My take on the 'assassination'

[DainBramaged]

He denounced America, he declared war on us, and he plotted against the U.S. The Yemeni Ministry of Defense cooperated in his death.


Should we be nice to these folks? I wonder what the people who have died at the hands of terrorists would say if they were alive because we killed more of these scumbags.

You can sit in your homes and pound away on your keyboards, but WE DO NOT HAVE CONTROL, we aren't even ants in the desert.


Pound away to your hearts content. I am glad he's dead.

[trumad]

1. My take...

I believe in the Constitution.

[banned from Kos]

2. WTF does that mean to a resident of Yemen?

Not jack shit.

[Exilednight]

32. So, if you lived in London and the US military killed you, then they are within their rights? n/t

[jberryhill]

22. Odd that you use Truman as an avatar

Nobody in Hiroshima got Due Process.

[MilesColtrane]

26. That was an a actual war, declared by Congress.

The War on Terror™ is a slogan-against-a-tactic that's being used to circumvent the protections defined by the Constitution of the United States.

[Schema Thing]

27. and that was a city full of innocent people.

compared to just some nasty guy who went to war with the USA.

[jberryhill]

28. So glad the folks in Hiroshima had their rights protected

[alphafemale]

57. You'll never see an actual "War" declared ever again.

Actually declaring "War" puts restrictions on what happens after.

But as I recall congress granted full powers to the president (b2 at the time- Obama now) to use "whatever means necessary" against terrorists.

Ugly? Yes.

We live in an ugly world.

We share a border with a country where the drug cartels hack the heads off of people and dangle their battered bodies from an overpass. For the offense of merely talking about trash about drug cartels on the internet.

[whatchamacallit]

3. My take: Question Authority

or be led by the ring in your nose.

[DainBramaged]

4. We are being led by the nose....

we're accomplishing a lot. Millions turned out to protest Booshe. We tried in Wisconsin, we're trying on Wall Street.


This isn't the 60's, we have no power.

[Broderick]

5. Great! You know so much more than me!

Heck, people convicted Casey Anthony for years before a trial! So, anyway, since you know so much about the guilt of this person beyond a few emails of anger,,, please enlighten me! I want to see it. I need to see the proof that you have that justifies killing an American citizen sans trial. We don't have to enforce every countries' laws, especially when we have no extradition treaty with a country that kills its own citizen so the Yemen conviction through absentia is not proof to me. Show me the proof that an American citizen ought be killed on our soil or foreign soil without trial for actions they committed. I will be all on board. Also, show me in the bill of rights and in the constitution where it is applicable.

I will be waiting. A long time.

[BeHereNow]

17. And you will not wait alone.

I'll be there with several others.
BHN

[Broderick]

18. Sadly

The team effect is more important to many.

Thank you for principle beyond a designation letter.


"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[Drale]

6. As far as I'm concerned the minute he joined a terrorist group

he gave up his citizenship.

[trumad]

7. Yeah---unfortunately that's not how it works.

[Broderick]

11. Off with their heads

Who will designate terrorism in the next administration I wonder. The precedent has been set I guess, and it is perfectly fine for executive decision prior to due process for execution.

Gitty up. Maybe it will be Democratic presidents from now on forever and we can eliminate the enemy in Republicans without a trial. Just execute them all. Anyone that "emails threats" without even acting on those threats should be droned. And while we are at it, let's let countries like Yemen who has no extradition treaty with us do the indictment and through absentia, convict. BAM. GONE. We only need to off 50M voters or so. GOSH, I hope a Republican doesn't get into office and have the same power via precedent.............



:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bvar22]

59. "Terrorist Group" ?

Who decides that?

Is GreenPeace a "Terrorist Group"?
Some Right Wingers truly think so.

What about those Fringe Leftists who gathered in St Paul plotting (fantasizing) about disrupting the Republican national Convention in 2008 through Civil Disobedience?

What about somebody who claims he is going to blow up the White House,
but has neither the explosives nor the ability to get to the White House?

Did you support Bush-the-Lesser when HE assumed the authority of a Unitary Executive.?

Will YOU support the next Republican who holds that office & unilaterally decides that somebody is a "Terrorist"?

The legal justification for the assassination of a US Citizen by a Unitary Executive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8

[sabrina 1]

62. You won't get an answer to those questions from the supporters of

the continuation of Bush's policies. I have been asking for days now if 'Bush was right after all and if we owe him an apology'. The only answers I have received are the same arguments Bush made to defend his policies. Or insults implying I might have cried over the death of Hitler.

Good luck. I think the reason I have not gotten an answer is because there is none. No justification for opposing Bush now, IF you support Obama.

