There is a 99% chance this guy was a terrorist, saying that though as an American he does/did have a right to defend himself in court against these accusations. The president is not the judge, jury, and executioner, he has no such power to make such a move, this is just one more chip knocked off the pillars of our Republic The sad part is most Americans agreed with this assassination, giving up liberties for security is still the biggest threat to us and is the main reason we our not a free country any more. History has shown examples are made by starting out these acts on the most vilified and hated people before eventually making its way to the common masses.
So if this guy was assassinated because the government labeled him a terrorist or threat what do you think can happen to those other Americans the government labeled possible threats. Biden called the Tea Party terrorists, DHS labeled Libertarians, military veterans, constitutionalist, 3rd party backers terrorists and possible threats.
Henry, Capture and trial would have been preferable. Had this terrorist been in the USA, or if he were a prisoner in our custody, then assassination would have been illegal. In the case of an active war against an enemy combatant, not a foot soldier, but a general position in the enemy ranks... engaged in active acts of war against the USA... military action was appropriate.
Had Nazis, Goering, Himmler or even Hitler been an American citizen in WW2, I don't think we'd be having this conversation.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has maintained an assassination list of U.S. citizens for the last eight year and has actually assassinated Americans (Washington Post). The Post reported a story of a predator drone strike in late 2001 in Yemen:
"The target was Abu Ali al-Harithi, organizer of the 2000 attack on the USS Cole. Killed with him was a U.S. citizen, Kamal Derwish, who the CIA knew was in the car."
"After the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush gave the CIA, and later the military, authority to kill U.S. citizens abroad if strong evidence existed that an American was involved in organizing or carrying out terrorist actions against the United States or U.S. interests, military and intelligence officials said. The evidence has to meet a certain, defined threshold. The person, for instance, has to pose 'a continuing and imminent threat to U.S. persons and interests.'
So CICERO, in light of this new evidence... are you going to join me in accusing George Worst Bush as a WAR CRIMINAL... of will your politics only allow you to point the finger when it fits your agenda??? (Just more Selective Conservative Outrage)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Henry, Capture and trial would have been preferable. Had this terrorist been in the USA, or if he were a prisoner in our custody, then assassination would have been illegal. In the case of an active war against an enemy combatant, not a foot soldier, but a general position in the enemy ranks... engaged in active acts of war against the USA... military action was appropriate.
Had Nazis, Goering, Himmler or even Hitler been an American citizen in WW2, I don't think we'd be having this conversation.
What acts of war? The guy was virtually defenseless. He wasn't protected by anti-aircraft weapons, or any other heavy arms installations. The guy lived in a hut and put out Youtube propaganda videos for crissakes. The guy doesn't have control of one of the worlds most powerful armies of their time in Germany.
I can't believe you just compared Al-awlaki to Hitler. Man you will go to no limits to embarrass yourself defending your savior.
So CICERO, in light of this new evidence... are you going to join me in accusing George Worst Bush as a WAR CRIMINAL... of will your politics only allow you to point the finger when it fits your agenda??? (Just more Selective Conservative Outrage)
No, I'm going to join you in sucking Barack Obama's balls because I'm too proud to admit that MY savior can do wrong.
No, I'm going to join you in sucking Barack Obama's balls because I'm too proud to admit that MY savior can do wrong.
Yea, I thought so!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Why insult me??? Why not continue your OUTRAGE??? Why not continue down your path of War Criminal???
OF course anyone who's read this thread knows why...
U LOST!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Henry, Capture and trial would have been preferable. Had this terrorist been in the USA, or if he were a prisoner in our custody, then assassination would have been illegal. In the case of an active war against an enemy combatant, not a foot soldier, but a general position in the enemy ranks... engaged in active acts of war against the USA... military action was appropriate. .
Again he was probably a terrorist but he was a American citizen, he was never found guilty of the accusations but was killed for those accusations. I don't care that he is dead but I fear what may come of these actions our government is now doing, this is the time for people to stand up against these actions because it will be a slippery slope.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
It's strange... The State of Georgie executed a (quite likely) innocent man last week... and there isn't a peep from the Right... But when the United States executes a guilty one, a terrorist who is a danger to this country... some on the Right are worried about a slippery slope.
Selective outrage?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Henry, box is king of the red herring. He's an Obamabot, but isn't it funny watching him and Sean Hannity agree on assassinating American citizens?
I did't lose - America did.
Neo-conservatism and Liberalism are closely connected, both are a great danger to our republic.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
It's strange... The State of Georgie executed a (quite likely) innocent man last week... and there isn't a peep from the Right... But when the United States executes a guilty one, a terrorist who is a danger to this country... some on the Right are worried about a slippery slope.
Selective outrage?
Troy Davis received a fair trial, he also had his case looked over again in a appeal but they found there was not enough evidence to bring it back to trial.
"But when the United States executes a guilty one"
Found guilty by who, maybe you and Obama but not by a jury. And you are damn right I'm worried about a slippery slope, when a government abuses its power it is never for the better.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
When Cicero charges Obama with being a 'war criminal', I asked him what was the 'war crime'... He changed the subject.
When I pointed out that George Worst Bush killed an American in Yemen in 2001... Cicero again changed the subject.
This type of attack, is keeping the USA safe from another WTC attack. In the past (and probably today) these killings would be carried out by US forces or more often, by foreign forces working for our CIA. The USA would deny any involvement. If you had read that an American citizen Al Qaeda terrorist was shot in Yemen by a local partisan, there would be no outcry about Obama (or Bush) killing American citizens even though their assassination was carried out by US direction. The only difference is the technology used.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Great video...Box's views on assassination of American citizens are more in alignment with Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Crystal of the Weekly Standard and the boys on FOX, than with Rachel Maddow. It's funny, over time I've shed my neocon beliefs that I was convinced was what it meant to be a 'limited government' conservative, and in that same time, box has adopted the neocon views he once despised while Bush was President.
Box went from believing the suspension of habeas corpus and the indefinite detainment of FOREIGN enemy combatants at gitmo, and the torture of 'enemy combatants' was considered war crimes based on international law. Now, two short years later, the executive branch executing American citizens with predator drones, that allegedly plotted attacks against America, without due process, is NOW legal and the duty of the president to keep us 'safe.
Only if George W. Bush knew then what he knows now, he could have closed Gitmo and just executed the enemy combatants(American citizens or foreign) on the "battlefield" and had full support from his political opponents. In the NEW Obama America definite death by predator drone is better than OLD indefinite detention on a tropical island.
The sad part is most Americans agreed with this assassination, giving up liberties for security is still the biggest threat to us and is the main reason we our not a free country any more. History has shown examples are made by starting out these acts on the most vilified and hated people before eventually making its way to the common masses. 
Logged
