Judge Andrew Napolitano: Obama has made the 5th amendment null and void

reply to post by emberscott


Truthfully, I do not either. We have a congress with a approval rating of less then 10%, right? So, this next election we need to change that. But even if we change that, will it change? The corporations have their greedy hands in there...and pockets influence many!

reply to post by Nucleardiver


Al-Awlaki

"Do not seek any permission when it comes

to the killing of Americans." - Al-Awlaki

It was back in November of 2010 when a Yemenite judge ordered that Al-Awlaki be captured "dead or alive".

The Yemeni government began trying him in absentia in November 2010, for plotting to kill foreigners and being a member of al-Qaeda, and a Yemenite judge ordered that he be captured "dead or alive".
en.wikipedia.org...

Incidently, Al-Awlaki's 16 year old son (also an American citizen) was also assassinated by the Americans:

Two weeks later Al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen who was born in Denver, was also killed by a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen. en.wikipedia.org...

If we want to make a stronger arguement about the illegalities of political assassinations and state sponsored killings of Americans why focus so much on Al-Awlaki, and not on his 16 year old (a minor) son who was also killed by the Americans without any due process whatsoever?


These are a few of my thoughts on this particular issue.

Originally posted by Drew99GT

The founders fought a revolutionary war to institute a form of human governance where laws usurp men. Men are now undoing rule by law at a scary pace, and no ones seems to even care.

"Do not seek any permission when it comes to the killing of Americans." - Al-Awlaki


Seems to me that Obama and Holder were just taking Al-Awlaki's advice.



It was back in November of 2010 when a Yemenite judge ordered that Al-Awlaki be captured "dead or alive".

The Yemeni government began trying him in absentia in November 2010, for plotting to kill foreigners and being a member of al-Qaeda, and a Yemenite judge ordered that he be captured "dead or alive".
en.wikipedia.org...

I think a better option would be if by some congressional bill the congress along with the presidents signature declares an individual a national threat that then and only then would a president be allowed to use US Forces against that American without a trial. No way should a president be able to singularly decide if someone is an enemy of the state or not.

"How Does U.S. Justify Killing A Citizen Without Trial"

Originally posted by queenofswords
The FAA Reauthorization Act (H.R. 658.ENR) that Obama signed last month laying the groundwork for 30,000 drones to fly over US airspace may sound benign to some, but considering NDAA and now this information in the OP, all citizens concerned with privacy issues, Congressmen that slink back or don't do their due diligence, and the lack of transparency in this administration concerning the details need to stay vigilant and informed. "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing."

What can you do when these drones are active and flying around our country? You know they will all be equipped with the latest in weaponry. What are we going to have to do, wrap our cellphones and all other rfd devices in metal so the drone can't easily find us and shoot us from above?

I wonder how many mysterious "gang shootings" will pop up in the news in the near future?

The future doesn't look too good.

Originally posted by ILikeStars
"How Does U.S. Justify Killing A Citizen Without Trial"

So sick.
Do we really think that one day they will declare the War on Terror to be over?
Yeah right!

reply to post by ILikeStars


That's my point,

you can't say Bush was so bad, he killed thousand's in illegal wars (which weren't illegal anyway),

but Obama is not responsible because he didn't do it with his own hands?

If the congress approves it, it is a legal act of war....not saying it is morally right or wrong.

But both president's need to be held to the same standard, as do all the people who put them in office.

Originally posted by TimesUp

So sick.
Do we really think that one day they will declare the War on Terror to be over?
Yeah right!

Damn good point, friend.

reply to post by Drew99GT


While this is so, it is also the fault of every single nitwit that cheered on the Patriot act. Hey, many of you fools wanted safety over freedom. Guess that Ben Franklin quote didn't mean much to you.

Americans poll over majority that they prefer security over freedom.

This is YOUR America. This is what YOU wanted. Live with it as it isn't going away.

Bunch of flag, waving, jingoistic morons.

As bad is Obama IS, it would have been way worse with Sadistic Sara (and she would have "Johnson'd" McCain like JFK). Santorum appears just as bad.

EDIT:

In this context: "US Political Madness: This forum is dedicated to the discussion of the state of divisive politics in the US including political ideology, politicians, political figures, politics in the media, and speculation of conspiracy theories related to the divisive state. Participants should be aware that this forum is under close staff scrutiny. Because of the inherent distrust of government by conspiracy theorists, discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to be highly critical of the current administration." ---

My characterization of Sara as sadistic is an opinion based on numerous reports of her abusive behavior toward subordinates as well as the turnky-kill video. And the "Johnson'd" inuendo is draws upon Oliver Stone's movie, JFK. So maybe my post should have elaborated that, or maybe it just gets dumped. Or maybe it is "good enough". Its sorta hard to tell.

Originally posted by TKDRL
What a joke.... WTF are we supposed to do about it? What can we do about it? I been doing all I know how to do, hasn't helped any. Short of storming capitol hill and hanging all those fools for treason, is there anything we can do?

There are two things we can do prior to becoming militantly discontent.

The first is, of course, that we vote the incompetent and/or corrupt federal legislators out of office after their first term if they do not perform. This is not likely to happen because the majority of voters are ignorant and the majority of campaign finance is provided by large corporations with unlimited funds. A recipe for disaster.