[Puregonzo1188]

61. What's a terrorist group? Earth Liberation Front? The Weather Underground? Rightwing militias?

Did Timothy McVeign give up his citizenship? The Unabomber?

[aquart]

8. I am glad he's dead. I am sick that a US citizen was murdered by the US.

Those two reactions are not incompatible to me.

[Broderick]

13. nor me

Simple values, morals and ethics based in principles.

[saras]

9. Sez who? Do you believe what Bush said about HIS enemies?

Why can't people get it through their heads that this is LAW and POLICY we're talking about, not a single isolated incident. The "debate" over "whether we should have killed so-and-so" is trivial and irrelevant compared to the debate "should we have a policy that lets presidents - ANY presidents, not just the ones we approve of AND MOST EMPHATICALLY NOT JUST AMERICAN ONES - summarily execute people living in foriegn countries who they disapprove of or regard as hostile.

Basically, if Gaddafi or Castro doesn't have the right to execute his enemies in foreign countries, then neither do we. There's no reason to privilege our discernment and judgement over any other national leader's. We've certainly, and completely, given up any claim to moral leadership or superiority.

[Taverner]

10. It's not about al-Awlaki. It's about Due Process.

Even the Nazis were tried

[gulliver]

15. He got due process.

I see no evidence that he would have been arrestable without danger to the lives of law enforcement. He was apparently heavily "protected" by his tribe. And he was an avowed Al Qaeda leader. As a combatant, he was clearly a threat to American lives.

This was just like a SWAT team action. If you can't reasonably arrest him, and he is out to kill innocents, then he's done.

[Taverner]

16. Yeah. Just like Fred Hampton got "due process"

Due process from the gun's chamber straight to his head

Give it up

We committed yet another in a long series of war crimes

Maybe someday, we'll get justice

But as long as you killbillies wave flags and call for blood, we won't

[Broderick]

23. But WAIT A DARN MOMENT

We have a D in charge. It doesn't matter then right?

It's never like we will see a R again.


Lighten up. When our team does it, it should ought be ok.


A US citizen is fair game sans AMERICAN due process now. Maybe we can eliminate the foreign soil thingee and incorporate those not indicted on American soil on what the government tells us for execution. Maybe we could eliminate all Republicans in the process.

God help us if a Republican understands the gravity of personal power on guilt or innocence. And if the courts say no, obviously all they need do is be tried in absentia in a foreign country that has no extradition treaty with us. Bam. Get rid of em all.


:sarcasm:

[Broderick]

21. In Yemen

The mental gymnastics is exhausting.

What is the extradition treaty with Yemen? how do they treat their citizens? Was he tried with defense, or in absentia? And while you are at it, why don't you proffer the proof of guilt that dictates execution without due process. how did you feel about Troy again????

[eridani]

56. And it's about who WE are n/t

[War Horse]

14. A U.S. citizen has been killed - without due process.

It raises some uncomfortable questions, limits of presidential powers being one.

I must admit that I'm not troubled by the killing of al-Awlaki. He decided to join a terrorist organization dedicated to mass murder.

But it's essential to have an open discussion about this.

Still, the "slippery slope" argument has been taken to the extreme here. It's getting to be absurd in many cases.

As is calling other DUers "fascists" or "terrorist apologists".

At this point I support both the targeted killing AND the ACLU doing its job and going after this.

[Nye Bevan]

19. Any problem with future president Palin or Perry having this power?

I expect the Republican presidential candidates are eager with anticipation at having the power to order the assassination of US citizens who "denounce America" or rhetorically declare war upon us.

[Major Hogwash]

34. That would depend on the parallel universe I live on when Sister Sarah becomes the President.

Because that would never happen, and I doubt that there are enough dumb people to elect Perry next year, so I'm not sure you made a valid point.

I'm just saying, that if some Republican President in the future kills a terrorist in the future, then he had better be right about who he kills in the future.
I think that President Obama did the right thing.

[loyalsister]

20. I can see too many valid points to have a truly solid opinion

I do disregard citizenship as a reason not to treat him as any other terrorist. I am not entirely comfortable with the assassinations. But, I don't think I would have enjoyed the global anti\pro demonstrations that would accompany a period of imprisonment and trial. I also must acknowledge that I don't have as much experience or information as the people who make these decisions.
So, there are too many gray areas for me to have a well defined opinion. I see a lot of good points coming from all sides.
I dislike the ugly reality of war and don't want any personal involvement with it. I wouldn't want to be making those kinds of decisions. That disqualifies me from being a person I would want anyone to defer to in those matters.

