Obama Has U.S. Citizen Executed; No Trial Held

[thegreekdog]

AAAHHHH!!!

22% voted for the first option?!?!?!? WHAT THE f*ck IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?!? Are you so blinded by "terrorism is bad" and "Muslims are bad" or, alternatively, "Obama is awesome" that you've completely gone batshit insane? Or are you all just trolling me?

[Gypsys Kiss]

All those people that were on the streets partying when bin Laden was taken out, now have something else to cheer about....I suppose that makes it USA 2 al-Qaeda 0.

Just remember you reap what you sow......oh, and be very careful what you post on Youtube in the future.

[jimboston]

I respectfully request that add another option to your poll... as I do not feel any of those proposed accurately present the option that I view as most appropriate to the case.

How about...

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans and/or American Military. The said person has through his own words committed treason, if he continues and continues these acts and does not deny making said statements then he (but rather admit to it by continuing the act)... he is essentially admitting to treason. Further if through his actions he clearly is recruiting and planning acts of terror then he becomes a valid target.

===

You know the intel is that he's switched from just encouraging terrorists to actively planning actions.... which is what cause the Obama Administration to take action.

[saxitoxin]

I respectfully request

[DogAlmighty]

Whatever your opinion on it may be it still is fact that nations can and will kill those who threaten their national interests and who do not have the power/popularity to defend themselves. That's been the case since the dawn of civilization and will not change ever.

[jimboston]

Technically, in order to renounce your citizenship, the closest thing to what you say is

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)

al-Qaeda is not a state. So, if you're actually a fan of, you know, the Constitution, al-Awlaki is still a citizen of the United States. Also, I'm not sure that any of the "proof" you have is more than "things the military tells us is true."

al-Qaeda is not a state and we are not technically at war with them....

yet we are calling it a 'war on terror' and we have committed thousands of our soldiers to fighting this foe....

Times are weird and the lines between 'states' and 'non-state actors' is very grey.

The "right" of the state (our state) to assassinate a citizen maybe SHOULD be questioned.

However, the one thing that is NOT grey is the fact that this guy was a bad dude, that he was a player in al-Qaeda, and that he was all for killing Americans. So I am not sad he's dead.

[jimboston]

This individual had chosen to wage war against the United States. He was killed on the battlefield as far as I am concerned. He was killed as an act of war, not as something that required a trial and conviction. Do we go through and give a trial to every person who fights for the enemy?

Killed on the battlefield by the United State Military?

I don't think so, he was killed by a civilian owned CIA drone. There is no way this can be chalked up to a battlefield kill.....

because the CIA is in NO WAY involved in the 'war on terror'?

[jimboston]

The government has not presented the proof. So, as I have stated, any American citizen now can be taken off the street, and with no proof presented to the public whatsoever, be executed at the order of the President.

As Saxi said, it is very likely that he was guilty, but now any citizen can potentially be given the same treatment, the press secretary say "I got nothin' for ya," and another American citizen is dead.

Nor are they going to present proof to the public... because that would undermine the intelligence system.

Get a fucking life.

[saxitoxin]

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans

Today, October 4, the Burlington, Vermont police are holding a U.S. citizen on suspicion on robbing a bank. This person publicly declared it was okay to kill an American. In Jimtopia no further investigation needs to occur, no arraignment, preliminary hearing, trial or sentencing. The fact that this isn't even a death penalty crime is irrelevant. The minute the Burlington Police arrested him they should immediately have put him on his knees and put a bullet in the base of his skull.



Works for Yemen, after all.

[jimboston]

As previously stated:

(1) this didn't occur in a war zone

(2) the U.S. military didn't conduct the execution, the main secret police agency (CIA) did

(3) the only evidence provided as to Awlaki's guilt was uncontested assertions contained in a press release issued by the CIA - the next time you say something critical about Obama, remember they could easily issue a similar press release about you - detailing your history as a fundamentalist Muslim, the summer's you spent at a mosque in Pakistan, the frequent calls you have made for beheading small children for the glory of Allah; it doesn't matter if it's true if your right to contest it has been revoked

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

2) The CIA is essentially an extension of the military as far as Terrorism is concerned.

3) The only evidence for Awlaki's guilt is his own public statements.

[saxitoxin]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,, ... 31,00.html

[jimboston]

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans

Today, October 4, the Burlington, Vermont police are holding a U.S. citizen on suspicion on robbing a bank. This person publicly declared it was okay to kill an American. In Jimtopia no further investigation needs to occur, no arraignment, preliminary hearing, trial or sentencing. The fact that this isn't even a death penalty crime is irrelevant. The minute the Burlington Police arrested him they should immediately have put him on his knees and put a bullet in the base of his skull.

Works for Yemen, after all.

I guess you only read the first sentence of my post.

Typical.

[jimboston]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,, ... 31,00.html

In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone.

Get over it.

Leave.

Bye.

[saxitoxin]

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans

Today, October 4, the Burlington, Vermont police are holding a U.S. citizen on suspicion on robbing a bank. This person publicly declared it was okay to kill an American. In Jimtopia no further investigation needs to occur, no arraignment, preliminary hearing, trial or sentencing. The fact that this isn't even a death penalty crime is irrelevant. The minute the Burlington Police arrested him they should immediately have put him on his knees and put a bullet in the base of his skull.

Works for Yemen, after all.

