American government assassinates one of it's own citizens

[HughJass]

So the Obama admin just bumped off a guy who kinda sorta had some affiliation with Al Qaeda. Or maybe didn't. No evidence was presented and no attempt was made to indict him.


How do the American members feel about their government awarding itself the power to kill any of you if they deem you a terrorist?


A good thing?


Indifferent?


Worried you are marching towards fascism?

 

[Cassin]

How do the American members feel about their government awarding itself the power to kill any of you if they deem you a terrorist?

How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed? Has there ever been a government that didn't "award itself" the power to do that in some form regardless of what any citizens may have thought about it?

 

[HughJass]

Link?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... index.html

 

[HughJass]

How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed? Has there ever been a government that didn't "award itself" the power to do that in some form regardless of what any citizens may have thought about it?

Pretty sure it doesn't happen in other modern democracies. Citizens get due process.



The point is that it is setting a new precedent in American politics and law. Citizens are all supposed to be protected and receive certain rights. Allowing the government to kill them on the basis of an allegation is pretty new.

 

[Cassin]

You're wearing blinders as usual.

 

[Viens]

How do the American members feel about their government awarding itself the power to kill any of you if they deem you a terrorist?

How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed? Has there ever been a government that didn't "award itself" the power to do that in some form regardless of what any citizens may have thought about it?

So what are you (cassin) trying to say exactly? (i.e. do you actually have any personal opinions/feelings yourself about this, or are you incapable due to the American 'education' system / media brainwashing?)

Is your response to the question of how you feel about your government murdering a human being that has not been proven guilty of anything really, "How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed?"

Troubling but unfortunately I've no doubt that most Americans would say almost the same thing, since most standard citizens have been brainwashed/stupefied since birth anyway, to keep them in-control.

 

[Viens]

You're wearing blinders as usual.

Don't worry your pretty little head. "America is the greatest country in the world." That's all you need to know!

 

[Cassin]

How do the American members feel about their government awarding itself the power to kill any of you if they deem you a terrorist?

How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed? Has there ever been a government that didn't "award itself" the power to do that in some form regardless of what any citizens may have thought about it?

So what are you (cassin) trying to say exactly? (i.e. do you actually have any personal opinions/feelings yourself about this, or are you incapable due to the American 'education' system / media brainwashing?)

Is your response to the question of how you feel about your government murdering a human being that has not been proven guilty of anything really, "How is that different than any government in any form that has ever existed?"

Troubling but unfortunately I've no doubt that most Americans would say almost the same thing, since most standard citizens have been brainwashed/stupefied since birth anyway, to keep them in-control.

What a discussion encouraging comment thats not meant to be petty at all.

 

[dimitar_berbagod]

Is this actually true? I mean, apart from the reporter's own word, are there any independent sources verifying his claims?

 

[Viens]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... ght-lines/

 

[Agahi]

I feel that it is not a good thing. I wont argue that the government is not allowed to do this, I'm sure they gave themselves the power, what I'm saying is that they should not have the power at all.

I imagine that it would be fine for the President himself to pull out a gun and shoot me in the head as long as he said I am a known and admitted traitor and terrorist, which is the line I've been hearing all day.

I'm also not saying the guy didn't deserve it, what I'm saying is that he was not proven to be deserving of it, even if he said it himself. This is why we still have trials even when people admit things. There are many admissions of guilt that police have to weed through because they are sometimes fake. I do not see why it would have been so hard to grab him and have a trial.

 

[Cassin]

I feel that it is not a good thing. I wont argue that the government is not allowed to do this, I'm sure they gave themselves the power, what I'm saying is that they should not have the power at all.

I imagine that it would be fine for the President himself to pull out a gun and shoot me in the head as long as he said I am a known and admitted traitor and terrorist, which is the line I've been hearing all day.

I'm also not saying the guy didn't deserve it, what I'm saying is that he was not proven to be deserving of it, even if he said it himself. This is why we still have trials even when people admit things. There are many admissions of guilt that police have to weed through because they are sometimes fake. I do not see why it would have been so hard to grab him and have a trial.

well said and I agree.

 

[optimus prime]

He was living in Yemen, tried by a Yemen court, and then ordered by the judge to be captured 'dead or alive'.

Then he was killed in Yemen with the help of the US Army. If he wanted to be trialled in US courts he should have handed himself in and gone 'home'.

If you think this is the first person to be killed without trial. How many bank robbers or criminals are shot running from scenes by police. Where is the trial there?

They told him to hand himself in..he never..so he risked getting shot.

 

[Bryan]

Pretty sure it doesn't happen in other modern democracies. Citizens get due process.

The point is that it is setting a new precedent in American politics and law. Citizens are all supposed to be protected and receive certain rights. Allowing the government to kill them on the basis of an allegation is pretty new.

