'State Secrets' Cited By White House To Block Targeted Killings Suit...

[Liability]

* * * *

What exactly is an ass-sucker, Liability?

Look in the mirror, stupid.

So what is it, exactly?

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Dr. T.

I understand very well the distinction you would draw. I even respect that you are willing to clearly draw that line.

I merely disagree with your opinion that the line is of any particular importance when it comes to guys like Adolf Hitler or Osama bin Laden (or maybe even that asshole, Awlaki).

If we are okay with offing some utter piece of shit like Adolf Hitler (and yes, the correct term IS "assassination") or Osama bin Laden, but we are NOT okay with assassinating some fucker like Awlaki merely because THAT particular piece of shit happens to be an American citizen attempting to kill lots of Americans, then we are placing FAR too much value on that happenstance of birth. Any pre-meditated taking of human life is serious business. But if it's somehow ok to do it to Adolf, then it should be ok to do it to an American citizen who is also trying to kill us.

For the record, I had no problem with targetting OBL for death. I don't even have an issue with the fact the USA specifically targetted Yamamato for death during WWII, potentially exposing the exsistence of ULTRA (and MAGIC). In both cases you're talking about a person that is also a legitimate high value military target.

The line for me is when it comes to American citizens, as American citizens are afforded legal protections. Once you allow someone to remove those protections, that's a very slippery slope.

I actually have respect for the folks that are supporting this. The world is a pretty damn murky place where one lone man can kill hundreds easily, and access to the right resources, possibly thousands. My concern is that once you cross that line, the damage you do in the future by setting that precedent might even be worse than the actions by that man. Alwaki, set lose in the USA with the right resources, could indeed kill thousands. An American president with the authority to target Americans he considers enemy combatants could end our way of life.

I'll concede there's no easy answer to this. I can only give my principles. In my mind that's a line that shouldn't be crossed. The consequences have the potential to be as terrible as the crime we seek to prevent.

Thankfully, its highly unlikely I'll ever have to make that call. I don't envy those that do.

 

[JBeukema]

Hey idiot (yes, JPukeenema, that means you, you fucking imbecile): According to what passes for your "logic," then, we could JUST as easily go after Osama bin Pigfucker in some cave in the mountains of Afghanistan.

But there's no compelling logical, rational, coherent reason at all to do so.

And yet we've been doing just that for how many years now?

Of course, you're ignoring thew fact that in the US, we don't have have armed forces roaming the countryside waging open warfare- but maybe you'd prefer we did.

Idiots of your kind --i.e., those with incredibly dense impenetrable skulls -- simply cannot get it into your minuscule minds that some vile behavior is not merely "criminal." Osama bin Pigfucker does not need to be "tried" for any crimes. He needs to be exterminated. Period.

Some would say the same about you

 

[JBeukema]

Look in the mirror, stupid.

So what is it, exactly?

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

Children should not be allowed online.

 

[Liability]

So what is it, exactly?

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

Children should not be allowed online.

So? Get off line then, idiot.

 

[JBeukema]

You're the one behaving like a child throwing a tantrum because we don't worship the state and blindly obey our political 'masters' like you do.

Here's a song for you.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ4A2MflNL8]YouTube - Laibach - Der Staat[/ame]

 

[Liability]

Hey idiot (yes, JPukeenema, that means you, you fucking imbecile): According to what passes for your "logic," then, we could JUST as easily go after Osama bin Pigfucker in some cave in the mountains of Afghanistan.

But there's no compelling logical, rational, coherent reason at all to do so.

And yet we've been doing just that for how many years now?

No, you dishonest retard. That's obviously NOT what we've been doing at all.

YOU, being a classic asshole, might want to have him served with an arrest warrant. But then again, you are a fucking idiot.

Most people who aren't utterly retarded (like you) just want him dead.

Of course, you're ignoring thew fact that in the US, we don't have have armed forces roaming the countryside waging open warfare- but maybe you'd prefer we did.

