Obama gives order to kill American imam
April 8, 2010, The Times (One of the UK's leading newspapers)
https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7089899.ece (https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7089899.ece)
The Obama Administration has taken the unprecedented step of authorising the killing of a US citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. The decision is extraordinary not only because Mr al-Awlaki is believed to be the first American whose killing has been approved by a US President, but also because the Obama Administration chose to make the move public. The Los Angeles Times reported in January that Mr al-Awlaki’s name had been placed on a top-secret list of targeted killings. In the past 24 hours, however, a handful of intelligence and counter-terrorism officials have briefed Reuters and The New York Times on the decision. The authorisation ... and the decision to make it public is a high-risk strategy. Tina Foster, of the US-based International Justice Network (https://www.ijnetwork.org/), told The Times: “It is shocking that our Government would go to these extremes, even depriving someone of their life without a legal process.” The policy of targeted killings is controversial. President Ford issued an order in 1976 banning political assassinations. Yet Congress approved the use of force against al-Qaeda after the September 11 attacks.
Note: Obama is the first president to order the assassination an American citizen. Neither George W. Bush nor Dick Cheney asserted such a power on the part of the president. For an analysis, https://wsws.org/articles/2010/apr2010/pers-a08.shtml (https://wsws.org/articles/2010/apr2010/pers-a08.shtml)
LenInSebastopol
04-13-2010, 04:16 PM
Some guys need a good killing. It's obvious he's one.
Peace Voyager
04-14-2010, 12:45 PM
Some guys need a good killing. It's obvious he's one.
Lenn,
Please leave our list, and our country.
Killing anyone does not resolve injustice. Your attitude, like that of those who use our Department of DEFENSE for offensive, strike-first, optional conflict are what has morally and financially bankrupted our country.
I do not support any person, military, country, religious group, business, etc. deliberately taking a life. (Another time, I'll take on the pro-life, pro-choice conflict; no less important, but that issue is not also putting us in financial peril.)
Fighting them "over there" has left us less safe "over there" AND here; (one example is endless cuts to emergency services).
Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, where we have US and civilian casualties, did NOT ask the US to invade and nation build; while our nation crumbles from misappropriation of Federal funds, theft of Defense funds in field operations, and a debt load unlikely to ever be paid off.
I DO support our troops; I cannot stand to see them abused and misused. I DO want a STRONG DEFENSE for our nation. Our misuse of force is our own worst enemy, not some elusive, or invented terrorists.
YES, there are plenty of folks who hate us and want to harm us. What would it take to get you to see how some of that hatred is justified, and clearly provoked?
Wouldn't we be fighting back if we were being asulted and occupied for 7-9 years? Can you be a "good" American and tell the truth about how WE are leading terrorism around the world. We have, and continue to, set a very dangerous and hypocritical standard. The tone WE set by our example is often all the other folks need to justify their offensive actions.
Do you really think the cycle of violence will end by our means of violence. Extermination is not victory, no one wins.
What does that teach our kids; killing someone who threatens you is a solution?
Don't misinterpret this, I do not justify ANY acts of violence beyond self defense by any person, group or nation. What America is doing is NOT self defense; we are promoting, and encouraging violence.
The only safe, sane way out of our mess is a call for a cease fire. Our enemies have indicated willingness for peace talks, we have not. We did not even promote the one day cease fire we have a UN mandate to enact each September 21st. Welcome to Peace One Day: Peace One Day – 21 September 2009 (https://www.peaceoneday.org)
Wake up and tell the truth, or please take your murder mentality somewhere else.
This list is for progressive people; progressive people know violence is not a solution.
:usflag::beatingheart:
In peace,
Colleen
LenInSebastopol
04-14-2010, 07:55 PM
Lenn,
Please leave our list, and our country.
Beautiful One, even if I left OUR country, I could still get to Wacco from another land.
And this country, is it the same one that got this far by practicing your way? I could only hope so, but I find it not to be the case. As much as you could be loved for choosing your path, and as sad as I am to express it, that is not the way of man or woman.
Killing anyone does not resolve injustice. Your attitude, like that of those who use our Department of DEFENSE for offensive, strike-first, optional conflict are what has morally and financially bankrupted our country.
While that sounds righteous, it is only rhetoric.
First, Justice is an ideal and being so can never ever be attained here on earth. As you know, if I take your possessions, locking me up is...what? justice? How can that be fair if I took hours out of your life through your earning money to replace what I stole? I took those items and you will never get those hours of working life back to buy that same junk-that-breaks even if I go to jail for 100 years. And again, as you know, if I kill a loved one, putting me in prison for life, or executing me, does nothing for your loved one whose life I took. So what is justice? Simply an ideal and exist only in some-other-place and not of this earth. We try to "make" justice so we can live together, so your approach of INJUSTICE falls on impractical ears. On a practical level removing this threat to a tranquil way of life would be a beneficial, no?
