A US Teenager Who Grew Up In Denver Was Executed WITHOUT TRIAL With a DRONE

[kelly4]

part conservative where did I say that?

I don't take notes like Buck, but if I find it I'll show you.

 

[deprave]

I don't take notes like Buck, but if I find it I'll show you.

goodluck with that one lol

I understand conservatives , I sympathize for them, I have thought I was a conservative years ago, I would never say I am "part conservative", Again I disagree with at least half of what they say, and I do find myself feeling a sort of hatred for them sometimes but that's a little strong of a word. Despise maybe a better word? I had a hard time registering as a republican to vote for Ron Paul emotionally but I know the fact is DR Paul is really a classic liberal like myself or at least he agrees 100% with classic liberals.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I'd say if you are a "libertarian" you might consider refamiliarizing yourself with the tenets of the non-initiation of aggression principle.

initiation of aggression is not what we have in junior's case. junior was an incidental casualty. the initiation of aggression by al quaeda in yemen occurred some time ago. yemen has been unable or un willing to squash these bugs, so the drone strikes are the only politically viable solution to curb their behavior, and combat their publicly declared war against the United States and the Entire Civilized World!

i had to make it big so you can read it from way up there on your high horse.

you might want to re-familiarize yourself with Facts, Truths and the Nature of Linear Time and Causal Relations within that Framework.

underwear bombers attempting to blow up air liners as part of an organized network of mohammedan terrorists engaged in declared war on all who are not under the yoke of Dar Al Islam is the initation of aggression. until they are defeated, dismantled and extinguished there can be no initiation of aggression by those who fight against al quaeda in yemen.

 

[ChesusRice]

goodluck with that one lol

I understand conservatives , I sympathize for them, I have thought I was a conservative years ago, I would never say I am "part conservative", Again I disagree with at least half of what they say, and I do find myself feeling a sort of hatred for them sometimes but that's a little strong of a word. Despise maybe a better word? I had a hard time registering as a republican to vote for Ron Paul emotionally but I know the fact is DR Paul is really a classic liberal like myself or at least he agrees 100% with classic liberals.

Come on man
Dont go there
Ron Paul is a nut ball conspiracy freak racist
That enriches himself off of rubes that support him

 

[Rob Roy]

the fecal stain in question chose to travel to a foreign land and join a foreign band which attempted to make war on the US.

what "Due Process" do you suppose he was entitled to? had he not been hanging out with al banni he would not have been caught up in al banni's entirely expected, well deserved, not at all surprising detonation incidents.

the cockstain was the architect of his own demolition. i feel no more concern over this insect's demise than i would a careless meth cook, a motorcycle rider who attempts a wheelie at freeway speeds, a drunk driver, an alcoholic who burns out his liver, a junkie who injects too much smack, or a bomb vest tailor who's latest fashionable creation sparks off prematurely.

foolish decisions rarely provide positive results.

case in point: Steve Irwin.

"Crikey! There's a stingray! Lets go take a closer look!"

you can weep for the injustice all you like, i maintain that he was not killed by the US government, but rather by his own Hubris. (look it up)

Okay. So by name calling this person with your big bad ass internet muscles you justify that SOME people get protection of your revered constitution, but not all. Hmm...got it.

Since we are playing the bet you don't the know the meaning of this word game , how about we asssign you this one...."hypoocrite" (one who is a hypocrite and full of poo...no really look it up)

 

[Rob Roy]

initiation of aggression is not what we have in junior's case. junior was an incidental casualty. the initiation of aggression by al quaeda in yemen occurred some time ago. yemen has been unable or un willing to squash these bugs, so the drone strikes are the only politically viable solution to curb their behavior, and combat their publicly declared war against the United States and the Entire Civilized World!

i had to make it big so you can read it from way up there on your high horse.

you might want to re-familiarize yourself with Facts, Truths and the Nature of Linear Time and Causal Relations within that Framework.

underwear bombers attempting to blow up air liners as part of an organized network of mohammedan terrorists engaged in declared war on all who are not under the yoke of Dar Al Islam is the initation of aggression. until they are defeated, dismantled and extinguished there can be no initiation of aggression by those who fight against al quaeda in yemen.

Perhaps this is relevant....oh by the way was he a U.S. citizen or not ?

 

[ChesusRice]

Buh Bye Scumbag

YOu got your martydom wish earlier than you wanted

Buh Bye
Dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out to hell

 

[Dr Kynes]

Okay. So by name calling this person with your big bad ass internet muscles you justify that SOME people get protection of your revered constitution, but not all. Hmm...got it.

Since we are playing the bet you don't the know the meaning of this word game , how about we asssign you this one...."hypoocrite" (one who is a hypocrite and full of poo...no really look it up)

conversely, had junior remained in denver and done exactly what he did in yemen, which is to say, sought out an alquaeda recruiter, expressed a desire for martydom, and gone to a location frequented by al quaeda in denver's top bosses he would have not been blown up. he would have been busted (provided he did not attempt to shoot out with the FBI) charged with a variety of crimes, and tried in a court for his deeds. he would have had the benefit of all the liberal lawyers and constitutional protections afforded to rapists, theives, hookers, and teenagers with a doobie. too bad he decided to roll the dice in yemen instead of playing the lower stakes game in colorado. maybe he should have re-familiarized himslef with the justice system found in a war zone instead of daydreaming of 72 virgins and 18 smooth young boys.

 

[Rob Roy]

conversely, had junior remained in denver and done exactly what he did in yemen, which is to say, sought out an alquaeda recruiter, expressed a desire for martydom, and gone to a location frequented by al quaeda in denver's top bosses he would have not been blown up. he would have been busted (provided he did not attempt to shoot out with the FBI) charged with a variety of crimes, and tried in a court for his deeds. he would have had the benefit of all the liberal lawyers and constitutional protections afforded to rapists, theives, hookers, and teenagers with a doobie. too bad he decided to roll the dice in yemen instead of playing the lower stakes game in colorado. maybe he should have re-familiarized himslef with the justice system found in a war zone instead of daydreaming of 72 virgins and 18 smooth young boys.

So he was in a "rights free" zone? Meaning his "rights" ceased to exist there? How does this happen? Who makes this decision?

Those questions are rhetorical by the way....The fact is your constitution is a wonderful document with some major flaws, but it is no longer applicable both abroad and in the geographical confines contained within the imaginary lines of the "United States". Your point that this kid may have been a "bad guy" is well taken, but it still fails to answer if his "rights" were protected or denied. They were, obviously, denied. Check mate.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Perhaps this is relevant....oh by the way was he a U.S. citizen or not ?

well i suppose that might matter if being a us citizen would somehow make him immune to missiles.

consider this:

if an F4 phantom had dropped a bomb onto a certain North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun in 1972, and jane fonda got blown up, would you demand the prosecution of the pilot for "deliberately targeting" hanoi jane?

even though there would be no possible way he could anticipate that an american actress would be sitting on a legitimate military target in the middle of a war zone?

of course you would.

it's only reasonable to demand perfection in planning and execution of any military strike. to do otherwise would negate the constitution and make us all doodoo heads and meaners.

 

[Dr Kynes]

So he was in a "rights free" zone? Meaning his "rights" ceased to exist there? How does this happen? Who makes this decision?

Those questions are rhetorical by the way....The fact is your constitution is a wonderful document with some major flaws, but it is no longer applicable both abroad and in the geographical confines contained within the imaginary lines of the "United States". Your point that this kid may have been a "bad guy" is well taken, but it still fails to answer if his "rights" were protected or denied. They were, obviously, denied. Check mate.

smearing oneself with a rich meaty gravy and leaping into a tiger pen does not make one into a martyr for the cause of civil rights.

holding up your US passport in the middle of a riot in downtown abu dhabi will not guarantee your safety.

wrapping yourself in an american flag before charging forward machine gun blazing into a marine checkpoint will not protect you from the bullets that will end your life.

possession of a us passport does not mean the freedom to ignore common sense precautions like not hanging out with guys who might get a bomb dropped on their heads.

 

[Rob Roy]

well i suppose that might matter if being a us citizen would somehow make him immune to missiles.

consider this:

if an F4 phantom had dropped a bomb onto a certain North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun in 1972, and jane fonda got blown up, would you demand the prosecution of the pilot for "deliberately targeting" hanoi jane?

even though there would be no possible way he could anticipate that an american actress would be sitting on a legitimate military target in the middle of a war zone?

of course you would.

it's only reasonable to demand perfection in planning and execution of any military strike. to do otherwise would negate the constitution and make us all doodoo heads and meaners.

aHHH...more deflection. So it's only "murder" if the government doesn't do it....then it's "not murder" ? So this "citizen that has rights guaranteed to be protected" was "not murdered" because he was a douche bag and it's okay for the government to "not murder" douche bags .....gotcha.

Jane Fonda was a fine piece of ass. I say that because by the time I gave her up to Ted Turner she was pretty much worn out anyway. So this Viet Nam thing you speak of....was that a "constitutionally declared" war ? Gee sounds like alot of times the good old constitution has a greart deal of flexibility huh?

 

[Rob Roy]

smearing oneself with a rich meaty gravy and leaping into a tiger pen does not make one into a martyr for the cause of civil rights.

holding up your US passport in the middle of a riot in downtown abu dhabi will not guarantee your safety.

wrapping yourself in an american flag before charging forward machine gun blazing into a marine checkpoint will not protect you from the bullets that will end your life.

possession of a us passport does not mean the freedom to ignore common sense precautions like not hanging out with guys who might get a bomb dropped on their heads.

Apparently a "guarantee of safety" by the constitution doesn't exist either.

So you are essentially okay with the U.S. government killing some people whilst ignoring the constitution ?

That's a yes or no question by the way.

 

[Nitegazer]

What I don't get about Dr. Kynes et. al. is the insistence that the violent acts are justified because the enemy is uncivilized and evil (queue the Darth Vader theme) and at the same time they praise revenge and the 'law of the club,' which Kynes 'liked.' The 'good guys' in this thread sound just as frothy as Al-Qaeda.

