White House hopeful Ron Paul and the American Civil Liberties Union each condemned the United States’ killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who has never been charged with any crime….The ACLU said the killing was a violation of both U.S. and international law. [1]
What the difference between THIS and a swat team sniper taking out a man using a hostage as a body shield in a bank robbery? No one reads him HIS rights? POW! Problem solved. Think about it…..
[1] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20113962-503544.html
“What the difference between THIS and a swat team sniper taking out a man using a hostage as a body shield in a bank robbery?” (FB)
.
.
Well, the ostensible difference is that the thug (the hostage-taking bank robber) in your analogy is engaged in immediate and aggressive violent action. . .that’s the distinction Ron Paul and some others make.
There ARE new realities today that MUST be addressed. In this Information Age, information can be more dangerous than guns. There is no doubt that both Awlaki & Samir were imminent threats to non-radicals everywhere.
Still, I’m sure you can see the very real possibility of abuse by even the slightest over-reach here.
It’s interesting that Americans support this by about the same rate they support online pedophile stings (around 70% support, and around 20 – 25% oppose). Those numbers would almost certainly be reversed if those tactics were used against other (less stigmatized criminals) drug dealers, or even bank robbers. Pre-emptively killing “potential bank robbers or drug dealers,” OR even actively engaging (encouraging) young miscreants who assert an interest in such things and using tactics that might be seen as approaching the line to “entrapment” would not be popular with most Americans. Many severe exceptions seem to be made for pedophiles and terrorists.
It’s not as though there isn’t a lot that SHOULD BE seen as “problematic” with many of these new programs and policies. They are ripe for over-reach and overuse AND any such abuse of these tactics could have a very widespread impact on all of us.
The unpopularity of Ron Paul’s views doesn’t make them less pertinent.
The sad thing is that Rep Paul’s “Frank Perdue delivery” doesn’t help him make his case very effectively and allies like the ACLU, which has long arbitrarily and capriciously opposed (without reason or rationale) some parts of the Constitution – they haven’t been ardent supporters of the 2nd or 10th Amendments, for instance, and HAVE endorsed “thought-crimes” (hate crimes) and opposed BOTH “equality before the law” and “equality of OPPORTUNITY” (“equality of results ALWAYS runs counter to equality of opportunity) in supporting race/gender preferences. That such flawed people are the face of the these (potentially) legitimate objections does those objections, or at least their legitimacy a grave disservice.
I actually like Ron Paul when he’s talking domestic issues (other than legalizing drugs) because I’m a Libertarian at heart. It’s when his meds wear off and he starts talking foreign policy that he sounds nuttier than squirrel poop
“I actually like Ron Paul when he’s talking domestic issues (other than legalizing drugs)…” (FB)
.
.
Yes, I think a lot more people agree with more of his domestic agenda than in other areas. As an example, he is/was a 9/11 Truther for awhile.
What Ron Paul and some others don’t seem to realize is that privacy cannot be defined as it originally was. . .because that kind and level of privacy simply no longer exists. He also doesn’t seem to recognize that in this age, information can be more deadly than any handheld weapon.
Again, he DOES bring up a necessary consideration, the dire possibilities that come with the abuse, over-use of such “exceptions,” BUT he simply doesn’t seem capable of making or even framing that argument correctly. . .NOR has anyone else to this point.
What EXACTLY are the rules and guidelines on the use of this policy?
At present, they are not at all clear.
We NEED legislation and review (since often such directives have to be made and carried out within serious time constraints) a post-event review procedure with potential criminal penalties for misuse MUST eventually be ironed out.
Assassinations, murders, rape, torture, genocide, euthanasia, infanticide, pedophilia and all kinds of abominations are now becoming acceptable in America. This sanctioned killing, like thousands of others, is being justified by a war on terror, but what war? There are no declarations against known Governments, there are no declarations of war at all, just mindless killing. If the U.S. Government can call an American citizen a terrorist and torture them or murder them without a jury trial, then they will be able to eliminate anyone who gets in their way in the same manner. Good bye whistle blowers, good bye leaders of Parties that oppose the status quo and good bye to the first, second, forth and 10th Amendments to the Constitution.
Have you ever wondered how these terrorists get their funding? How do they move supplies and provide food and medical care for their troops? How do they move money in this electronic age unseen? Do you ever wonder how they can move about freely from Country to Country and communicate with each other freely while fighting multi-continent battles against the entire military might of the United States and all of our allies? You can not put an army in the field without State support, much less a heavily armed globe trotting army that has supposedly been stalemating us for years now.
The fact that our troops are bravely fighting and spilling blood for what they believe is right and necessary to keep us safe and free is the truth, but the rest of this phony war, and everything that led up to it, are just one big lie after another. What we are witnessing in this story is the perfect dialectic to use for controlling the discussion of greater Government power over its citizens, and with the help of the Corporate Media the American public is by and large buying it hook line and sinker.
We need to remember that this is the same Government that committed genocide against the American Indians, it is the same Government that denied the rights of the Southern people to self govern and then marched into their towns killing, looting and destroying everything as they went. It is the same Government that has carried out atrocious crimes by experimenting on our troops and our minority populations, and at times on the public in general, all the while knowing that some would die. We can not trust this kind of assassination power in their hands, they will without a doubt abuse it.
I love my Country, it is the greatest Nation in the World, but it is only so because it is a Nation of laws and freedoms. Every person from the richest to the poorest, no matter what color or ethnic background, all of us are bound by the same laws and we all enjoy the same freedoms. If we allow that spirit to die and instead embrace this lynch-mob like spirit of murder and mayhem, then that is what we will get. Situational ethics is an evil tool that is being used against the population, and I guess that we must love it by the looks of things, unless of course you happen to be the one that is in the situation where your ethical treatment no longer matters.
Assassinations, murders, rape, torture, genocide, euthanasia, infanticide, pedophilia and all kinds of abominations are now becoming acceptable in America.
What?
Terminal hay fever. Pay it no mind.
I am not a Ron Paul supporter by the way, although he is right on most of the major issues facing us today. I will vote neither Republican or Democrat, both Parties are just supporting a different side of the dialectic in order to push us toward the globalist agenda. Those involved with these Parties that are not a part of this agenda, should have enough sense to get out of them.
AGREE!!!!!
Carol-CS
I rarely agree with your politics, but your post titles crack me up.