http://www.wired.com...illegal-or-legal/
Cheers,
Scott/
DangerRoom's take.
|
|
there is a simple answer with plenty of precedent
the federal JUDGE who was trying the fort hood shooter could very simply issue a warrant when requested after reviewing evidence that the fucktard was involved
All I ask is that the assholes in DC pretend to follow the law http://www.okolha.ne...er_king_names.htm Creekmore, Milo was commissioned in the Western District of Arkansas. Deputy Marshal Creekmore was summoned to arrest outlaw Ned Christie near Tahlequah, Cherokee Nation. Christie had killed Deputy Marshal Dan Maples and wounded two others in three previous attempts to arrest him. Judge Parker, realizing how dangerous Ned Christie was, placed a Dead Or Alive order on his warrant.this admin like the previous refuses to acknowledge that they are bound by ANY restraints. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
|
|
Open your eyes.
Arresting a civilian, or issuing a warrant for a civilian, inside North America is very different from doing so for someone at "war" with the US from the deserts of Yemen.
You may not like it, you may not think it was sufficient (it's certainly debatable), but a legal process was followed in Awlaki's case. http://www.washingto...x1bUAL_print.html ÂAs a general matter, it would be entirely lawful for the United States to target high-level leaders of enemy forces, regardless of their nationality, who are plotting to kill Americans both under the authority provided by Congress in its use of military force in the armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces as well as established international law that recognizes our right of self-defense, an administration official said in a statement Friday. There are legal restraints in place on what the President can do. If you don't think they're sufficient: lobby your Congressman and Senator to have the laws changed; send money to the ACLU to file more lawsuits; picket the Pentagon; write advocacy posts. Writing hyperbolic posts that are easily rebutted doesn't help your arguments. IMO. FWIW. Cheers, Scott. |
|
Really?
There are legal restraints in place on what the President can do. The president needs a written opinion that you are a danger to the country, an opinion that you can't read or challenge because it's natural security. I'm not seeing that as much of a restraint. Jay |
|
Not much of one, but one none the less.
Do you think that Obama could get a Finding signed off by all the various lawyers that declared that Rep. Allen West was an "unlawful enemy combatant" (, ignoring for the moment that the Obama administration gave up using that term,) so that he could be sent to Guantanamo? How about Box?
I don't. Rank-in-file federal officials - the ones who would have to sign off on such findings - swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. The vast majority take that oath seriously. And the federal courts can and do step in when asked. (Things have changed and been clarified since the days of Addington, Gonzales and Yoo.) Hyperbolic language about Obama having unlimited power to lock people up and/or kill them doesn't help. Obama isn't Assad. Review Padilla's case - http://en.wikipedia....la_%28prisoner%29 My $0.02. Cheers, Scott. |
|
no different at all, yemen or Indian Territories
Again, how hard would it be to get the Fort Hood shooter federal judge to issue that warrant? That is simple, that is legal, not hyperbole. Its the admin which is going to extraordinary efforts to ensure there is NO juidicial oversight or constraint of the executive's actions in regards american citizens. A direct violation of the constitution.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
|
|
Of course!
Back to that.
|