It's a sign of the times, frankly, and may simply have to be done that way, in certain cases. This same issue was discussed earlier this evening on the outstanding HBO show "Real Time With Bill Maher", and Bill discussed it with his guest panel, one of whom was Salman Rushdie (one can hardly imagine a more important figure to talk about the Anwar al-Awlaki affair than Salman Rushdie); the entire panel (Bill Maher and guests alike) seemed to be in favor of what happened. Rushdie pointed out that "There is such a thing as treason", and after committing treason, losing certain rights may be an inevitable consequence; "One of which may be being killed," is what I believe Bill Maher added afterwards.

 

[HughJass]

You're wearing blinders as usual.

that's not a valid response!

 

[HughJass]

one can hardly imagine a more important figure to talk about the Anwar al-Awlaki affair than Salman Rushdie

why do you say that?


When it comes to the Middle East he is as deluded as could be and he obviously has no knowledge of US constitutional law given all the people in the US who have been writing about how scary this latest assassination is from a legal perspective.


It's not like this policy is going to be temporary and they will scrap it once they've killed all the bad guys. This war will never end (because of how the US is fighting it) and that policy is now on the books for good. Obama has set a precedent and it will become the norm. Once that has been normalized the public will be willing to accept the government awarding itself even more (illegal) power. It's just a gradual slide into something very, very nasty.


You see what I mean?

 

[Cassin]

Pretty sure it doesn't happen in other modern democracies. Citizens get due process.

The point is that it is setting a new precedent in American politics and law. Citizens are all supposed to be protected and receive certain rights. Allowing the government to kill them on the basis of an allegation is pretty new.

It's a sign of the times, frankly, and may simply have to be done that way, in certain cases. This same issue was discussed earlier this evening on the outstanding HBO show "Real Time With Bill Maher", and Bill discussed it with his guest panel, one of whom was Salman Rushdie (one can hardly imagine a more important figure to talk about the Anwar al-Awlaki affair than Salman Rushdie); the entire panel (Bill Maher and guests alike) seemed to be in favor of what happened. Rushdie pointed out that "There is such a thing as treason", and after committing treason, losing certain rights may be an inevitable consequence; "One of which may be being killed," is what I believe Bill Maher added afterwards.

The more I read the more I agree with this ^

 

[squeegee]

I don't care where you from or are.. If you had, have any affiliation with the talibans.. you should die now.. Been in Afghanistan for almost 8 months now.. this is pathetic... got rocketed by them last week like never before.. they were aiming random people including civilians as usual.. We have to go by rules of engagement..they have none.. this is the only reason Al Quaida still alive.. High Five for the U.S. Army ! unk: Afghanistan is cursed.

 

[Bryan]

one can hardly imagine a more important figure to talk about the Anwar al-Awlaki affair than Salman Rushdie

why do you say that?

When it comes to the Middle East he is as deluded as could be and he obviously has no knowledge of US constitutional law given all the people in the US who have been writing about how scary this latest assassination is from a legal perspective.

Huh?? Salman Rushdie is a very very smart man, which is why Bill Maher likes to have him on his show. I think he (Rushdie) is as aware of US constitutional law as anybody else (including Newt Gingrich, who praised President Obama recently for having al-Awlaki killed).

It's not like this policy is going to be temporary and they will scrap it once they've killed all the bad guys. This war will never end (because of how the US is fighting it) and that policy is now on the books for good. Obama has set a precedent and it will become the norm. Once that has been normalized the public will be willing to accept the government awarding itself even more (illegal) power. It's just a gradual slide into something very, very nasty.

You're free to have your own opinion, of course, but I don't think this is as dire as you think. If terrorists are going to hide from justice in the worst parts of the world and continue their abominations where it's almost impossible to find them and arrest them, then we'll certainly take care of them with available technolgy, if we can.

 

[HughJass]

Huh?? Salman Rushdie is a very very smart man, which is why Bill Maher likes to have him on his show. I think he (Rushdie) is as aware of US constitutional law as anybody else (including Newt Gingrich, who praised President Obama recently for having al-Awlaki killed).

The link I posted earlier is from a constitutional lawyer who says is just about the most egregious example of a president violating the constitution as you can get.

Rushdie supported the Afghan war and has mouthed Israeli propaganda, he's clueless of Middle East issues. People just fawn over him because he called Islam out and received a death threat.

You're free to have your own opinion, of course, but I don't think this is as dire as you think. If terrorists are going to hide from justice in the worst parts of the world and continue their abominations where it's almost impossible to find them and arrest them, then we'll certainly take care of them with available technolgy, if we can.

The president of the US gets to kill anyone he wants merely on the basis of an allegation, without having to show any evidence or proof. How is that not a dire situation?

The USA government just called this guy a terrorist and the public accepted it as the truth. Can you say for sure that you know this guy was a terrorist?