Democrats Deliver Internal Assassination to America

[BigRob]

First let me say Iagree with the political theatre part and i know the price of failure in capturing American-born persons of interest is high. if they escape, they become harder to find, and can continue to plot attacks against America. I’m for the drone program. I’m for killing high-level al-Qaeda targets, but if they’re American citizens, and they’re not posing an imminent threat at the time, it should be incumbent upon us to capture, detain, and place them on trial...

Why? It might be they have been under the radar for years, and we get lucky. Why would we throw away that chance?

Our Constitution was meant to constrain government, and to ensure that certain rights can never be suspended by a usurpatory government. A president assuming the power of judge, jury, and executioner is an awesome power, and one that doesn’t have any congressional oversight as of late...

The President did not just unilaterally assume that power. Congress gave it to him -- and rightfully so in my opinion. Its a tough issue, but I think such a power is needed.

Sen. Rand Paul asked on the Senate floor, what are the limits of presidential power?

Congress can take away this authority if they so choose.

Furthermore, Sen. Paul said that we know little about some of the people on these kill lists. Concerning the president’s authority to use drone strikes on American citizens within the United States, the answer should be definitely no...

This is the issue of transparency in what criteria are used to identify someone as a threat...and this is a much harder issue. There does need to be some guidelines in place, but the public realistically doesn't need to know about them. I'd be more than happy with a simple briefing to the Gang of 8 -- something which might already be taking place.

What’s more disturbing is the fact that liberal Democrats seem content with this campaign. After all, we had a conservative Republican lead this filibuster effort. If this was George Bush, articles of impeachment would’ve been brought up. However, while some in the media don’t seem to be willingly to admit their failure in reporting Obama’s hypocrisy, I’m more than prepared to say that I now believe I was wrong in my support of killing American citizens abroad without due process...
The War on Terror has pushed us into new areas of warfare and legal theory, but we cannot forget the principles we’re fighting for in our conflict with al-qaeda. What good is our Bill of Rights if we decide to shred it for a quick kill on one of our fellow citizens? Even the most despicable American deserves the right of due process under the law. Our Bill of Rights was never meant to be applied to citizens on a case by case basis.

We just come down on different sides of this issue -- your position is a credible, valid position.

 

[cashmcall]

Why? It might be they have been under the radar for years, and we get lucky. Why would we throw away that chance?



The President did not just unilaterally assume that power. Congress gave it to him -- and rightfully so in my opinion. Its a tough issue, but I think such a power is needed.



Congress can take away this authority if they so choose.



This is the issue of transparency in what criteria are used to identify someone as a threat...and this is a much harder issue. There does need to be some guidelines in place, but the public realistically doesn't need to know about them. I'd be more than happy with a simple briefing to the Gang of 8 -- something which might already be taking place.



We just come down on different sides of this issue -- your position is a credible, valid position.

I agree with everything you said...This is the part that bothers me.. "Our Bill of Rights was never meant to be applied to citizens on a case by case basis".

 

[pocketfullofshells]

it was reported on drudge a day or two ago as part of holders testimony before congress related to domestic drones.

it came out that drones could be armed. holder said it was legal to kill with drones sans trial or other judicial review. just bo's say so.

so if its ok for drones it must be ok for the 2700 tanks dhs just bought. or any of the ak's and billions of bullets too.

you do know that its always been legal to kill without trial right? On Sept 11 when the Fighters where scrambled to intercept the 747's...did you think it was read Miranda Rights and hold court in the air? Also did you read the follow up memo that said if someone not in the act of committing a terrorist act...you could not use a drone?you should try actually reading the whole thing...not the tid bits Fox Noise tells you.Just like all the idiots crying how they where using drones for look for your cop killer friend.

If your about to blow up a building...they can shoot you with a gun...or a drone...or what ever they need. If your sitting planning something and normal law enforcement would be able to actually arrest you...then you can not legal use a drone...or shoot them.

 

[dogtowner]

you do know that its always been legal to kill without trial right? On Sept 11 when the Fighters where scrambled to intercept the 747's...did you think it was read Miranda Rights and hold court in the air? Also did you read the follow up memo that said if someone not in the act of committing a terrorist act...you could not use a drone?you should try actually reading the whole thing...not the tid bits Fox Noise tells you.Just like all the idiots crying how they where using drones for look for your cop killer friend.

If your about to blow up a building...they can shoot you with a gun...or a drone...or what ever they need. If your sitting planning something and normal law enforcement would be able to actually arrest you...then you can not legal use a drone...or shoot them.

planes would be warned drone targets would not.
who decides if the person on the receiving end the drone strike is being. terrorist ?
who could believe holder when he ssys they have no intention of doing something he took the time to research ?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

planes would be warned drone targets would not.
who decides if the person on the receiving end the drone strike is being. terrorist ?
who could believe holder when he ssys they have no intention of doing something he took the time to research ?

OK you go warn people before you drone strike...Maybe you can also walk accross the battlefeild and say hey would you like to surrender before we shoot? DO you live in the real world? I mean realy...Its a fucking war...I don't know how you do get that...

And so if there is no radio contact with the hijacked plane...you let it hit...Good to know.

If a cop is standing in the street and your driving at him trying to hit him...does he have to yell in your window that you could be arrested or do you shoot?

Honestly when did the right become a party of fucking hippies crying about the poor terrorist who got killed. Maybe you should offer to give them a hug and ask them if they would like to talk about there feelings as well before we kill the pricks.