Second, we can individually and/or collectively seek redress of any unconstitutional actions of our government by filing a Civil Rights Complaint in accordance with Title 42, Section 1983 of the United States Code. The last time I filed one about ten years ago, it cost about three hundred dollars. I got the remedy I was seeking prior to going to trial. If most US citizens knew their constitutional rights -- which they do not unfortunately -- they could use this complaint to seek redress of unconstitutional actions by our government officials. It is my observation that most people here in the US do not even know their "Bill of Rights", so how can they orally articulate a coherent argument seeking redress much less file a complaint in a federal court.

Unfortunately, I suspect that militancy, violence, and the deaths of many brave patriots will be required to turn this cluster%&#$ around if it is not already too late. If Obama is elected again, I am confident our country, as envisioned by the "Founding Fathers", is history.

reply to post by Ghost375

The US Constitution does not say "that Congress can quell a rebellion any way it wants....". Section 8 says in part that "The Congress shall have Power To...suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;". Implicit in all assigned powers by the constitution is that due process will be applied.

I am no constitutional scholar. Therefore, I could have missed and/or forgot the part of the constitution you were referring to. If so, please refresh my memory.

reply to post by ILikeStars

In short, yes. Obama is the chief of our military and Holder is responsible for articulating statutory and constitutional law for the President. They, although not directly responsible, would be "superior respondeats" in a civil suit or in legal terms.

See link: en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by timetothink

The total lack of "Due Process" is the difference. And, Al-Awlaki and his 16 year old son were US citizens.

Originally posted by ladygeek
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

There's the whole Department of Homeland Security for one - a group which upholds the Patriot Act when you go through any airport for one. The Patriot Act is a complete violation of all citizen's civil rights.

Once again -- what is violated? Just stating it is, doesn't make your case. Explain -- Educate -- Show me.

Then there's the matter of police having no need to get search warrants.

While I am against police not adhering to the obtaining search warrants, there have been cases in the Supreme Court, that haven't even invoked the Patriot Act, that agree that there are certain circumstances in which authorities have not acted outside of the 5th Amendment scope and did not overstep their bounds.

This isn't to say that the Supreme Court is always right, but after reading their reasoning on such cases, I believe they made sound Constitutional arguments that warrant such actions

reply to post by Plotus

I am not intentionally disparaging our military, but you presume that our military is astute enough to understand that the actions of our leaders are unconstitutional in the first place. I often suspect that our politicians and law enforcement officials, much less the military, do not understand our constitutional rights.

Unfortunately, the military will initially stand by the POTUS if there is a rebellion. Only after many are lost will there be an incremental shift in their attitudes.

reply to post by lambros56

I blame the American public for their ignorance. To do otherwise would be like blaming McDonald's for your childrens' obesity.

I am appalled and concerned about the article and the comments themselves… Though, people are right, it is our fault for not realizing sooner what was going on.

But I ask, what are we, the common person, supposed to do? Honestly, what can people, sitting behind their computers all over the world, reading such things do? USA citizens can go to law school for 4-8 years, work for the government and try to change things from the inside but one person can’t do it alone. And grouping up? Forming an alliance, group, or any such thing would not only be difficult it’s dangerous. Especially now. The issue is many people who believe such things are viewed as left wing extremists, out of the box, and when you start to form groups, THEN you become a threat because it doesn’t matter what you do, say, have in writing. If THEY think something dubious is going on, that’s it, you’re done. Add in if the media gets involved, not only can it completely humiliate you, destroy any cause you have (no matter how noble) they will write anything they want, say anything they want and there is nothing you, or your group could do about it. And if that doesn’t work… I don’t want to sound like I have been watching to many movies, but who knows what they could do to singled out people. I certainly don’t.

Sure we have blog boards all over the web, but if you really think about it, it’s not like they don’t know the blogs are here. We are allowed the luxury of such places because no matter how often we say “something should be done”, “how could people let this happen”, “Americans should do something”, how many of us has actually gone out and done something that was effective? As bad as it has gotten, or gets, there is not much we as normal citizens can do at this point, space for all out revolution and I’m not jumping on that bandwagon anytime in the foreseeable future. Even people on this site are spread out all over the world. How do you band together people even for a peaceful cause without massive funding? How many people have the extra money in times like these to fly off anywhere for a peace rally? Really the list goes on and on.

I can say with pure certainty that I am in no way a “domestic terrorist” for being opinionated. Regardless what anyone says, man or government I have the right to say as I please and think what I want. Because I have an opinion, or do not agree with every single thing our government says, I am no way a terrorist. I do agree that something should be done. Not by ways of war, but from peace. I think Americans should have a say in how our government is run, not through our senators but through the vote of the actual people. Not electronically but in paper, names written on every ballet. If people are too afraid to openly admit their opinions then something is wrong with the world. Everyone should stand by their beliefs, if you feel ashamed of what you believe then you should reconsider what your values are. Here is my little rant for the week. Sorry its so long.

reply to post by FeatherofMaat


Hey! Freedom isn't free, y'know? Freedom costs a buck o' five!


Yellow ribbon! Dey took our jerbs!