Pres. memo--execute Americans without due process

[Uncensored2008]

I support correct definitions. Water Boarding is torture.

Water Boarding is torture, but assassination is just good clear fun.

You're such a fucking hypocrite, you stinking communist puke.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

no such thing

Sure you did.

Wrong.

this about sums it up

Liabrilcream and unconscious2008 have now neutralized each other

 

[JakeStarkey]

I support correct definitions. Water Boarding is torture.

Water Boarding is torture, but assassination is just good clear fun.

You're such a fucking hypocrite, you stinking communist puke.

You are melting, little witch.

 

[Sallow]

It's not limited to just combat zones.

Obama has said that he has this authority anywhere in the world. And he didn't exclude inside the borders of the United States.

And exactly when did you want to end the AUMF?

Or the idiocy of Enemy Combatants?

Or the dangerous Patriot Act?

No?

Of course it doesn't surprise me.

Because here you are attacking the President.

Not the underlying "powers" that have been afforded TO the President.

Not even close. The best you can do for comparison is suspension of Habeas Corpus by Abraham Lincoln.

Be sure to put some ice on that pulled muscle.

The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

Another one who has not a clue.

 

[whitehall]

In a case of ultimate hypocrisy the greatest Military in the world is bogged down in Afghanistan because the commander-in-chief is afraid that civilians might be killed. It's not that president Hussein is really concerned about human life but he is concerned about his own political life. American Troops can't even get an artillery strike without a mile of red tape and career fat assed generals worrying about their own skins if a single civilian is caught in a crossfire.They dragged a career Marine through the liberal media mud and subjected him to a courts martial for pissing on an enemy dead body but meanwhile the president designates unnamed bureaucrats to determine if American citizens can be executed while they are driving their kids overseas on a holiday.

 

[Uncensored2008]

 

[Uncensored2008]

 

[NYcarbineer]

I support correct definitions. Water Boarding is torture.

Water Boarding is torture, but assassination is just good clear fun.

You're such a fucking hypocrite, you stinking communist puke.

Do you support waterboarding but not killing American Al Qaeda?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now you're going in circles.

ROFL

Blowing smoke again, huh?

Al Qaeda is a trans-national organization. It is not a country.

Which means that "war" is an absurd concept. You cannot "war" against an ideal or inanimate objects. This is stupidity by the politically correct.

Al Qaeda is a criminal organization. Why do I say "criminal?" Because they are not sanctioned by any law of any nation. Even the Nazis operated within the laws of the Third Reich. Al Qaeda is different, associated with no particular nation and based on a RELIGIOUS rather than political foundation.



Really?



Again, Obama has declared the Tea Party and opponents of abortion to be enemies of the state. So do you support killing anyone who went to a Tea Party? (Memo to self, get more ammo!)

Enemy combatants no matter whether or not they are US citizens, do not have the same rights as ordinary citizens.

The Supreme Court disagreed in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, and ruled that civil rights DO accrue to citizens held as enemy combatants.

{ We now vacate and remand. We hold that although Congress authorized the detention of combatants in the narrow circumstances alleged here, due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decisionmaker.}

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

The simple fact of their choosing to join Al Qaeda forfeits a whole set of rights.

False.

The fact is that Barack Obama is a thug and a criminal.

Hamdi had been captured. That is not a comparable situation to someone out there still fighting us.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Do you support waterboarding but not killing American Al Qaeda?

Yes.

Absolutely.

People recover from Waterboarding in about 10 minutes.

They don't recover from being murdered.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Show where I hated drone strikes under Bush. I have always supported technology in lieu of troop lives and limbs.

I oppose torture, yes, as any civilized person does.

Did you support enhance interrogation?

I support correct definitions. Water Boarding is torture.

Fine, do you support torture?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hamdi had been captured. That is not a comparable situation to someone out there still fighting us.

Irrelevant.

Those designated enemies of the state retain their civil rights. Bush got smacked down, correctly. Obama needs to be impeached and removed from office to reinforce this.

 

[Uncensored2008]

 

[Bill Angel]

Don't Argue with THE MAN!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Hamdi had been captured. That is not a comparable situation to someone out there still fighting us.

Irrelevant.

Those designated enemies of the state retain their civil rights. Bush got smacked down, correctly. Obama needs to be impeached and removed from office to reinforce this.

How can it be irrelevant? Can we legally shoot prisoners of war in the same manner we shoot enemies on the battlefield?

Are there no rights/protections that apply to ANY POW's that they don't possess before they're captured?

Seriously?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Was it illegal to kill Americans who fought for Hitler in WWII?

 

[whitehall]

The question is, and always has been....who makes the decision? We might consider the bloody 20th century where the concept was to kill as many civilians as it took for your enemy to surrender or the JFK crazy "exploding cigar" diplomacy that may or may not have resulted in his assassination. It seems that we are stuck in a killing spree whenever the liberal media justifies every decision by a democrat and especially a radical left wing president

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The question is, and always has been....who makes the decision? We might consider the bloody 20th century where the concept was to kill as many civilians as it took for your enemy to surrender or the JFK crazy "exploding cigar" diplomacy that may or may not have resulted in his assassination. It seems that we are stuck in a killing spree whenever the liberal media justifies every decision by a democrat and especially a radical left wing president

See? Exploding cigar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what I mean about this thread not being about politics. This is the kind of shit that killed the politics forum for a while.


The exploding cigar thing is such bullshit. Jesus, why is whitehall posting this shit in the politics section and not the conspiracy section of better -- in the Hobbies forum?

---

The administration managed to keep the memo under wraps for a while but apparently an executive order authorizes the execution of American citizens overseas without due process by drone strikes if "it is determined" that they are "threats" to American security. Is that OK with the left? Who makes the determination? It's pretty ironic that the US affords Constitutional protection to every person in the US regardless of their legal status but authorizes killing American citizens without due process overseas.

methinks the 'left' was onto this before you were .. like a few years ago.


You need to come out from under your rock more often. This has been discussed to death and it has been one of the "left's" main beefs with President Obama.

Well they did kill JFK didn't they. They proved then they had no scruples.

Here we are...two conspiracy kooks (Wehrwolfen and whitehall) posting in a conspiracy thread in the politics forum

 

[Jarlaxle]

Well no.

But okay.

You posted a simple declarative statement, to wit: "The very day a President is impeached AND THEN put on trial for ANYTHING..will be the end of the Nation." That is, of course, completely and utterly wrong in all respects. So, in conclusion...you are utterly clueless. Thank you for playing.

This was explained to you, Jarlaxle. Now run along and play.

No, you (along with the dude that posted it) were shown to be wrong, then (predictably) tried to tap-dance around it.

Dance, puppet, dance!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Well no.

But okay.

You posted a simple declarative statement, to wit: "The very day a President is impeached AND THEN put on trial for ANYTHING..will be the end of the Nation." That is, of course, completely and utterly wrong in all respects. So, in conclusion...you are utterly clueless. Thank you for playing.

Sorry?

We've had 2 President impeached. Neither was put on trial after their impeachment. In fact, neither was removed from office.

Wrong yet again: both were tried (in the Senate, as provided for in the Constitution), both won. Do you EVER get tired of being wrong?