As a matter of fact, removing such a threat is the stuff of morality, no?
It upholds a shared belief that this tribe is sacred, it will not bend to such a beast that would wipe this tribe out and furthermore it upholds the identity of this tribe and that one man cannot make it live HIS way and not the way they chose to live.
Is that not the essence of morality?
If you chose to cry out that each life is a moral statement, then we are at a cross roads. While that cry may have some truth it flies in the face of one would violate that statement by subjugating all of us, and presumably kill some of us, to live HIS way.
I do not support any person, military, country, religious group, business, etc. deliberately taking a life. (Another time, I'll take on the pro-life, pro-choice conflict; no less important, but that issue is not also putting us in financial peril.)
Fighting them "over there" has left us less safe "over there" AND here; (one example is endless cuts to emergency services).
It is only admirable that you live your life so, and it is easy that you may do so, but there are others that, like George Orwell once put it, " People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf". You may not be equipped to believe there are those that would do violence to you were it not for those that stop such. It has been so for more than a week now and I could almost understand it if that is the case for your position. But it is what it is. And you would be in your uniform speaking German today or be a lampshade were it not so.
The financial peril we suffer from currently is not the war, but rather the politics we enjoy at home. It can only be posited that we are safe here because our blood is split there, and I find an element of truth in that. Imagine all those mad guys that hate US would be doing if they were NOT engaged over there! Phew.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, where we have US and civilian casualties, did NOT ask the US to invade and nation build; while our nation crumbles from misappropriation of Federal funds, theft of Defense funds in field operations, and a debt load unlikely to ever be paid off.
I DO support our troops; I cannot stand to see them abused and misused. I DO want a STRONG DEFENSE for our nation. Our misuse of force is our own worst enemy, not some elusive, or invented terrorists.
I think those countries did invite US in....kind of....maybe not each person in that country, but those shakers and movers "want" US.....You know, we are using the same words, but our meanings are yards apart and it's tough to communicate. So let us say, we are there, kind of existential like....now what? We leave? Rather isolationist, no? I mean that is SO right wing!
And I cannot disagree too much with that position! Those in power tell us that it is dangerous to do so. Think it may be?
Those "illusive terrorist" blew up two buildings in New York, just at they said they would a few years before. Was that an illusion? Or is it an illusion that Osama sends messages to the world about America and turning it towards his way of life? I am very skeptical, but I believe such is the case.
YES, there are plenty of folks who hate us and want to harm us. What would it take to get you to see how some of that hatred is justified, and clearly provoked?
Let us say I agree with you; let us say their hatred is 'justified' and 'provoked'. Now what? Besides leaving their country do we give them money for their hatred or what? Pay them to stop hating? What if Luxembourg decides to hate US? Pay them? What if they feel something else, like hatred, later on, in 20 years? Pay them again?
Also, are they not responsible for their own feelings? When you write "some of that hatred is justified", I gather you know that in the Middle East there are tribes fighting over issues that happened to their family in the 10th century. I've met those folks.....they are serious, amazing, and feed a beast of hatred that, as you know, will never be satisfied. At the fear of being labeled wrongly, I am going label you....your notion is rather "christian" in the main. Most of the world we are fighting in have NO notion of your position. Go listen to Arabs and Jews discuss peace....they both have no interest in allowing the other to "live with their enemy" let alone doing it. Just my opinion and not worth powder to blow it to hell.
Wouldn't we be fighting back if we were being assaulted and occupied for 7-9 years? Can you be a "good" American and tell the truth about how WE are leading terrorism around the world. We have, and continue to, set a very dangerous and hypocritical standard. The tone WE set by our example is often all the other folks need to justify their offensive actions.
Do you really think the cycle of violence will end by our means of violence. Extermination is not victory, no one wins.
Quite a bit here. First, yes, we might fight when occupiers come here. We are currently being occupied by those from Mexico so I am not to sure about that. We did fight when bombed in 1941, so maybe....
As we do have the same vocabulary I doubt the meaning of the words "we are leading terrorism around the world" even if an Afghan fighter were to tell me that.....he would do so out his own personal terror, possibly. So many mix the meaning of the word 'terror' with 'war', and many more mix up words to suit their agenda. Good way to "win" what could be meaningful discussions. Or a better way to shut down discussions. As in "one is not a GOOD American if they disagree with this statement".
A couple more minor things: extermination is a great way to win. May not be conscionable for those that find it so, but it is effective.
Also, you write as if our actions are the only questionable ones in the world. Are they? Or is that just real-politic wishing things to be so?
