Q: Who is the war against?
A: Terror
(I believe you asked "Who", not "What". You failed at answering your own question. The correct answer is "members of a loosely affiliated group of individuals known as Al Qadea who plot to blow up innocent American civilians wherever they may be found."
Q: And can we kill anyone we like without presenting evidence in a trial?
A: Sure
(As long as we declare them enemy combatants, meaning those who are actively combating the United States and it's citizens."
Q: Anywhere in the world?
A: Sure
(Exactly)
Q: So you would have attacked a "terrorist" in,say, Europe, shooting them down with a drone plane?
A: Sure, but it would likely not be necessary as the Europeans would have handed them over
(And the political fallout could cause more problems that it would be worth to kill the individiual)
Q: Do you think that this maxim applies to the US alone or does it apply to any other country in the world?
A: Well, all have the right to fight against terrorism everywhere.
(Iran would have a right to attack someone in the US who attempted to bomb it, but because Iran is clearly an evil country, it's right would be overridden by the moral right to destroy it's government.)
Q: So can I shoot a US citizen on US soil if I believe they have been involved in terrorist activities?
A: (I leave this up to the concerned reader)
(You are not a government.)
So to you "fighting" only means physical activity? Conspiring with a bomber to blow up a bomb hidden in ones underwear does not, in your world, count as "fighting"? Fool.
Why do we need an investigation? The facts are clear: This man openly declared war on the US and its people. He worked closely with the Ft. Bragg shooter and the shoe bomber to kill both military and civilians alike. The constitution declares that people accused of a criminal act have the right of a Grand Jury; the US is not accusing him of criminal acts, but of acts of treason and war. The 5th ammendment does not apply; the only "investigation" would be a series of lawers arguing over the best way to interpret that ammendment, while the Supreme Court has been very clear. So no, you don't get an investigation. We need more people like this guy wiped out, not less.
I would accept that in other circumstances, given the circumstances. Wars do not need to be declared to be wars. Or was the Cold War merely an unfortunate misunderstanding? He was not a criminal; he was an enemy combatant. This foolish line of thinking of you people allows for the reclassification of 9/11 as merely a crime that needed criminal prosecution.
It is being reported in the media that crack teams went into capture him, but villagers in Yemen helped him escpae and hid him. So, at that point, we took the next correct action. We erased him.
Not all wars must be declared by congress to be wars. Or do you think the Cold War was merely an unfortunate misunderstanding? Congress is not the sole definer of the state of reality, fool. The definition of a war is not "A state of hostility that must be declared by a governmental organization before it can exist". The constitution does not state the the US can only be at war with other governments, does it?
Excellent post; I'm pretty sickened by all the "constitutional scholars" coming out today assuming all wars must be declared. As if the Cold War was merely an unfortunate misunderstanding.
Fool. Presentation before a Grand Jury only applies in criminal cases. This is not criminal; this man renounced his citizenship and declared war upon us, along with his friends whom he led and inspired. He is not a criminal. He is an enemy combatant. So fuck him; it is a GOOD thing our government wiped him off the earth. I am one of these fucks and I am MORE than proud of it; Good Job Mr. President; now take out that fucker Al Zawahiri. He's next.
Baloney. This is the foolishness that all the "due process" advocates continually forget. Wars don't have to be declared. The Cold War was a war. It was not declared by congress. One can be at war without that war being declared. It is really that simple.
Killing a man who openly declared war on the US and who sent men to blow up planes in the US is somehow equal to that man sending men to blow up planes? That is what you are saying when you are saying we are the terrorists. You are a fool.
No, we are at war with loosely affiliated members of a terrorist organization known as "Al Qaeda," wherever they may be. Not too hard to figure out if you are paying attention.
He wasn't executed because of his political opposition to the us. It's one thing to be "opposed"; it's another to declare war against us.
This is foolishness. That entire section is speaking how to handle criminal acts.
The relevant part, more relevant the bold text in either post, is this:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime..."
Bu he was not committing criminal acts. He had openly declared war on the Unites States of America. That is not a crime. It was an act of open war. Or perhaps you foolishly think that only "organizations" and not individuals can declare war? He should have been executed as soon as humanly possible, and I think he was.
Where does the 5th amendment say we must declare war to be at war?
