Assasination Power & Outlawry

I wrote a post over at the Conversation suggesting we can square the Assassination Power Circle by returning to the very ancient concept of "outlawry," in which a criminal is declared outside the protection of the law.

The chief benefit of this is that it's a transparent process. Strike that-- the chief benefit of this is that it is a process in the first place, and not just One Man deciding which citizens will get whacked this weekend.

Posted by: Ace at 06:21 PM



Comments

1

I was just reading your post over there.

And, noticed all the lovely links to Ace thereafter.

Posted by: confessions of a beachcomber at February 07, 2013 06:22 PM (LpQbZ)

2 FIRST !

Posted by: FURPC at February 07, 2013 06:22 PM (0ImZM)

3 Invite in the private sector: post a reward.

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 06:24 PM (QupBk)

4 2 FIRST !

Posted by: FURPC


Barrel.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 07, 2013 06:24 PM (NTBjC)

5 I'm looking forward to Death Race 2016.
_

Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 07, 2013 06:24 PM (RuUvx)

6 This applies to piracy as well. On land they are known as brigands.

Posted by: Minuteman at February 07, 2013 06:24 PM (jpbOX)

7 Well FeinStein just said that her and her team of comrades on the INTEL committee get to be in on it.

Is that codified?

Probably not.

There is a speech by Holder and then the memo.

Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:25 PM (r2PLg)

8 Wasn't outlawry the fictional conceit behind Django Unchained?

Posted by: logprof at February 07, 2013 06:25 PM (mi1DY)

9 in which a criminal is declared outside the protection of the law.
I believe we used to call them desperadoes.

Posted by: Linda Ronstadt at February 07, 2013 06:25 PM (6TB1Z)

10 Sarah Palin needs to come out against guns and these Extremist mass murdering tea party types like Chris Dorner if she wants to ever be taken seriously again.

Posted by: Jordan at February 07, 2013 06:25 PM (+OTLF)

11 Think this through, Ace. What happens when we are all declared criminals?

Posted by: L, elle at February 07, 2013 06:26 PM (0PiQ4)

12 Maybe we should just go back to whatever method Bush used (whatever that was.)


The Evil Cowboy was never as brazen or homicidal as Robin Hoody.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:26 PM (p/PNg)

13 8
in which a criminal is declared outside the protection of the law.
I believe we used to call them desperadoes.


The term you're looking for is Jackanapes.

Posted by: Buzz Killington at February 07, 2013 06:26 PM (6TB1Z)

14 Think this through, Ace. What happens when we are all declared criminals?

Glenn Reynolds is way out in front on this. When we are all criminals, government can do anything they like to us. Oh, wait, they already do.

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (6TB1Z)

15 hostis humani generis

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (QupBk)

16 Oh no.

Is that a Jordan sock?

Posted by: L, elle at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (0PiQ4)

17 I think that confirmation that the left has no intention to ever give up the reins of power is implicit in their silence over the First Drone Flyer.

Air Force Drone?

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (feFL6)

18 I am all for wacking these assholes, but citizenship in this country confers certain privileges that should not be arbitrarily taken away by a couple of assholes in a West wing office eating doughnuts, drinking coffee and drawing red slashes through Americans' faces.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (GsoHv)

19
....in which a criminal is declared outside the protection of the law.
I believe we used to call them desperadoes.

Nonsense, we call 'um my sons.

Posted by: Ma Barker at February 07, 2013 06:28 PM (ndqJC)

20 Here's a contrary opinion:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/024233.html

I'm going to disagree with Mr Auster. I mean, we're all in agreement that pirates swaying gently in the breeze is a lovely sight. But unless there's a process of law, we're on course to become pirates ourselves.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:28 PM (QTHTd)

21 Is that a Jordan sock?

Is it stupid?

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 06:28 PM (QupBk)

22 US citizens are not protected by the US Constitution while in Yemen or Saudi Arabia. If so, they would have freedom of speech and religion.

Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (LSTjp)

23 This would also address another concern: That the individual targeted for assassination might not even know he's been so designated, and have no chance to respond. Put his name in for consideration for an Authorization for Use of Lethal Force; let him submit documents in his defense if he likes.

_______________________

I know I am going to get bombed for this but even stateside if there is an eminent threat--say a cop has to take out a shooter--the due process sometimes comes after the event.

Note: I am not trying to argue I am undecided and trying to process it all still.

Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg)

24 Is it stupid?

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 06:28 PM (QupBk)
Completely.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (GsoHv)

25 I have been saying this for 3 days here. This is covered under LOAC (Law of Armed Conflict). Terrorists are unlawful combatants and you can kill them and the Geneva convention does not even apply to them. Because they do not wear a uniform, for a nation under a flag and hide among civilians they are unlawful combatants, "outlaws" for you. You can drone these people

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (Dnbau)

26 Speaking of stupid.

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (QupBk)

27 My daddy Obama would never assassinate me.

Posted by: Marmo at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (pcgW1)

28 "14 Think this through, Ace. What happens when we are all declared criminals?

Glenn Reynolds is way out in front on this. When we are all criminals, government can do anything they like to us. Oh, wait, they already do.

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:27 PM (6TB1Z) "

We already are all criminals. Racism, Sexism, Homophobia, Imperialism, Slavery, etc... those are all "crimes." And Leftism is the "Justice System."

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (p/PNg)

29 So what if a daddy wants to assassinate his children?

Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (BVkEs)

30 heh, desperadoes and jackanapes....

I was trying to add my own joke but I can't think of ANYTHING!

I am totally blank. Damnit, I've got like five of these, but I'm too tired to bring them up in front of my brain.

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:30 PM (LCRYB)

31 Ooops crap.

Left a Hirohito sock on.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:30 PM (r2PLg)

32 29
So what if a daddy wants to assassinate his children?


Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (BVkEs)
If you are a muslim daddy its not legitimate assassination if you can show that it was an honor killing.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:30 PM (+OTLF)

33 The ability to kill and American citizen should be hard to get. You better have a damn good reason and a chain of people with checks and balances. To give TFG the ability to murder American citizens at will is a big fkn mistake.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:31 PM (l86i3)

34 Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg)

Agreed. It was a very weak point.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:31 PM (GsoHv)

35 Rapscalions.

Hooligans.

Ne'er-do-wells.

Vegans.

Posted by: Pug Mahon at February 07, 2013 06:31 PM (K+mtQ)

36 "22 US citizens are not protected by the US Constitution while in Yemen or Saudi Arabia. If so, they would have freedom of speech and religion.

Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (LSTjp) "

You are obscenely stupid. The Constitution limits what the US Government can do.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (p/PNg)

37 i want to play but my brain isn't working well enough...

... i feel like ergie....

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (LCRYB)

38 LOAC people, look it up. It is already international law, has been used forever, has been used by US armed forces forever. They are unlawful combatants.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (Dnbau)

39
Kinda like the guy that made the anti-islam video?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (+z4pE)

40 The main thing to understand about the left - when they obtain power, the tools we provide them to use against our foreign enemies will sooner or later be turned against their domestic enemies.

And that's us, fellas.

Posted by: mongo78 at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (2b46R)

41 Read on the con webs a long time ago in the early post-911 days, that the roman's simply declared pirates to be enemies of civilization. That's why they could hang 'em on the spot.

I think that's what you're going for here. No safe harbor for monsters.

Posted by: joeindc44 is now more concerned about Dark Ages 2.0 than Great Depression 2.0 at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (QxSug)

42 Rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists

Posted by: can't let go of old memes at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (QupBk)

43 Ace, his army with fists open.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (iMHYN)

44 damn hooligans and rapscallions are virtually in my active vocabulary

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (LCRYB)

45 And that's us, fellas.
Posted by: mongo78 at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (2b46R)

AMEN!

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (l86i3)

46 Glenn Reynolds is way out in front on this. When we are all criminals, government can do anything they like to us. Oh, wait, they already do.


Actually, they can do less. When a man has nothing left to lose, he becomes a Chris Dorner. (Not batshit crazy, just nothing left to lose)

Posted by: rickb223 at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (45vNz)

47 33
The ability to kill and American citizen should be hard to get. You
better have a damn good reason and a chain of people with checks and
balances. To give TFG the ability to murder American citizens at will is
a big fkn mistake.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:31 PM (l86i3)
What difference does it make anyway?? Whether its with obamacare, rationed health care services and unelected beurocrats on a death panel deciding when granny should just get some asprin and be told to hurry up and die, or a drone strike....the end result is the same.If we didnt want to give that cocksucking piece of shit the ability to kill americans, we shouldnt have let them enact Obamacare.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (+OTLF)

48 Air Force Dr'One.

Needs work. But I think it's close.

Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (feFL6)

49 Imminent damn it.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (r2PLg)

50 "25 I have been saying this for 3 days here. This is covered under LOAC (Law of Armed Conflict). Terrorists are unlawful combatants and you can kill them and the Geneva convention does not even apply to them. Because they do not wear a uniform, for a nation under a flag and hide among civilians they are unlawful combatants, "outlaws" for you. You can drone these people

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (Dnbau) "

If they're in combat, sure.

