A Ron Paul moment....

[Henry Hawk]

Food for thought....


According to the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some aspirational statement of values, allowing exceptions when convenient, but rather, it is the law of the land.  It is the basis of our Republic and our principal bulwark against tyranny.

Last week's assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration.  If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a "really bad American", is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States?  If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights?  Didn't we just bomb Libya into oblivion under the auspices of protecting the civilians from being targeted by their government? Timothy McVeigh was certainly a threat, as were Nidal Hassan and Jared Lee Loughner.  They killed people in front of many witnesses.  They took up arms against their government in a literal way, yet were still afforded trials.  These constitutional protections are in place because our Founders realized it is a very serious matter to deprive any individual of life or liberty.  Our outrage against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of law.  Al-Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States and we are told he encouraged violence against Americans.  We do not know that he actually committed any acts of violence.  Ironically, he was once invited to the Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11.  As the US attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to US foreign policy.


Many cheer this killing because they believe that in a time of war, due process is not necessary – not even for citizens, and especially not for those overseas.  However, there has been no formal declaration of war and certainly not one against Yemen. The post-9/11 authorization for force would not have covered these two Americans because no one is claiming they had any connection to that attack. Al-Awlaki was on a kill list compiled by a secret panel within President Obama's National Security Council and Justice Department.  How many more Americans citizens are on that list?  They won't tell us. What are the criteria? They won't tell us. Where is the evidence? They won't tell us.


Al-Awlaki's father tried desperately to get the administration to at least allow his son to have legal representation to challenge the "kill" order. He was denied. Rather than give him his day in court, the administration, behind closed doors, served as prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.The most worrisome aspect of this is that any new powers this administration accrues will serve as precedents for future administrations.  Even those who completely trust this administration must understand that if this usurpation of power and denial of due process is allowed to stand, these powers will remain to be expanded on by the next administration and then the next.  Will you trust them?  History shows that once a population gives up its rights, they are not easily won back. 

Beware.

[Exterminator]

Had this scumbag wanted his day in court, all he had to do was turn himself in.  Anyone who would argue that taking out this guy without due process is a bad thing is a traitor.

[me]

I wouldn't go that far EX but, yes, I do think they did the right thing in taking him out. 

[Palehorse]

Conspiring with the enemy during war, and yes this country has been at war since 9-11, is punishable by death.

Now, one can argue surrounding the semantics around the theatre of ops and US involvement in the case in question, but even then it was simply a case of US assets being utilized within a UN sanctioned operation; to which the US is legally bound to meet the requirements of.

This guy was a target of opportunity, sure. But I venture to say he had ample time to do the right thing and made his choice.

Deliverance was achieved. He chose to consort with the enemy and conspire with them, and got what he had coming for those choices.

[Anne]

Just another creepy thing about Mr. Ron Paul.

[Palehorse]

Voting for this guy is like tying an anchor around a drowning man.

It will do nothing but accelerate the demise of this nation!

[me]

Voting for this guy is like tying an anchor around a drowning man.

It will do nothing but accelerate the demise of this nation!

I am in full agreement with you on that one.  Ron Paul is totally scary.  I honestly don't think he's playing with a full deck. 

[damfast]

