White House to release legal rationale for killing of US citizens with drones

[Your Ex]

Ninthman wrote:

Obama can't even catch the terrorists in Benghazi but he's all Gung Ho about killing Americans. It just doesn't add up.

Just enemies if the State.
Best watch your back.

[inbred Genius]

sounds like Dee-troit and Chitcago will be the safest places to be, he would never fire amongst his own people.

[Whatevea]

DanielGagnon wrote:

If W were still in office, this forum would
go on in perpetuity.
As it is, it will get half a comment from Pat
on Obama's blackness and ten comments on Pat's
retarded non-military service.
Nothing this Man does warrants questioning from
anyone. He is our King and Messiah.
Everyone brace themselves for a repeal of the
22nd amendment.
We are getting force-fed European socialism which
is allowing the infiltration of Radical Islam.
Enjoy!

dont call the sh!tsta!n king or messiah even in sarcasm!

[Whatevea]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Since I'm not a terrorist and don't support terrorism, I have nothing to worry about.

First they came...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came ...

[tha Professor]

Obama's administration is shaping up as no different than Bush's. Trying to justify the non-judicial murder of American citizens is inexcusable and outrageous.

Even bin Laden would have to have been arrested and tried if he'd been an American citizen. That is, if Obama and Bush hadn't invalidated our laws and COnstitution in this matter.

Disgusting.

[tha Professor]

inbred Genius wrote:

sounds like Dee-troit and Chitcago will be the safest places to be, he would never fire amongst his own people.

Racist craphead.

[Justin]

Targeting "American" Al-Queda members with missile strikes is perhaps one of few decisions that president Obama made that I actually agree with.

Still, I can picture the man distraught and sobbing in Hillary's arms after giving the order.

[serfs up]

tha Professor wrote:

Obama's administration is shaping up as no different than Bush's. Trying to justify the non-judicial murder of American citizens is inexcusable and outrageous.
Even bin Laden would have to have been arrested and tried if he'd been an American citizen. That is, if Obama and Bush hadn't invalidated our laws and COnstitution in this matter.
Disgusting.

Thank you Professor. Whatever differences people have in politics, they can be put on the back burner. But what can be done? The next president at this point will do the same. Doesn't seem like there is much yelling up there in Washington by the politicians right now. Why are they doing this? Is it possible our economy experience a downturn and people will act up? All of this is way overkill since 9/11.

[WeTheSheeple]

They're terrorists, no more rationale is needed.

[serfs up]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

They're terrorists, no more rationale is needed.

When in the course of human events.....In its zest to make laws is our government's cure worse then the symptoms?

[woodtick57]

serfs up wrote:

<quoted text> When in the course of human events.....In its zest to make laws is our government's cure worse then the symptoms?

not in this case.

[serfs up]

woodtick57 wrote:

<quoted text>not in this case.

I have seen nothing but expansion of government presence in our affairs. Every year laws are passed or hidden to add more and more of this. Remember, 9/11 was done with men who had BOXCUTTERS! Look at the results of their deed to our rights. And if you have certain people in mind to eliminate, it may not go the way you think.

[SirPrize]

Seems to me this leaked memo is in the same category as that used by President Bush to establish that water-boarding is not torture.

Now, we have a President seeking to establish a legal premise for killing American citizens. At this juncture, the memos appear to be limited to targeted Americans overseas. How long before the President tries to apply the same tenets to citizens in the U.S.?

It seems to me that a citizen who can be killed can also be captured and tried in a court of law. That is our right, regardless of where we happen to be. Infringement of the inalianable right to life is a crime, tanatamount to treason.

Any President who targets and kills American citizens anywhere without providing an opportunity for the citizen to face his accusers in a court of law should be impeached.

[WeTheSheeple]

serfs up wrote:

<quoted text> When in the course of human events.....In its zest to make laws is our government's cure worse then the symptoms?

No.

[WeTheSheeple]

SirPrize wrote:

Seems to me this leaked memo is in the same category as that used by President Bush to establish that water-boarding is not torture.
Now, we have a President seeking to establish a legal premise for killing American citizens. At this juncture, the memos appear to be limited to targeted Americans overseas. How long before the President tries to apply the same tenets to citizens in the U.S.?
It seems to me that a citizen who can be killed can also be captured and tried in a court of law. That is our right, regardless of where we happen to be. Infringement of the inalianable right to life is a crime, tanatamount to treason.
Any President who targets and kills American citizens anywhere without providing an opportunity for the citizen to face his accusers in a court of law should be impeached.

Within the US, yes.
Overseas, no.

Why should we risk the lives of American servicemembers to attempt to capture someone who is committing treason?

[WeTheSheeple]

SirPrize wrote:

Seems to me this leaked memo is in the same category as that used by President Bush to establish that water-boarding is not torture.
Now, we have a President seeking to establish a legal premise for killing American citizens. At this juncture, the memos appear to be limited to targeted Americans overseas. How long before the President tries to apply the same tenets to citizens in the U.S.?
It seems to me that a citizen who can be killed can also be captured and tried in a court of law. That is our right, regardless of where we happen to be. Infringement of the inalianable right to life is a crime, tanatamount to treason.
Any President who targets and kills American citizens anywhere without providing an opportunity for the citizen to face his accusers in a court of law should be impeached.

They DO have a chance to face their accusers by surrendering. Any American citizen can surrender to US forces anywhere around the globe at any time.

If they CHOOSE not to confront their accusers, then they're fair game.

[tha Professor]

Justin wrote:

Targeting "American" Al-Queda members with missile strikes is perhaps one of few decisions that president Obama made that I actually agree with.
Still, I can picture the man distraught and sobbing in Hillary's arms after giving the order.

The fact that right-wingers support it at all should have him crying and sobbing. That and the fact that he's violating the Constitution.

[tha Professor]

serfs up wrote:

<quoted text> Thank you Professor. Whatever differences people have in politics, they can be put on the back burner. But what can be done? The next president at this point will do the same. Doesn't seem like there is much yelling up there in Washington by the politicians right now. Why are they doing this? Is it possible our economy experience a downturn and people will act up? All of this is way overkill since 9/11.

What can be done? I don't know, and you're right, it would likely be the same whoever's in office.

Without the threat of a draft, as in the Viet Nam years, no one seems to care. I'm not sure what it's going to take to change things.

[tha Professor]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

They're terrorists, no more rationale is needed.

That IS the rationale, but it's a false one. American citizens are and should be protected by the guarantees built into the Constitution.

Who declares them "terrorists?" On what authority, with what evidence? What restrictions would prevent them from declaring ANY American citizen a "terrorist?"

You need to think these things through, not just take a knee-jerk approach because a Dem's in the White House.

[woodtick57]

tha Professor wrote:

<quoted text>
That IS the rationale, but it's a false one. American citizens are and should be protected by the guarantees built into the Constitution.
Who declares them "terrorists?" On what authority, with what evidence? What restrictions would prevent them from declaring ANY American citizen a "terrorist?"
You need to think these things through, not just take a knee-jerk approach because a Dem's in the White House.

there is also the provision that they cannot be able to arrest those terrorists to bring them to trial...ie, they are in another country and embedded with known terrorists...

if US citizens are known to be helping and plotting with terrorists to harm the US, would you rather they run free? isn't treason stilla capital offense?