[badtoworse]

24. Recommended. This isn't a law enforcement matter.

It's naive to look at it that way. Due process doesn't apply to armed conflict.

[grasswire]

25. but the Constitution applies to citizens

All of its protections, including the right to be arraigned, to face the accuser, to be tried by one's peers, to see the evidence and present witness.

That Constitution stands between YOU and tyranny. You want to give that protection away by saying it only applies selectively?

[badtoworse]

36. People who are acting in concert with our enemies have forfeited those protections - nt

[grasswire]

41. where is this written?

Or is it just your opinion?

You see, the brilliance of our founding documents is that even the worst criminal is provided the protections of liberty and equal justice under the law.

Is there a section noting the actions that will result in the forfeiture of those protections?

[badtoworse]

44. You're looking at this as a law enforcement matter. I'm not.

As I see it, this is a military matter. If you've taken up arms with our enemies, you should expect to be treated as an enemy.

[grasswire]

45. okay, where is that written?

"If a citizen takes up arms with our enemies, he/she should expect to be treated as an enemy"? And "relinquish his/her citizenship and its rights and protections"?

Is this written somewhere?

[badtoworse]

46. If he were captured alive, he might still have some claim to due process as a citizen.

I think that's laughable, but I'll concede it's possible. If he were interested in pursuing that approach, he did have the option of surrendering. Since he did not surrender and was still acting as an enemy combatant, it was entirely appropriate that he be treated as such. As a high value target, it is also appropriate that a special effort be made to neutralize him (i.e. kill him).

[DainBramaged]

33. They grasp at the straws of freedom, while there are cameras everywhere BECAUSE of the terrorists

We are powerless. And if we would be declared enemy combatants, we too would disappear. THEY have no reason to abide by the law any more.

[badtoworse]

38. So how would you deal with terrorists?

[DainBramaged]

40. Why does it matter to you?

I'm not in charge, maybe you should ask OUR President who thinks we should shut up.

[badtoworse]

43. It doesn't really matter all that much. I'm just curious about your views on this.

My sense is that you're happy he's gone, as am I

[DainBramaged]

49. I stated my views, and if you think I'm "happy" you really need to use better verbiage.

A man died because he believed we are evil. If the Arab world believed I was evil, I'm sure they'd want me dead, but they'd make a huge deal about it to stir up the unwashed masses.


Here, we take care of business and move on.


Those who have angst over this are he same people who don't like breast-feeding, cigarette smoking, soda pop drinking food stamp using Olive Garden eating narwhal loving people. They expect things to go their way without ever knowing the back story.

[badtoworse]

58. "...I'm glad he's gone" - these were your words

"Glad" and "happy" are close in meaning and the substitution seemed reasonable to me. Whatever, it's not worth arguing over. I agree with your take on this.

[provis99]

29. the Michigan Militia declared war on the federal government.

should we now assassinate all of them?

[JDPriestly]

30. Same old, same old,

Trust me, the Germans were "glad" when Hitler took away the Communists. They rejoiced when the Jews disappeared and suddenly Germans got their houses.

Fascism starts when people convince themselves that it is OK to disregard the rule of law, civil rights and due process when "that bad guy" is railroaded or lynched or gassed.

Of course, you are glad he is gone, but why couldn't he have "gone" after enjoying due process. If our drones could seek him out and kill him (and how do you know that the drones killed him and not someone who was posing as him or some entirely different person?), that "bad guy" over there who "deserves it," then the self-righteous fools think it is wonderful. If we could find him with our drones, why couldn't we have gone in and picked him up. He was, after all, an American citizen. And considering all the false news that is reported in our media, how do you know that he really was the terrorist he is claimed to have been?

Lots of people agree with the "He got what he deserved meme," but they are the ones who still think that Saddam Hussein was a leader of Al Qaeda.

They are ignorant and haven't read history. They can't think beyond the obvious. And so, history repeats itself.

Hey, bub, you could be next.

[DainBramaged]

31. So you think associating the Nazis with what I wrote is appropriate?

Hey Bub, Merry Christmas with a pineapple


PS all knowledgeable history cop, I AM GERMAN. And you insult me way more than you can imagine.


Come to think of it, maybe a porcupine is more appropriate.

[JDPriestly]

35. Bitte schon. Ich habe einige Jahre im Deutschen Raum gewohnt.

Kenne mich aus ziemlich gut. Im allgemeinen, die Deutsche waren, wie sie wissen, ganz zufrieden mit der idee dass Man den anderen, die bosem Kommunisten, die reichen Juden, die behinderten, die Schwullem, die Anderen, genommen hat.

Nur nach WWII, haben die Deutschen erkannt was fur Schuld sie hatten.