If they're scratching their balls in a Starbucks...

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (p/PNg)

51
I know I am going to get bombed for this


Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg)


--Dude, you got bombed hundreds of times in the '40s.

Posted by: logprof at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (mi1DY)

52 Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:30 PM (LCRYB)

I think jackanapes refers to kids, but it's such a damned good word....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (GsoHv)

53 But Booooosh! Waterboarding is torture! Nothing can be that bad.

Posted by: Marmo at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (pcgW1)

54 Couldn't Obama just declare him an enemy combatant?

Posted by: Lauren at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (wsGWu)

55 And that's us, fellas.

You're just a pawn in game of life.

Posted by: can't let go of old memes at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (QupBk)

56 That would be a good idea. A list of evil opponents that the public is free to attack as they will.


Oh wait, the SPLC already does that.

Posted by: WheelmanForHire at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (l8nIR)

57 The German American's hung by FDR here were not in combat. LOAC, its all the rage

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (Dnbau)

58 How the flying schmuck am I getting eminent in my imminent.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (r2PLg)

59 >>>returning to the very ancient concept of "outlawry," in which a criminal is declared outside the protection of the law.

That would be a bill of attainder. And as such is against the Constitution.

I like my resolution better.
1. Citizen has to not be in the US or within Sovereign US territory.
2. Citizen must be accused of treason.
3. Citizen must have an arrest warrant issued against him for treason.
4. DOJ must publicly announce said warrant and demand the Citizen repatriate to answer the charges.
5. After a reasonable period to respond (No less than 3 months) then the President may use personal discretion as to whether the Citizen will be arrested or killed if his location is discovered and the Citizen still has not repatriated.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (0q2P7)

60 Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (+OTLF)

True, but I will fight against every power TFG wants.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (l86i3)

61 US citizens are not protected by the US Constitution while in Yemen or
Saudi Arabia. If so, they would have freedom of speech and religion.


The fuck is this shit?

US Citizens are protected by the US Constitution in Yemen. Unfortunately they are also bound by the laws of Yemen which, if they break, means they stand to be arrested by Yemenis. Then it's the US Government's duty to rescue them (if all they did was trip over a merchant's Koran stand) or else to let them rot (if they were robbing the merchant).

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (QTHTd)

62 Amerishaka...when the walls fell

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (+OTLF)

63 Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (r2PLg)

The affect is the same.....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (GsoHv)

64 Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (0q2P7)


Sounds fair to me.

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (l86i3)

65 Advocates of central planning always envision themselves as the central planner.


Advocates of drone assasinations always envision themselves at the joystick.

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (qqZuQ)

66 51
I know I am going to get bombed for this


Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg)


--Dude, you got bombed hundreds of times in the '40s.
Posted by: logprof at February 07, 2013 06:33 PM (mi1DY)

______________________

I went big.

That small kinetic action is for muzzies.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (r2PLg)

67

This is so creepy.

It shows King O's complete disconnect with America, the Constitution, Individual rights, the rule of law, etc.

It's like he is hovering above our country, believes he is a higher being, and has the power to do as he pleases.

The shallowness and ignorance of the man shines brighter.

He could never define wisdom.

Posted by: confessions of a beachcomber at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (LpQbZ)

68 The discussion is viable, but the conclusion is highly illogical. If THOUSANDS of people belonging to a certain demoraphic, and who happen to be US citizens, join the ranks of an enemy during a conventional conflict - do you need the Congress in it's full assembly to declare each of them, individually, an outlaw?

Do you cancel air strikes on enemy camp because in one of the tents there is a US citizen?

This is nuts. There is no need to "declare" anyone, this isn't even the job of the POTUS. If there is a declared war or a de-facto war, any single enemy combantant is a target.

Citizenship is a civil mater, not military one.

Posted by: Combine of the Yeast at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (F4i/Q)

69 It would turn the LA game currently being played into the national sport...

kind of like a loose version of "Running Man"

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (LRFds)

70 57 They were tried by military tribunal,caught red handed with explosives after being landed by U-boat to commit sabotage.

Posted by: steevy at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (9XBK2)

71 when Iran nukes Washington DC, will we retaliate...

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (+OTLF)

72 "57 The German American's hung by FDR here were not in combat. LOAC, its all the rage

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (Dnbau) "

You honestly want to debase citizenship? Have you even thought this through at all?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (p/PNg)

73 BTW Outlawry was declared illegal under the Magna Carta, whose provisions of rights are generally considered part of US Citizens rights.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (0q2P7)

74 3
Invite in the private sector: post a reward.


Make the list public. $1M reward alive, $500k dead, no questions asked.

You'd have them all within a month. Their own people would give them up.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (J6hHs)

75 Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Note that "Nor be deprived of life . . ." is NOT moderated by the same 'in time of War' qualifiers as "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless . . ." There is no 'unless' there. Interesting no? No matter how 'ethical' and 'wise' these 'targeted killings' (aka assassinations) are, there's good cause to think they ain't legal. Obama: Foresworn. Again.

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (hHgxI)

76 matter, damnit

Posted by: Combine of the Yeast at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (F4i/Q)

77 5. After a reasonable period to respond (No less than 3 months) then the
President may use personal discretion as to whether the Citizen will be
arrested or killed if his location is discovered and the Citizen still
has not repatriated.


Would that time period change if you knew he was actively plotting to kill other Americans? Al-Awlaki, to pick a name at random.

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (6TB1Z)

78 63 Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:34 PM (r2PLg)

The affect is the same.....
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (GsoHv)

_________________________

Lawyers with there fancy talk always screwing me up.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (r2PLg)

79
The fuck is this shit?

US Citizens are protected by the US Constitution in Yemen. Unfortunately they are also bound by the laws of Yemen which, if they break, means they stand to be arrested by Yemenis. Then it's the US Government's duty to rescue them (if all they did was trip over a merchant's Koran stand) or else to let them rot (if they were robbing the merchant).

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (QTHTd)

--Remember Michael Fay, the dipshit teen who committed vandalism in Singapore? Glad we didn't bail his ass completely out.

Posted by: logprof at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (mi1DY)

80 Mike the Moose all that is not required, specifically the arrest warrant, publishing of said warrant, and waiting period. I also think, that in time of war, it is a really really bad idea. You do not want lawyers running the battlefield

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (Dnbau)

81 "65 Advocates of central planning always envision themselves as the central planner.


Advocates of drone assasinations always envision themselves at the joystick.

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 06:36 PM (qqZuQ) "

This.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (p/PNg)

82 there=their

Wow--I need Doritos.

Damn Ace and his french stuff.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (r2PLg)

83 do you need the Congress in it's full assembly to declare each of them, individually, an outlaw?

No; you need the courts to take them all to trial for treason. If they can't show up because, oh darn, they're too busy firing rockets at Jews and embassies then they can be convicted in absentia.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:39 PM (QTHTd)

84 do you need the Congress in it's full assembly to declare each of them, individually, an outlaw?

If they are American citizens on American soil you do. That's what gives Militias power

Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on KINDLE finally at February 07, 2013 06:39 PM (l86i3)

85 Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (r2PLg)

Way over the line with that one.

I'm not a lawyer.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:39 PM (GsoHv)

86 This shit's about to get real.

Posted by: Fritz, Outlaw Citizen at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (WM+rJ)

87 "73 BTW Outlawry was declared illegal under the Magna Carta, whose provisions of rights are generally considered part of US Citizens rights.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (0q2P7) "

The (spirit of the) Magna Carta has been abolished. Progress.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (p/PNg)

88 I know I am going to get bombed for this but even stateside if there is an eminent threat--say a cop has to take out a shooter--the due process sometimes comes after the event.

Note: I am not trying to argue I am undecided and trying to process it all still.

Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg)
In some respects though this is a bit of a different problem. This isn't an "imminent" threat. This is a "currently happening thing."Less people would have a problem with the memo I think if "imminent" weren't defined to be "well we think something might happen."Dude's hijacked a jetliner (for hypothetical case, let's say it's empty) wants to fly it into a building: blow the sucker up.Dude says he might at one point want to harm someone...erg....this is a trickier proposition. I certainly don't want a singular entity deciding who is a "threat" and who isn't. At least convene some sort of tribunal, maybe like the FISA courts.

Posted by: tsrblke at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (GaqMa)

89
Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or
otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a
Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in
the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor
shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb;

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to
be a witness against himself,

nor be deprived of life,

liberty, or
property,

without due process of law;

nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.


Nope. Still no 'unless' there.

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (hHgxI)

90 Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (r2PLg)

No! That's what made it funny.

And my affect was used incorrectly....

I think you and I are playing different games.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (GsoHv)

91 So, is it legal to own a drone and take out those you suspect of letting their dog poop in your yard?

Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (BVkEs)

92 You do not want lawyers running the battlefield
Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (Dnbau)


________________

]That.

