Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama Said That He Didn't Agree with Much of What Medea Benjamin Said. Well, What Did She Say? (109 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We're "eviscerating" our Constitutional (0+ / 0-)

    protections because we're killing Islamic jihadists living in regions without extradition treaties with the US? If a US citizen decides to join a terrorist cell and plan attacks on us we cannot kill him without sending in marines to kidnap him, bring him back to our shores, and put him on trial?

    Fine, but do you want to be one of those guys sent in to extricate him? What would you say to all the families of the American soldiers killed going in to conduct the extraction? Thankfully, we have the technology to do the job with no loss of innocent American life and a bare minimal loss of innocent life period. It is very easy for people here who are alive to criticize the man keeping you that way.

    •  see previous discussion of Canada (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sandino, aliasalias, JesseCW

      they don't have to do what you're talking about.

      They are not drowning in acts of terror.

    •  This policy not working (5+ / 0-)

      It is creating more terrorist, and it is doing so because we kill innocent people in these strikes.

      And how do you know that they have joined a terrorist group and are planning attacks?  Because the government claims that?

      And advocating violence against the US is protected free speech (see Brandonburg v Ohio).

      Finally, You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist, you are 8 times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack and you are 6 times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack.  

      This threat is overblown because the fear it causes allows the government to do these things.

      Call your representative and senators and the white house (lack of capitalization intended) to STOP this crazy warmongering with Iran, please.

      by Indiana Bob on Sat May 25, 2013 at 11:49:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  International treaties are a part of US law as (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Indiana Bob

      mandated by the Constitution. Article 6, clause 2 "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

      Now drones are banned by treaties signed by the US. Other things banned are "Unlawful combatant". The treaty indicates that a combatant is either a POW or a criminal. If he is a criminal he gets a trial according to the laws of the country whose jurisdiction he is in. If he is not a criminal he is a POW entitled to be treated like a POW. Now Obama has violated this as certainly as Bush did. But even Bush was frightened at the prospect of using drones. The legal response to Al Walki was to arrest him and try him. Risky, yes but that is the law. Period. Or we are an outlaw nation that needs to be brought to justice ourselves.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (159)
  • Community (74)
  • Baltimore (71)
  • Bernie Sanders (51)
  • Freddie Gray (39)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (29)
  • Elections (28)
  • Culture (26)
  • Racism (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Education (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Media (19)
  • 2016 (17)
  • Science (16)
  • Politics (16)
  • Environment (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site