quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

I am sticking to the point.  You seem to be missing the point.

The issue is that while the Bush admin authorized strikes against AQ, without regard to the nationality of the members just after 9/11 (and the Bush admin never claimed the right to simply assassinate American citizens, but rather to simply attack AQ members), they did not specifically target an American for assassination under that authorization.  In fact, that same concept of ignoring the rights of an American citizen was legislated in our court systems, and was held to be illegal (Hamdi vs Rumsfeld 2004).

The Obama administration has now specifically targeted an American for assassination under that authorization.

Potentiality versus reality.  Claiming the right, and expanding on, and exercising the expanded right.

This is said quite well in both articles.  Did you miss it?  You see no difference between claiming something, and acting on those claims?

If I claimed I wanted to be the new Tsar of Russian, it's one thing.  If I go to Russia and fomet a rebellion, recruit an army and attack the government of Russia is an entirely different matter.

If I claimed that some woman who I'd never met should now be my wife, and I should have the right to insert my penis into her at any time, that's one thing. Going to her home, sneaking into her house, and raping her is an entirely different matter.

Here, no less an "authority" than Keith Olbermann agrees with me (video).

Quote "it is a power not even claimed by the Bush/Chaney administration".

What I find particularly enlightening about this is the seeming willful blindness and lack of concern about the issue by many of the same people who complained and protested most viciferiously about the Bush admin's "illegal" use of wiretaps, the "illegal" holdings of both American and non-American citizens, and other such lesser affronts against our Constitutional rights, compared to an assassination order without any due process.

Kudos to Olbermann (who is not known as friendly to Bush or friendly to anyone right of center) and Glenn Greenwald, whose article started this debate (and whose most recent book, "Great American Hypocrites", examines the manipulative electoral tactics used by the GOP and propagated by the establishment press), again, not a particularly right leaning individual.

What is it that you think is equal between the policy under Bush and the policy now under Obama?

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Firm maybe I missed it somewhere but could you point me to the proof that Obama targets this man for arbitrary assignation. I just can’t see a President publicly targeting anyone for assignation.

I’m not saying it is not the case but second and third hand supposition is not proof of policy.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Both have given the go ahead to kill members af Al Qaida. The only thing you are doing is making a point that they are different nationalities. Talking of willful blindness, you quote Olbermann as having kudos, only when he agrees with your point. No doubt if Bush had done this, and not Obama, you would be defending him.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

From what I understand of your thinking, if Obama decided in a Presidential finding that Joe Liebermann was "a threat to the US and a member of AQ", then he could order him terminated as he was leaving the Senate.  Because, after all ... Bush could have done it

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

From what I understand of your thinking, if Obama decided in a Presidential finding that Joe Liebermann was "a threat to the US and a member of AQ", then he could order him terminated as he was leaving the Senate.  Because, after all ... Bush could have done it

I made my thinking clear earlier, Alwaki gave up any rights to due process when he joined AQ. I have also made clear that he (Alwaki) makes himself a target, as he is in the field fighting against US troops. I have never claimed or said anything even close to the above quote.

Lets try an exercise though, how would you deal with Alwaki while he is organising terror attacks while in Yemen ?

quote:

American forces anywhere, can legally be shot and/or killed because they are actively in combat

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy


— Beginning on May 14, 2010, in New York City, Dr. James David Manning will be presiding over the Trial of the Millennium: The C.I.A. COLUMBIA OBAMA Sedition and Treason TRIAL!

(details of the trial)

ACTION ITEMS!  EVERY CITIZEN CAN PARTICIPATE IN BRINGING THE TRUTH TO LIGHT
This is an amazing development to me.  Please read the article, watch the videos and act upon the items you feel comfortable with.  Pass this on to everyone you can.  The court date is on May 14th.  There will be a 7 day march around Columbia University before the trial each day.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/03/29/this-is-your-call-to-duty-to...

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

This thread is almost a year old.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Obama will be stepping down- or impeached in 2010 due to the Columbia trial coming up on May 14, 2010.



So- he is DONE.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Actually, the Mods frown upon old threads coming back to life. Repeatedly they have stated you can link back to the old thread and start a new one, but dont revive a thread older than 3 months.

You have been around long enough to know that, despite the snark you are trying to portray.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle


Uhmmm .... I know it's just a detail but could someone please explain to me how it's possible to have "a 7 day march around Columbia University before the trial each day"? Am I right in thinking this means there'll be magicians performing along with the comedians?