Originally Posted by Godzuki
big difference between us here from what it looks like is you all are much more paranoid of our government than i am. the way i see it is Awlaki was taken out as part of a war on terror, is a very rare incident that isn't really applicable to most Americans because most Americans don't associate themselves with known terrorists or attempts to recruit radical islamists, therefore i have no fears whatsoever that they will be coming to take me out anytime soon. i'm fine with our government doing what it takes to keep us safe, and realize war or any of the stuff our special ops, CIA, or drones do overseas aren't always going to be politically correct or lawful, and i'm fine with that. i think there is a huge difference in perspective from those at home in America who want all of our soldiers and operatives to play nice and politically correct vs the reality of what they're dealing with over there based on limited info to even get an opportunity. the idea we MUST take him alive to face trial because he's American is just ridiculous to me. as far as i'm concerned even being over there associating with/around terrorists makes him obviously guilty.
and you are exaggerating his innocence, just like you didn't mention any of the stuff i cited from his wiki. you're trying your best to portray him as some innocent we wrongly killed when thats not true, and you have a whole lot less proof than whats known about him to characterize him as innocent of recruiting and associating with anti American terrorist organizations than him being guilty of that. i don't think our government would go to anywhere near those lengths if there wasn't definitive proof, and its pretty obvious if you factor in where he was and who he was guarded by at the time of his assassination.
i'll get a fair trial and so will most Americans unless you're in/around associating with known terrorists and important enough that our government deems a target. to act like there isn't a difference between him and the circumstances that led to his assassination that he put himself vs most Americans is just being disingenuous. i have 0 fear of not getting a fair trial, Awlaki not getting one is irrelevant to that for most Americans but i guess its a good paranoia ploy to scare everyone into thinking their rights will soon be taken away. i guess...
A couple of things:
first..I'm basing my comments on a simple idea..not paranoia. The constitution guarantees Americans the right to a trial by a jury of their peers. No charges? You say you believe they wouldnt do anything without definite proof...well if they have proof, then a trial should be easy then... Thats no excuse to try and create new power in the executive branch where it doesnt belong. That part of our system works fine.. We dont need them f*cking with it.. That doesnt mean I think Al Awlaki is innocent. If people wants these rights to remain, then you have to protect them... You can.t just assume that the government would never take that power with the intent to abuse it...What's the government's track record when it comes to abusing power?? Not good. No offense to politicians, but they arent to be trusted. I like the idea that Americans are due a fair trial and I dont want them screwing with it because of these senseless wars. throughout history, wartime has always been the time when governments have been able take away the freedoms of the public... Almost always in the name of more protection..
Im not inclined to trust the government's word on this subject.
If the government is going to kill Americans? they need to provide some kind of discernable proof that the person is what the state says they are.