Assassinating American Citizens ... for or against?

[Amelia]

...

Sometimes, a government needs to take the initiative to protect it's citizens without stopping for permission - surely protecting it's citizens is one of the key roles of government.

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

 

[idb]

Before we go in further I want you to explain how is what I said spin?


Here's the comment that your saying I spined on



Al Quaeda is the enemy. obama used Americas military in support of the libyan rebel who were Al Quaeda the same people we are still fighting. Since when is the truth spin?

Because the Libyan rebels are not Al Quaeda.
Sure, there are Al Quaeda elements in there but that isn't the same thing.
Al Quaeda will also be hoping to get some sort of spin-off from the revolution but the rebels are not Al Quaeda.

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Are you maybe talking about this guy?

Abdel Hakim Belhadj, 45, is one of the most powerful men of the new Libya. From this point on, the security of Tripoli depends on him.
..................
The goal of this organization was to deliver the Libyan people from the dictatorship of Muammar Gaddafi. We never had any interest outside of our country. The Islamic combat group was never a part of al-Qaeda, neither from an ideological viewpoint, nor at an operational level, nor in its goals. It happened that we found ourselves in the same place at the same time as al-Qaeda: in Afghanistan, where we sometimes fought next to them when it was to liberate the country, but we were never at their service.

On the contrary, when Osama Bin Laden founded the Global Islamic Front to fight against the Jews and crusaders, in the autumn of 1998, we refused to become members of it. How could we want to kill all Christians? Or all Jews? That's absurd! And why not the Chinese or Japanese? Christians and Jews are the people of the Book, we have to protect them.

Read more: 'We Are Simply Muslim': Libyan Rebel Chief Denies Al-Qaeda Ties - TIME

'We Are Simply Muslim': Libyan Rebel Chief Denies Al-Qaeda Ties - TIME

Your move I think.

 

[idb]

...

Sometimes, a government needs to take the initiative to protect it's citizens without stopping for permission - surely protecting it's citizens is one of the key roles of government.

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Yeah, I'm sure if they'd simply issued a summons he would have turned up to court in his best suit.

Look, I'm not saying it's legal or moral but - again with the caveat of only knowing what's written about him in the paper - it seems that he was a bad bloke with evil intentions towards America and was prepared to act on those intentions or recruit/encourage others to act for him.
It looks like a good result to me I'm sorry.

How do you feel about the killing of Osama?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Because the Libyan rebels are not Al Quaeda.
Sure, there are Al Quaeda elements in there but that isn't the same thing.
Al Quaeda will also be hoping to get some sort of spin-off from the revolution but the rebels are not Al Quaeda.

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Are you maybe talking about this guy?

Abdel Hakim Belhadj, 45, is one of the most powerful men of the new Libya. From this point on, the security of Tripoli depends on him.
..................
The goal of this organization was to deliver the Libyan people from the dictatorship of Muammar Gaddafi. We never had any interest outside of our country. The Islamic combat group was never a part of al-Qaeda, neither from an ideological viewpoint, nor at an operational level, nor in its goals. It happened that we found ourselves in the same place at the same time as al-Qaeda: in Afghanistan, where we sometimes fought next to them when it was to liberate the country, but we were never at their service.

On the contrary, when Osama Bin Laden founded the Global Islamic Front to fight against the Jews and crusaders, in the autumn of 1998, we refused to become members of it. How could we want to kill all Christians? Or all Jews? That's absurd! And why not the Chinese or Japanese? Christians and Jews are the people of the Book, we have to protect them.

Read more: 'We Are Simply Muslim': Libyan Rebel Chief Denies Al-Qaeda Ties - TIME

'We Are Simply Muslim': Libyan Rebel Chief Denies Al-Qaeda Ties - TIME

Your move I think.

Nope not even close

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?

 

[Amelia]

...

Sometimes, a government needs to take the initiative to protect it's citizens without stopping for permission - surely protecting it's citizens is one of the key roles of government.

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Yeah, I'm sure if they'd simply issued a summons he would have turned up to court in his best suit.

Look, I'm not saying it's legal or moral but - again with the caveat of only knowing what's written about him in the paper - it seems that he was a bad bloke with evil intentions towards America and was prepared to act on those intentions or recruit/encourage others to act for him.
It looks like a good result to me I'm sorry.

How do you feel about the killing of Osama?

No he wouldn't have shown up to a trial. But he needed to be invited.

Killing Osama is a different subject since he wasn't an American citizen. Osama wasn't protected by our Constitution.

I'm glad that Osama won't be ordering any more attacks on us. And if they had to kill him to make that happen, they had to do it. But that's a completely different matter from specifically targeting an American citizen for death without indicting him first.

If they engaged Awlaki's hideout in battle and he was killed because he was where he shouldn't be, that would have been understandable. But that would also have been completely different from what actually happened. Our government marked a citizen for death, with plenty of time to dot the constitutional i's and cross the constitutional t's, but didn't even make an effort.

 

[The Gadfly]

...

