i guess death panels do exist (Reuters) - American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials. There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate. The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month. The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005
Where is Saul Alinsky now? His acolyte is failing. All we need now is a new Mcarthy to deal with these communist inspired traitors. Oh My God Wtf Is this taboo? Oh I'm so sorry.
How 'bout in the last 3? Funemployment Notion of fairness Man-caused disaster Kinetic military action Balanced approach ...
Funny how Steamy always misses the joke, but the joke never seems to miss him. Hell, the joke is on Steamer all the time.
First, it's worth asking, were you in favor of Bush admin policies with regard to the war on terror, e.g., wiretapping of questionable legality, rendition, Gitmo, denying habeas corpus until forced to do so ?? I'm asking because I'm genuinely interested in whether you were against those policies or whether you're just a hypocritical partisan hack. And yes, I suspect the latter, so prove me wrong. Here, I'll answer the reverse question before it's even posed. I was against the Bush admin's roll back of civil liberties mentioned above, and it's the source of my biggest disappointment with the Obama admin (as I've posted in numerous threads on the topics) that many of the policies have continued either unabated or only mildly changed. Now as for the assassination of al Awlaki, I'm not comfortable with it based on what we currently know, and I definitely agree with those who are arguing that, at the very least, the OLC legal justifications for this should be released for public review. However, at the same time, I don't agree with Glenn Greenwald and others who are arguing that nothing short of prospective Article III judicial review could render this assassination legal. Since no one's bothered to do so yet, here's some legal analysis of the issue from Jack Goldsmith and others who are well versed in this area of law. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/opinion/a-just-act-of-war.html?_r=4&ref=opinion http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/10/on-due-process-and-targeting-citizens/ Again, I don't have enough info now (and may never) to say that I agree with Goldsmith and Wittes's analysis, but they nevertheless provide a good starting point for addressing this issuse.
OH MY GOD! As I soon as I get to the bottom of the Clinton-murder-of-Vince-Foster, I'm TOTALLY going to research this further.
There is no Obama not failing thread, so I shall post this in here since it's not really about Immigration, per se And besides, at least one of the many folks on here who hate everything he does will find it a fail anyway. I believe Obama is trying to lock up the "breathing heterosexual male" demographic with his latest appointment: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011...ial-community-and-americas-economic-competiti
I don't have the "technical skills" to know quite how to express this in a legal framework, but it strikes me that there's a possible standard along the lines of "if we might hit him when we're shooting at somebody else anyway." Suppose for example Yamamoto's pilot had been a renegade US citizen? Would "due process" have been required before we shot the plane down? Actually here's a concrete case-- war of 1812. The "United States" fought a single ship action against the "Macedonian." Among the crew of the "Macedonian" was a US citizen, one of those whose impressment was the root of the conflict. He requested that he be allowed to sit out the conflict rather than fight against his country, the British captain indicated he would fight or be shot on the spot, and in fact he was killed fighting in the action. Was he denied due process? Should Decatur have avoided the action in case such a thing might happen? Or to take the issue away from declared wars-- US revenue personnel engaged in actions against pirates in the Carribbean and the Gulf during the era of the Articles of confederation and right on into the 1830's maybe 40's. I can't cite an individual, but its silly to pretend that none of the pirates were U S Citizens. I'm fairly sure no one felt any need to worry about their rights over and above those of non-citizen pirates in such a context...
US economy adds 103,000 jobs in September, and the July/August numbers were revised up (shockingly, as getting revised down is the usual procedure). http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/07/us-usa-economy-idUSTRE78C33C20111007 Almost 1.1 million jobs added for the year. That's not enough, but I would see this as the absolute minimum that President Obama needs out of the economy next year to have a semi-realistic shot at re-election.
I believe 45,000 of those jobs were counting the return of striking Verizon workers. http://www.citytowninfo.com/career-...-shows-more-job-growth-than-expected-11100701
They told me if I voted for McCain things like this would happen. I wish I had listened to them. And in a very bizzare postscript to all of this US State Department contacted the family of one of Awlaki's henchmen who was killed in the drone strike to give condolences (or so the family says, who knows what really was said).