Northern Iraq falls to Al Qaeda, $400 million looted from central bank.

When was his trial again?

Obama must have missed that part where it is guaranteed in the constitution. I thought a lit of the regulars here were all about freedom and democracy?


GO MURICA!

AlecTheGardener said:

When was his trial again?

I must have missed that part where is is guaranteed in my constitution. I thought a lit of the regulars here were all about freedom and democracy?


GO MURICA!

Click to expand...

he didnt get a trial.

he was in a WAR ZONE, riding in the car of AQ's top recruiter in yemen
he wasnt a target, but he was hanging out with one, and when the target's entirely expected detonation went down, al alawaki jr continued his ride to the recruiter's Final Destination as an INCIDENTAL (not accidental) casualty.

if jr had hooked up with AQ in america, then he might have survived his encounter with The Man, and gotten a trial, but he chose to go a different direction, and got blowed up for his trouble.

IF, during the vietnam war, a certain VC anti-aircraft gun had been blowed up, while a certain actress/traitor was sitting on it, would you be moaning and crying for her as well?



same difference.

How about the other three? Were those the ones with him?

"The administration acknowledged last year that drones had killed four U.S. citizens in Yemen, including cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was targeted by a CIA drone attack in September 2011. Obama called Awlaki the head of foreign operations for al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula."
Washington post

AlecTheGardener said:

How about the other three? Were those the ones with him?

"The administration acknowledged last year that drones had killed four U.S. citizens in Yemen, including cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was targeted by a CIA drone attack in September 2011. Obama called Awlaki the head of foreign operations for al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula."
Washington post

Click to expand...

al alawaki sr was a different story, he WAS a target, he WAS in league with insurgents attempting to overthrow a (sorta) friendly nation and as such WAS a military target.

his us citizenship isnt a magic cloak that protects him from his own foolish decisions.

any american who goes to yemen, enters the Drone Arena (which is EXCLUSIVELY the area under the control of insurgents) that american should expect that he may be in the path of incoming missiles



most people are clever enough to steer clear of what is, in effect, an artillery range.
those what aint smart enough to stay clear, well, maybe we dont need those cats breeding anyhow.

bu$hleaguer said:

Oh. Whoops. Sorry about that. No goat porn then.

If I had such a problem with shit in this country I'd move, though. So many armchair activists around these days.

They say Vancouver is awesome!

Click to expand...

Well, you're not going very far

Dr Kynes said:

. . .

Click to expand...

Bill of rights? Fuck it eh?

Due process is a right.
Denying trial is direct violation of this right.

Unless American citizens get a trial before any sentence is carried out major violations have been committed, human rights violations. It is in essence an assassination.

Your line of reasoning leads me to believe that you would approve the use of drones domestically if the target was 'a terrorist.'

I sure hope not.
Americans deserve a trial. Escape to a foreign country, they don't drone strike you, they catch your ass and stick you on trial. Why are THESE citizens any different?

I understand a strike on active (firing weapons/planting explosives) American militants that are engaged and/or become collateral damage. Totally tracking that one.



Primary targets being Americans is very reminiscent of past extremist countries that summarily executed its citizens. History also loves to call whatever government opposition that exists, terrorists. America could also be manipulated this way.

Don't be so laissez-faire about one of the most important foundations of our wonderful country being yanked out from underneath ALL of us.

AlecTheGardener said:

Due process is a right.
Denying trial is direct violation of this right.

Click to expand...

the trial part is a bit bothersome, but it is arguable that "due process" was given. although admittedly, i will probably trust obama's own secret due process over the next resident of 1600 pennsylvania avenue, so there is also that slippery slope.

at least rend pawl is not droning liquor store robbers...yet.

Meh. I guess I am an idealist.

nothing wrong with that, and ultimately you are right about his rights. and if it can happen to him, why not anyone else?

but it wouldn't keep me up at night if i were president. awlaki was arguably defensive and justified collateral damage, unlike some of the horrific collateral damage we have caused with droning[citation needed?].

still better than the rendpawlian doctrine.

