Drones and ExtraJudicial Killings

[ranrod]

As long as the public accepts the sophistry of the GWOT, and the various assassinations affiliated with it, it is just a matter of time before assassinations will be performed by drone on US soil.

I don't see congress of a state governor approving the use of drone attacks on US soil in today's climate. It's a very messy way of dealing with a problem. I see the use of ground unmanned weaponized vehicles. Somehow that seems ok. As long as you're not using explosions to solve the problem.

Do you think unmanned weaponized ground vehicles are any better than drones, or just as dangerous? The little tank things with guns, cameras, servo arms, etc.

[Ryinrea]

So Mr. Right Wing, I would like you ask why we shouldn't use people that are on ground to take these people out like seal team six or cia agents. We've got speicalized people that are trained to goin to do stuff like take out a compond. So why can't we put these black ops people to good use? Instead of going out and killing civilans, which is done by us using drones strikes in populted areas like in Yemen.

[Babe Ruth]

Babe, I believe what he is saying that it's fine with him if the government uses drones to kill suspected American terrorists on American soil.

You're probably right about that, but maybe he's just confused.

[Babe Ruth]

I don't see congress of a state governor approving the use of drone attacks on US soil in today's climate. It's a very messy way of dealing with a problem. I see the use of ground unmanned weaponized vehicles. Somehow that seems ok. As long as you're not using explosions to solve the problem.

Do you think unmanned weaponized ground vehicles are any better than drones, or just as dangerous? The little tank things with guns, cameras, servo arms, etc.

You know, I did not think I would ever see the day the Congress would nullify the Fourth Amendment, but it did back in 2001.

I never thought I would see Congress legislate Habeas Corpus into oblivion, but it did just a few months ago.

I never thought I would see the Executive usurp the power to be judge, jury and executioner, but it did last year under the traitor Obama.

[ranrod]

You know, I did not think I would ever see the day the Congress would nullify the Fourth Amendment, but it did back in 2001.

I never thought I would see Congress legislate Habeas Corpus into oblivion, but it did just a few months ago.

I never thought I would see the Executive usurp the power to be judge, jury and executioner, but it did last year under the traitor Obama.

All reactions to 9/11. For the authorization of air-to-ground missiles on US soil I speculate that some other big event like 9/11 would have to happen.

Not to stray too far off-topic but Obama went in trying to close out some of the post-9/11 policies, but after having long talks with the pertinent people, like the head of the CIA, he couldn't in good conscience go through with it. Neither you nor I are in the position he's in and we will likely never know what he learned when he took office. He had a strong personal drive and public mandate to do these things and if he didn't there must've been a very important reason! An ex-head of the CIA said in an interview that when they brief a new President, that the new President is always aghast at what he hears and changes his world view forever.

[ranrod]

<double post, sorry>

Edited June 14, 2012 by ranrod

[Babe Ruth]

You are a poor judge of men if you think Obama has any sort of conscience at all. Conscience requiring that one knows the difference between right and wrong.

You're quite right that the assault on the US Constitution derived DIRECTLY from the events of 11 September, and if they can stage those events, they can certainly stage others, as they please. Different scenarios, of course.

Yes, Jesse Ventura has told a similar story about his briefing as new governor, by the CIA. Little did he know that at least in Minnesota, there were a few CIA men in appointed (not elected) offices in the state government. It is safe to assume that it applies also in other states.

Obama is every bit the traitor that his predecessor was, and the record of his actions prove it. Extrajudicial killings are here to stay, and with the Unitary Executive fully established now, it won't be long before they take place on US soil, in the public eye.

[ranrod]

You are a poor judge of men if you think Obama has any sort of conscience at all. Conscience requiring that one knows the difference between right and wrong.

You're quite right that the assault on the US Constitution derived DIRECTLY from the events of 11 September, and if they can stage those events, they can certainly stage others, as they please. Different scenarios, of course.

