The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: There Goes Obama, Palling Around with Terrorists Again!

  1. #11
    Senior Member BonMallari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    LV/CenTex/Idaho
    Posts
    12,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    If you say so. But what does that have to do with this thread topic? It's a simple premise, really...do you agree with Ron Paul in condemning the killing of the two terrorists? Yes? No?
    agree with Ron Paul...not this time...I am concerned about the legality but not the morality of the action taken...the next one will be that Adam Gadahn kid , there has gotta be crosshairs on him too
    All my Exes live in Texas

    Quote Originally Posted by lanse brown View Post
    A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BonMallari View Post
    ...I am concerned about the legality but not the morality of the action taken...
    That's the best way of saying it that I have seen.

  3. #13
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    If you say so. But what does that have to do with this thread topic? It's a simple premise, really...do you agree with Ron Paul in condemning the killing of the two terrorists? Yes? No?
    I would have to say no.

    It is the global war on terrorism.....and any and all means justify the ends.

    Que no Pogo?



    JD
    Last edited by JDogger; 10-01-2011 at 07:41 PM.
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  4. #14
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    If you say so. But what does that have to do with this thread topic? It's a simple premise, really...do you agree with Ron Paul in condemning the killing of the two terrorists? Yes? No?
    First, let get the facts straight. Ron Paul said that it was a "sad precedent" in disregarding The Constitution and killing an American citizen without due process.

    Second, because of our policy all we are doing is growing worldwide terrorism not ending it.

    Third, can't you guys beat Bama in the Swamp? 2nd quarter Bama 17 Florida 10. I'm a Gator fan for the next two hours!
    It's such a shame that in the USA, defending Liberty has become such a heroic deed.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post
    First, let get the facts straight. Ron Paul said that it was a "sad precedent" in disregarding The Constitution and killing an American citizen without due process.................
    I have what may be a dumb question. Was the man still considered to be a citizen of the USA ?

  6. #16
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charly_t View Post
    I have what may be a dumb question. Was the man still considered to be a citizen of the USA ?
    Yes, he was still a citizen. And, there are situations like in the case of war that citizens abetting the enemy can be killed without due process.

    However, my problem with the entire situation is that I agree with Ron Paul in that our Foreign Policy is not only growing terrorism but costing us in life and treasure.
    It's such a shame that in the USA, defending Liberty has become such a heroic deed.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post
    Yes, he was still a citizen. And, there are situations like in the case of war that citizens abetting the enemy can be killed without due process............
    Treason ?

    I agree to some degree with the second part of your post.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charly_t View Post
    Treason ?

    I agree to some degree with the second part of your post.
    I think the term used by the administration was Sedition.

    The first Sedition Act was passed by Congress in 1797 because of the X,Y, Z Affair.

    "
    At the same time, two opposing political parties were developing in the U.S. Tending to sympathize with France in foreign policy were the Thomas Jefferson-led Democratic-Republicans. Their loyalty was called into question by the Federalists, who dominated Congress during Adams's administration. It was a dangerous time both for the security of the young Republic and the freedoms its citizens enjoyed.

    "

    The Sedition Act of 1918 (Pub.L. 65-150, 40 Stat. 553, enacted May 16, 1918) was an Act of the United States Congress that extended the Espionage Act of 1917 to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light or interfered with the sale of government bonds. One historian of American civil liberties has called it "the nation's most extreme antispeech legislation."[1]
    It forbade the use of "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for 5 to 20 years.[2] The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times "when the United States is in war."[3] It was repealed on December 13, 1920.[4]
    Last edited by Franco; 10-02-2011 at 08:05 AM.
    It's such a shame that in the USA, defending Liberty has become such a heroic deed.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post
    I think the term used by the administration was Sedition.

    The first Sedition Act was passed by Congress in 1797 because of the X,Y, Z Affair.

    "
    At the same time, two opposing political parties were developing in the U.S. Tending to sympathize with France in foreign policy were the Thomas Jefferson-led Democratic-Republicans. Their loyalty was called into question by the Federalists, who dominated Congress during Adams's administration. It was a dangerous time both for the security of the young Republic and the freedoms its citizens enjoyed.

    "

    The Sedition Act of 1918 (Pub.L. 65-150, 40 Stat. 553, enacted May 16, 1918) was an Act of the United States Congress that extended the Espionage Act of 1917 to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light or interfered with the sale of government bonds. One historian of American civil liberties has called it "the nation's most extreme antispeech legislation."[1]
    It forbade the use of "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for 5 to 20 years.[2] The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times "when the United States is in war."[3] It was repealed on December 13, 1920.[4]
    Would you not say that Foreign Policy is always the couse of War. and would you not say that we are in effect in a current undeclared war?

  10. #20
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    Would you not say that Foreign Policy is always the couse of War. and would you not say that we are in effect in a current undeclared war?
    To your first question, yes. Big difference however in fighting a war such as WW2 where we were attacked by the Japs and Germany declared war on the USA to us being Interventionist. Our Interventionist Foreign Policy is why we were attacked on 9/11 and the threats continue today and made worse by our intervention in Iraq and A'stan. When no WMD's were found we should have gotten the hell out of Iraq and when we learned that OBL fled A'stan we should have left there too! For everyone of these thugs we kill, five more pop up. Our Foreign Policy has grown terrorism not curtailed it.

    To the second question, Congress did approve the actions.

    Taking care of ourself and America First is a concept long overdue!
    It's such a shame that in the USA, defending Liberty has become such a heroic deed.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •