Killing Scum without "due process" - The Firearms Forum

The Duke · 09-30-2011, 01:24 PM

CAIR, Civil Liberties Groups Question Killing of American Militant Without 'Due Process'

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...#ixzz1ZSUoaAXv

Seem as if CAIR and some of the other left winger liberal groups got their panties in wad because our military took out Anwar al-Awlaki and some of his bretherin scum who happend to be along for the ride..

I would like to know what is their definition of "due process"? Maybe they should have called us before 9-11, USS Cole, Lebanon, etc with a warning of what is to come?...My definition of " due process' is to kill the rats everytime one of them sticks his head out of his hole in the ground...but with due process...

I believe they have a very valid point here and we should try our best to give them a "due process" warning ...

If up to me, the warning would be something like....Hey, A$$hole!!! Look Up!!! This warning allows them a few seconds to realize the kindness and graciousness of the American Military by arrainging for them an "imminent meeting with Alla...Now thats what I call "due process".

Brisk44 · 09-30-2011, 02:05 PM

I guess they have no idea what war means.

HunterAlpha1 · 09-30-2011, 02:09 PM

as far as i'm concerned the only warning they need is the sound of them being blasted to hell.

jbmid1 · 09-30-2011, 02:21 PM

I think the process worked just fine.

ofitg · 09-30-2011, 04:27 PM

Just before pushing the red button, the drone operator yelled "Stop or I'll shoot"

Bobitis · 09-30-2011, 06:02 PM

English (American) is a tough language to master and mistakes are made daily by even the best. Lose/loose, they're/there/their, etc.

I believe what they meant to say was 'do process'.

Thank me later.

Double D · 09-30-2011, 06:18 PM

Liberals, what else do you expect.

H-D · 09-30-2011, 06:19 PM

Here's the process. Clean weapon, load magazine, go find em', kill em, that's what they are due and that's the process

CampingJosh · 09-30-2011, 06:31 PM

While I agree that al-Awlaki needed to go, this does set us in an odd predicament.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that al-Awlaki was guilty of treason (he was, after all, a natural born US citizen). So they intentionally killed him.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that Randy Weaver was guilty of treason (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked him and his family, killing his wife and son.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that David Koresh and the Branch Davidians were stockpiling verboten weapons (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked them, killing 76 people in the process.

We're upset about some of these. We're not upset about all of these.

I for one do not want to cheer a government that violently, intentionally executes citizens without a trial. To do so would be to cheer totalitarianism.

jack404 · 09-30-2011, 06:33 PM

CAIR is just doing what they are supposed to do , protect Islam at any cost ..

they whine about unlawful killings , but never raise one of the dead this mutt plotted against

CAIR should be thrown out of your nation as the AFIC should be here

they dont like it , tough , you took out a enemy of your nation , they dont like it they can be enemies too

simple ...

jack404 · 09-30-2011, 06:37 PM

Let's see if CAIR will complain about this

http://1389blog.com/2011/09/29/irani...stian-beliefs/

Bobitis · 09-30-2011, 07:06 PM

I don't really care where he was born. It's a moot point.

The man plotted and inspired attacks on America. Not a singular group of individuals, but an entire nation and what it stood for. He was a terrorist.

We uphold piracy laws simply because the acts are committed on water. The same laws should apply on land. Nationality has nothing to do with it.

The idea that we should arrest him so he can stand trial escapes me.

Diamondback · 09-30-2011, 07:26 PM

Ask the educated morons who object to killing known terrorist leaders and followers without 'due process', Where was the due process for all of the people that this A**H**E and his kind have murdered in the name of God?

Due process for anyone who threatens me or mine, my family, my friends, my country, whether they be foreigners or citizens, is any method that removes the threat permanently. Any American citizen that goes to a foreign country and plots to murder innocent people simply because they don't like their life style, forever forfeits any rights they may have had to due process or any other legal proceeding. They are enemy combatants and are therefore fair game to anyone with the wherewithal to remove them from this sphere.

If I have in any way offended anyone with my honest opinion and what I consider no nonsense viewpoint, Tango Sierra.

Double D · 09-30-2011, 07:32 PM

Due process= flip open scope cover

PatAz · 09-30-2011, 07:47 PM

What in the world is the problem? All that occured was some stinky trash was taken out.

Bobitis · 09-30-2011, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diamondback

Ask the educated morons who object to killing known terrorist leaders and followers without 'due process', Where was the due process for all of the people that this A**H**E and his kind have murdered in the name of God?