I think that is what I was trying to say.

Ya that's it.

Due process--how long does that take even in the best of situations?

And actually what is the full scope of due process?

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:41 PM (r2PLg)

93 Cutthroats, lawbreaker, villain, gangster, renegade, malefactor, evildoer, transgressor, rogue, ruffian, miscreant

Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (kqqGm)

94 I'm with the president, let's bomb Berkeley.

Posted by: Dr Spank at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (w+Dvf)

95 Nope. Still no 'unless' there.

This is post-Constitutional America. Anything goes now.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (J6hHs)

96 remember when the press and lieberals were up in arms over the Patriot act when it was first introduced after 911....ah the good old days...

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (+OTLF)

97
The next step for Obama will be to redefine "terrorist". Once a terrorist is defined as anyone opposing government policies, he'll have a clear path for domestic drone strikes.

Posted by: Marmo at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (pcgW1)

98 i want to play but my brain isn't working well enough...

... i feel like ergie....
Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:32 PM (LCRYB)



chocolate soy milk

Posted by: confessions of a beachcomber at February 07, 2013 06:42 PM (LpQbZ)

99 72 MUMR,

Uh the federal government is curtailing citizen's liberty every day and granting defacto or dejure US citizen rights to foreigners everyday.

We're long past "undermining citizenship" we're now redefining it.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (LRFds)

100 90 Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:38 PM (r2PLg)

No! That's what made it funny.

And my affect was used incorrectly....

I think you and I are playing different games.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (GsoHv)

__________________

Don't worry.

I really have dyslexia.

So when Ace makes me think in French my brain fries for awhile afterwards.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (r2PLg)

101
Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:35 PM (QTHTd)

I'm not sure it's even that. They're protected from the US by the US constitution. It doesn't bind any other governments, at all.

Posted by: tsrblke at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (GaqMa)

102 I keep asking.... Bill Ayers took up arms against his country, so when do we get to assassinate him?

Posted by: Warden at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (HzhBE)

103 Heh- found this at Merriam-Webster On-Line:


DRONE noun \ˈdrôn\

Definition of DRONE

1: a stingless male bee (as of the honeybee) that has the role of mating with the queen and does not gather nectar or pollen

2: one that lives on the labors of others : parasite

3: an unmanned aircraft or ship guided by remote control

4a : drudge 1

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (qqZuQ)

104
Unlawful combatants? Evil BOOSH! Bad!

Assasinations of American citizens? Angelic bureaucrats! Good!

Posted by: Lurking Canuck at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (0WLla)

105 we still have 3 years and 11 more months of this presidency to go. You all might want to relax...and push back as you breath out so it doesnt hurt as much.

Posted by: jeremiah Gosh Darn Amerikkka wright at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (+OTLF)

106 And actually what is the full scope of due process?
Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:41 PM (r2PLg)

Depends on how good your lawyer is.

Posted by: BignJames at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (Sg0G/)

107

Expose the process to the sunlight; have the case presented and
challenged; take a vote. Isn't that what we're supposed to do? Isn't
that what non- barbarians do?

This would also address another concern: That the individual targeted
for assassination might not even know he's been so designated, and have
no chance to respond. Put his name in for consideration for an
Authorization for Use of Lethal Force; let him submit documents in his
defense if he likes.




uh hmm, documentation sent to any and all relatives , so the presumed american terrorist has a date to appear , publish in newspaper, set a trial , if necessary have a trial in absentia, strip of rights of found guilty of treason or terrorism .




if Found armed with a Known terorists group shooting at us well fine i realize no time for arrest and id checks.



we should actually know who is judge and jury.




Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (nqBYe)

108
If "terrorists" in general unlawful combatants, what about specific people targeted for killing by a drone strike? Not necessarily saying it's wrong, but what is the delineation between "people" and one person being targeted.

That's where people get uncomfortable. It may be a more rational "way of war", but it smacks a bit of a war of assisination., which I think was the point of Ace's post.
Is it better to kill a relatively handful of persons by drone strike than to turn a large section of Pakistan's tribal areas into radioactive glass? Or carpet bomb them the way the Russians did on Afghanistan in the '80's?

War is murder, there is no getting around that. There is nothing wonderful or uplifiting about it. The point is to make it as harsh as possible and get it over.

We have been "at war" with Salafist Islam since 1979, when the Islamic Republic of Iran declared it against the Great Satan (us).

This war will continue at the present rate until we determine to end it with extreme prejudice or surrender. My guess is that Obama isn't quite calling it "surrender" right now, more like "run away! run away!"

Shooting up some rubes with cruise missiles or a drone launched hellfire missile,in the desert is not going to win this war. It may appear to be "decapitating" the leadership of "Al Qaeda", which is what the Obama faithful news organs were declaring a couple of years ago, but that is not going to do it.

This is, I fear, target practice for his main goal of suppressing domestic dissent, especially if it appears to becoming violent. This Regime in Washington is not full of nice people who even give lipservice to any Constitutional restraints on what they think they can or cannot do.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (RFeQD)

109 mike the moose, you're saying Congress can't declare war on a specific person but the President, with no other consultation except for with his *lesser inferior officers*, can authorize it on his own?

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (LCRYB)

110
Shit...ow ow ow! I pulled a muscle today, and hell, I can barely breathe. I was on top of the Coast Guard Headquarters, (and how cool is that? I even peed up there. Wooooo!). I was just stepping over a pile of cables, turned and coughed once, and SPROING. Not even my back....it's my ribs. Freaking ow! It better feel better tomorrow, I have lots of work to do. Grrr.

P.S. Ow, ow ow!

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (s/ydT)

111 BTW the guys who operate them hate the word drone.They are UAV's.Drones have a long history in the military as remote controlled targets.

Posted by: steevy at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (9XBK2)

112 LOAC is incorporated in to the Consitution through Article VI of the Constitution. The problem is the hypocrisy of the administration. This is going off the rails

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (Dnbau)

113 Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 06:37 PM (hHgxI)

The fifth speaks of a person, not a citizen. What's the difference between Al Awlaki and Bin Laden?

Was OBL given due process? Was he judged by a Grand Jury before being deprived of life?

How about hundreds of thousands of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Hamburg residents which the US and Brit military diprived of life by indiscriminate bombings?

Posted by: Combine of the Yeast at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (F4i/Q)

114 "You are obscenely stupid. The Constitution limits what the US Government can do."

Only in the USA.

Why do you think Cheney set up his torture chambers in other countries?

Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (LSTjp)

115 Mark Levin is blistering asses on his show right now, the topic is the 911 Benghazi attacks.

Posted by: navybrat at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (0pxtK)

116 >>>Mike the Moose all that is not required, specifically the arrest
warrant, publishing of said warrant, and waiting period. I also think,
that in time of war, it is a really really bad idea. You do not want
lawyers running the battlefield

If you are talking about killing US Citizens then yes all of that should apply at a minimum. Time of war or no. You are making the argument that you have followed process, attempted to give the Citizen their 5th amendment rights which they declined by not repatriating and surrendering as is their responsibility when they discover a federal warrant has been issued for their arrest. And therefore the US can now assert its right to protect itself from further actions aiding the enemy.

This is not about combatants, or Marines on the field. There are different provisions for that type of action, collateral damage and the like. This is for specifically targeting US Citizens while on foreign soil. Not non-specifically killing them in a military action which serves a different purpose.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (0q2P7)

117 sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads

Posted by: hannitys_hybrid at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (zpqa2)

118 the fact is, they have labeled regular american ideas as possible terrorist precursers.


what can we do to fight against that? and how it would be used?

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (nqBYe)

119 "99 72 MUMR,

Uh the federal government is curtailing citizen's liberty every day and granting defacto or dejure US citizen rights to foreigners everyday.

We're long past "undermining citizenship" we're now redefining it.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 06:43 PM (LRFds) "

Treating foreigners like citizens is nowhere near as bad as treating citizens like foreigners.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (p/PNg)

120 Cutthroats, lawbreaker, villain, gangster, renegade, malefactor, evildoer, transgressor, rogue, ruffian, miscreant

lawyer, senator

Posted by: rickb223 at February 07, 2013 06:46 PM (d0Dmj)

121 Posted by: Hirohito at February 07, 2013 06:29 PM (r2PLg) In some respects though this is a bit of a different problem. This isn't an "imminent" threat. This is a "currently happening thing."Less people would have a problem with the memo I think if "imminent" weren't defined to be "well we think something might happen."Dude's hijacked a jetliner (for hypothetical case, let's say it's empty) wants to fly it into a building: blow the sucker up.Dude says he might at one point want to harm someone...erg....this is a trickier proposition. I certainly don't want a singular entity deciding who is a "threat" and who isn't. At least convene some sort of tribunal, maybe like the FISA courts.
Posted by: tsrblke at February 07, 2013 06:40 PM (GaqMa)


___________________

Okay. I was wondering that.