Those that utilize violence need not have a "reason" or justification and as a Peace Voyager who has studied violence in the word as well as their own heart, know that to be so.
What does that teach our kids; killing someone who threatens you is a solution? Don't misinterpret this, I do not justify ANY acts of violence beyond self defense by any person, group or nation. What America is doing is NOT self defense; we are promoting, and encouraging violence.
It will teach our kids very important lessons in this world. Do you teach children the same things when they are four and then 14? Do you teach your kids about sex the same way? No, you don't.
What a silly way to proceed! You DO justify acts of violence IF they meet YOUR criteria.....that contradicts everything I just THOUGHT I read!
You call yourself Peace Voyager, but it is really Conditionl Peace Voyager! So you would commit violence if you THOUGHT I was going to visit violence upon you, yours, or your nation?
Well the leaders of OUR country think like you do!
SO you agree with Bush AND Obama that violence can be justified, but only if YOU find it so. Well I've wasted 20 minutes.
The only safe, sane way out of our mess is a call for a cease fire. Our enemies have indicated willingness for peace talks, we have not. We did not even promote the one day cease fire we have a UN mandate to enact each September 21st. Welcome to Peace One Day: Peace One Day – 21 September 2009 (https://www.peaceoneday.org) . Wake up and tell the truth, or please take your murder mentality somewhere else. This list is for progressive people; progressive people know violence is not a solution.
Colleen
You are the third person to tell me to leave! I see tolerance or reasonable presentations are not part of the movement. I see that violence can be justified by those that call themselves Peaceful. I see those that believe liars are duped into believing those that say they will kill US now believe it when they say they want peace. Which is it, kill us or settle for peace? They have said both, so which do you believe? Could they want peace more because they see that we will kill more of them than they of us?
I could believe that! But then they have those that claim we should have more violence visited upon US. Or at least until we all convert to their way of law....and have you heard about their laws, woman?
Peace Voyager
04-17-2010, 09:49 AM
Lenn,
When I refer people to WACCO BB, I mention it is a local craigslist type BB; though in general, mostly Progressive people are members. There is always the exception. It's Barry's list, not mine; semi-free-speech I suppose. It's just that there are numerous other locations & venues for your POV; but thanks for the opportunity to shed some light on our different values.
Regarding our use of "war"; let's stick to the recent past, and present tense, as it is that all nations & individuals have the opportunity to evolve, and not repeat the sins of the past.
Defending yourself while you are being attacked is very different than striking first, as we are doing in the Middle East.
The events that happened in the Eastern US on 9/11 were not due to the countries of Iraq or Afghanistan. Another time we can look into synthetic terrorism, why it's used, and how much "freedom" we have lost, along with much more, as a result.
Revenge and annihilation, are not strategies you can "win" with. Sure you can defeat a great many people by killing, wounding, torturing them; but doing it the way we are, has made us just as bad as them - that's not winning, and new generations of those we have harmed, will continue to seek to harm us - that's not winning.
For now, I am busy providing a healthy dose of marrow for the spine of the CA Democrats at their convention, as I have for 3 conventions so far. Each time their bar is raised a little higher on what it to be Progressive.
For the record, I don't love religion or politics; but I look for best practices in all aspects of life, and try to apply the key findings, no matter what flavor or brand.
In the meantime; this letter to the Editor from the Press Democrat is well worth considering.
:sunshine:
Sol Solutions
Integrated Solutions for Energy Independence
www.sol-solutions.com
Russian River frost protection Debora Fudge Sonoma County supervisor tasting rooms wine alcohol Trudy Rubin Philadelphia Inquirer Hamid Karzai Chiang Kai-shek Reuters photographers Iraq videotape Pope Benedict XVI | PressDemocrat.com (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100416/OPINION/100419671/1044/OPINION02?p=3&tc=pg)
Barbaric violence
EDITOR: More revelations of military insensitivity to designated “enemies” have been eloquently demonstrated by the recently released videos showing indiscriminate shootings of Iraqi citizens in 2007 by American occupiers.
Eloquence was also expressed by Elizabeth Fuller (“Sowing and reaping,” Letters, Monday) referring to the voices of those Americans as they gunned down unarmed Iraqis. Hers was the same reaction to the recorded conversations as expressed by my veteran friends who experienced firsthand the U.S. violence against the people of Vietnam 40 years ago.
The most eloquent reaction, however, is that of Josh Stieber, a veteran soldier in the unit responsible for the killing, now a conscientious objector. He correctly identifies the real evil not as those fellow soldiers — whom America trained, brainwashed in dehumanization, then deployed to Iraq — but the military mindset of our leaders, and ultimately the American people ourselves, who continue to support war and killing as a legitimate means of “defense” against foreign ideologies.
