The Right Scoop
He thinks giving Obama the power of the drone memo to kill US citizens at his will is a-okay? And that US citizens don't deserve due process because the government says they're an enemy combatant?
I know he's one of the only people like teflon that we all seem to like here but if this is how he feels DUMP Bolton! If we can dump that hack Rove, Christie, and Rubio for their actions we can dump Bolton too. RINOs need to leave the stage.
If those are the positions of a conservative, why don't we trot out Alberto Gonzales too while we're at it?
That is not the stand of the Tea Party. We're against Obama or any government having the power to kill any US citizen they want like they're at war with their own people, which they've already stated since DHS calls conservatives (aka us) terrorists. Rush and Hannity smelled something wrong because they've got more serious conservative instincts in them.
We reject Obama's wish for a police state.
We take the Constitution seriously, and we think real conservatives would listen to the words of Ben Franklin any day over the words of Alberto Gonzales and Michael Chertoff.
If you think Walter`s story is neat,, 2 weaks-ago my brothers father in-law got a cheque for $4620 working an eleven hour week from there house and their roomate's mother-in-law`s neighbour did this for 10-months and made over $4620 in their spare time from their mac. follow the guidelines at this website, http://fly26.com
I think the drone program is subject to abuse and must be constantly monitored by the people, but, right now, the program is within bounds: It is simple, do not engage in "acts of war" against the United States. That being said, it is a VERY slippery slope!
Very important point noticed by Bolton.
"Due process" - any American? Where? Only other countries? DOMESTICALLY?? Hmmm..
"War power" - cannot be INSIDE U.S., must be under MILITARY code, not some weird "due process" concept that is FAR more broad.
Now, do I agree with the whole thing? I dunno. Complex. Feels like Obama wants to kill instead of capture, purely for political reasons, instead of capture and gain intelligence.
So is it consistent with US policy if the Federal Government decides to amend the memo to include DOMESTIC AMERICANS??? They're already flying drones over US cities as it is! What's to stop them? Who will stop them?
Do you see where the slippery slope takes us?
Don't forget that returning vets and "right wing extremists" have been labeled as possible threats to the nation by Big Sis and a west point think tank of all groups. What activities get put under the war powers act?
It is a very slippery slope. Big Brother is watching.
The problem is this president rallied calls for "revenge" in the "fixed" voting booths and allies are enemies as well as Americans that disagree with b.o.
I take issue with the hypocrisy that when Obama does it , it is wonderful, no code pink no rights being violated..When Bush did it they stalked him ...and he was doing it as a result of America being attacked on our soil..the Headlines would be Bush plans attacks on private American citizens..hell for that matter the headlines were Bush plans attack on enemy , they must have the same rights as Americans..Be nice to the people who want to do harm to America..they have more rights then we do. Do I have this straight you can kill American Citizens if you "deem" them to be a threat, but to do it in other countries you need approval????
Kill them, bag them, and tag them. You'll get no arguments from me when it comes to killing terrorists. I'm also sure that the government will have to make a solid case that the people they are taking out ARE indeed terrorists. The only problem I have is that the Obama administration is perfectly willing to drop a bomb or fire a missile on a terrorist without warning, but they find waterboarding illegal, even if it is done on an enemy combatant from another country who is NOT an American citizen. The hypocrisy in that just stinks. And nobody was killed being waterboarded by the CIA. The same cannot be said with a drone missile attack.
Did you read the white paper? They don't have to provide any evidence whatsoever, much less prove it. Be a responsible citizen--read the white paper before you support the government's position.
Mam , how do you arrest a terrorist that kidnapped a child and hold him hostage for 7 days with a gun. Law enforcement have to attack and if by no other mean, just kill him. Now with your little tunnel narrow mind, same scenario with any other citizen here in the country or anywhere else around the world. Did you ever think they started by planning on assassinating this terrorist you all are crying for ? No way they can arrest him. Many reason, he will resist arrest, he is ready to fight even if he'll lost his life( suicidal ).
The size of the gun do not change policy.
Your mentality makes this admin think twice in Banghazi, what a shame
What would be the difference between this drone attack that killed this American citizen in a foreign soil and a bank robber inside, say, a Bank of America that refuse to give up after ordered by security or a cop to freeze. The answer is simple, arrest and if resist or would attack and assault with a deadly weapon( and you can define the deadly weapon)shoot his arse and maim him if possible or put him out !
Now some define policy with the size of the gun or where you go to hunt down the wanted criminal. A drone can handle the job or a shot gun, or a pistol or a knife or a 2x4 or a pebble rock of a knock out punch size. Myself personally will take care of this sort with whatever means comes handy and available.