All this blathering on about our superiority is just a means to justify revenge killing. The posters here get all giddy about killing, like it's fun for them. Atrocities committed by the US I suppose are never really atrocities to them, because we are white hats. They are in a state of total confusion.

[video=youtube;fY_15OgTU5Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY_15OgTU5Y&feature=related[/video]

 

[Dr Kynes]

aHHH...more deflection. So it's only "murder" if the government doesn't do it....then it's "not murder" ? So this "citizen that has rights guaranteed to be protected" was "not murdered" because he was a douche bag and it's okay for the government to "not murder" douche bags .....gotcha.

Jane Fonda was a fine piece of ass. I say that because by the time I gave her up to Ted Turner she was pretty much worn out anyway. So this Viet Nam thing you speak of....was that a "constitutionally declared" war ? Gee sounds like alot of times the good old constitution has a greart deal of flexibility huh?

and you say i am deflecting?

jane fonda went into a live war zone (right or wrong constitutional or not is immaterial, bullets dont ask for ID before they drill through even the most liberal skulls) and took upon herself the risk that she might get shot by the Vietcong, the Viet Minh, the Us army, the airforce,. or even the navy. she made her own decision to travel to an area frought with perils, and had she been blown up she would have been the only one to blame. just like junior.

choosing to spend an evening of innocent frivolity in a notorious crackhouse could result in one being swept up like a common crackhead when the place gets raided by the cops.

most people would be reluctant to answer Yayha Ayyash's phone. it could be Mossad on the other end of the line.

likewise junior made a bad choice, rolled the dice and came up a loser. i still decline the invitation to feel bad for him.

 

[Rob Roy]

and you say i am deflecting?

jane fonda went into a live war zone (right or wrong constitutional or not is immaterial, bullets dont ask for ID before they drill through even the most liberal skulls) and took upon herself the risk that she might get shot by the Vietcong, the Viet Minh, the Us army, the airforce,. or even the navy. she made her own decision to travel to an area frought with perils, and had she been blown up she would have been the only one to blame. just like junior.

choosing to spend an evening of innocent frivolity in a notorious crackhouse could result in one being swept up like a common crackhead when the place gets raided by the cops.

most people would be reluctant to answer Yayha Ayyash's phone. it could be Mossad on the other end of the line.

likewise junior made a bad choice, rolled the dice and came up a loser. i still decline the invitation to feel bad for him.

..."constitutional is immaterial"..... Okay so if the government can ignore the constitution at will please explain how they are magically restrained by it or how it can ever really protect anybody?

 

[Dr Kynes]

Apparently a "guarantee of safety" by the constitution doesn't exist either.

So you are essentially okay with the U.S. government killing some people whilst ignoring the constitution ?

That's a yes or no question by the way.

no.

is that simple enough for you?

no, i am essentially completely satisfied that the missile was properly targeted, struck it's designated target location, and was launched under orders by senior officers who received their orders from the desk of barack hussein obama.

the missile delivered it's payload and detonated with satisfactory results, and provided sufficient destructive force to end the life of ibrahim al banni, abdulrachman al alawaki and several other individuals who were in the designated locations inside the zoine of engagement in al quaeda controlled territory within the borders of the duly recognized nation of Yemen. The Yemeni government has expressed no concern regarding the strike, and therefore the matter is closed.

good job all around. maybe the next chucklehead who runs off to yemen to join al quaeda will find a similar fate. one can only hope.

 

[Rob Roy]

..."constitutional is immaterial"..... Okay so if the government can ignore the constitution at will please explain how they are magically restrained by it or how it can ever really protect anybody?

Guess you're gonna skip the hard questions eh?

 

[Harrekin]

no.

is that simple enough for you?

no, i am essentially completely satisfied that the missile was properly targeted, struck it's designated target location, and was launched under orders by senior officers who received their orders from the desk of barack hussein obama.

the missile delivered it's payload and detonated with satisfactory results, and provided sufficient destructive force to end the life of ibrahim al banni, abdulrachman al alawaki and several other individuals who were in the designated locations inside the zoine of engagement in al quaeda controlled territory within the borders of the duly recognized nation of Yemen. The Yemeni government has expressed no concern regarding the strike, and therefore the matter is closed.

good job all around. maybe the next chucklehead who runs off to yemen to join al quaeda will find a similar fate. one can only hope.

Ah so it's ok if the Kenyan orders it cos he's President?

Hopefully the Conservatives elect Mittens and put him in charge of the "button". Then he can declare that growers, etc are terrorists and wipe them out. Thatd be ok tho, cos Mittens gave the order and the growers were declared terrorists, right?

 

[Fungus Gnat]

Ah so it's ok if the Kenyan orders it cos he's President?

Hopefully the Conservatives elect Mittens and put him in charge of the "button". Then he can declare that growers, etc are terrorists and wipe them out. Thatd be ok tho, cos Mittens gave the order and the growers were declared terrorists, right?