Yes, Jesse Ventura has told a similar story about his briefing as new governor, by the CIA. Little did he know that at least in Minnesota, there were a few CIA men in appointed (not elected) offices in the state government. It is safe to assume that it applies also in other states.

Obama is every bit the traitor that his predecessor was, and the record of his actions prove it. Extrajudicial killings are here to stay, and with the Unitary Executive fully established now, it won't be long before they take place on US soil, in the public eye.

So in your opinion both parties are in on it? At what point does it begin? Is the average congressman in on it, or just higher-ups?

[+OverSword]

So in your opinion both parties are in on it? At what point does it begin? Is the average congressman in on it, or just higher-ups?

In my opinion there aren't two different political parties there is one. The Money Party. The money party consists of mainly federal politicians, wether they label themselves democrat or republican who's campaigns are funded by the same corporations. If they want more than one term they do what is in the best interests of those corporate donors. The left and right paradigm is a puppet show meant to keep the public polarized against itself based on petty non-issues such as abortion and same sex marriage, and distracted from the things that make the corporations and the politicians richer and more powerful such as poor banking practices and wars. If you doubt this name one major shift in economic or foriegn policy since GWB left office. When this next set of presidential debates is aired later this year pay close attention and you will see it's more of a mutual back patting contest than a debate, with niether candidate taking a strong or detailed view on any topic.

UFSA, United Facist States of America, where corporations rule and the brainwashed voters drool.

Edited June 14, 2012 by OverSword

[ranrod]

In my opinion there aren't two different political parties there is one. The Money Party. The money party consists of mainly federal politicians, wether they label themselves democrat or republican who's campaigns are funded by the same corporations. If they want more than one term they do what is in the best interests of those corporate donors. The left and right paradigm is a puppet show meant to keep the public polarized against itself based on petty non-issues such as abortion and same sex marriage, and distracted from the things that make the corporations and the politicians richer and more powerful such as poor banking practices and wars. If you doubt this name one major shift in economic or foriegn policy since GWB left office. When this next set of presidential debates is aired later this year pay close attention and you will see it's more of a mutual back patting contest than a debate, with niether candidate taking a strong or detailed view on any topic.

UFSA, United Facist States of America, where corporations rule and the brainwashed voters drool.

Who's 'they'? Who's in on it? Every congressman, senator, President, vice-president? Others? All in on it? Some not? The press? The pages? Security?

[+OverSword]

Who's 'they'? Who's in on it? Every congressman, senator, President, vice-president? Others? All in on it? Some not? The press? The pages? Security?

Typically the guy who spent most wins the election so sad to say, yes, all of them.

If you get elected to that level of government your campaign was paid for mailnly by big business. If you want to be re-elected you do what's in the interest of your donors. If you don't, they will not donate funds to your campaign but to whoever runs against you. Why do you think that there is never any kind of campaign finance reform legislation to level the playing field? They talk about it every once in a while but have never backed it with a bill.

Really a topic for another thread but you asked.

[Babe Ruth]

I must agree with OverSword. I've known for at least 20 years that the US political system is intellectually bankrupt. Anybody who has been paying attention over the last few decades, and who is intellectually honest, must admit that based upon empirical evidence there is no meaningful difference between the Donkeys and the Elephants.

I wish it weren't so, but the government is owned by special interests, and legislates on their behalf.

Yes, there are certainly some conscientious individuals like Feingold and others, but the system drives them out.

[Bama13]

I must agree with OverSword. I've known for at least 20 years that the US political system is intellectually bankrupt. Anybody who has been paying attention over the last few decades, and who is intellectually honest, must admit that based upon empirical evidence there is no meaningful difference between the Donkeys and the Elephants.

I wish it weren't so, but the government is owned by special interests, and legislates on their behalf.

Yes, there are certainly some conscientious individuals like Feingold and others, but the system drives them out.

Well, as a Bama man, I have always prefered the Elephants!!

[+OverSword]

Well, as a Bama man, I have always prefered the Elephants!!

This is not a discussion about your girlfriend

[Babe Ruth]