Sometimes, a government needs to take the initiative to protect it's citizens without stopping for permission - surely protecting it's citizens is one of the key roles of government.

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Well, now, we didn't exactly pick this guy up on Main St. USA, and take him out and shoot him, now did we? Fact-he was an Al Quaeda recruiter, propagandist and commander, operating out of an Al Quaeda safe-house in Yemen that turned out to be no-so-safe! That, in my book, is an enemy combatant; period, paragraph, end of discussion. Do excuse me for not caring a bout whether a traitor and terrorist got his "due process", or not; a missile, or a bullet in the head, was all the due process this germ deserved.

 

[Amelia]

...

Sometimes, a government needs to take the initiative to protect it's citizens without stopping for permission - surely protecting it's citizens is one of the key roles of government.

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Well, now, we didn't exactly pick this guy up on Main St. USA, and take him out and shoot him, now did we? Fact-he was an Al Quaeda recruiter, propagandist and commander, operating out of an Al Quaeda safe-house in Yemen that turned out to be no-so-safe! That, in my book, is an enemy combatant; period, paragraph, end of discussion. Do excuse me for not caring a bout whether a traitor and terrorist got his "due process", or not; a missile, or a bullet in the head, was all the due process this germ deserved.

It's all good fun until the government targets you or someone you care about. What is to stop them from doing that?

The Constitution used to.

What do you have now?

 

[The Gadfly]

What? Are you insane? This is a war which will never be won. It it a war raging now for eons. Our little part of it has us too near bankruptcy now. Only a meglomanic could dream of victory. Every life and dollar expended there is wasted.
This continuous state of war is a direct result of the Military Industrial Complex we were warned about.

Oh, stop blubbering and get over yourself. This is not 1968, there's no more draft, and no one is going to make you risk your precious, defeatist little hide fighting a war you happen to "disapprove" of. You don't even have to run off to Canada. You don't have to defend your country; just stay out of the way of those who do. Here's a tissue to wipe your snotty nose with; now, go back to sleep.

 

[Valerie]

Before we go in further I want you to explain how is what I said spin?


Here's the comment that your saying I spined on



Al Quaeda is the enemy. obama used Americas military in support of the libyan rebel who were Al Quaeda the same people we are still fighting. Since when is the truth spin?

Because the Libyan rebels are not Al Quaeda.
Sure, there are Al Quaeda elements in there but that isn't the same thing.
Al Quaeda will also be hoping to get some sort of spin-off from the revolution but the rebels are not Al Quaeda.

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Because the Libyan rebels are not Al Quaeda.
Sure, there are Al Quaeda elements in there but that isn't the same thing.
Al Quaeda will also be hoping to get some sort of spin-off from the revolution but the rebels are not Al Quaeda.

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

 

[The Gadfly]

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Well, now, we didn't exactly pick this guy up on Main St. USA, and take him out and shoot him, now did we? Fact-he was an Al Quaeda recruiter, propagandist and commander, operating out of an Al Quaeda safe-house in Yemen that turned out to be no-so-safe! That, in my book, is an enemy combatant; period, paragraph, end of discussion. Do excuse me for not caring a bout whether a traitor and terrorist got his "due process", or not; a missile, or a bullet in the head, was all the due process this germ deserved.

It's all good fun until the government targets you or someone you care about. What is to stop them from doing that?

The Constitution used to.

What do you have now?

Well, aside from the fact that I have not committed treason, AND in effect renounced my citizenship by claiming to be a citizen of a foreign country, in which I was residing AND acting as a terrorist commander AND an unlawful combatant in the active service of an armed enemy of my country, not much. Then again, the constitution protects me as a citizen living within and subject to American law and jurisprudence. Once again, international terrorism is a military, not a law enforcement, matter. Do excuse me for having once been someone whose duty it was to kill enemy combatants, and for NOT having a problem with "enemy identification".

 

[idb]

In a matter of imminent threat, they would need to act without stopping for permission.

That's not what we had here.

They had YEARS to indict this guy, to invite him or a proxy to speak on his behalf in either a military or civilian court, to convict, and to sentence him.



They sentenced this American citizen to death almost two years ago, without trial, and without any attempt to seek indictment in the intervening period. They turned back the father pleading for due process for his son. They had so much time to do this properly.

Yeah, I'm sure if they'd simply issued a summons he would have turned up to court in his best suit.

Look, I'm not saying it's legal or moral but - again with the caveat of only knowing what's written about him in the paper - it seems that he was a bad bloke with evil intentions towards America and was prepared to act on those intentions or recruit/encourage others to act for him.
It looks like a good result to me I'm sorry.

How do you feel about the killing of Osama?

No he wouldn't have shown up to a trial. But he needed to be invited.

Killing Osama is a different subject since he wasn't an American citizen. Osama wasn't protected by our Constitution.

I'm glad that Osama won't be ordering any more attacks on us. And if they had to kill him to make that happen, they had to do it. But that's a completely different matter from specifically targeting an American citizen for death without indicting him first.