So there is possibly a slippery slope when defining what constitutes an imminent threat.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:46 PM (r2PLg)

122 So I guess we need to start the First American Assassinated by Obama In America Dead Pool.

Posted by: sTevo at February 07, 2013 06:46 PM (VMcEw)

123 Okay. I was wondering that.

So there is possibly a slippery slope when defining what constitutes an imminent threat.
Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:46 PM (r2PLg)
If by "slippery slope" you mean the memo pretty much does away with the idea of imminent all together.Yes. Then that.

Posted by: tsrblke at February 07, 2013 06:47 PM (GaqMa)

124 I had the most wonderful dream last night. Jeb Bush and Chris Christie in the Oval Office, a box of donuts and joysticks in their laps, fighting over who to kill next and the last donut. But mainly fighting over the last donut.

Posted by: Kirl Rove at February 07, 2013 06:47 PM (feFL6)

125 The fifth speaks of a person, not a citizen. What's the difference between Al Awlaki and Bin Laden?

That was Auster's point as well. It was as bad a point when Auster said it as when you said it.

The whole Constitution is a contract between the citizens and their Government. When it says "person" it means "citizen". It can't apply to persons who did not sign that contract.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:48 PM (QTHTd)

126 Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or

otherwise infamous crime, UNLESS on a presentment or indictment of a

Grand Jury, EXCEPT in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in

the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;

nor
shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in

jeopardy of life or limb;

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to

be a witness against himself,

nor be deprived of life,

liberty, or

property,

without due process of law; (NO 'except', NO 'unless')

nor shall private property be

taken for public use, without just compensation.

Still don't see it. Due process of law . . . I guess that's whatever His Majesty Obama says it is?

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 06:48 PM (hHgxI)

127 108

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 07, 2013 06:44 PM (RFeQD)

Iran isn't Salafist.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:48 PM (p/PNg)

128

completely out of left field...

Isn't it funny how Richard Clarke fell off the face of the Earth?

Remember Richard Clarke? He was a big hero for a while for whistle blowing on the Bush admin on Iraq.

His whistle bloJews wing amounted to a hill of beans, of course, but the media milked it and pimped it.

Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 06:48 PM (oxIUw)

129 herbert i think you meant clinton set up

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:48 PM (nqBYe)

130 You are making the argument that you have followed process, attempted to
give the Citizen their 5th amendment rights which they declined by not
repatriating and surrendering as is their responsibility when they
discover a federal warrant has been issued for their arrest. And
therefore the US can now assert its right to protect itself from further
actions aiding the enemy.


So how do you establish that the citizen has been notified? Also, isn't it implicit that taking up arms against fellow Americans means you are a sought-after felon?

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:49 PM (6TB1Z)

131 Was OBL given due process? Was he judged by a Grand Jury before being deprived of life?

The stupid is stong in this one.

Since you want to be legalistic, did a state actor declare war on us first before launching on 9/11?

No?

Then STFU.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 06:49 PM (Bq2kJ)

132 we would lose Al whats his name if we took the time to call a tribunal etc etc etc. He was an unlawful enemy combatant, and it was lawful to kill him under LOAC, which is Constitutional through Article 6, and has been forever. The Constitutional is not a suicide pact.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:50 PM (Dnbau)

133 I had to read the paragraph starting with "I agree" about four times.

I hope it's just the cold medicine.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 06:50 PM (piMMO)

134 Definition of DRONE 1: a stingless male son of a bee

+++++

FIFM

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 06:50 PM (qqZuQ)

135 "114 "You are obscenely stupid. The Constitution limits what the US Government can do."

Only in the USA.

Why do you think Cheney set up his torture chambers in other countries?

Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (LSTjp) "

"Only in the USA."

Prove it.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:51 PM (p/PNg)

136 MUMR: Iran isn't Salafist.

Yeah. But I was going to let that slide. The Iranian theory of wilayat al-faqih corresponds closely to the Salafists' deference to "the Book and the Sunna" which in practice means the imams who interpret the Book and the Sunna.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:51 PM (QTHTd)

137 Remember when looking into what kinds of books someone checked out at the library was a high crime?

good times... good times....

Posted by: wiserbud at February 07, 2013 06:51 PM (gCa4h)

138 117-- HAH!

You took the joke and you spun it into a whole new direction.

Posted by: ace at February 07, 2013 06:52 PM (LCRYB)

139 Due process of law . . . I guess that's whatever His Majesty Obama says it is?

Now you're catching on. The US Constitution has about as much force today as the USSR's did.

Posted by: @PurpAv at February 07, 2013 06:52 PM (J6hHs)

140 The Constitutional is not a suicide pact.

After dinner I like to take a constitutional along MLK boulevard, so I'm not sure I agree.

Posted by: Kris Rock at February 07, 2013 06:53 PM (feFL6)

141 Prove it. Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:51 PM (p/PNg)

Forget it, MUMR, it Libtardtown.

All you're going to get is, "The New York Times said...."

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 06:53 PM (Bq2kJ)

142 Yeah, that exploding engine block on I-10 to Houston? Just improperly inflated tires.

Posted by: Prezzy Killbox at February 07, 2013 06:53 PM (WM+rJ)

143 Why do you think Cheney set up his torture chambers in other countries?
Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 06:45 PM (LSTjp)How quaint. You think this all started in 2000, don't you?

Posted by: garrett at February 07, 2013 06:53 PM (6OjR8)

144 US Citizens that have taken up arms against us in foreign lands as clearly as al-Shithead did are most certainly enemy unlawful combatants under LOAC. You do not know what you are talking about

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 06:54 PM (Dnbau)

145 >>>mike the moose, you're saying Congress can't declare war on a specific
person but the President, with no other consultation except for with his
*lesser inferior officers*, can authorize it on his own?

Yes because Congress does not have the power to deprive you of due process.
For that matter neither does the President. But...

As a Citizen abroad you have the responsibility to repatriate and surrender if you discovery ANY federal warrant is issued for your arrest. Specifically for Treason, you are aiding the enemy so at some point your failure to surrender to competent authority and answer the charges against you can be construed as intent not to answer for said charges in a court of law. Which then the right of the US to defend itself comes into play.

The answer is simple for those that don't want to get dead. You get a federal warrant issued against you for treason. Go to an embassy and surrender. Then you won't get kilt. AND you will get your due process.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 06:54 PM (0q2P7)

146 Outlawry. That's the editor of the National Review, right?

Posted by: mugiwara at February 07, 2013 06:54 PM (hpYnL)

147 garret i guess President Clinton wasn't very forthcoming either.

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:54 PM (nqBYe)

148
>>The Constitutional is not a suicide pact.<<

It isn't?

Posted by: Elvis, America's First King at February 07, 2013 06:54 PM (6OjR8)

149 Democratic renditions are peaceful renditions guys, come on. they wouldn't have a D after their name otherwise

Posted by: JDP at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (60GaT)

150 Ace, there is a great word in Black's Law Dictionary for this: Woolferthfod. Link in sig.

A couple years ago this was a word that got zero hits on google. 20 hits now. This post will become #21.

Posted by: wooga at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (CB+1e)

151 Outlawry. That's the editor of the National Review, right?

It would better apply to John Derbyshire

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (QTHTd)

152 www.aclu.org › Keep America Safe and FreeDec 6, 2005 – This program is commonly known as "extraordinary rendition." ... policy traces its roots to the administration of former President Bill Clinton.

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (nqBYe)

153 i guess President Clinton wasn't very forthcoming
---
I beg to differ.

Posted by: Monica at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (VMcEw)

154
>>Woolferthfod<<

Wolf Head?

Too toothy.

Posted by: garrett at February 07, 2013 06:56 PM (6OjR8)

155 ew!

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:56 PM (nqBYe)

156

Richard Clarke was such a cause celebre that he supposedly got a subtle nod in the SUPERMAN movie.

Remember that stupidity?

Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (NNTrd)

157 Look, people are confusing two very different things:

Foreigners fighting out of uniform.

And Citizens.


To conflate the two a priori is not nice. Not nice at all.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (p/PNg)

158 153 i guess President Clinton wasn't very forthcoming---I beg to differ.
Posted by: Monica at February 07, 2013 06:55 PM (VMcEw)

*****

Who were first, second and third?

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (qqZuQ)

159 Ah, well, off to see the daughter in Cinderella. Not a big part, but big enough to obligate me to sit there listening for 2+ hours. She's a junior in HS, though, and my youngest, so I suppose I should enjoy it.




Nah, screw that noise.

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (6TB1Z)

160 Posted by: Monica

Again, I feel so sorry for any Monica's born prior to 1996. Especially those born 1990 or so. All their lives they'd heard nothing but blowjob jokes.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (QTHTd)

161 156

Richard Clarke was such a cause celebre that he supposedly got a subtle nod in the SUPERMAN movie.

Remember that stupidity?

Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (NNTrd)

________________

Gross. I missed that.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (r2PLg)

162 pep, she will remember that you cared .

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (nqBYe)

163 As a Citizen abroad you have the responsibility to repatriate and
surrender if you discovery ANY federal warrant is issued for your
arrest. Specifically for Treason, you are aiding the enemy so at some
point your failure to surrender to competent authority and answer the
charges against you can be construed as intent not to answer for said
charges in a court of law. Which then the right of the US to defend
itself comes into play.


And when you invoke Treason, here comes Article, Section 3.

No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

We can argue whether the Testimony of two Witnesses has to be in open Court (grammar) later. But for now who are these witnesses that King Barry has heard from?

Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (kqqGm)

164
Salafi (arabic) who emphasises theSalaf ("predecessors" or "ancestors"), the earliest Muslims, as model examples of Islamic practice.



The modern usage connects Salafism to Wahhabism (specifically), which is Sunni, but broadly speaking, the Islamic Republic of Iran is "salafist".



It is, again, a distinction without a difference. Sunni and Shia would make war on each other constantly if there was not the infidel West to distract them.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (RFeQD)

165 Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 06:49 PM (Bq2kJ)

I think we need one of those beehives we were drooling over a few days ago.

And the M1A2 to fire it.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (GsoHv)

166 Such "outlaws" must be given due process if it is not truly an immediate threat.

I don't want sole killing power in the hands of any one politician.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 74% more DOOM! at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (FsUAO)

167 Sometimes at work, they steal my motor scooter keys and put them into the vending machine so I have to pay money to get them out. It makes me so angry, especially when they put it into the peanut butter cracker slot knowing that I am ALLERGIC to them.

After that, the only thing that calms me down is the soothing voice of Daddy Barack.

Posted by: Herman Hideitinmypooper at February 07, 2013 06:59 PM (HzhBE)

168 Who were first, second and third?


Who's on first...

Posted by: rickb223 at February 07, 2013 06:59 PM (d0Dmj)

169 ooh i forgot to say Boooosh

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 06:59 PM (nqBYe)

170 Who were first, second and third?
---
That info will cost you.

Posted by: Ken Starr at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (VMcEw)

171 Nah, screw that noise.

Posted by: pep at February 07, 2013 06:57 PM (6TB1Z)

You haven't learned to fake it yet?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (GsoHv)

172 We can argue whether the Testimony of two Witnesses has to be in open Court (grammar) later. But for now who are these witnesses that King Barry has heard from?

****


*crickets*

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (piMMO)

173 MUMR LOAC permits you to kill an unlawful combatant overseas, even if they are a citizen

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (Dnbau)

174 But but but I'm pretty sure Bronco Bama said the US government should not assassinate people . . . before he was elected. I can't find the quote now, however.

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (hHgxI)

175 Compadres, it is imperative that we crush the freedom fighters before the start of the rainy season. And remember, a shiny new donkey for whomever brings me the head of Colonel Montoya.

Posted by: the simpsons have a quote for every occasion at February 07, 2013 07:01 PM (QupBk)

176 "164
Salafi (arabic) who emphasises theSalaf ("predecessors" or "ancestors"), the earliest Muslims, as model examples of Islamic practice.



The modern usage connects Salafism to Wahhabism (specifically), which is Sunni, but broadly speaking, the Islamic Republic of Iran is "salafist".



It is, again, a distinction without a difference. Sunni and Shia would make war on each other constantly if there was not the infidel West to distract them.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (RFeQD) "

It's not "a distinction without a difference." Salafis are Sunnis, and like you said, they hate each other.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:01 PM (p/PNg)

177 We can argue whether the Testimony of two Witnesses
has to be in open Court (grammar) later. But for now who are these
witnesses that King Barry has heard from?


Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 07, 2013 06:58 PM (kqqGm)

well hell couldn't it be trust worthy folks such as the MB what a nice way to off your opponent

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:01 PM (nqBYe)

178 hell maybe a house of Saud informant against a capitalist?

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:01 PM (nqBYe)

179 Such "outlaws" must be given due process if it is not truly an immediate threat.

I don't want sole killing power in the hands of any one politician.


****

We are all now just one poorly phrased sentence away from enemy status.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:01 PM (piMMO)

180 Clarke is an ABC consultant, the one who received Brennan's leak about the body bomber, last May, his best pal, Rand Beers, is a top man at DHS.

Posted by: archie goodwin at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (Jsiw/)

181 fer cryin out loud they do not have to be charged with treason. LOAC, through Article VI

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (Dnbau)

182 ok i'm being facetious , but this is the problem.

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (nqBYe)

183 58 How the flying schmuck am I getting eminent in my imminent.

------------

Just blame it on zombie Steve Jobs. Everyone else does.

Posted by: Citizen Anachronda at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (FzhYM)

184 >>>No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of
two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.


Once again if you want your PROCESS follow the LAW and return to the US when a warrant for Treason is issued for your arrest. It is your obligation and duty as a Citizen to do so as you have NO RIGHT to travel outside sovereign US holdings.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (0q2P7)

185 The USA can do pretty much whatever it wants these days, including an armored personnel carrier or tank with infantry introducing CS gas in to your abode, which later burns to the ground. This has already happened, and nothing was done except everyone involved got promotions.

Posted by: navybrat at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (0pxtK)

186 and bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia.

Posted by: Fletch at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (6OjR8)

187 Squibob thanks NDH for the response.

So he's violated Art. 3, Sec. 3 and the 5th Amendment.

Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (kqqGm)

188 I think we need one of those beehives we were drooling over a few days ago. And the M1A2 to fire it.

It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (Bq2kJ)

189 Ringleaders.
Instigators.

Posted by: Bob, Henchman at Large at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (1efte)

190 "173 MUMR LOAC permits you to kill an unlawful combatant overseas, even if they are a citizen

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (Dnbau) "

1. Prove it.
2. LOAC is not above the Constitution.
3. "An unjust law is no law at all."
4. Permits whom?

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (p/PNg)

191 186 and bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia Jose Padilla.
Posted by: Fletch at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (6OjR

*****

Fixed

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at February 07, 2013 07:04 PM (qqZuQ)

192 Speaking of banditry:

Despite past assurances that tourists are safe in their country, Mexican tourism officials are again faced with trying to explain away another report of crime against foreign visitors.

The latest incident took place in the resort town of Acapulco, where six Spanish tourists on vacation were raped Sunday by masked gunmen.

Unlike many crimes involving drug violence in the country's interior states, the rapes took place near the beach, where the tourists were renting bungalows near four-star hotels.


Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 07, 2013 07:04 PM (NTBjC)

193 "174 But but but I'm pretty sure Bronco Bama said the US government should not assassinate people . . . before he was elected. I can't find the quote now, however.

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (hHgxI) "


His views have Progressed.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:05 PM (p/PNg)

194 The modern usage connects Salafism to Wahhabism (specifically), which is
Sunni, but broadly speaking, the Islamic Republic of Iran is
"salafist".


Here's the point, though: Shi'ism holds that some of those first "Companions" to the Prophet were traitors. Seriously. They said some bone-chilling stuff against, especially, Mu'awiya but also 'Uthman and 'Umar. Sunnis hold 'Umar as a saint, and agree that 'Uthman was also a saint until halfway through his reign. So Shi'ites can't be literally "salafist".

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (QTHTd)

195 and please clean up any terrorists children, wives or daughters ,aunts, grandparents.
i mean

well tough he should have had a better father.
or mother
or granma

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (nqBYe)

196 Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:03 PM (Bq2kJ)

What kind of dispersion do you get over that 500 meter range?

And do I have to reinforce the floor of my garage?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (GsoHv)

197
i]the rapes took place near the beach, where the tourists were renting bungalows near four-star hotels.

It's not rape-rape if you are in a seaside bungalow.

Posted by: Whoopie at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (6OjR8)

198
Al-Awiaki's kid was killed two weeks after he was assassinated in a separate drone attack. , "a 16-year-old American citizen from Denver, was killed in a drone strike in Yemen. Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi was the son of terrorist Anwar al-Aulaqi. He did not have a trial. He was never waterboarded. He was sixteen."
Why? Because his father was a terrorist?

Sounds like the old "corruption of blood" reasoning?

Where did I see that before? Oh Yeah, the Constitution Article III Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person
shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the
same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no
Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during
the Life of the Person attainted.


If the President does this, Is It OK?




Posted by: rd at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (zLp5I)

199 Unlike many crimes involving drug violence in the country's interior states, the rapes took place near the beach, where the tourists were renting bungalows near four-star hotels.


THAT will definitely leave a mark.

Posted by: rickb223 at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (d0Dmj)

200 His views have Progressed.

That's progress??

At this rate we'll be back in the Renaissance by next year.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (Bq2kJ)

201
the Iraq years

that was the time when lonely Republicans and attention-seeking admin employees realized they could get their 15 minutes of fame and adoration by criticizing Iraq and Bush


Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (ZgBZU)

202 119 MUMR,

Quite the contrary when the elected officials of the US go full tard and allow aliens uneducated in the historic interpretation of our bill of rights to tilt the political balance wildly they are in fact devaluing the nature and rights of the true citizens of this nation.

