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.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by TDawgRex
If the ACLU were what it pretends to be, it would be very valuable to us all. Sadly though like any organization it is what it's leadership is.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
The ACLU needs to brush up on Federal Immigration Law and look at what must occur in order for a US Citizen to renounce their own cistizenship. Alawaki meets the criteria in place by his own actions that effectively ended his citizenship for the US. As a matter of fact he actually met several of the criteria.
Secondly under US law a person does not have to wait for the person pointing the gun at them to pull the trigger before they are able to defend themselves. Alawakis actions posed a clear and present danger to the citizens as well as the natioanl security of the United States.
The ACLU should also look at the flip side of the coin where alawakis actions against the US made him judge jury and executioner towards innocent US civilians.
Per the US Constitution he is allowed to associate with whomever he wishes.
He decided himself what religion he wanted to be a part of.
He decided himself to move to Yemen
He decided himself to work with al queida
If your going to play stickball in brooklynn you better know the rules.
He got what was coming to him and I wont lose sleep knowing the world is short one more terrorist.
Rule of thumb - If you dont want to be killed in a military operation, then doing take up arms against your own country.
He either gets the plague or my cavalary, whichever gets their first,
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
The ACLU needs to brush up on Federal Immigration Law and look at what must occur in order for a US Citizen to renounce their own cistizenship. Alawaki meets the criteria in place by his own actions that effectively ended his citizenship for the US. As a matter of fact he actually met several of the criteria.
Secondly under US law a person does not have to wait for the person pointing the gun at them to pull the trigger before they are able to defend themselves. Alawakis actions posed a clear and present danger to the citizens as well as the natioanl security of the United States.
The ACLU should also look at the flip side of the coin where alawakis actions against the US made him judge jury and executioner towards innocent US civilians.
Per the US Constitution he is allowed to associate with whomever he wishes.
He decided himself what religion he wanted to be a part of.
He decided himself to move to Yemen
He decided himself to work with al queida
If your going to play stickball in brooklynn you better know the rules.
He got what was coming to him and I wont lose sleep knowing the world is short one more terrorist.
Rule of thumb - If you dont want to be killed in a military operation, then doing take up arms against your own country.
He either gets the plague or my cavalary, whichever gets their first,
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Howdy, XCathdra. Hope the post tornado season has been a little more kind to you and your neighbors.
I am just going to throw out my opinion and thoughts here....
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
There are generally two schools of thought that are seen here. One is yours, and the typical conservative type viewpoint. This is that there are two different "inalienable" rights here: those afforded to American Citizens, and then the rest....snipped for response text
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
It is not clear nor present to me. Who made this decision? Did it represent a jury of peers? Any legal authority rooted in the judiciary? Or is the military throwing its weight around, violating law by committing an assassination?
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
The singular most frightening thing about todays world is the prevalence of the "two wrongs make a right" mentality. I pray, with everything in my being, that this mentality does not become rooted in the philosophy of military action (at least, more than it already is).
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
This is not some silly or phoney political debate between pundits on Fox/CNN/MSNBC/ad nauseum. This is life and death.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Erm....what does that have to do with anything? Is this a holy war?
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I had always understood the rules to be in line with the Magna Carta.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
And how many innocents are killed in these operations? Our 'surgical strikes" and "smart bombs" (one wonders why there aren't any people working on smart politicians).
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Regardless, when it comes to questions of rights, I think we should never err. But if we must err, lets always defend liberty before our buildings and infrastructure. Because that is what this really is: a sacrifice of liberty and what is right in exchange for a hope of not having any more stuff blown up in the homeland.