In the words of the Associated Press, “Anwar al-Awlaki, and a second American, Samir Khan, were killed by a joint CIA-U.S. military air strike on their convoy in Yemen early Friday. Both men played key roles in inspiring attacks against the U.S., and their killings are a devastating double blow to al-Qaida’s most dangerous franchise.” Aside from the fact that they were killed, is that true? Let’s just ignore Khan on the “what’s one more dead body” theory that is apparently the convention guiding most commentary on the day’s events. Do we know that al-Awlaki has played a “key role” in inspiring attacks against the United States, and that his death is a “devastating blow” to al-Qaida? My colleague Max Fisher makes a persuasive case, elsewhere on this site, that “though the Yemen-based branch of al-Qaeda has been tied to recent attempted terrorist attacks the U.S., those attacks have all failed. And even those failures might have had little to do with Awlaki, a man with no operational experience, battlefield experience, or skill-set known to extend beyond shouting into a webcam and posting to YouTube….
Does the government work for us or do we work for the government? Is freedom in America a myth or a reality? Tonight, what if we didn’t live in a free country?
What if the Constitution were written not to limit government, but to expand it? What if the Constitution didn’t fulfill the promise of the Declaration of Independence, but betrayed it? What if the Constitution actually permitted the government to limit and constrict freedom? What if the Bill of Rights was just a paper promise, that the government could avoid whenever it claimed the need to do so? What if the same generation
It was first reported in January of last year that the Obama administration had compiled a hit list of American citizens whom the President had ordered assassinated without any due process, and one of those Americans was Anwar al-Awlaki. No effort was made to indict him for any crimes (despite a report last October that the Obama administration was “considering” indicting him). Despite substantial doubt among Yemen experts about whether he even has any operational role in Al Qaeda, no evidence (as opposed to unverified government accusations) was presented of his guilt. When Awlaki’s father sought a court order barring Obama from killing his son, the DOJ argued, among other things, that such decisions were “state secrets” and thus beyond the scrutiny of the courts. He was simply ordered killed by the President: his judge, jury and executioner. When Awlaki’s inclusion on President Obama’s hit list was confirmed, The New York Times noted that “it is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing….
…The Occupy movement is upset about many things but unlike the Tea Party their message doesn’t seem to have a single unifying theme. The Tea Party has branches that are unhappy about illegal immigration or voter ID laws but their unifying theme is government spending and the national debt. Occupy is unhappy about “money in politics” and “the banks” but you’re just as likely to see somebody at this movement complain about the wars or the Federal Reserve. Eric Bickford of West Roxbury, a Ron Paul supporter, came to the event in an “End The Fed” shirt because he thought it would resonate with some protesters. “We can bond on certain issues but not everything. I think some of these people don’t understand the difference between capitalism and corporatism, it’s really corporatism that is the problem,” he said…
In this article the media tries to simplify the issue and ignore Habeas Corpus into sound bites that make Ron Paul look like he is against going after terrorists. However, Ron Paul introduced the Constitutional measure of Letters of Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 which is a declaration of war against terrorist organizations. This brilliant strategic act was never passed, but President Paul will remove the troops from occupying countries and use the US Constitution to deal with rogue enemies the proper legal way.
This Wall Street Journal article fails to discuss Congressman Paul’s position that Obama is not the King decider of which Americans live or die. The President Obama, his former and a majority of US Government ignores the US Constitution, the rule of law and due process for American citizens. Obama is the first president in US History to authorize assassination of American citizens and without explanation.
Since, the President thinks he can authorize the killing of Americans for ‘PreCrimes’ outside the rule of law, are we really safe? Maybe, but what if you speak out against tyranny or abuse of power? What constitutes a pre-crime? What if the US intelligence is wrong about you, can they just kill you for an erroneous tip with faulty information? Do YOU deserve the apparent non-right to be innocent until proven guilty? Or, do we blindly trust those wonderful government ‘leaders’ who are so worth the honor?
Now for the less than thorough article:
By Elizabeth Williamson
Tisha Casida, a lifelong Coloradan, was baptized in the Arkansas River and raised on a small farm in Vineland, Colorado. She went on to the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (UCCS), where she studied business and political science, graduating with a dual major in 2005. After returning to southern Colorado, she pursued her Masters in Business Administration from Colorado State University-Pueblo, graduating and starting her own small business
Republicans love to lecture Democrats that our government cannot spend more than it brings in. Apparently, two GOP candidates for President do not think that message applies to their own campaigns. Both Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich spent more money than their campaigns raised from April 1st-June 30th.
George Harrison famously sang the words