There should be a reckoning.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (LRFds)

203 Despite past assurances that tourists are safe in their country,
Mexican tourism officials are again faced with trying to explain away
another report of crime against foreign visitors.

The latest
incident took place in the resort town of Acapulco, where six Spanish
tourists on vacation were raped Sunday by masked gunmen.

Unlike
many crimes involving drug violence in the country's interior states,
the rapes took place near the beach, where the tourists were renting
bungalows near four-star hotels.


They were just doing some SM. You know, Spaniards and Mexicans.

Posted by: Steve Martin, not longer really funny at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (kqqGm)

204 It's too bad Barack doesn't have a motorcycle. If he did, I could ride on back and clutch him tightly about the waist as he does a wheelie, giddly screaming, "Oh, Barack!" as my heart pounds with fear and excitement.

Posted by: Herman Hideitinmypooper at February 07, 2013 07:07 PM (HzhBE)

205 "181 fer cryin out loud they do not have to be charged with treason. LOAC, through Article VI

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:02 PM (Dnbau) "

Fer crying out loud, the Constitution is not a living document, nor can it be bypassed through "International Law."

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:07 PM (p/PNg)

206 Sheesh, it's like the Mexicans have set up a live-action version of FarCry 3 on their side of Rio Bravo

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 07:07 PM (QTHTd)

207 We need a legally defined Assassin's Guild.

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 07:07 PM (QupBk)

208
thunerb ----

OK, I get the LOAC argument, now you need to explain how LOAC overrides the Constitution and nullifies the Due Process thingee.

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 07:07 PM (i9GsZ)

209 Anyone know where to buy a slightly used drone?

Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 07:08 PM (BVkEs)

210 LOAC, as an international treaty, in incorporated into the Constitution through Article VI.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (Dnbau)

211 Or have Holder and the DoJ go to court. Even a classified court. Show the intel on why some brigand with American citizenship needs to have it stripped away. And let a panel of say 5 judges decide if the scum bag, like Johnny Lindh, needs to lose the protection of their citizenship and thus be zapped from afar by Predator.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (LqrVH)

212
>>>Clarke is an ABC consultant, the one who received Brennan's leak about the body bomber, last May, his best pal, Rand Beers, is a top man at DHS

Hacks, the lot of them.

Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (ZgBZU)

213 There should be a reckoning.

I'd be in favor of a Hunger Games-style reaping. Each state has to contribute 1 politician, and they fight to the death. I'm not much of a TV guy, but I'd get the pay-per-view on that.

Posted by: jakeman at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (96M6e)

214 Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 07:08 PM (BVkEs)

I had an old girlfriend who used to drone on...and on....and on....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 07:10 PM (GsoHv)

215 Think this through, Ace. What happens when we are all declared criminals

We have, conservatives, Republicans and Tea Partiers that is. You just haven't been paying attention.

Posted by: Decaf at February 07, 2013 07:10 PM (NmvvV)

216 "200 His views have Progressed.

That's progress??

At this rate we'll be back in the Renaissance by next year.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (Bq2kJ) "

The Renaissance? That's extremely optimistic.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:10 PM (p/PNg)

217 What kind of dispersion do you get over that 500 meter range? And do I have to reinforce the floor of my garage?

M1A2 combat loaded comes in at north of 70 tons. Of course you'll also need an M977 HEMTT to haul the ammo and an M978 HEMTT tanker to haul your diesel around.

You saw that video, I don't have ballistics on the round, but it looked like dispersion over 500 meters cleared a swath about 60 yards wide.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (Bq2kJ)

218 Anyone know where to buy a slightly used drone?

***

Heck, just buy a new one.

There must be a Radio Shack nearby.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (piMMO)

219 We have, conservatives, Republicans and Tea Partiers haters that is.

FIFY

Posted by: SPLC at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (QTHTd)

220 >>>If the President does this, Is It OK?

The President isn't convicting you or even judging you for treason. He judges you as a threat to the US. I get that you all don't see that your rights are substantially different when you leave the US. For instance what is free speech here, can be sedition on foreign soil. If you want your full cadre of rights don't leave the US.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (0q2P7)

221 Or have Holder and the DoJ go to court. Even a
classified court. Show the intel on why some brigand with American
citizenship needs to have it stripped away. And let a panel of say 5
judges decide if the scum bag, like Johnny Lindh, needs to lose the
protection of their citizenship and thus be zapped from afar by
Predator.


Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (LqrVH)

can i admit the idea of Holder of 300 dead mexicans and boarder guards being in charge of life taking decisions isn't comforting

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (nqBYe)

222 The Renaissance? That's extremely optimistic.

I was trying to give him the affirmative action boost he's become accustomed to. He is black you know.

Sorry...half black.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:12 PM (Bq2kJ)

223
You know, Mark Levin covered this yesterday.
I can't say I completely agree with him, but he spent at least 30 minutes on this during yesterday's (2nd hour I think)show.

Posted by: garrett at February 07, 2013 07:12 PM (6OjR8)

224 213 Jakeman,

I think the citizens should pick a lawyer from every county in each state to face gladiatorial combat every four years.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:12 PM (LRFds)

225 I was disappointed that Cheney didn't order all the unlawful combatants in US custody hanged at dawn on Obama's Inauguration Day. Leaving a bunch of twisting, orange body bags for him to deal with. But, I'm the sedimental sort.

Posted by: Jean at February 07, 2013 07:12 PM (gKGI0)

226 Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (LqrVH)

However imperfect your solution may be (and I am sure someone will find a flaw -- real or imagined) it removes the decision from the administration, with all of its temptations to act politically, rather than from a national security perspective.

Now, some of you will say that an American president would never stoop so low as to politicize the most important decisions delegated to him by the people and the Constitution....

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 07:12 PM (GsoHv)

227 "202 119 MUMR,

Quite the contrary when the elected officials of the US go full tard and allow aliens uneducated in the historic interpretation of our bill of rights to tilt the political balance wildly they are in fact devaluing the nature and rights of the true citizens of this nation.

There should be a reckoning.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:06 PM (LRFds) "

Everyone is "uneducated in the historic interpretation of our bill of rights." And no one is allowing anyone to do anything. Birthright citizenship is.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:13 PM (p/PNg)

228 SMOD: So near and yet so far.

http://tinyurl.com/aog2mzf Close approach of 150' meteor, closer than some satellites. Bloomberg.com

{sigh}

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka Ol' 3 tooth) at February 07, 2013 07:13 PM (qyv02)

229 The president cannot lawfully order the killing of anyone, except according to the Constitution and federal law. Under the Constitution, he can only order killing using the military when the U.S. has been attacked or when an attack is so imminent that delay would cost innocent lives. He can also order killing using the military in pursuit of a declaration of war enacted by Congress.

Unless Obama knows that an attack from Yemen on our shores is imminent, he’d be hard-pressed to argue that a guy in a car in the desert 10,000 miles from here -- no matter his intentions -- poses a threat so imminent to the U.S. that he needs to be killed on the spot in order to save the lives of Americans who would surely die during the time it would take to declare war on the country that harbors him, or during the time it would take to arrest him.

-Judge Napolitano

Posted by: Jones in CO at February 07, 2013 07:13 PM (8sCoq)

230 Climate change warming cold warm thingy headed for New England. Cha ching!!

Posted by: Whatev at February 07, 2013 07:14 PM (A7Wh1)

231 We need to work Robspierre and his guillotine into this somehow.

Posted by: toby928© at February 07, 2013 07:14 PM (QupBk)

232

nood

Posted by: soothsayer's fake quotes at February 07, 2013 07:14 PM (xIzGn)

233

What "Law of Armed Conflict" treaty are you citing, thunderb?

Moreover, the treaties of the United States do not supercede the amendments to the US Constitution, among them the Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing due process.

Posted by: imp at February 07, 2013 07:14 PM (UaxA0)

234
>>But, I'm the sedimental sort.


Sedimentarian.

Posted by: garrett at February 07, 2013 07:14 PM (6OjR8)

235 Sean, beehive rounds would have warmed Napoleons dark heat

Posted by: Jean at February 07, 2013 07:15 PM (gKGI0)

236 Al-Awiaki's kid was killed two weeks after he was assassinated in a separate drone attack. , "a 16-year-old American citizen from Denver, was killed in a drone strike in Yemen. Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi was the son of terrorist Anwar al-Aulaqi. He did not have a trial. He was never waterboarded. He was sixteen."
Why? Because his father was a terrorist?

***

Someone clarified for me, yesterday, that the kid wasn't the target, but the head of a terrorist org with whom he was dining was.

If he was collateral damage, what difference does it make to the discussion?