I dunno guys, the guy could have been satan himself, but what about all that "innocent until proven guilty", and "jury of peers"?
where does it stop?
i am not saying he wasnt guilty, but due process and all that.  how can we have much to say about other countries who murder politically? or assasinate citizens?
it is scary that we are not apple pie, chevrolet and sunday afternoon baseball.
are we moving to the dark side now, and who is next? what if it is a teacher who teaches revolution, or a minister who preaches against government, or a military leader who refuses to follow orders?
or one of us. 
just plain scary to see the direction we allow. 
do you think the media sends us in the direction of soft news, like who divorced who, and who cheated, in sports and hollywood?  do you think michael moore has a point?  i watched some of his videos, and as crackpot as he seems, is there a point in there? do we believe too quickly? and isnt it odd that one guy is in custody for plotting to kill an ambassador from iran? why did he confess? did we waterboard him? or is it a lie? a way to move more of our kids into those eastern countries and get them out of the job market here?  and then you have the demonstrations goin on. why are they awful, and the tea party isnt? who organized it, and why is it increasing?
i know you are all really informed and you spend loads of time on this blog confronting questions like these. 
in all seriousness, i am just a normal citizen, i collect my pay, pay my bills, own a home, have a retirement plan, i dont belong to any funky group, dont really live outside the box at all. but what about my grandchildren, i worry about what place we are leaving them. i try to teach them about justice and moral standards, and working hard, save their money, and educate themselves. maybe those "crazies" who live in the woods and train with weapons, and believe the government is out to exterminate them arent that "crazy"

[The Troll]

  Henery, where is Ron Paul now?  I really haven't heard much out of him.   

[The Troll]

Food for thought....


According to the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some aspirational statement of values, allowing exceptions when convenient, but rather, it is the law of the land.  It is the basis of our Republic and our principal bulwark against tyranny.

Last week's assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration.  If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a "really bad American", is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States?  If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights?  Didn't we just bomb Libya into oblivion under the auspices of protecting the civilians from being targeted by their government? Timothy McVeigh was certainly a threat, as were Nidal Hassan and Jared Lee Loughner.  They killed people in front of many witnesses.  They took up arms against their government in a literal way, yet were still afforded trials.  These constitutional protections are in place because our Founders realized it is a very serious matter to deprive any individual of life or liberty.  Our outrage against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of law.  Al-Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States and we are told he encouraged violence against Americans.  We do not know that he actually committed any acts of violence.  Ironically, he was once invited to the Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11.  As the US attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to US foreign policy.


Many cheer this killing because they believe that in a time of war, due process is not necessary – not even for citizens, and especially not for those overseas.  However, there has been no formal declaration of war and certainly not one against Yemen. The post-9/11 authorization for force would not have covered these two Americans because no one is claiming they had any connection to that attack. Al-Awlaki was on a kill list compiled by a secret panel within President Obama's National Security Council and Justice Department.  How many more Americans citizens are on that list?  They won't tell us. What are the criteria? They won't tell us. Where is the evidence? They won't tell us.


Al-Awlaki's father tried desperately to get the administration to at least allow his son to have legal representation to challenge the "kill" order. He was denied. Rather than give him his day in court, the administration, behind closed doors, served as prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.The most worrisome aspect of this is that any new powers this administration accrues will serve as precedents for future administrations.  Even those who completely trust this administration must understand that if this usurpation of power and denial of due process is allowed to stand, these powers will remain to be expanded on by the next administration and then the next.  Will you trust them?  History shows that once a population gives up its rights, they are not easily won back. 

Beware.

  I will admit I never read the long winded piece of bull shit.  Who wrote it Henery.  It's too well composed for you to have wrote it.

  Killing these two worthless bastard who had declared war on the United States of American and It's people, deserved it.  I would have pulled the trigger on them myself.  You kill a rat where you find it.   

[dan foster]

