Obama orders the assassination of US Citizen

#1
paul1454

paul1454

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
683
Likes
0
#1
Barack Obama orders killing of US cleric Anwar al-Awlaki

Just curious why an administration that has so zealously advocated Miranda rights and other constitutional protections for enemy combatants would order the death of a US citizen without affording him any due process rights. I'll be waiting for all those who denounced acts such as eavesdropping without oversight and detaining american enemy combatants like Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi without due process to come out in droves to denounce a clearly more appalling act of taking someone's life without due process..............(but, for some reason, I think I will be waiting quite a while).
 
#2
#2
I'll start:

Reason #1... Anwar al-Awlaki failed to show up at the much celebrated Ramadaan dinner hosted at the White House.
 
#4
#4
Hah, I guess the point of my post was unclear. I am not saying that he isn't a vile human being. What I was getting at is where are all the people that stood up for the constitutional rights of enemy combatants, or the right of Padilla when he was detained without due process, when this administration orders the death of someone without even a hearing on his crimes?

Back in 2007, Obama even stated that a president lacked the power to even detain a US citizen without due process, much less kill one. See Question 5
 
#5
#5
Wait. Are you implying politicians lie and do whatever they want when convenient? Get out of town!

But ya, I see what you are saying.
 
#6
#6
IPorange said:
Wait. Are you implying politicians lie and do whatever they want when convenient? Get out of town!

But ya, I see what you are saying.
Click to expand...

Shocking right? No big news here, but I figured this was at least wothy of a mention.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#7
#7
I wonder since he was a citizen if the Obamanator went ahead killed him for treason. If he wasn't a citizen, he could have got enemy combatant status, and a trial.

:crazy:
 
#8
#8
rjd970 said:
I wonder since he was a citizen if the Obamanator went ahead killed him for treason. If he wasn't a citizen, he could have got enemy combatant status, and a trial.

:crazy:
Click to expand...

Even for treason, there must be a hearing where at least two witnesses confirm the act right? (trying to remember what that section of the constitution requires)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
paul1454 said:
Even for treason, there must be a hearing where at least two witnesses confirm the act right? (trying to remember what that section of the constitution requires)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know.

But hey, we are talking about the constitution, who really follows that anymore?
 
#12
#12
paul1454 said:
Barack Obama orders killing of US cleric Anwar al-Awlaki

Just curious why an administration that has so zealously advocated Miranda rights and other constitutional protections for enemy combatants would order the death of a US citizen without affording him any due process rights. I'll be waiting for all those who denounced acts such as eavesdropping without oversight and detaining american enemy combatants like Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi without due process to come out in droves to denounce a clearly more appalling act of taking someone's life without due process..............(but, for some reason, I think I will be waiting quite a while).
Click to expand...


There's a wee bit of difference between a guy that intelligence establishes was behind or involved in at least two terrorist acts (one successful) versus a random combatant.

Besides which, even if you were right that Obama had earleir said he would not approve of such things, and here he is doing it, I would think you would applaud his apparent wising up to the realities you said he was out of touch with earlier.

This is why the GOP is going to get itself in trouble: They say on the one hand that he's not tough enough. Then, whe he shows some toughness, the refrain changes to he's a hypocrite, as though he isn't allowed to change his mind and actually agree with you.
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
There's a wee bit of difference between a guy that intelligence establishes was behind or involved in at least two terrorist acts (one successful) versus a random combatant.

Besides which, even if you were right that Obama had earleir said he would not approve of such things, and here he is doing it, I would think you would applaud his apparent wising up to the realities you said he was out of touch with earlier.

This is why the GOP is going to get itself in trouble: They say on the one hand that he's not tough enough. Then, whe he shows some toughness, the refrain changes to he's a hypocrite, as though he isn't allowed to change his mind and actually agree with you.
Click to expand...