If a terrorist philosophy can be called barbaric, is the only solution by a so-called civilized society to react in the same barbaric way — (an eye for an eye)? Or is it time for us to look more deeply inside our own souls?
JACK RUSSELL STONE
LenInSebastopol
04-19-2010, 08:08 AM
Free speech does bare the burden of allowing all manner of palaver including the discordant sounds of misanthropes. It affirms that Barry is more tolerant than several here and as there is no better place I've found for adult discourse and, in truth, I desire much the same as so many here, until quitting is the best alternative the Wacco door is a fine place to post such principles.
The real tragedy for me and the loss of "freedoms" is that we've lost the will to follow our Constitution. Without doing so we HAVE lost freedoms, since we've not really declared war and the method the politicians take in legalizing such loses is in stone laws. Any thing taken now is lost almost for good, but if we really were at war (Constitutionally) then such freedoms would be suspended, but only for a brief time since winning would be mandated; not the pussy footing we've been habituated towards.
I am not surprised that one who has no love for religion, and the resultant principles engendered by ethical and morals that flow from such, is at a political party. It is clear that you are with your own as none of our elected officials demonstrate any such ethics nor morals as well.
You all enjoy each others company. Try and stay the course without the invisible ruder that helps guide most other Americans.
The editorial peace submitted to the PD seems typical of a shell shocked soldier rattled with the misery of war and then placed in the hands of those that have a political agenda other than the care of that fellow fighter. He placed his life in danger for strangers to give a freedom they've not known, and comes home to a peoples that care for their freedoms in a way that negates his actions as well as those he left behind; and all that for their own political gains, in a way similar to the very leaders they hate and scorn.
I've got real work to do. Enough!
Lenn,
When I refer people to WACCO BB, I mention it is a local craigslist type BB; though in general, mostly Progressive people are members. There is always the exception. It's Barry's list, not mine; semi-free-speech I suppose. It's just that there are numerous other locations & venues for your POV; but thanks for the opportunity to shed some light on our different values.
Regarding our use of "war"; let's stick to the recent past, and present tense, as it is that all nations & individuals have the opportunity to evolve, and not repeat the sins of the past.
Defending yourself while you are being attacked is very different than striking first, as we are doing in the Middle East.
The events that happened in the Eastern US on 9/11 were not due to the countries of Iraq or Afghanistan. Another time we can look into synthetic terrorism, why it's used, and how much "freedom" we have lost, along with much more, as a result.
Revenge and annihilation, are not strategies you can "win" with. Sure you can defeat a great many people by killing, wounding, torturing them; but doing it the way we are, has made us just as bad as them - that's not winning, and new generations of those we have harmed, will continue to seek to harm us - that's not winning.
For now, I am busy providing a healthy dose of marrow for the spine of the CA Democrats at their convention, as I have for 3 conventions so far. Each time their bar is raised a little higher on what it to be Progressive.
For the record, I don't love religion or politics; but I look for best practices in all aspects of life, and try to apply the key findings, no matter what flavor or brand.
In the meantime; this letter to the Editor from the Press Democrat is well worth considering.
:sunshine:
Sol Solutions
Integrated Solutions for Energy Independence
Sol-Solutions Integrated Solutions for Energy Independence (https://www.sol-solutions.com)
Russian River frost protection Debora Fudge Sonoma County supervisor tasting rooms wine alcohol Trudy Rubin Philadelphia Inquirer Hamid Karzai Chiang Kai-shek Reuters photographers Iraq videotape Pope Benedict XVI | PressDemocrat.com (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100416/OPINION/100419671/1044/OPINION02?p=3&tc=pg)
Barbaric violence
EDITOR: More revelations of military insensitivity to designated “enemies” have been eloquently demonstrated by the recently released videos showing indiscriminate shootings of Iraqi citizens in 2007 by American occupiers.
Eloquence was also expressed by Elizabeth Fuller (“Sowing and reaping,” Letters, Monday) referring to the voices of those Americans as they gunned down unarmed Iraqis. Hers was the same reaction to the recorded conversations as expressed by my veteran friends who experienced firsthand the U.S. violence against the people of Vietnam 40 years ago.
The most eloquent reaction, however, is that of Josh Stieber, a veteran soldier in the unit responsible for the killing, now a conscientious objector. He correctly identifies the real evil not as those fellow soldiers — whom America trained, brainwashed in dehumanization, then deployed to Iraq — but the military mindset of our leaders, and ultimately the American people ourselves, who continue to support war and killing as a legitimate means of “defense” against foreign ideologies.
If a terrorist philosophy can be called barbaric, is the only solution by a so-called civilized society to react in the same barbaric way — (an eye for an eye)? Or is it time for us to look more deeply inside our own souls?