Und jetzt ist es soweit in den Vereinigten Staaten. Es ist zum weinen dass wir nun machen die gleichen Fehlern die die Deutschen fruher gemacht haben. Schau mal wie die Deutschen haben ihre moralische Foulheit gereut.

[Bonobo]

37. I don't disagree.

It's just that your "opinion" is about as well thought out as a third grader saying why Iron Man could beat Thor.

[madinmaryland]

39. Recommended. nt

[StarsInHerHair]

42. the name fits you

[DainBramaged]

47. And you have no idea why I chose that name so you choose to insult me

Ignored in your hair.


Meh meh and meh.................I should publicly mock your absurdly childish nickname, but then again you've already exposed yourself.


Fucking place is getting like a Tea Party meeting, the crazies come out if you aren't clutching pearls like they are.

[StarsInHerHair]

48. run away, nice to get an insult inn my inbox & have you cowardly blocking

ANY reply. Your name really is appropriate. tumors or not, it's your views & now your responses that eanred it

[La Lioness Priyanka]

66. oh he's done that to me too. internet bullies are the biggest cowards. nt

[DainBramaged]

71. No, ignorant people hiding behind their keyboards are the biggest cowards

piling on like you do consistently is even more laughable. So talented you are. If it wasn't for the Internet, I'm sure you'd be reporting on your neighbors.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

73. i am also in a phd program. thats what i do when i am not on the internet

and yes, i am very talented :)

[StarsInHerHair]

78. he's really quite nasty. why bother asking "if we should be nice" when he isn't

as it seems to be his normal to be a nasty guy. & I stand by my assessment of him, I feel better, thanks Lioness

[alphafemale]

50. If you declare yourself an enemy of America. And vow to bring death to its citizens

Death via a heat seeking missile up the ass courtesy of Uncle Sam should hardly be a surprise.

Good riddance to a piece of scum terrorist trash.

Blown to bits.

Good.

I hope dogs ate some of the pieces of his flesh.

[DainBramaged]

51. You better look out, Peta will be after you for wishing bad food on dogs

or at least the DU correctness police for not reading him his rights in YEMEN for shit sake.


Folks here will never get it.



I wonder if the terrorists read Daniel Pearl his rights when they assassinated him in Pakistan?

[alphafemale]

54. Oh gawd...those beheadings.

With a swift sword would be one thing. To have your head hacked/sawed off via a dull knife like these motherf-ckers like to do. And to know it will be filmed and sent to your mothers Email address.

Like those motherfu-kers like to to do.

I'm not sorry all the sombitch is dead.

[COLGATE4]

63. I think you meant to post this over at FR

[Eric J in MN]

52. Since the government of Yemen was cooperating

...it could have arrested him and extradited him.

If the US government has even a bit of solid evidence that Anwar al-Awlaki is a terrorist, the trial would have been easy for the prosecutor.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DainBramaged]

55. Another addition to the fools ignored list

[Balbus]

77. At least you didn't embarrass yourself more by denying it.

[sabrina 1]

60. Does Cuba have a right to send a drone into this country

to kill the terrorist who murdered 70 of their citizens, and is living here now?

Oh yes, and was Bush right after all? Because you are making the same argument HE and his supporters made for engaging in extra-judicial executions.

[Harmony Blue]

64. I hope they do it

I want to see how the administration would handle it.

[sabrina 1]

67. I think they now do have theright to do it.

But no one who is now flip-flopping and supporting Bush policies here, will answer any of these questions. Their silence speaks volumes. There is simply no justification for this, just as there wasn't when Bush did it and the Left was united in that belief then.

I too want to see what the administration would do, and what the supporters of Bush policies would do, if Cuba were to do the exact same thing.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

65. lol. what a laughable take. nt

[DainBramaged]

68. LOL what a laughable life......nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

69. yeah, because clearly your comment made sense. there are several threads that clearly

articulate why this action was legal and possibly the right thing to do, yours however is not one of them. yours is merely laughable.

[DainBramaged]

70. Meh, go bother someone else who cares about your opinion.....nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

72. clearly you care, else you wouldn't have responded

:)

[DainBramaged]

74. Here's my last response bully

clicking the red x

You've been bullying people here for years, I thought you'd change, I was wrong, and I didn't listen to others. Now you're done, go bully someone who is lonely.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

75. telling you that you are wrong isnt bullying.

it's just the truth.

[jefferson_dem]

76. Yup.

:thumbsup:

[coalition_unwilling]

79. So I take it you wouldn't have a problem if the Iraqis sent a hit

squad to the U.S., in order to assassinate Bush and Cheney for their war crimes and crimes against humanity?