If they engaged Awlaki's hideout in battle and he was killed because he was where he shouldn't be, that would have been understandable. But that would also have been completely different from what actually happened. Our government marked a citizen for death, with plenty of time to dot the constitutional i's and cross the constitutional t's, but didn't even make an effort.

You're completely right but strangely...I don't care, I'm glad he's gone.
Odd eh?

 

[Valerie]

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

It is you who looks stoopid with every single post constantly changing the subject away from the truth about Anwar al-Awlaki...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

It is you who looks stoopid with every single post constantly changing the subject away from the truth about Anwar al-Awlaki...

Read this again that is if you read

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

I did not change the subject I am within the context of what this post mentioned

 

[idb]

It was confirmed by the rebel generals that the rebels were Al Quaeda. Do you have anything else to offer?

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

Do please quote me the part of your link that says that all the rebels are Al Qaeda.
I must be blind, I can't see it at all.

Also, it's the same bloke that I quoted before but your quote is heavily edited from March whereas mine was an interview from September.

Try again.

 

[Valerie]

It was military intelligence that got us into Iraq so now whats your excuse?

Bush Cheney and company said Iraq had WMD's

I find it whether disturbing that if this had been Bush the left would be screaming bloody murder calling for Bush Cheney heads on a silver platter.

BEHOLD LittleReb's BIG argument against killing Anwar al-Awlaki... ^^

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh I guess that sort of CONFIRMATION is just fine when it's conveeenient for a deflection in your little pea brain, huh? Keep pretending there was no CONFIRMATION of what Anwar al-Awlaki was up to though...

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

Do please quote me the part of your link that says that all the rebels are Al Qaeda.
I must be blind, I can't see it at all.

Also, it's the same bloke that I quoted before but your quote is heavily edited from March whereas mine was an interview from September.

Try again.

So now you're going to try and split hairs? Is al-Qaeda America's enemy? Is al-Qaeda the people we are fighting in Iaq? Was it reported that al-Qaeda was fighting in Libya?

 

[Valerie]

try again

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links

Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

And before you deny it why would he say it if it wasn't true, and fear lossing the help from American militiary?


And I posted thaat because this comment was made



But do continue defending obama it's par for the course stupid people will always do that.

It is you who looks stoopid with every single post constantly changing the subject away from the truth about Anwar al-Awlaki...

Read this again that is if you read

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

I did not change the subject I am within the context of what this post mentioned

Try reading THIS dipshit:


American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki is calling for jihad against America, claiming "America is evil" in a new audio message obtained by CNN."With the American invasion of Iraq and continued U.S. aggression against Muslims, I could not reconcile between living in the U.S. and being a Muslim, and I eventually came to the conclusion that jihad against America is binding upon myself just as it is binding on every other Muslim," he says in the recording...

Purported al-Awlaki message calls for jihad against U.S. - CNN

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It was military intelligence that got us into Iraq so now whats your excuse?

Bush Cheney and company said Iraq had WMD's

I find it whether disturbing that if this had been Bush the left would be screaming bloody murder calling for Bush Cheney heads on a silver platter.

BEHOLD LittleReb's BIG argument against killing Anwar al-Awlaki... ^^

No stupid bitch my argument has never changed Any American citizen has due process of the law, and have certain inalienable rights protected in the Constitution.

I just find it disturbing that the left 3 years ago were pissed because Bush didn't mirandized anyone captured on the battlefield but yet now it's ok to side step the Constitution and assassinate American citizens. And it's even more disturbing that those on the right the so called defenders of the constitution are happy about it to.

It's either we do it the Constitutional way or do it the barbarian way without any rule of law to protect people from an over baring power hungry government.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It is you who looks stoopid with every single post constantly changing the subject away from the truth about Anwar al-Awlaki...

Read this again that is if you read

I think it's called the "Global War on Terrorism". I really don't care what it is called. In case you forgot, these people started this with an unprovoked attack on our nation on 11 September, 2001. We are going to finish it, along with finishing Al Quaeda and its allies, however long that takes, and no matter how many enemy bodies we have to pile up, blow up, vaporize, or otherwise destroy in the process. That specifically includes any "American" who becomes a soldier and/or commander in the enemy cause. Had I been personally ordered to hunt down and execute this dirtbag, I would have had no problem whatever obeying that order. The same goes for anyone else who allies himself/herself with an armed foreign enemy in combat against the United States of America. Such a person becomes, by that act, a foreign enemy combatant, no longer subject to the protections provided by the constitution of the United States.

I did not change the subject I am within the context of what this post mentioned

Try reading THIS dipshit:


American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki is calling for jihad against America, claiming "America is evil" in a new audio message obtained by CNN."With the American invasion of Iraq and continued U.S. aggression against Muslims, I could not reconcile between living in the U.S. and being a Muslim, and I eventually came to the conclusion that jihad against America is binding upon myself just as it is binding on every other Muslim," he says in the recording...

Purported al-Awlaki message calls for jihad against U.S. - CNN

A newpaper reported him saying that? Did you hear him say that?

If you did not hear him say it then i a court of law that information would be thrown out.