Ron Paul on Al-Awlarki's Assasination: We Have Crossed the Rubicon to Tyranny

Easier said than done. Much easier to kill him.

It doesn't have to be proven in court, here are some quotes from the al Qaeda terrorist himself:

In March 2010, a tape featuring al-Awlaki was released in which he urged Muslims residing in the U.S. to attack their country of residence. In the video, he stated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

There were WMD's in Iraq:

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/157828-wmds-found-iraq.html
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swBcfdN5Nh4"]New WMD Evidence - YouTube[/ame]

You must be a really important person...or you are an al Qaeda agent.

Are you defending a terrorist? You really need to stop listening to Ron Paul.

 

So does that mean we should send drones into any sovereign country we are not at war with that is harboring American citizens that the government *alleges* is a member of Al Qaeda to kill them (without trial) and any other innocent casualties that happen to be near the target?

 

If it prevents the loss of American lives then yes, we have a duty to eliminate that threat.

 

Yep. We can't let the Constitution get in the way of the inconvenience of cost! It's much easier for the cops to kill suspected murderers when they arrest them, instead of forcing taxpayers to suffer the inconveniences of a costly trial too. Let's just abolish the court system altogether. The police can be the judge, jury and executioners as well.

Thanks for those quotes, but they were really unnecessary. Your point effectively was null after you claimed the axiom "it doesn't have to be proven in court". Yes, it does. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says that no one shall be deprived of life without due process. Assassinating an American Citizen without a trial is not due process. I know that as a statist, it's hard to come to grips with the fact that your position blatantly contradicts the Constitution...or maybe you just don't care, because government is the solution to all of your problems.

Chemical munition shells of Mustard Gas that predated the Gulf War are not the active WMDs that the Bush administration claimed Iraq was producing and harboring.

Or I'm just one of the many ordinary American Citzens on Obama's Hit List.

Typical caveman neo-con response. Defending a man's rights is not the same thing as defending his alleged actions.

 

How does killing Americans prevent the loss of American lives? Lol

Where in the Constitution does it say that the President has the power to engage in warlike activities within another country's border without Congressional approval to assassinate American citizens without due process?

 

The same way the death penalty does. There is no morality in American society anymore. It is only fear of grave punishment that keeps people from turning back into tribal natives.

I don't beleive in the goodness of humanity. i think we're all gross, greedy animals who will take whatever we can get from someone else without some form of coercive state authority to keep us in line.

There is no such thing as "good" people anymore, only people forced to do good under threat of punishment.

This societal shift happened sometime around 1960 when we lost God and religious morality and replaced it with the secular morality of the State and consumerism.

 

You want to kill people to keep your morality?

 

Go ahead and defend terrorists who are not American citizens because they are expatriots, a word that must not be in your vocabulary.

 

Spoken like a brainwashed member of the US military murdering machine.

 

That's bullsh(*)(*). There is no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder.

Anymore? I never realized that there was ever such a thing to begin with. Once greedy animals, always greedy animals.

More bullsh(*)(*), Vatican propaganda. Ever hear of the Inquisition? Pre-enlightenment Europe? Some really (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up sh(*)(*) happened whenever religious morality that claimed God was on their side was governing the state. But we still do have one thing in common with those times....people still worship the state in a creepy form of idolatry. The world as a whole isn't any more (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up today than it was 50 years ago....but the health of America certainly is.

 

No, I want evil human beings, which we all are, to be coerced into working together peacefully, the only question is to what degree of coercion are we going to allow?

LIberty is the minimum amount of coercion necessary to ensure an orderly society and no more.

The fact really is, that it is impossible for dense populations to have true liberty. As we see in Cities where the Government agents(cops) are on every street corner.

population density is directly related to the amount of liberty an individual has. Only by escape to the lowest population density area possible can an indiviudal experience true liberty and freedom. The hermit is as completely free as a human being can be.