This admin have behaved in it's policy calls rather strangely, This drone attack is not one,
tho, we may mourn the lost of innocent lives.
As American citizens, we have always had the right to due process. That is, if we are accused of something, we have the right to see the evidence against us and to defend ourselves. These protections are in place for very good reasons, which I'm sure you can discern with a moment's thought.
This policy changes the standard, and says that if the government thinks you are a terrorist, they can assassinate you. They do not need to provide any evidence and you are not entitled to defend yourself--or even know you are accused. If you think such power will never be abused and only be used against people we "know" are terrorists, your knowledge of history is abysmal.
tru dat Laurel, the Shah & America were enemy of all radical Islamists all over the world.
Islam attacking various countries around the world happened four to five thousand years ago. These are all old old misbehave from these thugs of a religion of peaches
DHS already has classified most of us here as possible terrorists. Anyone else remember the video which was out? Bolton needs to wise up.
Not me. I'm not one of you. I like Mr. President Sir Obama boss. I just come here to keep an eye on you Tea Party types. You know the ones, who cling to their Bibles and guns. Did I mention Michelle is soooo cool?
Oh, and I don't own any guns either. Haven't since they were all stolen 5 years ago.
No, really.
It really boils down to whether America is still a Nation of Laws, and will remain a Government restricted by our Constitutional Republic. Recent events (past six years +) do not promote trust and intentional "leaks" like this should raise concern.
Or perhaps to encourage it. This information does a good job of demonstrating what the "right wing nut-jobs" have been ridiculed for predicting.
I said this in another thread but if an American is fighting on foreign soil against other American's than he's all but renounced his U.S. citizenship and is fair game. Safeguards should be put into place so that drones are never used on American soil in this way but I have no problem dropping bombs on Jihadists.
How do you know you're dropping bombs on Jihadists? These bombs kill innocent children and first responders at funerals and weddings and it creates more hatred for America therefore meaning more attacks. America is less safe because of such stupidity!
It's not our policy to target civilizations but what of the terrorists who do target civilizations? Would you prefer we don't do anything so he can kill more civilizations?
The Muslims will say their civilization is being targeted when America has bases all over their lands including in what they consider to be the most holiest of places.
This could be the breakthrough we libertarian-Republicans need. Spying, detaining indefinitely, and killing American citizens should never be acceptable.
This a slippery slope if I've ever seen one. He acts like this couldn't ever be abused.
I understand the thought process because we live in a time where disaster can hit in a millisecond. Man made disaster. Thousands are potentially in serious danger as we speak here in the US. A terrorist attack is most likely in the works right now right here. But how to save these people without trampling on our rights is a complicated issue.
Soetero would love nothing more than to be able to abuse this.
"We're gonna punish our enemies and reward our friends."
The enemies he was referring to weren't Al Qaeda.
If this new "white paper" is completely consistent with longstanding US executive policy, why is it issued anew through the Attorney General's office? A real fear for Americans is that they can be called "enemy combatants, taking up arms against the US or its interests, having potential for an attack against US interests, etc.," at the whim of the CinC. The re-issue of this policy at this time and this way should be frightening to all Americans.
I'm hard-pressed to believe this is anything other than a legal way to dispose of those who disagree with this corrupt monster or his cronies. And the criminal media will cover up "hits" made by these animals. This stinks bigtime.
Look, I'd feel less threatened if it were a conservative President... but Obama has proven time and again that he hates America and he's hostile towards those who oppose him. So, after living through Fast and Furious, Benghazi, etc., please excuse me for not believing this is good for America. Especially when the media has covered every single one of Obama's tracks along the way...
You just can't trust Obama or his minions... not at all. When a government authorizes the use of military power against it's own citizens, then how is that different from say, Syria? And I know some would argue that they're not "targeting" U.S. citizens per se... but they seriously might in the future and now they can "legally" if they wish... they have been proven to be untrustworthy and "above the law" in the past. So, no... this reeks to high Heaven and concerns me greatly.
Right! And he is cleansing the military of leaders that will not fire upon American citizens on our soil if ordered to do so.
Look, I'd feel less threatened if it were a conservative President
We cannot trust any of them. Even the ones we like must be held to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. A exception for one is precedent for the next.
That is how we got here. Both Republicans and democrats in Congress trusted Bush2 with the Patriot Act.
No president is as ever conservative as you like them to be but only as conservative as you make them be. As the government continually powers up there will be no making them be anything. Tyranny isn't coming in the back door. People opened up the front door and welcomed it in.
"He does take issue with the ‘due process’ argument against it, suggesting that’s more an argument within the ‘law enforcement paradigm’ rather than the ‘war paradigm’ which is where this memo falls."