Note that it does not state
"when in actual service in time of War declared openly by a majority vote of the Congress of the United States of America... or public danger"
Or do you think the Cold War was not a war?
He is a Mormon. Mormons believe that Jesus walked among Native American Indian tribes, and that there are lost cities in America. The Book of Mormon describes three heavily populated, literate, advanced civilizations in the Americas.
The book primarily deals with the Nephites and the Lamanites, who it claims existed in the Americas from about 600 BC to AD 400. It also deals with the rise and fall of the Jaredite nation, which the Book of Mormon claims came from the Old World shortly after the fall of the Tower of Babel.
This is silly stuff. We do not need a person who believes this running our country. Beliefs matter. Don't vote for kooks.
Nono, you have it wrong. Evolution is wrong because of all the gaps that keep increasing.
See, say you have fossil A and E. The creationist says, "Aha, there's no fossil between A and E! There's a gap there!"
Then the evolutionist finds fossil C, which fits nicely between A and E. Now the creationist says, "Aha, now there's a gap between A and C, and between C and E! You've just created MORE gaps!"
This is creatinionism logic at its finest.
Don't worry, you'll feel a big one soon. We get those 5.8 - type quakes roughly once every two years or so on average. or at least it feels lke it. I feel a quake here in SF a few times a year, but always small.
Kids! Have a cold? Take your Draco! Draco pills for everyone!
Seriously, I'd be so happy to finally have a medicine with a cool name. Named after a Dragon. They could not have come up with a cooler acronym.
I was re-watching Silence of the Lambs today. We are shown a scene of Buffalo Bill's house, filled with home-raised moths and butterflies, unusual costumes and other assorted oddities, followed by a panned shot of Buffalo Bill sitting, typing naked, while his latest victim is languishing in a well.
The above writer somehow reminds me of such a person. Not quite sure why.
Slashdot Mirror
Q: Who is the war against? A: Terror (I believe you asked "Who", not "What". You failed at answering your own question. The correct answer is "members of a loosely affiliated group of individuals known as Al Qadea who plot to blow up innocent American civilians wherever they may be found." Q: And can we kill anyone we like without presenting evidence in a trial? A: Sure (As long as we declare them enemy combatants, meaning those who are actively combating the United States and it's citizens." Q: Anywhere in the world? A: Sure (Exactly) Q: So you would have attacked a "terrorist" in ,say, Europe, shooting them down with a drone plane?
A: Sure, but it would likely not be necessary as the Europeans would have handed them over
(And the political fallout could cause more problems that it would be worth to kill the individiual)
Q: Do you think that this maxim applies to the US alone or does it apply to any other country in the world?
A: Well, all have the right to fight against terrorism everywhere.
(Iran would have a right to attack someone in the US who attempted to bomb it, but because Iran is clearly an evil country, it's right would be overridden by the moral right to destroy it's government.)
Q: So can I shoot a US citizen on US soil if I believe they have been involved in terrorist activities?
A: (I leave this up to the concerned reader)
(You are not a government.)
Yes, it does.
So to you "fighting" only means physical activity? Conspiring with a bomber to blow up a bomb hidden in ones underwear does not, in your world, count as "fighting"? Fool.
Why do we need an investigation? The facts are clear: This man openly declared war on the US and its people. He worked closely with the Ft. Bragg shooter and the shoe bomber to kill both military and civilians alike. The constitution declares that people accused of a criminal act have the right of a Grand Jury; the US is not accusing him of criminal acts, but of acts of treason and war. The 5th ammendment does not apply; the only "investigation" would be a series of lawers arguing over the best way to interpret that ammendment, while the Supreme Court has been very clear. So no, you don't get an investigation. We need more people like this guy wiped out, not less.
I would accept that in other circumstances, given the circumstances. Wars do not need to be declared to be wars. Or was the Cold War merely an unfortunate misunderstanding? He was not a criminal; he was an enemy combatant. This foolish line of thinking of you people allows for the reclassification of 9/11 as merely a crime that needed criminal prosecution.
It is being reported in the media that crack teams went into capture him, but villagers in Yemen helped him escpae and hid him. So, at that point, we took the next correct action. We erased him.
