Eric Holder's Message To U.S. Citizens...
- Thread starter JakeStratham
- Start date
For anyone interested, Greenwald has been really good on this stuff. If (the one or two of) you enjoyed his blog post (link in the OP), you'll enjoy these:
The due-process-free assassination of U.S. citizens is now reality - Salon.com
Execution by secret WH committee - Salon.com
The killing of Awlaki’s 16-year-old son - Salon.com
Keep killing it, UG.
The due-process-free assassination of U.S. citizens is now reality - Salon.com
Execution by secret WH committee - Salon.com
The killing of Awlaki’s 16-year-old son - Salon.com
Keep killing it, UG.
He wasn't hiding because he was naive to think that an enemy combatant would get the same rights as your regular American. That doesn't make him any less culpable for his actions though.
He wasn't hiding in Yemen for 20 years but they have been following and investigating him for 20 years. I'd agree with you normally, but they didn't just dig this guy up off the street.
Normally I'd agree with you. But he took allegiance with a terrorist organization, and was given rank by them. He essentially waged war on the United States and it's allies. Openly and publicly called for Islamic people to kill us all because we don't believe in the same God as they do. This makes him an enemy combatant in the "War on Terror" and at that point he isn't afforded rights.
If this whole situation was different, and lets say we did put boots on the ground in Yemen to go extract him for trial, how many people would have died? Would his private security force allowed for a peaceful arrest? After all he could be innocent, right?
If they didn't, would it then be ok to shoot and kill him? How many soldiers have to be killed before it's ok to kill this "American Citizen" hiding behind a Al-Queda financed militia in Yemen?
How many soldiers died going in to a much more hostile country to get bin-Laden? And this guy was no bin-Laden by any stretch of the imagination. If he were killed while resisting against US forces attempts to extract him, well then there isn't much argument to be made, is there? Police kill suspected criminals all the time in pursuit and during raids and the general consensus is the person shouldn't have resisted.
However, since this guy wasn't wanted for any crimes, what exactly would he be resisting? Kidnapping? Torture? At what point as a human being are you required to allow others to do you harm?
There is a reason that our government wanted him dead and not captured - and that should concern you as a citizen of this country.
The alleged 9/11 mastermind isn't even a US citizen and he is sitting in Guantanamo awaiting trial, which at one point was going to be a civilian trial.
Timothy McVeigh received a trial and he was also an enemy combatant to the state.
Exactly. How many soldiers need to die before it's ok to just kill him? At what point do we deem him dangerous enough to just kill? Wasn't he resisting by moving to Yemen and surrounding himself by a well armed militia? I'm not saying that proves any sort of guilt but it sure looks like resisting.
Enemy combatants don't need to be charged with anything. Just like a soldier doesn't have to try an enemy soldier before he shoots him.
Conspiracy's aside, what was the reason?
No but I'm also not in the business of investigating and/or killing terrorists. His views are widely publicized. He even wrote several books on the subject.
But then they decided to not have a civilian trial, because he is an enemy combatant. He's up on trial because it did not cost any American lives to capture him. If he had been holed up in another country surrounded by a terrorist financed militia I'm willing to bet he wouldn't sitting in Guantanamo right now.
Did he get a trial? Sure he did, but that's because he was working alone, wasn't financed by a terrorist organization, didn't have a private militia to hide behind, and it didn't cost any lives to capture him. He was a "lone gunman." Regardless the outcome was the same, he was convicted on all the charges against him and killed. The trial was just for show, we were gonna kill him anyway.
You clearly missed the sarcasm because no US soldiers died going in to kill bin-Laden and it's highly unlikely any would have died going in to capture Al-Awlaki.
Resisting what? You really need to wrap your mind around the concept that he wasn't charged with a crime so there was no "arrest" for him to be resisting.
There is a difference between taking up arms on a battlefield and chilling in Yemen with your friends and family.
It appears to me to be an effort to remove the protections afforded to US citizens under the 5th and 6th Amendments of our Constitution. It's a clear example of the Government overreaching the powers enumerated to it by our Constitution. NDAA simply codifies these things all but nullifying any future legal grounds we might have as citizens to protect ourselves from the State once they decide to expand their list of "threats to the State" to include dissenters, intellectuals, drug users etc - the list goes on. Haven't we seen this play out before all over the world over the last couple of thousand years?
The Constitution was supposed to be a bulwark against these types of governmental abuses of power, since they always occur (not sometimes, not occasionally, but always). Shit like this is intentionally done to erode the protections provided by that document.
Cheshire, Goddammit, the Constitution says that every American deserves the right to a trial.
NOWHERE in the constitution, which is supposedly still the basis for all law in this country and our PRIME law document, does it say that when someone is deemed a "Terrorist" that he or she is immediately stripped of his or her citizenship.