Due process for anyone who threatens me or mine, my family, my friends, my country, whether they be foreigners or citizens, is any method that removes the threat permanently. Any American citizen that goes to a foreign country and plots to murder innocent people simply because they don't like their life style, forever forfeits any rights they may have had to due process or any other legal proceeding. They are enemy combatants and are therefore fair game to anyone with the wherewithal to remove them from this sphere.

If I have in any way offended anyone with my honest opinion and what I consider no nonsense viewpoint, Tango Sierra.

I like that. ^

Everyone has an opinion, but some are more valid than others.

jwrauch · 09-30-2011, 07:50 PM

Good riddance to scum. As for Ron Paul, he just killed any chance he had and I'm glad he showed just how much of a nut job he is now. JR

jwrauch · 09-30-2011, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

While I agree that al-Awlaki needed to go, this does set us in an odd predicament.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that al-Awlaki was guilty of treason (he was, after all, a natural born US citizen). So they intentionally killed him.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that Randy Weaver was guilty of treason (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked him and his family, killing his wife and son.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that David Koresh and the Branch Davidians were stockpiling verboten weapons (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked them, killing 76 people in the process.

We're upset about some of these. We're not upset about all of these.

I for one do not want to cheer a government that violently, intentionally executes citizens without a trial. To do so would be to cheer totalitarianism.

He had taken residence with our enemies and given them aid and comfort. What more proof of treason do you need ?

JR

CampingJosh · 09-30-2011, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwrauch

He had taken residence with our enemies and given them aid and comfort. What more proof of treason do you need ?

JR

Again, I'm not saying that the man deserved to live. He was a traitor, a terrorist, genuine scum. He deserved to die for his crimes.
But there is a difference between being punished for one's crimes and being executed.

I just don't like the slippery slope. Today it's executing a terrorist without any kind of trial or public display of evidence; tomorrow it's killing an accused kidnapper; by Monday morning, the Feds are murdering tax evaders on sight.

The due process restriction on our government is in place to protect the people from tyranny. The fact that some bureaucrat claims a person committed some particular crime is not justification for execution. If we accept that this is an OK action for the Feds, they're sure to turn it on us shortly.

How do we go about keeping our government in check while still allowing our military to effectively wage war on our enemies? I don't know. I don't have an answer to this just yet.
But I do know that I don't want our government to have free license to kill citizens with simple "it was for your own good" explanation.

Inthewind1976 · 09-30-2011, 09:09 PM

Any comparison to Randy Weaver or the Branch Dividians is disingenuous, at best.

ofitg · 09-30-2011, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

While I agree that al-Awlaki needed to go, this does set us in an odd predicament.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that al-Awlaki was guilty of treason (he was, after all, a natural born US citizen). So they intentionally killed him.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that Randy Weaver was guilty of treason (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked him and his family, killing his wife and son.

Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that David Koresh and the Branch Davidians were stockpiling verboten weapons (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked them, killing 76 people in the process.

We're upset about some of these. We're not upset about all of these.

I for one do not want to cheer a government that violently, intentionally executes citizens without a trial. To do so would be to cheer totalitarianism.

Josh, you raise some good points.

I do not know anything about Randy Weaver's character, but it does seem to me that the feds could have handled it better. According to what I read, an FBI agent shot a dog, then Weaver's son shot at the FBI agent (and missed), and the son was killed. After that it was all-out war. It could have all turned out differently if both sides had exercised more restraint. Pretty much the same thing could be said about Koresh and the Branch Davidians.
It did not seem that Weaver or Koresh presented any immediate threat to society, and what should have been routine law enforcement actions suddenly escalated into "military" operations on U.S. soil.

Maybe my moral compass is broken, but al-Awlaki's death doesn't bother me so much. He may have been a U.S. citizen (accident of birth), but he was beyond the reach of our law enforcement agencies, allegedly engaged in violent actions against our public..... if those allegations were false, he could have surrendered and cleared his name.
It turns out that he wasn't beyond the reach of our military, but you know how that goes - the military is skilled at killing people and breaking things, not serving arrest warrants.

CampingJosh · 09-30-2011, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inthewind1976

Any comparison to Randy Weaver or the Branch Dividians is disingenuous, at best.

I'm not being insincere at all. In all three cases, Federal officials claimed that what they were doing was in the best interest of the people. Were they? You can't really say because a fair, open airing of the evidence never happened.
I'm not saying that killing al-Awlaki was a bad thing; I'm saying the way that it was done is a bad precedent. History shows that, given an inch, governments will take a yard.

