Skip to main content

View Diary: Circular debate (75 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And that means he shouldn't have killed al-Qusa? (0+ / 0-)

    the convicted Cole bomber?

    I would kill the bastard if I could get my hands on him. What's so "shocking" or "secret" about that?

    "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

    by zenox on Mon May 07, 2012 at 08:35:25 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  No. It doesn't mean that at all. (5+ / 0-)

      The topic has to do with the President's ability to target AMERICAN CITIZENS for assassination anywhere in the world WITHOUT first indicting them, let alone convicting them of any crime. These are violations of a US citizen's 5th amendment rights, amongst others.

      •  NO PERSON (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias, zinger99

        ...shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

        I'm having a hard time finding the reference to AMERICAN CITZENS in that...can you help me?

    •  You would be tried for murder if you did that (5+ / 0-)

      If you had killed this man, you would have no legal defense and would be tried and likely imprisoned for your actions.

      While you may believe that Obama would only ever use this power for good, he will not be president forever. The precedent he sets now will be used by any future president to justify killing any person, even an American citizen,anywhere in the world,  for any reason whatsoever. Or none.

      If a republican president decided that all liberals were enemy combatants, we would have no legal recourse. How would you argue that a republican president should not be allowed to murder you and your entire family? He declares you, your loved ones and all "liberals" to be enemy combatants. There is no legal oversight or review. The executioners come and kill you and your family, and no one even needs to know why, except that someone, somewhere decided you are the enemy and must be killed.

      That is what you are advocating for. You need to think things through and not just blurt out whatever gut feeling you currently hold. Unless you take pride in having civilized people think of you as a dangerous barbarian.

    •  Clearly you haven't followed this issue. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aliasalias, zinger99

      Do some research.

      By the way, if I could get my hands on him, I'd kill the bastard who murdered my sister. But we either have a system of due process, or a system of mafia rule. Right now in foreign policy, and increasingly in domestic affairs, we have mafia rule.

      You can easily find out a lot of awful shit we're doing in the world. Ask yourself if Iran was doing this to us, in the name of protecting themselves against U.S. terror (a real threat for them, in this case), would you approve?

      Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth. - Lucy Parsons

      by cruz on Mon May 07, 2012 at 01:40:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site