Help me understand. . .

[Gaspar]

When the Bush administration developed a policy wiretaps on Americans known to be working with terrorist groups in other countries.  It was treasonous and criminal.

When the Obama administration developed a policy of killing Americans known to be working with terrorist groups in other countries.  It is good.

This new liberalism is very confusing.

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite

[Conan71]

And don't mention water-boarding.  That's cruel and unusual but depriving someone of all their rights is cool.

[Townsend]

The websites you're frequenting are doing damage.

[Hoss]

The websites you're frequenting are doing damage.

[Gaspar]

The websites you're frequenting are doing damage.

You're right.  I should probably stay away from the front page of http://www.msnbc.com

Wow!  It's even on Al Gore's Al Jazeera http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/02/20132517311796860.html

[Conan71]

I seldom agree with the ACLU, but I'm in agreement with them on this one. Warrantless wiretaps pales in comparison.

The memo said that authorities did not have to possess information regarding a specific imminent attack against the US.

It does require that the capture of terrorism suspects be first deemed unfeasible, and that any such lethal operation by the US targeting a person comply with fundamental law-of-war principles.

"A decision maker determining whether an al-Qaeda operational leader presents an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States must take into account that certain members of al-Qaeda [...] are continually plotting attacks against the United States" and that "al-Qaeda would engage in such attacks regularly to the extent it were able to do so", the document says.

The document also says that a decision maker must take into account that "the US government may not be aware of all al-Qaeda plots as they are developing and thus cannot be confident that none is about to occur; and that [...] the nation may have a limited window of opportunity within which to strike in a manner that both has a high likelihood of success and reduces the probability of American casualties".

With this understanding, the document said, a high-level official could conclude, for example, that an individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the US where he is an operational leader of al-Qaeda or an associated force.

'Profoundly disturbing'

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said the document is "profoundly disturbing".

"According to the white paper, the government has the authority to carry out targeted killings of US citizens without presenting evidence to a judge before the fact or after, and indeed without even acknowledging to the courts or to the public that the authority has been exercised," Jameel Jaffer, ACLU's deputy legal director, wrote on the organisation's website.

"Without saying so explicitly, the government claims the authority to kill American terrorism suspects in secret."

He termed the limits set out in the memo to be "so vague and elastic that they will be easily manipulated".

[Townsend]

You're right.  I should probably stay away from the front page of http://www.msnbc.com

Wow!  It's even on Al Gore's Al Jazeera http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/02/20132517311796860.html

Note they don't go with the "it's dem liberals" conspiracy route.

Remember, it's not just the left that's out to get you.

[Gaspar]

Note they don't go with the "it's dem liberals" conspiracy route.

Remember, it's not just the left that's out to get you.

No conspiracy.  It's just odd to see Holder and Feinstein who both argued so vigorously on the criminality of warrantless wiretaps to so supportive of warrantless extermination.  No conspiracy, hypocrisy.
   

[Townsend]

hypocrisy.
   

From the federal government?


Whaaaaaa?

[Gaspar]

From the federal government?


Whaaaaaa?

Actually I was just being entertained going back and looking at the posts about wiretapping durring the Bush years.  There were some upset folks on this forum.  How dare the Bush administration assume they have the right engage in Warrantless Wiretaps.

Boy I'm glad that FOTD is no longer around.  He'd be pissed if he learned that the Obama administration has escalated that into assassination.

[Townsend]

Actually I was just being entertained going back and looking at the posts about wiretapping durring the Bush years.  There were some upset folks on this forum.  How dare the Bush administration assume they have the right engage in Warrantless Wiretaps.

Boy I'm glad that FOTD is no longer around.  He'd be pissed if he learned that the Obama administration has escalated that into assassination.

Doesn't matter who's in charge.  It's always people using power and money to retain their power and money.

[Teatownclown]

I'm confused. I thought Guido, Gaspar, and Conan were all for an outlaw nation. Conan only agrees with the ACLU when it suits his set of political beliefs.

If Obama didn't work at protecting us the GOP would be whining that he was weak. The rules of engagement have changed... as long as the GOP refuses to close Gitmo we will have this type of conflict. Where were the concerns when Bush/Cheney ordered all those renditions that were against our constitution?

I'm just trying to figure out the strategy of all this. It is wrong. POTUS Obama needs to terminate this. But the MIC runs the country and there's your proof...

[RecycleMichael]

Conan only agrees with the ACLU when it suits his set of political beliefs.

I also only agree with groups like the ACLU when it suits my political beliefs.

Are you saying you have to completely agree with everything a group says? It is all or nothing?

[Teatownclown]

I also only agree with groups like the ACLU when it suits my political beliefs.

Are you saying you have to completely agree with everything a group says? It is all or nothing?

NO. I'm saying he blasts their organization %99 of the time. I find it odd when he decides to source them.

[Red Arrow]

Are you saying you have to completely agree with everything a group says? It is all or nothing?

TTC is thinking of running for Congress.