It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul & Civil Liberties Groups Decry Killing Of American Militant Without Trial (Video)

page: 3
60
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:45 AM
link   
It's a truly dismal field of candidates this election cycle. Probably the worst I've ever seen. Some of the fine folks here at ATS, after a great deal of give and take discussion, had convinced me that Dr. Paul was the only viable option, and so I had determined to vote for him if given that chance at all.

Now I can't.

If he thinks that criminal law somehow applies here, then he isn't clear on the concept of what a war is. In light of that, I can't vote for him to be made commander in chief. A commander in chief should be very clear on what is war, and what isn't war.

Criminal proceedings? The man didn't knock over a liquor store.

Criminal case? next thing you know, folks are going to want lawyers to head to the front to fight our battles. They can throw their briefcases at the enemy.

Criminal? Seriously?

You know, there are folks who swore the oath. It demands that they defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. When a man declares himself at war with us, I can't say that I truly care how many citizenships he has, or where they are from, whether foreign or domestic. Once he's declared war on us - and that "us" includes all of my family, who I'll defend to the end - he's bought and paid for.

Done deal.

I can't vote for a man who gets confused about the difference between a mugging and an act of war.

Courtroom proceedings are a gentleman's game. War is a good bit nastier.





edit on 2011/10/2 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by joshter
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


This kind of stuff SHOULDN'T be handled in our court system. Maybe in a military court with a military judge. Because I don't think our laws have jurisdiction to where he's at.

If he really was planning something dangerous as we've been told, then it won't be as simple as sending him a letter telling him to arrive in court or even send soldiers to arrest him. He declared war on the US government.


Yeah.. because open fair due process is a bad thing. The Nazis created "People courts" that took place outside their constitution.. its where Hitler sent people he didn't like to be hung after trial.

..lol.. you'll excuse me if I laugh hysterically at 1 guy declaring war on the US govt being a serious threat.. he said words.. I wasn't concerned. Dude is obviously totally insane.. like any zealot. A direct, immediate threat with the means and capability to kill untold dozens?..from youtube?..lol..

Innocent until proven guilty still applies, used to be an American virtue anyway... damn pre 9/11 thinking.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu
Ah, no credible process.. confirmed, good job.

Who found him guilty of being a so called "terrorist"..lol.. he's just some dude to me, I don't watch TV.. don't know what strangers had to say about him. I'd read court transcripts.. if there were any. If he's really that bad with gobs of evidence.. he could easily have been tried in absentia, or charged via a grand jury indictment.. govt has lots of justice avenues and followed none of them.

Heck.. the system is largely a facade anyway, obtaining "legal" authority is trivial to power.. yet they didn't even bother... conditioning the sheeple to accept politicians deciding who to kill in secret.



Imagine how much more intelligent your post would be if you actually read what you replied to, checked the link, and had a millisecond of critical thought. Perhaps you would like to try again because everything you wrote, I already responded to.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by joshter
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


Even "Innocent" people can be considered as a "Person of interest" to investigators. This wasn't some idea that stemmed from an old, angry guy with names taped over a dart board, I'm willing to bet that there is a lot that the government knows about him that we never will.

He was a vocal supporter of terrorist groups with financial ties to those that were either confirmed or suspected terrorists. My theory is they were watching him for a while and while the information was piling up, they saw he was making a "treasonous" type of move and decided it was time to do what we do to those that threaten our national security.


He said words you say?.. unpopular words.. because they didn't support the war profiteers agenda.. tisk tisk, sticks and stones. Looks like the Rush of jihad.. hardly a threat to 350 million people.

Which court or open process unveiled these alleged dastardly "financial ties" to innocent people "suspected"?.. oh yeah, none. Mere allegations. Weak ones.. from epic liars. Convincing.

I'm still not convinced this story is even real..



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


please google: blowback



Who is the president to give a signature to immediately kill an American with no questions asked? We already know even people who swear to protect the constitution at all costs are being observed as terrorists by the government.


To just be able to kill anybody that the government deems 'terrorist' doesn't make any of it ok. Do Americans deserve due process or don't they? don't blur the lines because that isn't logical in the LEAST.