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:15 PM (piMMO)

237 214 Posted by: Craig Poe at February 07, 2013 07:08 PM (BVkEs)

I had an old girlfriend who used to drone on...and on....and on....
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 07, 2013 07:10 PM (GsoHv)

________________________

He said "Slightly used" though.

Posted by: tasker at February 07, 2013 07:15 PM (r2PLg)

238 LOACblog.com is helpful if you really want more info.

Al-shithead's son was not the target, he was traveling with someone who was. He was not a combatant. A child can never be a combatant. He was collateral damage. An argument can be had about whether they should have taken the shot then. But he was not the target.

Listen, I can't stand the JEF and Benghazi makes me sick. But LOAC was around lonnng before him and I am not going to pretend to be upset with drones only because he is using them to kill terrorists overseas.

What I don't like is we lose intel by not taking some of these guys alive.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:16 PM (Dnbau)

239 Miss Lindsey Graham is getting all aroused by this torture talk.

Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at February 07, 2013 07:16 PM (LSTjp)

240 "211 Or have Holder and the DoJ go to court. Even a classified court. Show the intel on why some brigand with American citizenship needs to have it stripped away. And let a panel of say 5 judges decide if the scum bag, like Johnny Lindh, needs to lose the protection of their citizenship and thus be zapped from afar by Predator.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (LqrVH) "

Right. So 2 Leftist bureaucrats + 5 Leftist bureaucrats can decide who lives and who dies today. Brilliant.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:17 PM (p/PNg)

241 227 MUMR,

I disagree, there has been a concerted and purposeful obliteration of civics education as an understanding of the structure and tradition of the US system.

With one party trying to weaponize race, that is also "coincidentally" DEEPLY allied with the Education complex I am not sure I can ever accept Fiat Amnesty.

As such I am of the mind to punish ANY POLITICIAN responsible for said same to the limit of the law for the rest of my life.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:17 PM (LRFds)

242 228 SMOD: So near and yet so far.

http://tinyurl.com/aog2mzf Close approach of 150' meteor, closer than some satellites. Bloomberg.com

{sigh}

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka Ol' 3 tooth) at February 07, 2013 07:13 PM (qyv02)


quoted from the article: “No Earth impact is possible,”

The phrase that made my co-workers want to kill me when uttered: "NOTHING can stop us now..."

There is always hope.

Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 07, 2013 07:17 PM (Qxe/p)

243 >>>Or have Holder and the DoJ go to court. Even a

classified court. Show the intel

My problem is not in making sure the process has accuracy. My concern is making sure the accused gets the opportunity to claim their rights as a Citizen. Hence my solution which includes a public proclamation of a warrant to arrest under charges of treason, and a waiting period to give the accused time to surrender and claim their rights before the US acts in self defense and goes ZZAAPP!

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 07:17 PM (0q2P7)

244 So, if a government official can decide, without due process of the law, that a citizen is an imminent danger to other US citizens, and that they can be killed by the government;

And the President has actually targeted and killed citizens, and plans to do so again at any time;

Doesn't that make him an imminent threat?

Posted by: starboardhelm at February 07, 2013 07:17 PM (hHgxI)

245 Sean, beehive rounds would have warmed Napoleons dark heart

They warm mine.

Never got to fire one though.

::: sigh :::

Posted by: Sean Bannion at February 07, 2013 07:18 PM (Bq2kJ)

246 Napolitano's argument is also stupid. And it's muddying the waters.

If there is a convicted traitor to the US in the Yemen, then he is sentenced to death. The traitor gets the choice of checking in at the embassy and getting 20 years of free meals on Death Row, or else dying in terror and agony by drone right now.

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 07:18 PM (QTHTd)

247 "220 >>>If the President does this, Is It OK?

The President isn't convicting you or even judging you for treason. He judges you as a threat to the US. I get that you all don't see that your rights are substantially different when you leave the US. For instance what is free speech here, can be sedition on foreign soil. If you want your full cadre of rights don't leave the US.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (0q2P7) "

In the eyes of Foreign Governments.

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:18 PM (p/PNg)

248 240 MUMR,

I am in favor of at a minimum using the Israeli standard for Operation Hand of God, 6 politicians 3 from each major party and 6 professionals.

What we have now is divine right of media allowing Bark to play God.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:19 PM (LRFds)

249 So, if a government official can decide, without due process of the law, that a citizen is an imminent danger to other US citizens, and that they can be killed by the government;

And the President has actually targeted and killed citizens, and plans to do so again at any time;

Doesn't that make him an imminent threat?

***

Since 2008

He's a threat to ALL we hold dear

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:19 PM (piMMO)

250 My fear is that we are but a hop, skip, and a jump from application on American soil.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:19 PM (piMMO)

251 "221 Or have Holder and the DoJ go to court. Even a
classified court. Show the intel on why some brigand with American
citizenship needs to have it stripped away. And let a panel of say 5
judges decide if the scum bag, like Johnny Lindh, needs to lose the
protection of their citizenship and thus be zapped from afar by
Predator.


Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 07, 2013 07:09 PM (LqrVH)

can i admit the idea of Holder of 300 dead mexicans and boarder guards being in charge of life taking decisions isn't comforting

Posted by: willow at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (nqBYe)"

This.


(Where have you been, anyway?)

Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at February 07, 2013 07:19 PM (p/PNg)

252 SPLC thread up

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 07, 2013 07:20 PM (piMMO)

253 This is the power claimed by kings and tyrants. It is the power most repugnant to American values. It is the power we have arguably fought countless wars to prevent from arriving here. Now, under Obama, it is here.

Posted by: Jones in CO at February 07, 2013 07:20 PM (8sCoq)

254 238 ThunderB,

I can, however be less than thrilled that Bush would have been crucified for "shoulda had a better daddy" and Ogabe gets a pass.

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:20 PM (LRFds)

255 What I don't like is we lose intel by not taking some of these guys alive.

C'est pire qu'un crime - c'est une faute!!

Posted by: Joseph Fouché at February 07, 2013 07:20 PM (QTHTd)

256
thunderb - 210 ----

uh-huh - so you're saying that an international treaty has the authority to nullify - or perhaps even void - the Constitution? Mr. Holder has a desk for you in his outer office -you can liason with Mr. Kerry.

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 07:20 PM (i9GsZ)

257 what Judge Napolitano fails to consider in that quote is that Al-shithead can kill American servicemen in Iraq or Afghanistan, and was. He was an immediate threat. We are not fighting a conventional war. Its stupid to pretend we are.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:21 PM (Dnbau)

258 250 NDH,

who says it has not already happened....?

Would the press report it?

You can make the argument Waco was extra judicial murder...I would argue LAPD is engaged in the drive for it.....

Where does it end?

Posted by: sven10077 at February 07, 2013 07:23 PM (LRFds)

259 Old Bob LOAC has been the law our armed forces have used since at least WWI and heavily modified by the Geneva Convention after WWII. Every president since WWI has used LOAC. We are just in a different kind of war, with an enemy comprised entirely of non-state actors.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:24 PM (Dnbau)

260 Oh how I miss Dick Cheney...

Posted by: D. Hopper at February 07, 2013 07:26 PM (AVfT8)

261
From your post there:
"The Constitution, as Ron Paul always reminds us, does give Congress the power to issue letters of Marque and Reprisal."

The Constitution also explicitly prohibits Congress from passing Bills of Attainder.
Congress can no more create a hit list than can the President, or the Supreme Court if it comes to it.

The Constitution also explicitly prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
Since, as you cite, allows anyone to "persecute" the outlaw with impunity, it is not merely a sentence of death, but one of rape, torture, and slavery. Certainly those are all permissible once the person is outlawed, but the very act of outlawry is a violation of the Constitution first.

I also note that outlawry applied to those fleeing justice. Once we readmit it for terrorists, how soon before we accept it for all bail jumpers? Or just for failure to appear? That will cause some serious trouble for the narrative about Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Finally it should be noted that a bit of checking reveals some interesting people who have been outlawed and why. For example:
Eric the Red, who discovered Greenland, was outlawed(as was his father before him as it happens)for manslaughter. Since he couldn't stay home, Eric went off to discover and settle Greenland.
You see rather than being an expression of the power of the State, outlawry was rather an admission of the weakness of the State. They could not execute such an individual, so instead they promised not to punish his killer, or accept revenge against that killer under the rules of blood vengeance and feud. And that was supposed to be "justice". Well, assuming the killer did not just pay weregild.
You know, the way the Muslims allow a criminal to be "forgiven", typically provided he makes a suitable payment to the other family, and suffer no punishment.
Could Awlaki have made a suitable payoff and just escaped being outlawed completely?
How much will we charge per terrorist act?

Or perhaps we could just stick with the Constitution, and full trials.

Posted by: Sam at February 07, 2013 07:26 PM (wZIgv)

262 Maybe with his new heart he'll run in 2016

Posted by: A Guy Can Dream, Can't He? at February 07, 2013 07:28 PM (AVfT8)

263 Sam, if u haven't noticed, the constitution in null and void here in post modern america. Raw political power is the law of the land.

