[Salon] Obama authorizes assassination of U.S. citizen

What I always found scary about stuff like this and Gitmo is how you can just label someone a terrorist and have them waterboarded and killed. If I was president and anti-semitic couldn't I just label all jews as terrorists? Or all blacks or whites or pagans? Couldn't this lead to genocide?

 

No, it would never be on such a massive scale. It's still scary though because one or two deaths here and there fly right under the radar.

 

Tr. Awlaki status has been changed from "inspirational" leader to "gone operational" based on information obtained from investigations of the Ft. Hood and Christmas day terrorist attacks.

Hence, the authorization to capture or assassinate Tr. Awlaki--ASAP.

So the key factors here were:

1. Tr. Awlaki being the spiritual leader of at least two of the 9/11 terrorist. I guess this was basically forgiven, until......

2. Evidence was found linking him to directing the Ft. Hood shooter.

3. Evidence was found linking him to directing the Christmas Day bomber.

If the US waits until he is captured and tried through the proper legal channels, there is a high risk that more US citizens may be killed in terrorist attacks.

Obama probably realizes that any chances he has of being reelected is only one major terrorist attack away from being doomed.

However, it seems that Obama's latest take on the assassination policy is similar the DWI laws, its three strikes and your out for Tr. Awlaki.

What I find ironic is that those that advocate the most protection of these terrorists are the very same group that would be "wiped out" first if these extremists ever realized their world vision.

After all, they are the "poster child" of "conservatism gone wild."

 

and you freaks pray for it every day

you're a piece of......work

 

The Cleric claims that he is innocent. There have been mistakes already in people who were supposed terrorists and arrested, but later it turned out they weren't terrorists.

If an American citizen who claims he is innocent, can be denied any sort of a trial, and sentence just passed not by a jury of his peers, but by the government who we aren't supposed to trust any way, then what does that say about the safety of our other rights?

I have no idea if he is guilty or not, but until we have vetted the evidence and had it go through a legal trial, I'm not comfortable with the government just saying they can kill him.

You supported the tea party who supposedly doesn't trust the gov. but when it comes down to killing Muslims we are just supposed to take the word of our govt. at face value?

 

You are totally off base here. What you don't seem to understand is that impressions are everything in politics

Liberals as seen as soft on national security--I am not saying this is true--just the general perception out in the public.

Its basically no different than when The TEA Party is falsely labeled as only made up of "racist white trash."

I was only pointing out a political perception that would not favor his reelection. And he knows that.

I would happily settle for another Obama term, if it would assure no further attacks on America.

Unfortunately, there has already been two attacks already on his watch--so this is a moot point of discussion.

 

Yes, we know. Hence the reason facts mean little to your little teabagger party.

Anyway to the subject at hand, very troubling and, like FB, am very uncomfortable with the mindset.

 

But I will say it’s an interesting dichotomy.

One day Obama signs a treaty to lower the US nuclear arsenal (love it) and the next sign off on a program that, to me at least, sounds repugnant?

We have a very complex president.

 

Cool, people are finally learning about the false left-right paradigm! *pats on back* Too bad it's too late.