Isn't this whole discussion just a re-hashing of the pros and cons of the Patriot Act???
edit on 2-10-2011 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu

Originally posted by joshter
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


This kind of stuff SHOULDN'T be handled in our court system. Maybe in a military court with a military judge. Because I don't think our laws have jurisdiction to where he's at.

If he really was planning something dangerous as we've been told, then it won't be as simple as sending him a letter telling him to arrive in court or even send soldiers to arrest him. He declared war on the US government.


Yeah.. because open fair due process is a bad thing. The Nazis created "People courts" that took place outside their constitution.. its where Hitler sent people he didn't like to be hung after trial.

..lol.. you'll excuse me if I laugh hysterically at 1 guy declaring war on the US govt being a serious threat.. he said words.. I wasn't concerned. Dude is obviously totally insane.. like any zealot. A direct, immediate threat with the means and capability to kill untold dozens?..from youtube?..lol..

Innocent until proven guilty still applies, used to be an American virtue anyway... damn pre 9/11 thinking.


Perhaps you shouldn't be posting in this thread if you don't know anything about the guy this entire thread is about. You are, by far, dearly under-estimating him. This guy wasn't just "some guy". He was a rising star where terrorism is concerned. As I've said before, which you've conveniently ignored, that he had strong ties to those who were strongly suspected and confirmed actual terrorists. Such as ties to the maker of the underwear bomber, for example. Do you understand that at all? Then he leaves the states to that same area that these suspected terrorists are meeting up at while he continues to use his influence from that area.

He wasn't killed JUST because of that. How are you NOT getting this? He would still be under investigation and surveillance if he wasn't currently involved in something that WAS dangerous. Where do you come from that you DON'T take the "Totally insane... Zealot" Seriously? Those are the kinds of people that ARE capable of doing horrible things.

Now will we ever know what was going on the 24 hours before he was killed? Probably not. Should we know? That's absolutely debatable. But should our legal court system, which doesn't have jurisdiction on him since he's in a different country, another fact you've CONVENIENTLY ignored, be responsible for digging into military information and intel? Hell no.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu

Originally posted by joshter
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


This kind of stuff SHOULDN'T be handled in our court system. Maybe in a military court with a military judge. Because I don't think our laws have jurisdiction to where he's at.

If he really was planning something dangerous as we've been told, then it won't be as simple as sending him a letter telling him to arrive in court or even send soldiers to arrest him. He declared war on the US government.


Yeah.. because open fair due process is a bad thing. The Nazis created "People courts" that took place outside their constitution.. its where Hitler sent people he didn't like to be hung after trial.

..lol.. you'll excuse me if I laugh hysterically at 1 guy declaring war on the US govt being a serious threat.. he said words.. I wasn't concerned. Dude is obviously totally insane.. like any zealot. A direct, immediate threat with the means and capability to kill untold dozens?..from youtube?..lol..

Innocent until proven guilty still applies, used to be an American virtue anyway... damn pre 9/11 thinking.


You believe Osama was innocent too then right?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


Hey, how much did you love that Ft. Hood shooting eh? You thought that was either pretty cool or just a nonevent?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by nenothtu
 


please google: blowback


Provide a link. I'm not running through 6 million links and trying to second guess which you are attempting to apply.



Who is the president to give a signature to immediately kill an American with no questions asked?


That would be the designation "Commander in Chief" which I mentioned in my post. It's a military term, applicable to situations involving war. Thanks for that. it irritates the crap out of me to be forced to defend the Hostage Taker in Chief Obama as a commander of any sort. In this case, the decision was correct, however, so I'm forced to admit that.



We already know even people who swear to protect the constitution at all costs are being observed as terrorists by the government.


That's right, and when the time comes, we'll fight like men and die like men.



To just be able to kill anybody that the government deems 'terrorist' doesn't make any of it ok.


He condemned himself, and that's fine by me if that's the way he wanted it.



Do Americans deserve due process or don't they? don't blur the lines because that isn't logical in the LEAST.