Until you have some idiot in the WH that manipulates a scenario for it to fall under 'the war paradigm'.
What if a person like Rush or Mark Levin...or all of the radio hosts banded together and called for YOU to take up arms against your government? That is a scenario that is so manipulable. Remember Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus and that was something thought never to be done either.
Lincoln not only suspended Habeus Corpus he imprisoned the Rush and Mark Levin's of his time. Dozens of newspaper editors in the north were imprisoned because they opposed him. He even tried to deport a Congressman from Ohio and threatened to arrest the Chief Justice. He was far from a saint as portrayed by American culture and the public education system.
Correct. I didn't go there in an effort at succinctness.
"I know of no class of my fellowmen, however just, enlightened, and humane, which can be wisely and safely trusted absolutely with the liberties of any other."~Frederick Douglas
Totally agree. Lincoln like all presidents has his pluses and minuses. History is written by the victors and America isn't immune to martyring those assassinated. I will say though that Lincoln did have a job that no president before him saw and no president has seen since. It was untrodden ground.
This isn't the time or place for a debate about Lincoln but there's a lot of interest in perpetuating the myth (see recent Hollywood movie). Also because he routinely abused the constitution statists love to idolise him (see recent comparisons of Obama to Lincoln).
Well, much as I like The Moustache, I think he's overlooked the sad reality that the POS doesn't give a d*mn about the law, that he has E.O.s which would allow him to use these drones against Americans on the US Mainland, and that he's been using them indiscriminately already.
And who is going to hold him accountable for a drone attack at a Tea Party event? Ft. Hood, Fast and Furious, Benghazi ring bells?????
Yeah and I suppose he'll be saying the same thing when they start the drone strikes in U.S cities.
Go away John, you've already cost the GOP it's credibility on foreign policy with your failed Iraq war now you want to turn Republicans into supporters of assassinations of American citizens .
Still ramblin on about the iraq war… What about "O"s" other illegal wars currently going on, don't care about those?
Of course. I oppose them all including the intervention in Libya and the backing of Al Qeada in Syria. It's just more of the same failed foreign policy that we've had for decades from people like Bolton.
But the Iraq war fought because people Bolton claimed they had WMD has damaged the GOP massively on foreign policy and cost it credibility. You cannot hope to win the trust of the electorate when you lie and shill like Bolton and his friends do.
Even if there was no smoking gun on Iraq WMD, I would be the giant of all all fools if I denied that !
And Colin Powell was SoS advising the potus and Congress, we've seen how dishonest he truly is!
"These people will never admit they're wrong."
Hello pot, kettle calling…
You do realize that the democrats have doubled down and then doubled down again on foreign wars since "O" is in office an it does not appear to be hurting them. In fact "O" has received brownie points by following the so called "Bush plan" in Iraq. That should say it is not a policy issue but a message issue. That does not mean I agree with our wars, it simply shows there are holes in your position...
There is plenty of evidence of drone strikes killing children and first responders, go look it up especially in Pakistan where most of them are ordered by the Commander in Chief, Barack Obama
You sound absolutely ridiculous. What's it got to do with us?
EVERYTHING!
Listen hypocrite don't post over and over about bombs dropping on children and first responders, despite no evidence, then turn a blind eye to WMD's being dropped on civilians. Furthermore you obviously cannot see the big picture about WMD's.
What's it got to do with us? would you rather the Al Qeada affiliated militants that we're backing get them?
I would have gone after OBL and left Afghanistan long ago. I would have also listened to the reasons why they attacked us and closed the military bases in Saudi Arabia which are still there to this day propping up a despotic monarchy and further pissing off Muslims and turning them into terrorists.
There was absolutely no evidence beyond that which was manufactured or obtained by people with an interest in a U.S invasion. The Iraq war was costly and based on a lie and that has damaged the GOP on foreign policy immeasurably and led to huge losses in 2006, 2008 and the presidency in 08 and 12. These people will never admit they're wrong. Only now are we able to get over the Bush disaster and yet the same people like Bolton are popping up telling us to embrace further abuses of the constitution in the name of security.
Most countries believed Iraq had WMD's, not just the U.S. and reasonably so. Israel had destroyed a nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981. We have Sadam on tape talking about acquiring weapons of mass destruction and preventing U.N. inspectors from finding out. One of Saddam's generals, Georges Sada, has said they transferred chemical weapons to Syria before the invasion. Look it up.
Your argument there wasn't any WMD isn't true, they have been proven to have been there.
I disagree with you on Bolton, he is very forth coming when I hear him speak. He made clear in this interview the history of such actions and also brings up the legal paradigm.
I do agree regarding Libya, Syria, etc..
What do you think would have been the correct reaction to the US being attacked on 9/11?
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.