So what could have been done? A summons to a trial, with the understanding that the trial would take place on a given date regardless of al-Awlaki's presence or absence? Would that be fair? I mean, if he didn't want to turn himself in (either because he knew he was guilty or because he doubted the impartiality of the trial), he still could have legal representation at the trial.

I don't know how to go about this the right way. I just know that giving our government free reign to seek out specific people for execution without any kind of trial is the wrong way to go about it.

ofitg · 09-30-2011, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

So what could have been done? A summons to a trial, with the understanding that the trial would take place on a given date regardless of al-Awlaki's presence or absence? Would that be fair? I mean, if he didn't want to turn himself in (either because he knew he was guilty or because he doubted the impartiality of the trial), he still could have legal representation at the trial.

I know that this whole "al-Awlaki" situation has been raising Constitutional/legal questions for months, ever since the gov't announced that he was on a "hit list".

Your proposal is worth considering - why wouldn't it be feasible to try somebody in absentia before sentencing them to death?

The only complication I can think of is that evidence would have to be safeguarded from public disclosure, to avoid compromising intel resources.

CampingJosh · 09-30-2011, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ofitg

Your proposal is worth considering - why wouldn't it be feasible to try somebody in absentia before sentencing them to death?

"The defendant is hereby sentenced to death by firing squad. The United States Marine Corps is hereby authorized to carry out this sentence at any time, in any location, by any personnel, and with any weaponry deemed appropriate by the Corps."

ofitg · 10-01-2011, 12:49 AM

You know, Josh, the need to safeguard classified evidence probably means that the trial would be conducted by a military tribunal (like the trials conducted for GITMO detainees).

There is a strong possibility that al-Awlaki's case went through a similar review process by military officers and intel officials before it was forwarded to Obama. They might have even assigned an officer to present controverting evidence, just as a defense lawyer would do.

Perhaps all they need to do is change the name from "review board" to "Special Court".

09-30-2011, 01:24 PM	#1
The Duke Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: NW Louisiana Posts: 813	Killing Scum without "due process" CAIR, Civil Liberties Groups Question Killing of American Militant Without 'Due Process' Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...#ixzz1ZSUoaAXv Seem as if CAIR and some of the other left winger liberal groups got their panties in wad because our military took out Anwar al-Awlaki and some of his bretherin scum who happend to be along for the ride.. I would like to know what is their definition of "due process"? Maybe they should have called us before 9-11, USS Cole, Lebanon, etc with a warning of what is to come?...My definition of " due process' is to kill the rats everytime one of them sticks his head out of his hole in the ground...but with due process... I believe they have a very valid point here and we should try our best to give them a "due process" warning ... If up to me, the warning would be something like....Hey, A$$hole!!! Look Up!!! This warning allows them a few seconds to realize the kindness and graciousness of the American Military by arrainging for them an "imminent meeting with Alla...Now thats what I call "due process". __________________ Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers. --> Last edited by The Duke; 09-30-2011 at 01:25 PM..

09-30-2011, 02:05 PM	#2
Brisk44 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Iowa Contributor Posts: 1,747	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" I guess they have no idea what war means.

09-30-2011, 02:09 PM	#3
HunterAlpha1 Former Guest Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Yorktown, VA Posts: 1,049	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" as far as i'm concerned the only warning they need is the sound of them being blasted to hell.

09-30-2011, 02:21 PM	#4
jbmid1 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1,081	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" I think the process worked just fine.

09-30-2011, 04:27 PM	#5
ofitg Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Contributor Posts: 1,447	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Just before pushing the red button, the drone operator yelled "Stop or I'll shoot"

09-30-2011, 06:02 PM	#6
Bobitis Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 6,612	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" English (American) is a tough language to master and mistakes are made daily by even the best. Lose/loose, they're/there/their, etc. I believe what they meant to say was 'do process'. Thank me later. __________________ ^.^ A point in every direction is the same as having no point at all

09-30-2011, 06:18 PM	#7
Double D TFF Moderator/Host Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: North Florida Contributor Posts: 8,252	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Liberals, what else do you expect. __________________ I own a bunch of scary guns. You want em? Come and take em..... Liberalism is a serious, non curable, mental disorder... NRA LIFE MEMBER Oath Keepers Member NRA Certified Instructor 30 Yr CC permit holder.

