Rights groups challenge Obama on targeted killings

Rights groups challenge Obama on targeted killings

news.yahoo.com

Civil liberties groups sued the Obama administration on Monday over a program they said illegally tries to kill U.S. citizens believed to be militants living abroad, like the anti-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit on behalf of Nasser al-Awlaki, the father of the Muslim cleric, arguing targeted killings violate the U.S. Constitution and international law.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Irony at it's best. Them liberals defending terrorists! ACLU does it again right? Today, in conjunction with (wait a minute *does a double-take*) the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit against *another double-take* the Obama administration for violation of the Constitution...having a policy to kill American citizens.

I gladly support the ACLU, because there is no other rights group out there that has the power and will to challenge Presidents and the government. Some may say they conflict. But maybe, their whole reason for filing lawsuits is simply to keep America free and use the role of government to protect those that would not have rights simply because a majority of Americans would gladly remove those rights.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by ExPostFacto


It was wrong when the liberal progressive Bush did it and it is wrong when the liberal progressive Obama did it.

There is no REAL difference between Bush and Obama.

They are both totalitarians.

One just spends three times as much as the other.

Patriot Act. Check.
Wars. Check.
Death warrants. Check.
unConstitutional actions. Check.
Liberty killers. Check.
Bankster whores. Check.
Corporate lackeys. Check.


I no longer give consent to be governed.
I am not liable for the debts of the corporation of the United States of America. That debt is held by the Federal Reserve, a corporation that by the Constitution that has NO authority over a flesh and blood sovereign.

Sorry, no TAXATION without representation.

If anyone wants to argue that I was allowed to vote, tell me how this country, has been screaming for smaller government for DECADES and do they listen to US? Well?

As for the death warrants, tell me, how can ANYONE with half a neuron still firing, think this in anyway is right?

reply to post by ExPostFacto


I beat ya! Mine was posted at 9:55!
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Mods can close mine if they like. No hard feelings!
News is news,no matter who brings it to the surface!

I hate human rights groups, but unfortunately they need to exist since we live in a world of madness

these illegal wars by the US are the prime example of human rights crimes ... I mean, its CRAZY to believe that people accept it as a WAR ON TERROR

people forget that terrorism actually is a term created to produce fear - just like SATAN, many other techniques we can find on these religion freaks groups

when bad people kill others = terrorism
when people dont agree with something = terrorism

really? come on ... you need to be completely nuts to believe in the word terrorism, it doesnt make any sense

I'm with The Prez on this one. Alwacki is a hard core terrorist and should be hunted down and disposed of like a mangy animal before he kills anybody else.

Way to go Barrack! I'm with you for once. Just don't tuck tail and run. OK?

This shows where Arizona made its mistake
If Arizona would have called all illegals terrorists
They would have been legally able to, just kill them on sight
like the Federal Government does!

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Gmoneycricket]

My question is, what gives this jerk, or any other jerk for that matter, the authority to kill ANYONE, if there was no direct harm done to him or his own family? That's as far as one man's authority can possibly stretch - that and MAYBE his village, but even that is mostly unnecessary. All governments are is a way to keep the "less fortunate" in servitude to the "rich", and if anyone gets hurt along the way, "better them than me" they say. Disgusting.

reply to post by On the Edge


Well I did search and it wasn't there. Maybe I was writing mine as you were posting lol. You are a good sport.

reply to post by MY2Commoncentsworth


The problem isn't so much hunting down someone that is engaged in hostilities with the US. The problem is the power to order killings. If they said we there is a warrant out for his or anyones arrest and that person puts up a fight, then a killing is warranted. But to order someone killed is absolutely another thing, it is the opposite of intending to bring someone to justice.

reply to post by ExPostFacto


One man's terrorist is another man's HERO...

How many civilians in countless countries that the US (and others) have attacked have seen friends and family members die as collateral damage??

If these people seek revenge are they terrorists??
Should they be targeted and killed like dogs?
I for one think "you reap what you sow" and the west is planting sick crops..

Whoever thinks that the President is wrong for ordering the killing of Alwacki, I would like to see you try to explain that to the families of the victims of the Fort Hood shooter.

And I would love to be there to see you try to explain it to them. I could use a good laugh.

I JUST DID explain it, above. Neither Obama, nor any other president or "authority figure" has any right whatsoever to send anyone to die, for ANY reason. That being said, Fort Hood shouldn't even exist, the US should never have attacked anyone in the middle east in the first place, hell, the US shouldn't even exist as it does! It's an intricate system of slavery, and it only continues because people don't realize that there's a better way to live.

I remember way back when I was a kid living in Arizona Territory, I think i was, and I seen this poster of a wanted man.
It read

"$5,000 Dollar rward"
"Wanted dead or alive"
"Jesse James for bank robbery, train robbery, murder"

Now it sems to me that Jesse
was an American Citizen,
living in these United States.


I say that just like torture, water boarding, used to extract timely and immediate information, is justified, then so is assassination of a identified criminal.

Besides, before the President can ever issue this kind of presidential directive, he has a team of attorneys look over the charges, information and facts before he signs off on the directive.

A "team of attorneys" who are somehow "qualified" to decide a man's fate, based upon some stuff they read, which was based upon something the writer read, and so on.
What makes anyone qualified to decide whether a man lives or dies? MOST ESPECIALLY if that man is retaliating for an attack on his home, family or friends!

[edit on 31-8-2010 by ktorvalds]

reply to post by ktorvalds


Every President has done this clear back to before the turn of 1900.

Son, we live in a world right now with walls.
Somebody has to guard the wall.
Do not criticize the manner in which the protection is provided until you pick up a weapon and stand on the wall for your turn.

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
I'm with The Prez on this one. Alwacki is a hard core terrorist and should be hunted down and disposed of like a mangy animal before he kills anybody else.

Way to go Barrack! I'm with you for once. Just don't tuck tail and run. OK?

As of 09 "Anwar Awlaki was never charged with a crime in Yemen or the US. "

Was Awlaki ever charged or found "guilty" in a court of law after that?

King obama is playing cop, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner by authorizing the murder an innocent American. Now that's killing you can believe in.