Drone Strke on American Al Qaeda

[Eric P]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/10/white-house-reportedly-struggling-to-target-us-citizen-with-drone-attack/?intcmp=latestnews

I see no conflict in this decision. Once you plan and/or fund attacks on Americans, you lost your US citizenship. Take him out ASAP. Or take him out as collateral damage while meeting with other terrorists.

[Colorado Osprey]

Although morally I have no problem, I also see that we have an obligation to not just execute American Citizens without a trail.
Once you set in motion using drone strikes to kill American Citizens without trial, it won't be long before it is used on US soil to execute "dometic terrorists" or Patriots.

[Hound]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/10/white-house-reportedly-struggling-to-target-us-citizen-with-drone-attack/?intcmp=latestnews

I see no conflict in this decision. Once you plan and/or fund attacks on Americans, you lost your US citizenship. Take him out ASAP. Or take him out as collateral damage while meeting with other terrorists.

Ya, due process... It really is overrated. If your government "SUSPECTS" you are a terrorist, all they need to do is slap that label on you and an execution is justified. This is the real reason for the Constitution. Back in the day when the British could just barge into your house, search through your house and then kill you in the name of the king it was all good. We really need to get back to the Good ol' Days!!! The forefathers saw this and wrote the Constitution so a few hundred years later your toilet paper needs would never go unfulfilled. They expected you to pick and choose what part you like and which parts you don't. Hey, this guy even left America. How dare he leave the land of the free. You do know that when you step foot off American land you are no longer protected by that pesky Constitution from your own government. America is different from the British Empire who imposed their will on the rest of the world! We are not an empire and this is really just a plot by those liberals that do read the Constitution "the potential domestic fallout of killing an American without charging him with a crime or trying him, and the potential international fallout of such an operation in a country that has been resistant to U.S. action." Those US officials are just pussies afraid to use the full might of our empire.... I mean our free country. You got it. To hell with sovereignty, we are America. We can go anywhere, do anything.... Because we are America!! By God!!! Our Government has said so!!!

And I know you always trust our Government... Because you are an American, protected by the Constitution!!!!! Rights?? If the Government says you are even SUSPECTED of being a terrorist you have the right to death from above!!! This all could have been taken care of centuries ago if the British had just taken care of their terrorists...you know... The forefathers.

[Gman]

The CIA drones watching him cannot strike because he's a U.S. citizen and the Justice Department must build a case against him, a task it hasn't completed.
This will probably fall under 'more selective enforcement from the Teleprompter in Chief'.

[GilpinGuy]

Maybe I'm off base here but my first thought is to smoke the traitorous bastard. Is a drone strike much different than a sniper spotting him with a group of Taliban f*cks in the field and killing him?

[Hound]

Maybe I'm off base here but my first thought is to smoke the traitorous bastard. Is a drone strike much different than a sniper spotting him with a group of Taliban f*cks in the field and killing him?

It does not matter how you kill him at this point. The issue is that as an American we ALL get due process. If you don't ensure due process, per the Constitution, then we are all at great risk from a totalitarian government that only has to label a person as a 'terrorist' to do anything they want. If he is guilty then it should be easy to prove in a court of law.

[drew890]

I'm glad the british didn't have drones in 1776.

[blacklabel]

At least they're considering that due process should occur.

The guy should most likely be executed for his transgressions but not until he's found guilty in as close to a proper trial as can take place considering he's out humping sheep.

[Dave]

But the same gov't is relaxing restriction on immigrants who have aided terrorists before....

[Kmanbay]

I'm good with the death penalty AFTER he is tried in a US court of law, however if during the "arrest/capture" process he is fatally wounded then so be it.

The general public is so afraid of the ever present fear of attack from a "terrorist, that they have long ago begun the slippery path of security trumping freedoms. The founding fathers tried their best to set us up for prosperity but over time our focus has changed and memories faded (taught redacted history) from patriot to whiners; depending on the same government, the founders sought to protect us from, into over taxed citizens, over spending legislators and handout expecting slaves.

[rockhound]

Arrest him and try him, if you catch him in the act or he resists arrest then smoke him.

honestly your govt is out of control. if his rights to a trial have been violated then why not yours?

[Bailey Guns]

I think saying the gov't can just "label someone as a terrorist and kill them" is a bit of a stretch here. I understand the need for due process. However, it isn't like this guy is in a house in Omaha and appears to be supporting terrorist activity and the CIA is gonna whack him there. He's actively engaged with al Qaida fighters in a foreign country.

If a police officer kills someone in the line of duty to protect others isn't that person ultimately deprived of their due process? We view that as "justifiable" because their actions are what caused their death, but that's also the case here. The guy is actively plotting harm against US citizens.

I don't see it as being very different.

[rockhound]

true BG, as is said if you catch him the act then all bets are off.

[BlasterBob]

Arrest him and try him, if you cath him.

Yeah, CATH him with a red hot rod!
Sorry, I couldn't resist. [LOL]

[sellersm]

I think saying the gov't can just "label someone as a terrorist and kill them" is a bit of a stretch here. I understand the need for due process. However, it isn't like this guy is in a house in Omaha and appears to be supporting terrorist activity and the CIA is gonna whack him there. He's actively engaged with al Qaida fighters in a foreign country.

If a police officer kills someone in the line of duty to protect others isn't that person ultimately deprived of their due process? We view that as "justifiable" because their actions are what caused their death, but that's also the case here. The guy is actively plotting harm against US citizens.

I don't see it as being very different.

The problem as I see it is this: many here see it as you do BG, but the fact of the matter is that none of those here have their fingers on the trigger of the strike mechanism! And, we all need to remember that it doesn't matter how WE see anything, it only matters how THEY see it. And I promise you this: THEY see it very differently than you do. They've already proven that they don't care about the constitution. They've already proven that they're not concerned that the entity in the WH isn't qualified to be there. They've already shown how willing they are to terminate any and all opposition to their plan.

What matters, and it's the only thing that matters here, is how THEY see this. And their view isn't the same as yours...

And BTW, may I remind us all that all of us are considered t******st according to THEIR definitions... So how are you and I any different in their eyes?

[68Charger]

I think saying the gov't can just "label someone as a terrorist and kill them" is a bit of a stretch here. I understand the need for due process. However, it isn't like this guy is in a house in Omaha and appears to be supporting terrorist activity and the CIA is gonna whack him there. He's actively engaged with al Qaida fighters in a foreign country.

If a police officer kills someone in the line of duty to protect others isn't that person ultimately deprived of their due process? We view that as "justifiable" because their actions are what caused their death, but that's also the case here. The guy is actively plotting harm against US citizens.

I don't see it as being very different.

This is the slippery slope... and you're comparing apples to oranges.
If he has taken someone hostage outside a 7-11 in Denver, then you can take him out in self-defense or defense of others.

if he's "Plotting to harm" US citizens (because if he is plotting to harm Afghans, then it's an Afghan issue) either domestically or abroad, can you just declare so and blow him up with a drone? Who builds the case against him, who defends him, who decides to waive his rights?

I think that is clearly unconstitutional- you can confront him and then shoot him when he fights, but even holding a trial without him present to defend himself and then deciding to blow him up isn't constitutional, either... due process. At what point can you legally declare them "enemy combatants", and waive their constitutional rights? That is the $64,000 question.

[RblDiver]

Is the guy most likely a scumbag? Absolutely. But is he American? If so, we have the Constitution for that. As others have said, catch him engaging in action and he's a valid target, but drone him while sleeping, you've just violated the Constitution. Even overseas, Americans have the right to due process from our government, and due process does not simply involve setting the drone's target.

I mean, how hard would it be at a minimum to set up some sort of kangaroo court that could find him guilty in absentia?

[UrbanWolf]

If you give the gov't an inch and say "Yeah, you can blow up those you suspected as terrorists to potentially protect others", then the gov't will take a mile and say "The guy across you street just bought 5 guns and 5000 rounds of ammo, we think he is supplying terrorists and we are blowing him up. And we saw you talking to him too, so see ya!".

[Kmanbay]

If the executive brach government can call you a terrorist and that designation automatically allows them to put you on the drone hit list, where is the checks and balances set forth in the Constitution?

All arrests must be made with probable cause. All felony criminal cases in which a jury is seated must have a unanimous decision, after the accused has had due process and faces his accusers.

Then and only then can a death warrant be signed by a judge. And all of this is to be carried out in a public trial, not the BS of closed judicial sessions without the accused or representation being present.

The British did this to the Colonists and said it was in the name of the king. Hasn't the president become that person here? Nearly unlimited power in which the power was abdicated to the president by lazy and weak senators and representatives.