09-30-2011, 06:19 PM	#8
H-D Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Mississippi Posts: 1,334	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Here's the process. Clean weapon, load magazine, go find em', kill em, that's what they are due and that's the process __________________ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

09-30-2011, 06:31 PM	#9
CampingJosh TFF Moderator/Host Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Indiana Contributor Posts: 4,798	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" While I agree that al-Awlaki needed to go, this does set us in an odd predicament. Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that al-Awlaki was guilty of treason (he was, after all, a natural born US citizen). So they intentionally killed him. Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that Randy Weaver was guilty of treason (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked him and his family, killing his wife and son. Federal authorities claimed they had reason to believe that David Koresh and the Branch Davidians were stockpiling verboten weapons (among other charges), so they intentionally attacked them, killing 76 people in the process. We're upset about some of these. We're not upset about all of these. I for one do not want to cheer a government that violently, intentionally executes citizens without a trial. To do so would be to cheer totalitarianism. __________________ Nothing posted on TheFirearmsForum.com constitutes legal, accounting, gunsmithing, or other professional advice. Readers are encouraged to consult with qualified professionals for real advice. Your life is lived at your own risk. Don't blame me for the dumb things you do.

09-30-2011, 06:33 PM	#10
jack404 Former Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Australia Contributor Posts: 17,622	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" CAIR is just doing what they are supposed to do , protect Islam at any cost .. they whine about unlawful killings , but never raise one of the dead this mutt plotted against CAIR should be thrown out of your nation as the AFIC should be here they dont like it , tough , you took out a enemy of your nation , they dont like it they can be enemies too simple ...

09-30-2011, 06:37 PM	#11
jack404 Former Guest Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Australia Contributor Posts: 17,622	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Let's see if CAIR will complain about this http://1389blog.com/2011/09/29/irani...stian-beliefs/

09-30-2011, 07:06 PM	#12
Bobitis Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 6,612	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" I don't really care where he was born. It's a moot point. The man plotted and inspired attacks on America. Not a singular group of individuals, but an entire nation and what it stood for. He was a terrorist. We uphold piracy laws simply because the acts are committed on water. The same laws should apply on land. Nationality has nothing to do with it. The idea that we should arrest him so he can stand trial escapes me. __________________ ^.^ A point in every direction is the same as having no point at all

09-30-2011, 07:26 PM	#13
Diamondback Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Silver City, Oklahoma Posts: 705	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Ask the educated morons who object to killing known terrorist leaders and followers without 'due process', Where was the due process for all of the people that this AHE and his kind have murdered in the name of God? Due process for anyone who threatens me or mine, my family, my friends, my country, whether they be foreigners or citizens, is any method that removes the threat permanently. Any American citizen that goes to a foreign country and plots to murder innocent people simply because they don't like their life style, forever forfeits any rights they may have had to due process or any other legal proceeding. They are enemy combatants and are therefore fair game to anyone with the wherewithal to remove them from this sphere. If I have in any way offended anyone with my honest opinion and what I consider no nonsense viewpoint, Tango Sierra.

09-30-2011, 07:32 PM	#14
Double D TFF Moderator/Host Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: North Florida Contributor Posts: 8,252	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Due process= flip open scope cover __________________ I own a bunch of scary guns. You want em? Come and take em..... Liberalism is a serious, non curable, mental disorder... NRA LIFE MEMBER Oath Keepers Member NRA Certified Instructor 30 Yr CC permit holder.

09-30-2011, 07:47 PM	#15
PatAz Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Oro Valley, Az. Posts: 1	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" What in the world is the problem? All that occured was some stinky trash was taken out.

09-30-2011, 07:50 PM	#17
jwrauch V.I.P. Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Flyover territory , USA Posts: 202	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Good riddance to scum. As for Ron Paul, he just killed any chance he had and I'm glad he showed just how much of a nut job he is now. JR __________________ People who are willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither. Liberalism is a mental illness.

09-30-2011, 09:09 PM	#20
Inthewind1976 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Central Pennsylvania Posts: 533	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" Any comparison to Randy Weaver or the Branch Dividians is disingenuous, at best.

10-01-2011, 12:49 AM	#25
ofitg Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Contributor Posts: 1,447	Re: Killing Scum without "due process" You know, Josh, the need to safeguard classified evidence probably means that the trial would be conducted by a military tribunal (like the trials conducted for GITMO detainees). There is a strong possibility that al-Awlaki's case went through a similar review process by military officers and intel officials before it was forwarded to Obama. They might have even assigned an officer to present controverting evidence, just as a defense lawyer would do. Perhaps all they need to do is change the name from "review board" to "Special Court".