AlecTheGardener said:

Bill of rights? Fuck it eh?

Due process is a right.
Denying trial is direct violation of this right.

Unless American citizens get a trial before any sentence is carried out major violations have been committed, human rights violations. It is in essence an assassination.

Your line of reasoning leads me to believe that you would approve the use of drones domestically if the target was 'a terrorist.'

I sure hope not.
Americans deserve a trial. Escape to a foreign country, they don't drone strike you, they catch your ass and stick you on trial. Why are THESE citizens any different?

I understand a strike on active (firing weapons/planting explosives) American militants that are engaged and/or become collateral damage. Totally tracking that one.



Primary targets being Americans is very reminiscent of past extremist countries that summarily executed its citizens. History also loves to call whatever government opposition that exists, terrorists. America could also be manipulated this way.

Don't be so laissez-faire about one of the most important foundations of our wonderful country being yanked out from underneath ALL of us.

Click to expand...

the key word is DUE process. when you make war on a foreign land in the service of a foreign organization, you are DUE very little in the way of PROCESS

some americans joined the nazis in ww2, and on the field, they got shot, blowed up by artillery, shanked by commandos, stepped on mines, and burnt up in the dresden firestorm just like any kraut.

when you trot off to a foreign land to make war on that land's government, or (as in the case of alawaki jr and sr) join up with an organization that has declared war on the US, your citizenship is worth LESS than the citizenship of a gangbanger who dies in a shootout with the cops in LA.

if the alawakis didnt wanna get blowed up by US missiles, they had an easy solution, STAY in america, and dont join AQ.

personally, i think if the US govt had a shot at capturing those dipshits, they should have, so those two idiots could enjoy the hospitality of the Yemeni prison system.

if you commit crimes in a foreign land, your ass will get extradited even if you are safely back in the US when youre caught. if you get caught IN yemen, you are not even DUE an extradition process.

ChesusRice said:

There is no good way to end it. It should of never started.
And fuck no. We dont need to leave any troops behind. We have 1500 nukes we can send over anytime we want

Click to expand...

Nukes? What would you nuke? And how can that help, and isn't this why you aren't in charge? Nukes never solved anything but WW2, if you call endless Cold War a solution.

I give you one Cavalier for that response.

AlecTheGardener said:

Bill of rights? Fuck it eh?

Due process is a right.
Denying trial is direct violation of this right.

Unless American citizens get a trial before any sentence is carried out major violations have been committed, human rights violations. It is in essence an assassination.

Your line of reasoning leads me to believe that you would approve the use of drones domestically if the target was 'a terrorist.'

I sure hope not.
Americans deserve a trial. Escape to a foreign country, they don't drone strike you, they catch your ass and stick you on trial. Why are THESE citizens any different?

I understand a strike on active (firing weapons/planting explosives) American militants that are engaged and/or become collateral damage. Totally tracking that one.



Primary targets being Americans is very reminiscent of past extremist countries that summarily executed its citizens. History also loves to call whatever government opposition that exists, terrorists. America could also be manipulated this way.

Don't be so laissez-faire about one of the most important foundations of our wonderful country being yanked out from underneath ALL of us.

Click to expand...

A President can declare a US citizen is an enemy Combatant and terminate his citizenship with prejudice.

This is not a capture and return situation. He was actively aiding the enemy, On US soil that is treason, and a trial.

But in Yemen, you mess with the bull, you get the horn.

londonfog said:

Iraq war is a touchy conversation for me

Click to expand...

When against the tree and no real cover, the forest is a myth.

And though you had a true experience for you, being there means you did not see anything really about why we did it.

UncleBuck said:

my apologies for pointing out your hypocrisy, bigot.



i was under the impression that being born in hawaii made him an american, but carry on with your racism. let's see where this goes.



there's that outright racism we have come to expect from someone who is too much of a pussy to own up to his own white supremacy.

coward little bitch.

