This is not a political or religious thread. It is a thread about the mentally ill. So please do not add this to the political thread front page statistics. BTW, for this next trick, the GOP will bring him to casinos to start doing rain man card counting.
***Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul told reporters at a press club lunch that they could be assassinated by their own government in the same way it targets Americans with ties to Al Qaeda. **Paul was criticising President Obama for approving last week’s drone strikes against an American citizen in Yemen ****based on secret intelligence that linked him to failed terrorist attacks against the U.S. *Paul told the National Press Club luncheon if citizens do not protest the deaths, the country could start adding reporters to its list of threats that must be taken out.
Anyone can be named an enemy combatant without any such egal determination by the courts etc. (There is a secret committee that determines who gets put on “the list”)
The authority of the President to kill Americans is rooted in the Patriot Act.
So, what exactly, is factually wrong about Paul’s claim?
Can you prove he’s wrong?
I doubt it.
Awlaki was an American and he was executed by the government without due process, so how the fuck do you explain that?
"Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvement with militants."
Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US? Not the Armed Forces, nor the CIA, nor Special Ops, nor the FBI, nor the police, nor the National Guard, nor the Boy Scouts. And the same goes for a US-based American journalist.
Well, not everyone has heard of the thirteenth law:
A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, reverent, **and deadly from up to a thousand yards. **
While Paul’s example is extreme, it is certainly possible.
It is disturbing that there are people, both Democrats and Republicans, that think it is crazy this killing doesn’t warrant serious discussion about due process and rights of American citizens, no matter their alleged crimes.
The fact that we have a lot of evidence is wonderful. The fact that the executive branch of government decided it was judge, jury, and executioner needs some vigorous debate.
Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US? Not the Armed Forces, nor the CIA, nor Special Ops, nor the FBI, nor the police, nor the National Guard, nor the Boy Scouts. And the same goes for a US-based American journalist.
While Paul’s example is extreme, it is certainly possible.
It is disturbing that there are people, both Democrats and Republicans, that think it is crazy this killing doesn’t warrant serious discussion about due process and rights of American citizens, no matter their alleged crimes.
The fact that we have a lot of evidence is wonderful. The fact that the executive branch of government decided it was judge, jury, and executioner needs some vigorous debate.
Absolutely. Unless he renounced his citizenship, he’s still protected under our Constitution.
“Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US?”
Tomorrow or the next day? No one, of course. But I think the point is that it doesn’t take very much to get to that point. Awlaki was an American citizen. He was targeted and killed without a trial, due process of a justice system, etc. No one doubts that he was a threat and that he did horrible things, but he was a citizen nonetheless. Citizenship comes with certain privileges, as I mentioned in the Awlaki thread. One of those privileges is not getting whacked by your own govt without due process. So, we take a little shortcut here, and the end result is something everyone is happy with because he was a bad guy. But you take that one little step to make it easier to kill American citizens. And then we take another little step, and so on and so forth, and it’s not too far down the road where the govt is able to target a journalist that it believes represents a security threat.
Is what Ron Paul said true? Probably so. Is it something that you can say and still get elected to the Presidency? No.
Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US? Not the Armed Forces, nor the CIA, nor Special Ops, nor the FBI, nor the police, nor the National Guard, nor the Boy Scouts. And the same goes for a US-based American journalist.
Ron Paul must be off his meds.
Paul presaged that part of his remarks with the hypothetical “What if the media becomes a threat?” That’s not quite the same as asserting that it’s going to happen today. As things stand, most of the media is supportive of government policies; in fact, when they object, it’s usually because they’re clamoring for politicians to take even more power.
Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US? Not the Armed Forces, nor the CIA, nor Special Ops, nor the FBI, nor the police, nor the National Guard, nor the Boy Scouts. And the same goes for a US-based American journalist.
Ron Paul must be off his meds.
Paul presaged that part of his remarks with the hypothetical “What if the media becomes a threat?” That’s not quite the same as asserting that it’s going to happen today. As things stand, most of the media is supportive of government policies; in fact, when they object, it’s usually because they’re clamoring for politicians to take even more power.
Exactly, Paul’s point is that the President can unilaterally assasinate a US citizen without due process of law.
Absolutely. Unless he renounced his citizenship, he’s still protected under our Constitution.
He never did. And because of both federal and international law, we couldn’t strip him of it. This is an amazingly simple case for some people, and amazingly complex for others. On one hand, he was the enemy, he must die. On the other hand, he was a citizen, he needs due process. On the third hand, the Geneva Convention and the various “laws of war” are ridiculously outdated and comically distanced from the reality of the fog of war.
I do think it demonstrates that the Obama administration doesn’t have the experience or desire to cover their asses or follow the law. Bush/Cheney was no standard to be held to, but at least they feigned following the process before they went and did whatever the hell they wanted to.
At a minimum, the administration should have gone the route of attempting to strip him of his citizenship, then attempting to convict him in absentia (another can of worms). None of these would have worked, but at least they would have demonstrated that they recognized the seriousness of the decision to kill a U.S. Citizen.
The real question is if Obama puts this killing above or below his Nobel Peace Prize when he updates his post presidential resume.
Paul’s talking points are more valid than Dems telling seniors that Republicans want to completely dismantle Social Security in all forms or Republicans telling folks that committees will now decide who lives and dies under Obamacare.
It’s all well and good to cheer the murder of people you don’t like, but don’t forget that someday you might fall into disfavor and end up on the receiving end. Squealing about your rights won’t help after you’ve participated in destroying them.
Who is going to kill an American journalist in the US? Not the Armed Forces, nor the CIA, nor Special Ops, nor the FBI, nor the police, nor the National Guard, nor the Boy Scouts. And the same goes for a US-based American journalist.
Ron Paul must be off his meds.
Paul presaged that part of his remarks with the hypothetical “What if the media becomes a threat?” That’s not quite the same as asserting that it’s going to happen today. As things stand, most of the media is supportive of government policies; in fact, when they object, it’s usually because they’re clamoring for politicians to take even more power.
Exactly, Paul’s point is that the President can unilaterally assasinate a US citizen without due process of law.
So again Ken, does Obama have the authority to kill US citizens, even though that citizen was no prosecuted and convicted of a crime?
I’m waiting.
He does not have the authority to kill US citizens in the US. He does not have the authority to kill US citizens outside the US unless they have committed acts of treason: journalists do not fall in that category, but al Qaeda recruiters probably do.
Paul is still incorrect that Obama can kill US journalists.