Well, that was sure a stupid and utterly meaningless random collection of "words." Well, except maybe for "thew."

Idiots of your kind --i.e., those with incredibly dense impenetrable skulls -- simply cannot get it into your minuscule minds that some vile behavior is not merely "criminal." Osama bin Pigfucker does not need to be "tried" for any crimes. He needs to be exterminated. Period.

Some would say the same about you

Only absolute motherfucking assholes like you.

 

[Liability]

You're the one behaving like a child throwing a tantrum because we don't worship the state and blindly obey our political 'masters' like you do.

* * * *

As always, what you said ^ was dishonest and baseless and stupid.

Nobody (not even you in this rare case) has been throwing a tantrum.

And it is fuckwads like you who worship the State, shit-breath. I don't. I never have. And nothing I've said here suggests any such thing, either. You are just a liar. No surprise.

Disagreeing with your petty thinking is not the same as worshiping the state, you fucking asshole. Buy a clue someday.

 

[JBeukema]

Wow, you found a typo. Clearly, that constitutes an intelligent rebuttal

And that is what we've been doing. Ask the troops who were patrolling the mountains looking for him and other members of AL Queda. Ask them why they got that neat deck of playing cards.

 

[JBeukema]

And it is fuckwads like you who worship the State, shit-breath.

What orifice do you pull this stuff out of?

 

[Liability]

Wow, you found a typo. Clearly, that constitutes an intelligent rebuttal

And that is what we've been doing. Ask the troops who were patrolling the mountains looking for him and other members of AL Queda. Ask them why they got that neat deck of playing cards.

Evidently you, being a complete asshole, are laboring under the misapprehension that the troops who have spent time searching for Osama bin Laden in the mountains brought along an arrest warrant.



You really are quite unintelligent.

 

[Liability]

And it is fuckwads like you who worship the State, shit-breath.

What orifice do you pull this stuff out of?

Recognizing an asshole like you is easy. One "whiff" of your imbecility gives you away.

 

[JBeukema]

FOXNews.com - Obama: Best Officers Working to Capture Bin Laden

McChrystal: Goal is to capture bin Laden alive - Washington Times

John McCain: I Know How To Catch Bin Laden

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html


Clearly, we're not trying to take him into custody for his crimes

 

[8537]

Look in the mirror, stupid.

So what is it, exactly?

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

well, it's confirmed that I'm no expert on ass-sucking. You seem to grasp it very well, so perhaps you could explain.

 

[Liability]

So what is it, exactly?

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

well, it's confirmed that I'm no expert on ass-sucking. You seem to grasp it very well, so perhaps you could explain.

No no. You ARE the expert at ass sucking. That's the point, dimwit.

 

[Liability]

FOXNews.com - Obama: Best Officers Working to Capture Bin Laden

McChrystal: Goal is to capture bin Laden alive - Washington Times

John McCain: I Know How To Catch Bin Laden

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html


Clearly, we're not trying to take him into custody for his crimes

CLEARLY you are simply incapable of honesty:

Obama Administration

U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said in December 2009 that officials have had no reliable information on Bin Laden's whereabouts for "years". One week later, general Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said in December 2009 that al-Qaeda will not be defeated unless its leader, Osama Bin Laden, is captured or killed. Testifying to the U.S. Congress, he said Bin Laden had become an "iconic figure, whose survival emboldens al-Qaeda as a franchising organization across the world", and that Obama's deployment of 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan meant that success would be possible. "I don't think that we can finally defeat al-Qaeda until he's captured or killed", McChrystal said of Bin Laden. "Killing or capturing Bin Laden would not spell the end of al-Qaeda, but the movement could not be eradicated while he remained at large."[118]

excerpted from: Osama bin Laden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which footnotes: "Gen McChrystal: Bin Laden is key to al-Qaeda defeat". BBC News. 9 December 2009. BBC News - Gen McChrystal: Bin Laden is key to al-Qaeda defeat. Retrieved 2010-05-25.

