A bit disapointed really...Follow

Link.

So. What do you think? Extrajudicial killing by the gubnmint is ok because the targets are towelheaded muzzies and wether they've been to court or not, they should be exterminated forthwith.

Or an affront to the constitution which says..




Edited, Sep 28th 2010 7:10pm by paulsol

No, the director of the CIA's always been that way.

Not to mention the obvious but we've been extrajudicially killing folks for years in regards to the collected events post 9/11. The only question here is because this guy is a citizen.

Edit: I thought this had come up before...

Edited, Sep 28th 2010 2:54pm by Jophiel

I'm sure the US government has put out hits on non-towelheaded muzzies too. I'm not sure I can condone assassinations or not, but I imagine it's hard to keep it under wraps like it once was....or, maybe the pres is making a point about total transparency...or maybe it's a political move to garner some respect from the rednecks.

Anyways, I have to think they're infrequent, and I'm sure they justify it with some secret board or committee that decides the nation is at imminent threat of harm if this individual lives...or something. It's rather novel, eh.

wow, i went ellipse crazy there.

I'd trade Elinda and Kavekk for Moe and Totem in a heartbeat. Or a threesome, for that matter.

Baby, why you gotta be this way?

With the Obama economy, I can't afford smiley faces!

Although, my point remains. Are you concerned about this guy because he's a US citizen or are you referencing all the drone and special forces targets from the past nine years when you say "Extrajudicial killing by the gubnmint is ok because the targets are towelheaded muzzies and whether they've been to court or not, they should be exterminated forthwith"?

Edited, Sep 28th 2010 3:42pm by Jophiel

You don't honestly believe that, do you?

Elne, sometimes your speech reminds me of an automated program. But I get where you're coming from. Frankly, I haven't been a fan of the Obama administration when it comes to security. He's taken a much more right-wing approach than I would have liked. PATRIOT Act still alive and kicking, refusing to let former Guantanamo inmates sue, and killing Americans without cause... ugh. Not a fan AT ALL when it comes to war. Declaring Iraq over with 50k troops left is just icing on the ****-cake that is his foreign policy.

Now, the logical part of me understands a lot of this... but the patriotic part of me, that believes in due process, accountability, and freedom hates it.

Silly patriotic part!

I think the general understanding by most US citizens is that the POTUS can order the execution of pretty much anyone deemed to be a significant enough threat, as long as they are not located on US soil. The fact that said person is a US citizen does bring up a constitutional question in terms of what constitutes "due process", but it's almost more of a technicality.



Again, I think the key point you're failing to mention is "Not on US soil". When I'm not on US soil, I'm subject to the jurisdiction of wherever else I am, right? Same deal here. There are as many, if not more, legal issue with attempting to charge someone with a crime for actions taken abroad (US citizen or not), than the legal issues resulting from this particular executive order.



Neither are any soldiers who have been killed in any war we've ever fought. If the president can order 100,000 men into an area to kill people, without bothering to read them their rights, or arrest them, or try them for whatever offense caused said military action, then I suspect you're trying to apply the wrong standards here. Due process does not always mean "court of law". In terms of extra-national executive action, there are laws in place for that. Oversight by Congress is involved, there are restrictions on where and how such things can be done, etc.


It's just not as simple as saying that since he wasn't charged with a crime, it must be illegal to execute him. And technically, it's not an execution, but I understand why you'd prefer to use that term.



Not really, no.

**** off Paul. The constitution is only held as a standard when it supports whats wanted to be done.

To answer this in order, and concisely:

1) Yes;
2) No, he should just order the execution of the people doing the questioning;
Commentary on intervening paragraph: So?
3) Not really.

There a some Central Asian countries that you would really enjoy living in. In fact, the US has military bases in some of them. You should so go and check them out. You'd feel right at home!

Central Asia, in case you don't know geeografy, and because the US hasn't seriously invaded any of the countries there yet, is just North of Afghanistan, and sort of North and a bit East of Iran, which I expect you have seen maps of recently.