George Washington said in his Farewell Address:
"It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free Country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective Constitutional spheres; avoiding in the exercise of the Powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position.


Sorry for ranting.

[DavieD55]

Once you set in motion using drone strikes to kill American Citizens without trial, it won't be long before it is used on US soil to execute "dometic terrorists" or Patriots.


It does not matter how you kill him at this point. The issue is that as an American we ALL get due process. If you don't ensure due process, per the Constitution, then we are all at great risk from a totalitarian government that only has to label a person as a 'terrorist' to do anything they want. If he is guilty then it should be easy to prove in a court of law.


And BTW, may I remind us all that all of us are considered t******st according to THEIR definitions... So how are you and I any different in their eyes?


Is the guy most likely a scumbag? Absolutely. But is he American? If so, we have the Constitution for that. As others have said, catch him engaging in action and he's a valid target, but drone him while sleeping, you've just violated the Constitution. Even overseas, Americans have the right to due process from our government, and due process does not simply involve setting the drone's target.


If you give the gov't an inch and say "Yeah, you can blow up those you suspected as terrorists to potentially protect others", then the gov't will take a mile and say "The guy across you street just bought 5 guns and 5000 rounds of ammo, we think he is supplying terrorists and we are blowing him up. And we saw you talking to him too, so see ya!".


Exactly.

[sellersm]

The British did this to the Colonists and said it was in the name of the king. Hasn't the president become that person here? Nearly unlimited power in which the power was abdicated to the president by lazy and weak senators and representatives.

Yes. Some research and you may just find that the entity currently in the WH is indeed a british subject still serving the king...

[BushMasterBoy]

Are you guys going to Obama's coronation? Long Live the King!

[centrarchidae]

Are you guys going to Obama's coronation? Long Live the King!

Sorry, I think I'm scheduled to be bathing my cats that day.

[Hound]

I mean, how hard would it be at a minimum to set up some sort of kangaroo court that could find him guilty in absentia?

I hope not. The fact is, kangaroo courts are where we will have fully lost America if it comes to that. At that point Orwell will be batting 1000 and we will be sitting around drinking oily gin and afraid of our own thoughts.

[RblDiver]

I hope not. The fact is, kangaroo courts are where we will have fully lost America if it comes to that. At that point Orwell will be batting 1000 and we will be sitting around drinking oily gin and afraid of our own thoughts.

Indeed, my point was that following the law would probably not be very difficult for such clear cases like these. You'd think it'd be better to have at a _minimum_ a fig leaf of legality, rather than even the appearance of lawlessness.

[Gman]

The Justice Department (part of the Executive Branch) has to build the case against this guy. They haven't done it. The issue ends there.

[sellersm]

Is this somewhat relevant? For those that care, note the bottom symbol in their patch/emblem: http://mediatrackers.org/ohio/2014/02/10/ohio-national-guard-training-envisions-right-wing-terrorism

1st paragraph of article:

Documents from an Ohio National Guard (ONG) training drill conducted last January (http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/Mock-Disaster-Training-Exercise-in-Scioto-County-187322931.html) reveal the details of a mock disaster where Second Amendment supporters with “anti-government” opinions were portrayed as domestic terrorists.

[sellersm]

Hey! There's an App for that: http://chasvoice.blogspot.com/2014/02/now-you-can-track-us-drone-killings-on.html

Here's the link to iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/metadata+/id806503163?ls=1&mt=8

[hatidua]

The Justice Department (part of the Executive Branch) has to build the case against this guy. They haven't done it. The issue ends there.

If Obama wants to drone the guy, Eric Holder will unleash the smoke/mirrors and the drone will fly.

[Kmanbay]

Yes. Some research and you may just find that the entity currently in the WH is indeed a british subject still serving the king...

One thing is certain; the congress over many decades have given the president powers he should never have been given. The founding fathers, while the repression/murder etc... of the British was still fresh in their minds, wanted a government run by congress, and a weak president in order to prevent what has been bastardized by the slugs in Washington.

The irony is in the town named after George Washington, who could have been king had he wanted it, have reverted back to the very thing our forefathers fought againt; a ultra powerful executive branch.

BTW your quote by Voltaire is awesome.

[brianakell]

American citizen, has a right to trial. Never read that doing bad things got you executed before any trial or even arrest. I can thing of many many many more people doing worse things that are left to walk the streets every day, and have been convicted of much worse than "aiding terrorists"

[DavieD55]

http://youtu.be/czleWdUggow