 

[JBeukema]

And? Police kill violent suspects all the time. It doesn't mean we put a hit out on them.

'Captured' comes first for a reason. 'Capitulate him if you can- kill him if he's getting away'

 

[Liability]

March 16, 2010 - 3:58 PM | by: Mike Levine
Usama bin Laden


Usama bin Laden will never be captured alive, Attorney General Eric Holder told lawmakers on Tuesday.

"The possibility of capturing him alive is infinitesimal," Holder said. "He will be killed by us, or he will be killed by his own people so that he is not captured by us. We know that. ... The possibility simply does not exist."


That assessment, which Holder said was based on "all the intelligence I have had to review," came during an often-heated hearing of a House Appropriations subcommittee.

Republicans pressed Holder over recent decisions to prosecute terrorism suspects in civilian courts, and they suggested he intends to treat terrorism suspects as "common criminals."

Holder said such suggestions tend to "get my blood boiling," calling them "anything but the truth."

He said the "apt" comparison is to mass murderers like Charles Manson, who is currently serving a life sentence for orchestrating a killing spree in the 1960s. [ APT? ?? Holder is a douche ]

Trying to explain the analogy, Holder said mass murderers like Manson still reserve the right to go before a jury and have the charges against them proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Holder was asked whether that means Usama bin Laden, if captured, would be tried in a civilian court and afforded the same rights as Charles Manson.

"In some ways I think they're comparable people, in some ways," Holder said. []

Rep. John Culberson, R-Tex., called that response "incredible."

"This is where the disconnect between this administration in your mindset is so completely opposite that of where the vast majority of the American people are," Culberson said. "This is war, and in a time of war we as a nation have never given Constitutional rights to foreign nationals, enemy soldiers, certainly captured overseas."

Holder insisted there is no major split between the administration and the American people, and he said he understands the nation is at war.

"That is why we have 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, why we are taking all kinds of other measures -- some of which I can't talk about -- in Pakistan," Holder said. "We are not fighting this from a law enforcement, preventive mode. We are using law enforcement as one of the tools, but we are also using military means to defeat this enemy."

As for the Charles Manson analogy, Holder said he was simply trying to think of a mass murderer.

"The comparison is not [between] the average American and these terrorists," he said. "The comparison is between people who have committed the most heinous acts and have been charged in [civilian] courts."

Still, Culberson found the Charles Manson analogy ill-advised.

"By granting Usama bin Laden the right to appear in a U.S. courtroom, you are clothing Usama bin Laden with the protections of the U.S. Constitution," he said.

Holder characterized the whole discussion as outside "reality."

"You're talking about a hypothetical that will never occur," he said. "The reality is that we will be reading Miranda rights to the corpse of Usama bin laden. He will never be in an American courtroom. That's a reality."


Holder may be the first U.S. official to say unequivocally that bin Laden will never be captured alive, but he is not the first to raise such a possibility.

In October 2001, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said bin Laden may never be captured, adding that capturing or killing the Al Qaeda leader would be "very difficult."

"It's a big world," he told USA Today. "There are lots of countries. He's got a lot of money, he's got a lot of people who support him and I just don't know whether we'll be successful. Clearly, it would be highly desirable to find him."

Holder: Bin Laden Never To Be Caught Alive Liveshots

 

[Liability]

And? Police kill violent suspects all the time. It doesn't mean we put a hit out on them.

'Captured' comes first for a reason. 'Capitulate him if you can- kill him if he's getting away'

Take it up with AG Holder, retard.

 

[8537]

It is now confirmed. You have no clue what you are.

well, it's confirmed that I'm no expert on ass-sucking. You seem to grasp it very well, so perhaps you could explain.

No no. You ARE the expert at ass sucking. That's the point, dimwit.

I don't even know what it means! you, on the other hand, seem quite capable of defining and applying it.

One would conclude that you have a lot of experience with ass-sucking. Tell us about it.