this case?

[Robb]

9. Why didn't we capture Emil Matasareanu?

[WillyT]

11. Really... REALLY ???

Well we better get the Pre-Crimes unit up and running before the next assinine murderous crime.

Because we'll all be safer under BIG BROTHER than we will be under the tides of freedom.

Sigh...

America... it was nice to experience you for a while...

One Brief Shining Moment...

[Renew Deal]

13. I don't know why you're saying "pre-crimes."

The crime was in progress in the Emil case. I would argue it is in the Al Awlaki case as well.

[Robb]

24. "Under the tides of freedom"?

And the wristwatches of Liberty!!

[Icicle]

22. Making war on the U.S....

....qualifies as treason, in which case you are renouncing your citizenship.

[quote]POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);
2) taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);

3) entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);

4) accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);

5)formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);

6) formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);

7) conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA). [/quote]

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

[Union Scribe]

19. I sincerely hope you are not in law enforcement.

There are enough "wanted dead or barely alive" types as is.

[elleng]

2. No, he didn't have it right,

he was a terrorist, operating internationally, and a perennial threat.

[WillyT]

8. So... Benjamin Franklin Was Wrong ???

He who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

This was written by Franklin, within quotation marks but is generally accept as his original thought, sometime shortly before February 17, 1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly, as published in Memoirs of the life and writings of Benjamin Franklin (1818). A variant of this was published as:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

This was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759); the book was published by Franklin; its author was Richard Jackson, but Franklin did claim responsibility for some small excerpts that were used in it.

An earlier variant by Franklin in Poor Richard's Almanack (1738): "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."

Link: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

[elleng]

14. No, Benjamin Franklin was not wrong,

but neither were 'all of our cherished values . . . subsumed' by killing a wild, rogue terrorist organizer, virtually impossible to capture, and positioned to wreak untold havoc around the world. This was not done out of fear, it was a matter of defense potentially of an untold number of worldwide victims.

[WillyT]

15. So... Show Us The Legal Indictments

You know... the court proceedings...

[elleng]

16. You sound ridiculous, WillyT.

I am an attorney, went to law school to honor the Constitution.

He was WORSE than a mere enemy combattant and, of course, evidence of the kind normally provided was hardly reasonably available, would have wreaked havoc on work of international intelligence agencies etc, and, as I said, he could not reasonably have been captured.

[WillyT]

17. And The Court Documents ???

[cherokeeprogressive]

21. Come on Willy... she want to LAW SCHOOL. She knows better than us.

The LAW SCHOOL told her so. She doesn't need "Court Documents". She's got "LAW SCHOOL" on her side.

[obxhead]

3. The attacks were brutal, but

we have been far more devastating to the nation in our war on terror that can never be won.

Bad people do bad things. Our current state of affairs since 2001 are completely self inflicted though.

[WillyT]

18. Yep...But Nobody Wants To Acknowledge That...

[obxhead]

23. No, it's human nature to blame the other guy.

The fact is that it's always been us doing the damage for fear of the boogie man.

[saras]

20. Given that we, for all practical purposes, created both Al-Qaeda and the Taliban...

...as effective forces in the world, it's pretty pissy to be ragging on one of our erstwhile allies just because of some political maneuvering turned out bad for us. Given what we've done in the Middle East in the last century, it's rather like Pol Pot complaining about a rice thief.