So no matter what you say here, killing awlaki and his son were both UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Obomba basically had to throw away the 7th Amendment to do what he did. Twice so far that we know of.
Why you pissing on the constitution, bro? Just because you don't like brown people?
NOWHERE in the constitution, which is supposedly still the basis for all law in this country and our PRIME law document, does it say that when someone is deemed a "Terrorist" that he or she is immediately stripped of his or her citizenship.
So no matter what you say here, killing awlaki and his son were both UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Obomba basically had to throw away the 7th Amendment to do what he did. Twice so far that we know of.
Why you pissing on the constitution, bro? Just because you don't like brown people?
It seems to me that you're passing all sorts of judgment based on hearsay.
I can't speak for anyone else, but before I endorse the murder of anyone, I sorta need to know for sure, not just based on what I've heard.
He's not a US citizen.
Police never lose lives trying to capture anyone? Are KKK or well-armed street gang members not allowed to be arrested?
Terry Nichols is still alive and lives in the same cell block as world trade center bomber Ramzi Yousef and Ted Kaczynski, who is also classified as a terrorist by the FBI.
Oh man. I'm up against the wall here. The WF legends are workin me over. Uncle guys! You win.
Maybe I came off a little troll-ish. I guess the point I was trying to make was that the Government has been murdering American citizens since ... well probably the beginning of the country without due process, in your name. State and Local Police kill suspects all the time either directly or indirectly for any number or reasons. They do this because trying to bring them to justice will cost too many lives, or could potentially cost lives. So it's just easier to off 'em.
I just found it odd it's with Al-Awlaki that you planted your flag and said we've gone too far. I guess since he slid out of his moms vagina on this piece of dirt as apposed to another piece is what makes the biggest difference between killing Al-Awlaki and the thousands of muslim extremists we've murdered over the last two or three decades.
LukeP:
Sorry for calling you a pussy, I just hate to see people give up. You've fought this long, why give up now? Remember the Alamo! You can do more damage from the inside. Yadda Yadda Yadda, Rah Rah Rah!
Guerilla:
I'm not even going to try to debate you. I'd feel like a youngling fighting a Jedi Master. It would be a slaughter.
<troll>Guys just think of it as the new, leaner, more efficient Government you've always been asking for. Due process takes too long and costs too much, lets just cut to the chase and kill 'em. Less paperwork that way.</troll>
Maybe I came off a little troll-ish. I guess the point I was trying to make was that the Government has been murdering American citizens since ... well probably the beginning of the country without due process, in your name. State and Local Police kill suspects all the time either directly or indirectly for any number or reasons. They do this because trying to bring them to justice will cost too many lives, or could potentially cost lives. So it's just easier to off 'em.
I just found it odd it's with Al-Awlaki that you planted your flag and said we've gone too far. I guess since he slid out of his moms vagina on this piece of dirt as apposed to another piece is what makes the biggest difference between killing Al-Awlaki and the thousands of muslim extremists we've murdered over the last two or three decades.
LukeP:
Sorry for calling you a pussy, I just hate to see people give up. You've fought this long, why give up now? Remember the Alamo! You can do more damage from the inside. Yadda Yadda Yadda, Rah Rah Rah!
Guerilla:
I'm not even going to try to debate you. I'd feel like a youngling fighting a Jedi Master. It would be a slaughter.
<troll>Guys just think of it as the new, leaner, more efficient Government you've always been asking for. Due process takes too long and costs too much, lets just cut to the chase and kill 'em. Less paperwork that way.</troll>
"Today, however, the left remains shockingly silent. Legions of those, from habitually apathetic college students to card-carrying members of the counterculture, who marched so vigorously against the previous President and his War on Terror policies are nowhere to be found.
Even Michael Moore, Code Pink, and Fellow Rabble-rousers and Co. have taken a seat. Legal scholars have nary taken a step down from their ivory tower to challenge Eric Holder, and the steady stream of fiery editorials and op-eds from major media outlets lambasting the nature of national security policy has but been replaced by a blatant double-standard."
Eric Holder defends the assassination of U.S. citizens | Washington Times Communities
Even Michael Moore, Code Pink, and Fellow Rabble-rousers and Co. have taken a seat. Legal scholars have nary taken a step down from their ivory tower to challenge Eric Holder, and the steady stream of fiery editorials and op-eds from major media outlets lambasting the nature of national security policy has but been replaced by a blatant double-standard."
Eric Holder defends the assassination of U.S. citizens | Washington Times Communities
This is exactly why Obama is worse than Bush. Pound for pound he's no worse than the neocons with the Patriot Act, Military Commissions, Warner Defense Authorization, etc. It's that he's completely stifled the antiwar and civil rights movements with his left cover. At least the douchebag left stood up and whined a little when the neocons pulled this shit. Fucking Obama.