I'm not blurring any lines. Quite the contrary, I'm making a very clear delineation between a parking ticket and a declaration of war on my own people. if anyone is trying to blur any lines, it's those who can't seem to tell the difference between a court room and a battlefield. Here;s a hint: bullets are supposed to fly on one of those, and are NOT supposed to fly on the other.

Americans deserve DUE process. It's DUE to them in criminal proceedings. If you want a trial, rob a bank. If you want a bullet, go to war.



Isn't this whole discussion just a re-hashing of the pros and cons of the Patriot Act???


No.

War is much, much older than the Patriot Act, and has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. We've had the Patriot Act less than ten years. we've had war for as long as we've had people. You'd think everyone would be clear on the concept by now.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Yes, that person deserved to be killed....but, the problem is the way they went about it (and as usual, some of you are thinking short term)

The problem starts when the president starts to make decisions to have Americans killed because they are deemed domestic terrorists - and those lines of what is considered a domestic terrorists are being changed as we speak)
edit on 2-10-2011 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
OldCorps


Does anyone know anything about the other American killed in the drone strike Samir Kahn apparently he wrote a web magazine called inspire? I guess TPTB saw an opportunity for a 2for. I read about him in an article published in the lebanon daily news on Oct 1st



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


He was more than a domestic terrorist by the time we got him. He was a terrorist on a global scale. He wasn't in his basement or garage concocting deadly gasses and bombs, he was overseas in the middle east with other known terrorists devising anything of the sort against the American population and government.

The government was already looking for the guy. If they wanted to kill him from the start we never would have heard about it.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FallenWun
 


The FBI claimed they had nothing on him there is a bit of information regarding osama or is it Usama ono changedachannel's you tube profile as I remain neutral on these things it is good to collect as much info on topics to formulate better conclusions



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by joshter
 


You are correct, and I could care less that there is one less scumbag in this world, but as I said, I am worried about the near future when/if the president starts ordering people killed, labeling them as domestic terrorists.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


Make that two less scumbags that were killed without a trial, and I am curious about the identities of the other 10 supposedly killed as well.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   
One of the Seals were broken when Waco happened.


US Army General Wesley Clark released US Army Ordinance to kill the innocent women and children at Waco. They were burned alive. Those poor people had straw hay bails to insulate their buildings from the cold. Once the US Army grenades were shot in....she burnt up real quick.

Those Americans were killed without a trial. They were 100% completely innocent.

Apparently there was 1 man allegedly with an unregistered machine gun in the compound. The ATF could have caught him during his weekly trip to town for supplies. But they didn't.

They wanted to break a Seal.


And now we have a Fascist country where Americans can be killed by their Government without a Trial.

Your number will come up eventually.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by joshter
 


..lol.."rising star.." hilarious... "as seen on TV!" no doubt.

Media, govt and other assorted strangers characterizations don't impress or concern me. Charges, due process evidence and vetted facts do.

I'm impartial to who they say he is.. it doesn't change the fact politicians are handing out secret death sentences... like Iran, N Korea, China, Nazi Germany.. great company.

Another aspect of this.. just like what happened in Nazi Germany.. is a conditioning process where the sheeple are "programed", via programming, to accept dear party leader summarily killing people outside courts. It's already been done with kidnapping, torture, lawless off shore prison camps.. and other forms of draconian fascist nastiness.

This guy is just a small piece of a bigger game thats playing you.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by FallenWun
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


Hey, how much did you love that Ft. Hood shooting eh? You thought that was either pretty cool or just a nonevent?


People get shot every day... just another crime scene with stains & bodies. The only special aspect of this incident was the media spin that just so happened to fit an agenda.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by FallenWun
 


" You believe Osama was innocent too then right? "

Technically, I know he was. Letter of the law says so... politicians & media say otherwise, but they have zero credibility.. history tells us that..



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by GovtFlu
reply to post by FallenWun
 


" You believe Osama was innocent too then right? "

Technically, I know he was. Letter of the law says so... politicians & media say otherwise, but they have zero credibility.. history tells us that..



LOL You're ridiculous. YOU have zero credibility. What kind of law says that Osama is innocent? Why do you disagree with any of the evidence that the government has on the guy?



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join