The Truth Is Viral - ACLU: "Obama is now Judge, Jury, and Executioner"

page: 1
42
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+3 more 
posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
In the second part of this episode of The Truth Is Viral, Bobby speaks with Nate Wessler, Senior Fellow at the ACLU's National Security Project. Mr. Wessler's field of expertise is the practice of "Targeted Assassinations," which are being used against those individuals whom President Obama alone has deemed a threat to national security. In this interview, Wessler states the ACLU's position that the President has unlawfully assumed the mantle of "Judge, Jury, and Executioner," and that the civil rights organization is "deepy troubled" about U.S. citizens being targeted for assassination without any type of judicial review or Congressional oversight.


(click to open player in new window)



 



This is a video series from ATS Member, Bob Powell (a.k.a. OldCorp), the views of which do not necessarily represent those of AboveTopSecret.com management, or that of The Above Network, LLC.



+14 more 
posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
For those who may not be aware, I AM NOT the OP "AboveTopSecret.com" The thread is simply an announcement of the posting of the video.

The next video focuses on the CIA sponsored overthrow of the Libyan government by "rebels" trained by the CIA and MI6 to advance the agenda of the "Banksters."

Cheers ATS,
Bobby



*If you like this video, you may voice that approval by depositing your stars here. I guess I'll have to do without the flags.

edit on 11/1/2011 by OldCorp because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
 


How Ironic. Obama taken to task by his own. The plot thickens as they realize just how phoney the Alinsky Progressives actually are and who and what the true NWO is.

Alas, poor Obama! I knew him, ACLU, a fellow of infinite
mistrust, of most superior desires. He hath fooled me a
thousand times, and now how abhorr'd in my imagination it is!
My gorge rises at it.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


It is amusing to watch the snake eat it's own tail.

While I can't say that I am a fan of the ACLU, they do serve their purpose from time to time.

edit on 1-11-2011 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 


Thanks OldCorp, I will watch your video when my dinner is ready shortly.

I really like the work you have done in the past and I am personally behind you and support your efforts.

If only the world had more journalists such as yourself, we would be far better off and know a lot more about what is going on.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
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.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
 


Excellent Video!!!!

Watched the entire thing !

Whos next? You know who......Old Corp...


Miami



Surveillance,not spying they say........

And its not Just the President making these decisions,although he signs the death warrant........


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.


Secret panel can put Americans on "kill list'

The perpetual "war on terrorism",is the ploy to take ALL freedoms away. Period.

I leave off with this quote................

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. ~Ronald Reagan



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Hi there.

I'm trying to watch the video via smart phone-so that might be
the issue....

I tried watching the video and it said something like "content removed" & the video was gone?

Is anyone else having the same issue???



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


I wholeheartedly agree. The ACLU is the original "Occupy"...but with lawyers. And they all seem to disagree with one another.

I've seen pro gun ACLU and Anti-gun ACLU in the courts.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
no matter how often people think obama does this and that wrong

what matters is which party was at the helm when things were established like the
department of homeland security, when laws were created like the patriot act, and when this nation was lead
into a war cause of an attack from a handful of terrorists.
A war which drained our money, and made specific companies rich, who really benefit from that.

Now with current politics we see a nice try putting the system to a shape the so called 99% would like,
and see it constantly battered by this very same party again blocking decisions in the congress, just to show
where the frog has its hair.

Over almost all the decades there was one party playing the cool guys wasting money, and the other party had to solve the financial issues arising from that.

and you guys simply don't get it which party did what.

i would like to ask to rememeber who the rich 1% in our nation are, and who serves whom better.
Checkout who got the money.
Checkout the laws which were fabricated, the decisions being made.

it does not matter if you sit it out on wallstreet, amusing the 1%
it matters wether you put those 1% back into business or not.

got it ?



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Wouldn't it be ironic if they end up calling their US based UAV fleet the Patriot Drones. Like the liberty eroding Patriot Act. I can see the commercial now from homeland security. The Patriot Drone flying the skies over American keeping us safe from Al Ciada. They then are used to target dissenters and smaller government activist which have been relabeled domestic terrorist.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
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,



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

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.


Or what its name says it is: American Civil Liberties Union. It is in their focus on "civil liberties" that makes them so damned annoying, and even at times flat out dangerous. This is the organization that - in spite of recent SCOTUS rulings - maintains that the 2nd Amendment is a "collective right" and not an individual one.

The ACLU, tragically, is far too much what they pretend to be, and not nearly enough advocates of individual unalienable rights.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
It was my phone & I was finally able to watch the video!!!

Excellent, thought provoking video, must say.

Why would they take this guys son out a week or two later????

I'm actually impressed with the ACLU's stance on this one!