Did I say he was out of touch with realities in another post or something? I'm only asking because I don't think I did.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#14
#14
paul1454 said:
Did I say he was out of touch with realities in another post or something? I'm only asking because I don't think I did.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


Oh my gosh, you are not really asking me to go back and find the threads about how naiive he would be in foreign policy or in dealing with terrorists, how soft he would be?

Here he is taking a hard line, which the right absolutely begged for, and they deride him for that!

It's really just more proof -- as if we needed any -- that the GOP and the right in general just knee jerk criticize him for everything he does.

They can't stand him and are irrational about it. Even if he does something they theoretically should love.
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
Oh my gosh, you are not really asking me to go back and find the threads about how naiive he would be in foreign policy or in dealing with terrorists, how soft he would be?

Here he is taking a hard line, which the right absolutely begged for, and they deride him for that!

It's really just more proof -- as if we needed any -- that the GOP and the right in general just knee jerk criticize him for everything he does.

They can't stand him and are irrational about it. Even if he does something they theoretically should love.
Click to expand...

Actually yes. That's what I'm asking. If you are going to accuse me of something, I think there should be some basis to it.

Second, his actions make him a hypocrite regardless as to the GOP stance on previous issues. That doesn't mean they aren't hypocratic as well, but that isn't the issue here.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
lawgator1 said:
Oh my gosh, you are not really asking me to go back and find the threads about how naiive he would be in foreign policy or in dealing with terrorists, how soft he would be?

Here he is taking a hard line, which the right absolutely begged for, and they deride him for that!

It's really just more proof -- as if we needed any -- that the GOP and the right in general just knee jerk criticize him for everything he does.

They can't stand him and are irrational about it. Even if he does something they theoretically should love.
Click to expand...

The problem is he is inconsistent. He orders trials for every other terrorists and to give them milk and cookies and make sure they are happy, but kill this guy (which I am for) but why not kill all of them, what's the difference?

This strategy worked out well for your side.
 
#17
#17
volfanjustin said:
The problem is he is inconsistent. He orders trials for every other terrorists and to give them milk and cookies and make sure they are happy, but kill this guy (which I am for) but why not kill all of them, what's the difference?

This strategy worked out well for your side.
Click to expand...

Got exaggeration?
 
#19
#19
I think more than anything it is a matter and problem of consistency. I will admit that it is a thin line but he has sent some very mixed messages and contradicted himself many times in respect to his policy toward terrorism.
 
#20
#20
This type of order is problematic regardless of the political affiliation of the President. Regardless of what he has done, he's a US citizen and deserves a trial first.
 
#22
#22
I'll give it a try, Alawi violated a fatwa by osamba been lauden!!!

I'm pretty sure this story first broke under the same headline; 'obama orders hit on us citizen', by the world socialist site.

When I first read it I surmised it had a dual purpose.

1.) to give obama supporters ammunition to feed to mainstream America that obama was indeed fighting islamic terrorism.

2.) to stir up more unrest among the radical muslims, particulrly in the al-qaeda hotbed of yemen.
 
#23
#23
the fact that this was released publicly is a clear indication of a desire to try some damage control after Obama's bowing and scraping before Russia.

Out of one side of his mouth, Teleprompter Jesus channels Neville Chamberlain, and out of the other he attempts to channel Churchill.

I'll believe he's actually serious about this when Al-wacki's head is on a pike somewhere
 
#25
#25
MG1968 said:
the fact that this was released publicly is a clear indication of a desire to try some damage control after Obama's bowing and scraping before Russia.

Out of one side of his mouth, Teleprompter Jesus channels Neville Chamberlain, and out of the other he attempts to channel Churchill.

I'll believe he's actually serious about this when Al-wacki's head is on a pike somewhere
Click to expand...

Teleprompter is duplicity personified.

Actually according to the world socialist site, the information was leaked from several high level sources connected to the white house.

In other words the impression is out there but he has complete plausable deniability.

varv04082010a20100408030905.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top