Not all wars must be declared by congress to be wars. Or do you think the Cold War was merely an unfortunate misunderstanding? Congress is not the sole definer of the state of reality, fool. The definition of a war is not "A state of hostility that must be declared by a governmental organization before it can exist". The constitution does not state the the US can only be at war with other governments, does it?
Not all wars must be declared by congress to be wars. Or do you think the Cold War was merely an unfortunate misunderstanding?
Excellent post; I'm pretty sickened by all the "constitutional scholars" coming out today assuming all wars must be declared. As if the Cold War was merely an unfortunate misunderstanding.
Fool. Presentation before a Grand Jury only applies in criminal cases. This is not criminal; this man renounced his citizenship and declared war upon us, along with his friends whom he led and inspired. He is not a criminal. He is an enemy combatant. So fuck him; it is a GOOD thing our government wiped him off the earth. I am one of these fucks and I am MORE than proud of it; Good Job Mr. President; now take out that fucker Al Zawahiri. He's next.
At that point we were at war with another openly declared nation...one led by President Jefferson Davis. Apples and Oranges.
Baloney. This is the foolishness that all the "due process" advocates continually forget. Wars don't have to be declared. The Cold War was a war. It was not declared by congress. One can be at war without that war being declared. It is really that simple. Killing a man who openly declared war on the US and who sent men to blow up planes in the US is somehow equal to that man sending men to blow up planes? That is what you are saying when you are saying we are the terrorists. You are a fool.
No, we are at war with loosely affiliated members of a terrorist organization known as "Al Qaeda," wherever they may be. Not too hard to figure out if you are paying attention. He wasn't executed because of his political opposition to the us. It's one thing to be "opposed"; it's another to declare war against us.
This is foolishness. That entire section is speaking how to handle criminal acts. The relevant part, more relevant the bold text in either post, is this: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime..." Bu he was not committing criminal acts. He had openly declared war on the Unites States of America. That is not a crime. It was an act of open war. Or perhaps you foolishly think that only "organizations" and not individuals can declare war? He should have been executed as soon as humanly possible, and I think he was.
Where does the 5th amendment say we must declare war to be at war? Note that it does not state "when in actual service in time of War declared openly by a majority vote of the Congress of the United States of America... or public danger" Or do you think the Cold War was not a war?
He is a Mormon. Mormons believe that Jesus walked among Native American Indian tribes, and that there are lost cities in America. The Book of Mormon describes three heavily populated, literate, advanced civilizations in the Americas. The book primarily deals with the Nephites and the Lamanites, who it claims existed in the Americas from about 600 BC to AD 400. It also deals with the rise and fall of the Jaredite nation, which the Book of Mormon claims came from the Old World shortly after the fall of the Tower of Babel. This is silly stuff. We do not need a person who believes this running our country. Beliefs matter. Don't vote for kooks.
Behind, you mean.
It's my understanding that nothing can *accelerate* to the speed of light; it's generally theorized that things like Tachyons can go faster.
nonnono. It's not child porn; it's the goatse image. Still pretty bad.
Nono, you have it wrong. Evolution is wrong because of all the gaps that keep increasing. See, say you have fossil A and E. The creationist says, "Aha, there's no fossil between A and E! There's a gap there!" Then the evolutionist finds fossil C, which fits nicely between A and E. Now the creationist says, "Aha, now there's a gap between A and C, and between C and E! You've just created MORE gaps!" This is creatinionism logic at its finest.
Don't worry, you'll feel a big one soon. We get those 5.8 - type quakes roughly once every two years or so on average. or at least it feels lke it. I feel a quake here in SF a few times a year, but always small.
Possibly the coolest study I've read in a long time. Very nice.
Kids! Have a cold? Take your Draco! Draco pills for everyone! Seriously, I'd be so happy to finally have a medicine with a cool name. Named after a Dragon. They could not have come up with a cooler acronym.
I would be interested if the cure described has the side effect of turning people into Pirate Ninjas.
I was re-watching Silence of the Lambs today. We are shown a scene of Buffalo Bill's house, filled with home-raised moths and butterflies, unusual costumes and other assorted oddities, followed by a panned shot of Buffalo Bill sitting, typing naked, while his latest victim is languishing in a well. The above writer somehow reminds me of such a person. Not quite sure why.