Oh & I loved the "my furry butt" comment...LOL!!!!




posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Drones are the perfect intervention invention. They fly so hi, no one knows they are there. From their lofty position, they can't see any borders. Operators aren't told why a particular "target" is selected, just to hit "it". And the drone has no denial ability. If a person or place is sanctioned, then hell fire will rain down at any time and any where on the globe, without so much as a how_ do_ you_ do. America has way over stepped their bounds with these things. We think we can invent a thing and just bypass all the regular channels of declaring war on any one, anywhere and that there will be no repercussions for it. We are woefully mistaken about that. Time will prove that out. Just as soon as we create enough collateral damaged minds to respond back to us in kind.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
 

Interesting video.

One problem, the background music overshadows the people speaking.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   
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 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.


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.

Then there is the other view that rights are inherent in our existence, and thus ALL humanity shares our rights.

While I understand the merits of both arguments, I must point out that rights are not afforded us by our government. Our rights emanate from the Creator via the fact that we exist. This mans citizenship, in this understanding, is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is, all humans have the right of due process. If there is law that states otherwise, it is tyranny as it displays the hubris of believing that legal authority grants rights, not the Creator.



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.


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?




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.


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).

This is not some silly or phoney political debate between pundits on Fox/CNN/MSNBC/ad nauseum. This is life and death.



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.


Erm....what does that have to do with anything? Is this a holy war?



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.


I had always understood the rules to be in line with the Magna Carta.




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,


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).

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.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Gonna start calling you 'Brass Ones Bob'! You've definitely made Obama's list…good on ya.


Mr. Wessler brings up an interesting point in that drone tech WILL be further developed by other countries and it will be interesting to see if it comes back to haunt us in that respect.

There's not much doubt that the Al-Awlaki incident is in danger of being construed by other American administrations as a 'precedent' and used again…short of American citizens voting/ousting disconnected sociopathic politicos out of office permanently.

And the Judge was right on: It wasn't so long ago that the concept of assassination was anathema to most citizens AND politicians.

What happened? Ticks me off. Tick Tock, Tick Tock…this crap is gonna bite us in the butt.

Good show, looking forward to more…if a drone doesn't cancel the series.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   

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,


There is no evidence Alawaki was a threat the only evidence anyone has seen is a few video clips of him preaching anti-government rhetoric. Everything else he supposedly is is nothing more then a bunch of unsubstantiated accusations promoted by a media campaign with the assurance that a bunch of politically connected secret attorneys approved in secret.

This is a very bad precedent here, there is no accountability, no authority, and evidence. That is why the founders put in the 5th and 6th amendments to the constitution that no man could be deprived of life liberty or property without due process and every man was entitled to a trial by jury. With this precedent they can label anyone they want a terrorist or threat and take them out.

Pin the terrorist or Al CIAda label on it and the American people will go long with anything it seems.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   

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....

So far so good.. Slowly rebuilding.


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

While ive seen the argument before about rights and where they come from, in this particular case the argument being used revolves around citizenship and how that affects what occured. I dont have to wait to have a person who is pointing a gun at me pull the trigger before acting. To use the flip side argument people make about Bush, Bush never killed anyone personally, however his orders are cited to argue the war crimes charge against him.

Using their same argument, Alawaki is in the same boat.



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?

When a person looks at you and says im going to kill you, you dont have to wait for that person to pull the gun and get a round off before you can act. The intent was established when the comment was made, and is part of US law when it comes to justifiable defense and a justified homocide.


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).

We are already there and the US is heading towards the slope. However, on the other side the system they use accepts the eye for an eye mentality. When the rules that govern us dont account for that setup, we have a problem.



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.

I am fully aware of that.


Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Erm....what does that have to do with anything? Is this a holy war?

Because the argument people are using is that the attack on him was unconstitutional because he was a US citizen. My response was he can associate with whomever he wants. In this case he chose a group is is actively at war with the US. Under US immigration laws, the moment he took that route, he himself gave up his citizenship through his actions, which are spelled out and clear.


Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I had always understood the rules to be in line with the Magna Carta.

Being arrested in a foreign country for a crime committed in the US, and during that custody you talk to the foreign police, you cant claim that your miranda rights were violated. If your going to plays stickball in brooiklynn, you better know the rules.


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).

No idea.. maybe they should act like cowards and hide behind civilian populations where they know full well any atack on them will result in civilian casualties. I get what your saying, however it doesnt excuse terrorist tactics.



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.

I agree however if a US citizen is going to cross over and take up arms against the United States, regardless if its for religious, personal, terrorist, etc reasons, the fact remains they established their loyalty.

If we had a extradtition treaty with Yemen then I could see trying to arrest him. However, since we dont, then what? As I said earlier, just because a person does not physically pull the trigger doesnt make that person immune from criminal prosecution.

As many many many people pointed out with calls to arrest Bush and Cheney.

Why is it ok to push action against those 2 and not alawaki?



top topics
 
42
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join