terriorist denied due process ???

[mikegideon]

sigmtnman, your on fire guy!

That explains it

[laktrash]

Obama and Eric Holder are both lawyers. I trust both of them about as far as I can throw them.

You don't trust Holder? you mean you think he knew about "fast and furious" Viva la Mexico

It just gets worse daily

Edited October 5, 2011 by laktrash

[mikegideon]

That really is the deal. Nothing wrong with killing terrorists, as long as it's not the current administration pulling the trigger.

[sigmtnman]

That really is the deal. Nothing wrong with killing terrorists, as long as it's not the current administration pulling the trigger.

Incorrect.

There is nothing wrong with punishing US Citizens as long as due process is followed.

REGARDLESS of the political affiliation of the administration.

[Guest GunTroll]

That really is the deal. Nothing wrong with killing terrorists, as long as it's not the current administration pulling the trigger.

Not at all.

I'd say Obama has had more success with HVT's than Bush ever had. Bush's numbers were probably higher but UBL, then these recent others, the pirates even, etc. Obama gets ****z done! Best killing peace and love liberal we ever had!

Still not supporting it though nor the O admin...ever.

**look at that fancy auto edit-ing S , H , I , ? , little z on the end. **

Edited October 5, 2011 by GunTroll

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You don't need to be a lawyer to understand the principles of the Constitution.

Killing terrorists is one thing. Killing American citizens when they might have been

captured and tried is quite another. If the administration had said up front that this was

collateral damage and this guy was in the vehicle that got whacked by the drone,

we might have never had any of this conversation. The way it is, however, is against

the law of the land. I'm not saying he didn't deserve it, but, as a citizen, he should have

been tried before punishment was exacted.

It should serve to tell you what this administration believes in justice and constitutional law.

Just a hindrance to their mission.

[mikegideon]

Incorrect.

.

Right. I'm gonna go bang my face into a tree now.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Now, now. That might hurt. Besides, we usually solve all the world's problems around here, don't we?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Not at all.

I'd say Obama has had more success with HVT's than Bush ever had. Bush's numbers were probably higher but UBL, then these recent others, the pirates even, etc. Obama gets ****z done! Best killing peace and love liberal we ever had!

Still not supporting it though nor the O admin...ever.

**look at that fancy auto edit-ing S , H , I , ? , little z on the end. **

Well, actually number two. Truman ordered two nukes dropped, if you will recall. That will be

hard to top.

[E4 No More]

Since when is standing for the Constitution paranoia? The Constitution has no provision for renouncing Citizenship.

Not standing up for it means accepting infringements. At that point the document is as good as toilet paper.

There will be plenty of folks who will "feel" it is justified upon the next infringement.

I hate to tell you this but your rights have been under attack for more years than you have been around. It happens in every court in the land in the form of contempt of court and judicial/prosecutorial/police misconduct. You can get your panties in a wad over a military target being eliminated in an unfriendly country who would not capture and extradite the terrorist to be tried, but not have outrage for what's going on in this country every day? WOW!

[mikegideon]

Now, now. That might hurt. Besides, we usually solve all the world's problems around here, don't we?

I know that if Al-whatshisname came running into your yard, they would need a spatula to get him in the truck, not to mention what Little AR would do with his trusty Saiga. Fess up... you've been sharing granola bars with the neighbors

[Guest GunTroll]

Mmmm granola!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yeh, but that would be trespassing! I don't know about some of my neighbors.

I may graduate into their liking soon, however. Back yard is getting cleaned up today.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

My wife even quit trying to get me to eat the stuff. Oatmeal, however:D

[E4 No More]

Contempt of Congress

Isn't just about everyone in the US guilty of that?

[mikegideon]

Yeh, but that would be trespassing! I don't know about some of my neighbors.

I may graduate into their liking soon, however. Back yard is getting cleaned up today.

Need to get you behind that SOCOM soon. Don't want you flippin' to the other side :-)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Definitely need to shoot the cannon. But I won't flip, don't worry:D

[sigmtnman]

I hate to tell you this but your rights have been under attack for more years than you have been around. It happens in every court in the land in the form of contempt of court and judicial/prosecutorial/police misconduct. You can get your panties in a wad over a military target being eliminated in an unfriendly country who would not capture and extradite the terrorist to be tried, but not have outrage for what's going on in this country every day? WOW!

Disregarding your suggestion that people who believe in the Constitution wear panties; Are we at war with Yemen?

[G27]

That really is the deal. Nothing wrong with killing terrorists, as long as it's not the current administration pulling the trigger.

Sorry Mike, but that couldn't be further from the truth in my mind. I think Obama's terrible, sure, but I felt that way about Dubya, too. This goes way beyond party lines in my book, and dismissing it as if it's politically motivated is cheap.

The Secret Memo That Explains Why Obama Can Kill Americans - Conor Friedersdorf - Politics - The Atlantic

[mikegideon]

Sorry Mike, but that couldn't be further from the truth in my mind. I think Obama's terrible, sure, but I felt that way about Dubya, too. This goes way beyond party lines in my book, and dismissing it as if it's politically motivated is cheap.

The Secret Memo That Explains Why Obama Can Kill Americans - Conor Friedersdorf - Politics - The Atlantic

You're saying there's no political agenda behind all this? These kinda operations are driven by some classified information too. We don't know all the details, and neither does Dr. Ron. Do they have the right to act on classified information? I think they do, and apparently some don't.

They have Bin Laden's data now. These attacks are probably going to get more frequent. They probably aren't going to open the files just because we don't trust Obama.

I'm a simpleton. If you see a coyote, shoot it.

[daddyo]

I hate to tell you this but your rights have been under attack for more years than you have been around. It happens in every court in the land in the form of contempt of court and judicial/prosecutorial/police misconduct. You can get your panties in a wad over a military target being eliminated in an unfriendly country who would not capture and extradite the terrorist to be tried, but not have outrage for what's going on in this country every day? WOW!

So, you're saying that because it's been going on for years, we should just bend over and take it up the rear??

[mav]

You're saying there's no political agenda behind all this?

I don't think there is. I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of republicans were supportive of the administrations actions. As you should know there are very few constitutionalists in Washington (one of the reasons we have so many problems).

[mikegideon]

I don't think there is. I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of republicans were supportive of the administrations actions. As you should know there are very few constitutionalists in Washington (one of the reasons we have so many problems).

I have seen Ron Paul beating the drum on TV... calling them assassinations. There are some politics behind it. Ron simply doesn't know how much evidence they had.

[G27]

You're saying there's no political agenda behind all this?

No, I was talking about my own thoughts, not anyone else's.

My frustration with this act has nothing to do with who is calling the shot(s). And in all honesty, even if he weren't running for POTUS, Ron Paul would be saying the very same thing.

[mav]

I have seen Ron Paul beating the drum on TV... calling them assassinations. There are some politics behind it. Ron simply doesn't know how much evidence they had.

Yes, I have seen that too. There is one major difference. Ron Paul would be saying that if Bush was president. I haven't seen any of the typical republican vs. democrat political posturing that we frequently encounter on so many issues.