 

I'm not defending the actions of terrorists who aren't American citizens. I'm defending the rights of alleged terrorists who are American citizens. Please don't cloud the differences up in an attempt to smear me because it suits your insane anti-American agenda.

It's not in anybody's vocabulary except yours, because it's not even a word:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/expatriot

Did you mean expatriate? If so, we've already covered this: see post 47.

 

Freedom from government restriction is necessary to ensure an orderly society?

Well, I can't agree more but you want the government to kill people to preserve your morality. Nothing less like Liberty than that.

 

Vigilantes don't need a court of law to mete out punishment and Al Alawki was the victim of American vigilante justice, which has a long and storied history in this nation.

basically al alwki was lynched by the American people in a vigilante fashion, using the State as the Rope. Now maybe you hate vigilante justice, which is legitimate, but in certain extreme cases most Americans have always adopted a vigilante attitude. We wouldn't cheer Charles Bronson in Death Wish or Chuck Norris in Walker:Texas Ranger if we didn't.

Your problem is with Vigilante Justice administered by the State and approved by the American People.

 

So you do support anarchy? Just want to make sure we are on the same page.

 

Why is everything always an absolute with you people. I don't beleive in absolutism.

Exceptions can and should be made in certain extreme cases. Our principles are malleable according to situation. I don't beleive principles are something that can never, ever be violated for the common good.

Principles are not law, and can and should be compromised when necessary.

 

So you are for forced state killings? Death is absolute.

 

I disagree that the "American People" killed al awlaki using the state. I didn't approve of his killing, and many other Americans did not approve his killing. Just because the majority of the voting population of America elected Obama doesn't mean that they approved of all future actions he would take. If he gets re-elected in 2012, then your claim that the majority of American People approved of the "lynching" might hold ground.

I'm not necessarily opposed to vigilante justice if it's done by the individual...and if it's done by the state, I suppose it would depend on the circumstances. But at least we can agree that what Obama did was totally illegal and in complete violation of the Fifth Amendment, which was the point I was trying to get through to you.

 

Are we still beating this old rug to death?
Look,Al-Awlarki sided with the enemy(Al Qaeda) renounced his citizenship,and deserved to be smoked.Believe me as a former military,if one of my guys sides with the enemy,and threatens me,believe me Im going empty a clip on his ass.

 

Quit pretending that a nation of 310 million people can exist in justice, peace, harmony and absolute individual freedom. It cannot.

The only question is, how much liberty are we willing to trade to maintain an orderly society and how much evil (*)(*)(*)(*) are we willing to do to eachother in order to achieve it.

As the population density of America increases, we will inevitably at some point find it necessary to adopt the totalitarin tactics of China in order to merely exist as one nation.

Those who wish indiviudal freedom had best move somewhere the population density is low enough to allow them to establish their indiviudal freedom to the level they desire.

The reason Pioneers left society was to have absolute freedom, there are no frontiers anymore, hence no absolute freedom. Daniel boone would be a miserable son of a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in today's society.

The higher the population density, the more statism is required. At some point density reaches the point of critical mass and only totalitarianism can hold the population together in an orderly fashion. "Big Brother" is an inevitability, even in America.

 

American's love them some murder.

 

Would you feel the same way had he succeeded bringing down airliners,killing hundreds of innocent Americans with his shoe and underwear bombers?Or if the Times Square bomb had succeeded?
Tell me,had that happened,would those people had gotten a "fair trial"?

 

Oh, I believe you.

Violence is, after all, the American way.

 

I just wanted to understand were you where coming from. I understand your point and to an extent you are correct. I just wanted to make sure you were for forced state killing. It seems like you are. That is the opposite of Liberty. It makes it hard to take someone seriously when they bring up the Liberty card when they are advocating the opposite side of that coin.

 

Yes, it is. What is your problem with that? We used to have a term for peaceniks. Cowards, or "being yellow".

Our entire history from the beginning is one of violence. You don't fight a 400 year long war of conquest against a brutal and warlike native people and come out of it a peaceful society.