Posted by: A Guy Can Dream, Can't He? at February 07, 2013 07:33 PM (AVfT8)

264 I also note that outlawry applied to those fleeing justice. Once we
readmit it for terrorists, how soon before we accept it for all bail
jumpers?


Also a stupid argument. Bail jumpers haven't been convicted at that stage of the process. So they can't get killed by drones in this model. (Tranquilised by drones, perhaps.)

Posted by: boulder toilet hobo at February 07, 2013 07:34 PM (QTHTd)

265

Al-Qaeda Taliban unlawful combatant detainees, unlawful belligerency, and the international laws of armed conflict.
Article from: Air Force Law Review | March 22, 2004 | Bialke, Joseph P. | COPYRIGHT 2008 U.S. Air Force, Academy Department of Law

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:39 PM (Dnbau)

266
thunder ---

I never suggested otherwise --- it's your use of it to allow nonjudicial executions that bothers me. It's applicability to the conduct of National armed forces vs others of like kind is unquestioned. Using it as a justification for a head of state to directthe execution of one of his/her citizens is what I have a problem with.

Would you extend the same argument to defend eastern bloc murders of defectors during the Cold War era?

And you still need to answer the separate issue of an International Treaty nullifying the Constitution.

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 07:40 PM (i9GsZ)

267 barry soetero the indonesian muslim in the WH is the biggest muslim danger to this country. Who's going to drone his pansy ass?

Posted by: sablegsd at February 07, 2013 07:41 PM (AKS75)

268 Old Bob it is not nullifying the Constitution. LOAC is a collection of treaties and common law plus the Geneva Convention that has accumulated over hundreds of years, and is adopted into the Constitution through Article VI. I have posted a website, and an article. It has been around forever. It is dispositive here.

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:44 PM (Dnbau)

269 Assasination is against the Laws of War.... and the Geneva Convention.

An unarmed combatant, taken UNDER ARMS, can be shot... but we're taking guys out who are driving down the road, no where near any armed conflicts.

Now, if the Prezzy wants to cap Al Q types? who are Foreigners? thats one thing... but putting a Hit on an American Citizen without due process of Law???

The Constitution is a document which says what the Government can do, to WE, the Citizens.... it prohibits the Government from a Lot of Actions.... Like... taking your life without due process of law... it does not matter if you are in another country or not, you are still a citizen, and this document should stop the US Government from taking your life on a whim....

Easy solution for me... Try them in abscentia for Treason... take their Citizenship... then kill them..... ie.... follow our OWN Rules... but we don't have a King who can kill people at will.... or at least, we're not supposed to.

Posted by: Romeo13 at February 07, 2013 07:47 PM (lZBBB)

270 when you leave the US. For instance what is free speech here, can be sedition on foreign soil. If you want your full cadre of rights don't leave the US.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at February 07, 2013 07:11 PM (0q2P7)


The US Constitution says what the US Government may do to you.... ie... even if you are foreign soil, the US cannot convict you of some speach violation... it does not forbid OTHER governments from doing so however....

Which is the question here. Does a US Citizen loose his Constitutional protections FROM the US Government, because he is on foreign soil?

Posted by: Romeo13 at February 07, 2013 07:56 PM (lZBBB)

271 MUMR LOAC permits you to kill an unlawful combatant overseas, even if they are a citizen

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 07:00 PM (Dnbau)

Not real familiar with the idea of an Amendment to the Constitution and what it does are you? The Fifth Amendment trumps previous sections of the Constitution - so what ever they allowed are changed by the existence of the Fifth and its requirements.


Posted by: An Observation at February 07, 2013 07:59 PM (ylhEn)

272 220v,221v, whatever it takes.

Posted by: nip at February 07, 2013 07:59 PM (11Tdq)

273
thunder -

So if I understand you; because Art. VI incorporates the treaty it is therefor consitutional. Let me expand on that with a hypothetical:

Obama et al enter into a treaty (approved by Senate) with the EU that outlaws firearms, requires all publications to receive prior approval by an appointed body, and declares the Euro to be the onlylawful currency. What parts of this would you consider binding on the USA and it's citizenry?

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 08:04 PM (i9GsZ)

274 I am a lawyer. I was a JAG. I have been to war. I know the law. I am not a professional outrage addict. What is outrageous here is the hypocrisy of the left. Flame on

Posted by: Thunderb at February 07, 2013 08:57 PM (Dnbau)

275 You mean like shooting non-uniformed combatants captured on the battlefield?

No Miranda rights? No lawyer?

Never happen. We are too civilized for that. Meanwhile, google Kristian Menchaca to see what the other side does.

I'm untroubled by drone attacks on enemy combatants. I'm quite troubled that it is not the military selecting the targets. Too LBJ-ish for my liking.

Posted by: MarkD at February 07, 2013 09:03 PM (+xUiW)

276
thunder -

Dude ... not looking to flame ... but iffen' you want - I'll match my JD and actualpre-law combat experience with a JAG REMF anytime.

What I would like, however, is a rational answer to politely phrased questions. S'pose that's at all likely?

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 09:11 PM (i9GsZ)

277 #275- amen. Menchaca, Tucker, and Babineau were in my sister battalion- they were in 1/502 when I was in the Brigade recon squadron.

Posted by: SGT Dan's Cat at February 07, 2013 09:36 PM (nranl)

278 Oh darn --- the 'Imma' lawyer and a vet' gambit having failed to intimidate his opponent, thunerb hastaken the 'if I don't respond it's like I never saw it' Ostrich position. Darn.

Posted by: Old Bob at February 07, 2013 09:55 PM (i9GsZ)

279
If we have PUBLICLY indicted, made an attempt to notify- news releases, for example-
I do not lose sleep over whacking an American citizen in a drone strike OVERSEAS, if it is a crime worthy of dead or alive circumstances.
If a citizen of this (formerly?)fine country wants to avail themselves of our legal systems and their rights as guaranteed in the Constitution, come home and face justice, or turn yourself in at the closest embassy or consulate.
As long as the persons targeted have been publicly declared and are fugitives overseas, I do not have a problem with it.

Posted by: Gerry Owen at February 07, 2013 10:19 PM (4ABat)

280 no Bob, I went to dinner. I gave you two resources to look at it yourself. And I've been there. If that is not good enough for you, I can live with that. Flame on

Posted by: thunderb at February 07, 2013 10:26 PM (Dnbau)

281 Jimmy Carter put people on list for the White House tennis courts and Obama puts people on a list to kill? One made the Presidency too small, and one made it too large.

Posted by: Baldy at February 07, 2013 10:39 PM (opS9C)

282 Outlawry is still on the books in Britain, and could be invoked for criminal cases, actually. It was not outlawed with the Magna Carta, just became subject to due process of law. They don't use it anymore, but it still exists for criminal offenses. The main reason they stopped using it was because catching fugitives got easier as the world got more populated and modern communication came along, and the concept of extradition treaties.
In fact, the Brits wanted to use it to handle the Nazi war criminals after WWII. Declare them to be outlaws and thus anyone could kill them. But we (and the Russians) objected to it and thus Nuremburg was set up.
We never had anything like this over here, but the concept boils down to this: Someone refuses to show up for a criminal charge and cannot be apprehended. Via judicial procedure, the court declared that person to be an outlaw. He thus forfeits all rights and legal protections, and all property is forfeit to the Crown (state). He can be killed on sight by anyone.

Posted by: publius(NotBreitbartPublius) at February 07, 2013 11:26 PM (VVB18)

Posted by: Vic at February 08, 2013 06:28 AM (53z96)

284 Let me see - a US citizen goes overseas to join a foreign army waging war on the US and the US government kills him without a trial.

Nope - I see no problem with that at all. He made his choice, if he wanted the protections of civilization and the law then he should have acted otherwise. I do not see why we are obligated to assist our enemies with the cutting of our throats.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - It's Not Me, Babe at February 08, 2013 10:07 AM (hLRSq)

285 269 Assasination is against the Laws of War.... and the Geneva Convention.

Admiral Yamamoto is unavailable for comment.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - It's Not Me, Babe at February 08, 2013 10:14 AM (hLRSq)

286
264"Also a stupid argument. Bail jumpers haven't been convicted at that stage of the process. So they can't get killed by drones in this model. (Tranquilised by drones, perhaps.)"
If you bothered to read the wikipedia entry which Ace used as a reference, you will note that it says anyone fleeing justice or failing to show for trial were automatically outlawed.
You can call it a slippery slope argument if you like, but it is far from stupid to cite the history of the principal looking to be implemented when considering its effects.
Not only could they get killed by drones in this model, they could get killed by anyone who keeps up to date on the wanted posters.

Posted by: Sam at February 08, 2013 08:52 PM (wZIgv)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0548 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0206 seconds, 295 records returned.
Page size 155 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat