Jamal Khashoggi

[clarksvol00]

.

 

[Weezer]

Seems like everybody is more concerned with catching Luther with a "whatabout Obama's drone strikes" than the fact that we're big into* supporting a regime that cuts newspaper columnists into little pieces.

*(and have been)

Are you okay with assassinating U.S. citizens without them receiving due process?

 

[NEO]

And you just gave him an out that he will twist by saying “without cause”

So let’s clear that up now. The office of the President is not bestowed with the powers of acting as prosecutor, judge, and jury against a US citizen. That power is solely vested in the Judicial branch. The Executive branch indeed acts as prosecutor but has ZERO vesting in the determination of guilt and consequences.

Doesnt everyone here this forum already know that already?

I guess I just figured it was an understood.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Because he was a journalist working in the US.

Are you concerned with every foreign national who works in the USA and gets murdered elsewhere? Man, you must weep for Latin America profusely. Not sure how you have the time for that.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Jamal was a moron fyi. Didn't deserve to die but like most "journalist" types was ignorant of his actions and their consequences and acted aloof and irresponsible in real life.

Now he is longpig seasoning in a diplomats BBQ oven.

 

[clarksvol00]

Are you okay with assassinating U.S. citizens without them receiving due process?

Did I say that?
Edit: wait... I think you just whatabouted me.

 

[Roustabout]

In all honesty, I was probably aware of the story at the time; but It was 9 years ago and my memory sucks. I had absolutely no recollection of it today when it was brought up. I'm sure it was way overplayed on conservative news sources so it would be a much bigger story to some.
The crying wolf effect: Benghazi, e-mail, birther, Uranium 1, Vince Foster, Fast and furious, etc.....every time the right sees a mountain, I assume it's a molehill.

How can you be sure it isn’t the “nothing to see here effect?”

 

[FLVOL_79]

In all honesty, I was probably aware of the story at the time; but It was 9 years ago and my memory sucks. I had absolutely no recollection of it today when it was brought up. I'm sure it was way overplayed on conservative news sources so it would be a much bigger story to some.
The crying wolf effect: Benghazi, e-mail, birther, Uranium 1, Vince Foster, Fast and furious, etc.....every time the right sees a mountain, I assume it's a molehill.

Ignorant af..no wonder you voted for a pedophile

 

[0nelilreb]

The guy was an idiot , playing idiot games with very powerful people in other countries , hiding behind some perceived special press protection that he thought would cover his azz . One of my favorite lines from the Joker in Suicide Squad ... “ All that chit chat gonna get you hurt “ , Applied here .

 

[luthervol]

How can you be sure it isn’t the “nothing to see here effect?”

You have to process the information available while considering the source and then make your best judgement.

 

[luthervol]

How can you be sure it isn’t the “nothing to see here effect?”

You have to process the information available while considering the source and then make your best judgement.

 

[hog88]

Now that we've established that we don't like Obama dropping a bomb on a citizen without court approval because he might be terrorist, can we get a show of hands on who approves the Saudis chopping a guy into little pieces because he wrote mean things about them in the newspaper?

I don’t approve but that doesn’t negate the fact that it’s none of our business.

 

[hog88]

He was an Al-Qaeda terrorist plotting attacks on Americans. Once you become a functional combatant with a stated foreign enemy, you knowingly sacrifice your right to due process.

Again, can you point to that statute?

 

[hog88]

Seems like everybody is more concerned with catching Luther with a "whatabout Obama's drone strikes" than the fact that we're big into* supporting a regime that cuts newspaper columnists into little pieces.

*(and have been)

I’m all for telling the Saudis to kick rocks but that would require us to be energy independent.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Seems like everybody is more concerned with catching Luther with a "whatabout Obama's drone strikes" than the fact that we're big into* supporting a regime that cuts newspaper columnists into little pieces.

*(and have been)

No it’s more on calling Luther on his hypocrisy but I’m sure he appreciates you defending it.

 

[luthervol]

Again, can you point to that statute?

It was in here that I read it.

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/olli/class-materials/warfarechesney.pdf

 

[clarksvol00]

I’m all for telling the Saudis to kick rocks but that would require us to be energy independent.

Are you saying they've got us over a barrel?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Did I say that?
Edit: wait... I think you just whatabouted me.

He did no such thing. You were defending Luther’s hypocrisy so he was checking if you’re a hypocrite too

 

[clarksvol00]

He did no such thing. You were defending Luther’s hypocrisy so he was checking if you’re a hypocrite too

Nah. I think he was trying to deflect from the rampant But Obamaing that was going on.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Nah. I think he was trying to deflect from the rampant But Obamaing that was going on.

Well deflection from his idiocy is a goto play so I’d guess you’re not far off. Luther that is

 

[hog88]

It was in here that I read it.

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/olli/class-materials/warfarechesney.pdf

Did you read your link? It only addresses the international law (whatever that is) and specifically states it doesn’t go into domestic law or constitutional protection of citizens.

 

[hog88]

Are you saying they've got us over a barrel?

Pretty much, and it’s our own fault.

 

[luthervol]

Did you read your link? It only addresses the international law (whatever that is) and specifically states it doesn’t go into domestic law or constitutional protection of citizens.

I read the beginning and the conclusion.

 

[hog88]

I read the beginning and the conclusion.

So you agree the link you posted doesn’t address the question.

 

[NorthDallas40]

It was in here that I read it.

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/olli/class-materials/warfarechesney.pdf

LMAO I’ll bet you’ve been scurrying all night to find SOMETHING to back up your BS. Remember you didn’t know who he was or what this was about after all?

So those Vandy private people use International Humanitarian Law to justify the killing of a citizen of by their government without due process. They spend 50+ pages on applying international law. Then they ask the question “but does IHL apply here?” which they sagely offer “well we think it does” without any strong basis to make the claim with. I definitely didn’t see any precedent referenced thus it has never passed muster within our judicial system. Womp womp.