Click to expand...

But he as born in Jarkarta, he is only faking in the gray area by setting aside the fact his mother ex-patriated to Indonesia. So, he ignores our laws and the laws of Indonesia.

I would say, by now, he got away with it and that is the American Way, so I am impressed.

AlecTheGardener said:

Meh. I guess I am an idealist.

Click to expand...

no.............
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/mcm.pdf
he gets tried

Will he ever be fit the stand for Court Marshall?



Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

ART. 43. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

(a) A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war, or with any offense punishable by death, may be tried at any time without limitation.

(b)

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section (article), a person charged with an offense is not liable to be tried by court-martial if the offense was committed more than five years before the receipt of sworn charges and specifications by an officer exercising summary court- martial jurisdiction over the command.
-----------------------------

Anyone know when the 5 year clock started. Did they get the remand before the 5 years was up?

Doer said:

Will he ever be fit the stand for Court Marshall?



Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

ART. 43. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

(a) A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war, or with any offense punishable by death, may be tried at any time without limitation.

(b)

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section (article), a person charged with an offense is not liable to be tried by court-martial if the offense was committed more than five years before the receipt of sworn charges and specifications by an officer exercising summary court- martial jurisdiction over the command.
-----------------------------

Anyone know when the 5 year clock started. Did they get the remand before the 5 years was up?

Click to expand...

doesn't matter.......me, an' Vladimir Putin are gonna bust'em out, evade capture, escape by swimming the Bering, in January .......tappin' Sarah Palin on the way.

Vlad an' the Don don't care..........

they're takin' guys they know can't cut it because they need so many tin soldiers to play Game of Oil with, stickin' them in combat for 240/365 days a year, in an unjust war, and now they will nail him to the barracks gate to scare the rest of their Praetorian Guard. ya see..........this shit is why I get my own NSA guy.

Yo, Ralph!!......my man

Dr Kynes said:

he didnt get a trial.

he was in a WAR ZONE, riding in the car of AQ's top recruiter in yemen
he wasnt a target, but he was hanging out with one, and when the target's entirely expected detonation went down, al alawaki jr continued his ride to the recruiter's Final Destination as an INCIDENTAL (not accidental) casualty.

if jr had hooked up with AQ in america, then he might have survived his encounter with The Man, and gotten a trial, but he chose to go a different direction, and got blowed up for his trouble.

IF, during the vietnam war, a certain VC anti-aircraft gun had been blowed up, while a certain actress/traitor was sitting on it, would you be moaning and crying for her as well?

same difference.

Click to expand...

I'd hit that...........she can leave the helmet on, but nothing else

The timeline allows for five years to charge him, Hrmmm. The does raise questions about his timeline and courts martial proceedings if they were to occur.


If they want to prosecute him they will succeed. Earlier I made a statement: UCMJ is so generalized that if they can charge you with it they will also succeed with prosecuting.

If they want to punish him they will just slap a few article 91s and 92s on him and call it a day.

91 is a catch all statute that essentially allow NCO and commissioned service members to prosecute all junior members who disrespect them. Disrespect can be interpreted as almost anything you want.

Roll your eyes? Insubordination, I can file for a punitive administrative administrative action that will take one month of your pay and force labor for up to 45 days from 0600 to 2400. That is a light punishment.

If that soldier doesn't show up EXACTLY ON TIME to their extra duty I can then file more paperwork claiming article 91. 91 is a big gun catch all: if you are given an order you cannot disobey it if lawful. "Late after I told you 0600, it is now 0600:01. Start the paperwork."

UCMJ is no joke, if they want you they will get you. Very different then civilian courts.


****
FYI articles can be used as a basis for courts martial, and administrative action. The difference being that an administrative action is something minor compared to jail time and is carried out at the company, or battalion level.

Courts martial can also be carried out with these articles just as easily.