I guess you only read the first sentence of my post.

Typical.

Should I have read more? As a general rule your posts don't improve as the word count increases.

[saxitoxin]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,, ... 31,00.html

In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone." does not mean "In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,, ... 31,00.html

[jimboston]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

Gang, in point of clarification, Saxi saying "there is no evidence" does not in fact mean that there is no evidence. It just means that either Saxi is clueless.... or Saxi can't be bothered to pay attention.

[jimboston]

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans

Today, October 4, the Burlington, Vermont police are holding a U.S. citizen on suspicion on robbing a bank. This person publicly declared it was okay to kill an American. In Jimtopia no further investigation needs to occur, no arraignment, preliminary hearing, trial or sentencing. The fact that this isn't even a death penalty crime is irrelevant. The minute the Burlington Police arrested him they should immediately have put him on his knees and put a bullet in the base of his skull.

Works for Yemen, after all.

I guess you only read the first sentence of my post.

Typical.

Should I have read more? As a general rule your posts don't improve as the word count increases.

Thanks

[jimboston]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,, ... 31,00.html

In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone." does not mean "In the 'war on terror' all Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

Gang, in point of clarification, whatever Saxi says... just know that the opposite is true.

[saxitoxin]

1) All of Yemen is a war zone.

Gang, in point of clarification, jiimboston saying "all of Yemen is a war zone" does not mean "all of Yemen is a war zone." (or any part of Yemen, for that matter)

Gang, in point of clarification, Saxi saying "there is no evidence" does not in fact mean that there is no evidence. It just means that either Saxi is clueless.... or Saxi can't be bothered to pay attention.

Go ahead and post the evidence here, Jim. Anxious to see it. Thanks, Jim!

[Gypsys Kiss]

If 'all of Yemen is a war zone' in the war on terror, does that mean 'all of the USA is a war zone' and if so does that make the twin towers a legitimate target?

[saxitoxin]

If 'all of Yemen is a war zone' in the war on terror, does that mean 'all of the USA is a war zone' and if so does that make the twin towers a legitimate target?

Sounds like it. According to Jim the CIA is part of the military. As reported elsewhere, the CIA had an office at the World Trade Center. Ergo, the World Trade Center was a legitimate military target.

We know that Serbia was criticized for putting TripA batteries in "residential neighborhoods" in '99 and that the U.S. wouldn't avoid targeting them just because they were being barracked among civilians. Why was the U.S. putting military facilities in civilian office buildings and should the enemy have been expected to play by tighter rules than the U.S. sets?*

*This actually veers into a different but relevant topic, the U.S. really should not be placing military facilities in the middle of population centers but it does so with great aplomb. In D.C. there is a platoon of MANPADS-equipped troops on top of the parking garage of the Crystal City Marriott, turning the Marriott into a military target. The U.S. frequently criticizes other countries for doing similar things with great surprise and shock.

[BigBallinStalin]

I respectfully request that add another option to your poll... as I do not feel any of those proposed accurately present the option that I view as most appropriate to the case.

How about...

Yes... when a citizen declares in public statements that it is OK to kill Americans and/or American Military. The said person has through his own words committed treason, if he continues and continues these acts and does not deny making said statements then he (but rather admit to it by continuing the act)... he is essentially admitting to treason. Further if through his actions he clearly is recruiting and planning acts of terror then he becomes a valid target.

===

You know the intel is that he's switched from just encouraging terrorists to actively planning actions.... which is what cause the Obama Administration to take action.

Oh, I know, right! China has the same policy too if you talk about overthrowing the government! Treason!! Treason!!! Treason!!!

[PLAYER57832]

All those people that were on the streets partying when bin Laden was taken out, now have something else to cheer about....I suppose that makes it USA 2 al-Qaeda 0.

Just remember you reap what you sow......oh, and be very careful what you post on Youtube in the future.

The MAJOR difference is that Osama bin laden was tried, and not just for one incident, either. Further, there was a real and proven threat that he would continue his actions. He did not even hide it, he bragged about hurting the US over and over.. and showed he could do it.

[PLAYER57832]

Look everyone, Night strike thinks it's ok to kill people without trial as long as it's done in the name of "war against terrorism" or whatever propaganda bullshit your government stuffs down your throat next. How does that fit with your view of "respecting the constitution" and "not giving the government too much power"?

Basically, Night Strike, your government is fucking you up the ass, and you're praising it for using lube.

Anwar Al-Alawki was actively planning and executing terrorist plans to kill Americans. The American military and intelligent operatives took out that threat as part of the war on terror against Al-Queda and other terrorist organizations.

Those are all absolutely wonderful reasons to arrest the guy. However, they also illustrate why claiming that this attack on terrorism is a "war" is stupidity.

Just because some people like yourself believe that terrorists won't kill us if you beg and plead with them doesn't meant that's how our government is supposed to operate. One of the primary functions of the federal government is protect its citizens from threats, both foreign and domestic. This terrorist chose to leave this country and fight with the enemy, so it was our government's responsibility to kill him (and all the others) in order to protect our nation. We do not give trials to every single person before every single drone strike, so we shouldn't start for a person who decided to renounce his nation and fight against it.

I see, so the constitution just doesn't matter for people you don't like?

[CreepersWiener]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdcUInOI ... ture=feedu

You can skip over all the Chris Christie blowing smoke up everyone's ass...about a minute fifty into the video.