I dunno guys, the guy could have been satan himself, but what about all that "innocent until proven guilty", and "jury of peers"?
where does it stop?
i am not saying he wasnt guilty, but due process and all that.  how can we have much to say about other countries who murder politically? or assasinate citizens?
it is scary that we are not apple pie, chevrolet and sunday afternoon baseball.
are we moving to the dark side now, and who is next? what if it is a teacher who teaches revolution, or a minister who preaches against government, or a military leader who refuses to follow orders?
or one of us. 
just plain scary to see the direction we allow. 
do you think the media sends us in the direction of soft news, like who divorced who, and who cheated, in sports and hollywood?  do you think michael moore has a point?  i watched some of his videos, and as crackpot as he seems, is there a point in there? do we believe too quickly? and isnt it odd that one guy is in custody for plotting to kill an ambassador from iran? why did he confess? did we waterboard him? or is it a lie? a way to move more of our kids into those eastern countries and get them out of the job market here?  and then you have the demonstrations goin on. why are they awful, and the tea party isnt? who organized it, and why is it increasing?
i know you are all really informed and you spend loads of time on this blog confronting questions like these. 
in all seriousness, i am just a normal citizen, i collect my pay, pay my bills, own a home, have a retirement plan, i dont belong to any funky group, dont really live outside the box at all. but what about my grandchildren, i worry about what place we are leaving them. i try to teach them about justice and moral standards, and working hard, save their money, and educate themselves. maybe those "crazies" who live in the woods and train with weapons, and believe the government is out to exterminate them arent that "crazy"

I agree with the killings.  We should have done this to all the "crazies" instead of sending troops into either Afghanistan or Iraq.  So, I disagree with the stupidity of those wars, but for the very same objections raised in the piece.  The invasion of Iraq was completely assinine and without legal or moral merit done by the same treasonous assholes (cheeny/bush) that instituted torture, illegally (like many other actions by them); a sad day for all Americans.  Those folks should be sitting in jail at the Hague awaiting trial.  But, maybe some other rogue nation will send assassins in to kill the two of them in some sort of sweet irony.  After all, they are enemy combatants, as well, are they not (at least while in office)?  Wouldn't they deserve the trial in the Hague, at least?  Wonder what the US would do, after the fact?  ;>)

[damfast]

i guess it says a lot that the timmy and lassie days are gone if they ever did exist.  at least before richard nixon we all lived in a euphoric time that allowed us to believe that america was free, our flag was our treasured committment to democracy, that going to church on sunday with your family was significant and created strong families.  that our grandparents were soft and comfy, and they knew if you should be a democrat or a republican.  we believed...

[Henry Hawk]

i guess it says a lot that the timmy and lassie days are gone if they ever did exist.  at least before richard nixon we all lived in a euphoric time that allowed us to believe that america was free, our flag was our treasured committment to democracy, that going to church on sunday with your family was significant and created strong families.  that our grandparents were soft and comfy, and they knew if you should be a democrat or a republican.  we believed...

[me]

i guess it says a lot that the timmy and lassie days are gone if they ever did exist.  at least before richard nixon we all lived in a euphoric time that allowed us to believe that america was free, our flag was our treasured committment to democracy, that going to church on sunday with your family was significant and created strong families.  that our grandparents were soft and comfy, and they knew if you should be a democrat or a republican.  we believed...

[The Troll]

i guess it says a lot that the timmy and lassie days are gone if they ever did exist.  at least before richard nixon we all lived in a euphoric time that allowed us to believe that america was free, our flag was our treasured committment to democracy, that going to church on sunday with your family was significant and created strong families.  that our grandparents were soft and comfy, and they knew if you should be a democrat or a republican.  we believed...

  Yep, the good old days.  Before television, computers, computer games, before organized sport activities for the kids.  Before you had to be a rocket scientist to get a job.  When we had manufacturing and anyone who wanted a job could get one.  Before the super rich and the corporations out sourced all of our jobs.  Yes, the good old days.

  Oh yes, the churches.  The place to go to hear the same old shit about how if you're good you will go to that invisible old guy in the sky who watches you every second of your life and if you break any of his stupid laws he will send you to hell, because he loves you. 

  Back then the church was the place to go.  That's where you caught up on all of the gossip and the only place you could afford to go.  It's where you went to be brain washed every week, hell and damnation.

  One reason we think it was the good old days was, we were kids and we did know what was going on in life.  All we care about was having fun, where we were going to ride our bicycles without a helmet or the fear of the cops throwing you in jail, he was your friend.

  The only way I would want the old days back is, if I could be a kid again and see my mother, father and my grandma and grandpaw.  The days when I didn't have a care in the world and everything was great.