Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

2 Bumps

Do you believe AG Holder when he promises he nor the Obama Admin will use drones to attack US citizens on US soil??

I personally do not. I think there will be a real good excuse some day why a US citizen was targeted and killed on our soil... He has already lied previously by saying in his State of the Union address that he has been transparent with Congress about his administration’s policy. Well we all know different now don't we? It took a filibuster to finally get AG Holder to say anything at all!! There is an article I read in the PolitiFact that claims there has been 15 instances from the past two years in which lawmakers have sought information from the administration about its policy on targeted killing. So I ask myself why in the hell can't the Obama Admin keep Congress and such in the loop? IMO, I think the Obama Admin knew law makes wouldn't agree to any of this. Maybe cause they care about the Constitution? Care about US citizen's right to due process??

I am all for killing off "home grown" terrorists. But they still have a right to Due Process. They can't be targeting citizens and killing them by remote control fucking airplanes!!!! Even if the suspected terrorist is on American soil, using a drone should be prohibited. Its why we have agencies such as the FBI, CIA, ATF, National Guard, and so on. Send them in and pick up the terrorist and deal with him/her. Non US citizens DO NOT deserve Constitutional Rights as afforded to a US citizen. They should be dealt with swiftly and aggressively and sent to Gitmo Bay. And not so the can play soccer or basketball. To a cell by themselves, no talking or any contact with any other prisoner or anyone else for that matter.

So............ thoughts???

Answer Question
 
Michigan-Mom74

Asked by Michigan-Mom74 at 7:31 PM on Mar. 7, 2013 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (66,351 Credits)
Answers (20)
  • I believe that perhaps both of them mean what they say, but the very existence of drones makes it impossible for anyone to promise that they'll never be used in any certain way, against any certain people. Those who want to badly enough will find justification, or at least the means, to do anything they set their minds to.
    Ballad

    Answer by Ballad at 7:40 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • He did not promise. He said neither he nor the President of the USA have the legal right to use drones, unless the person is involved in an act of terrorism against the USA.
    booklover545

    Answer by booklover545 at 7:41 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • He threw every other constitutional right out the window, why the hell wouldn't he be lying about this?
    uwmilf

    Answer by uwmilf at 7:49 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • ^^What constitutional right is now gone because of Obama?
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 7:55 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • I thought he shut down Guantanomo. And anonymous, he pretty much screwed us on the 2nd Amendment. He should focus on CRIME CONTROL not GUN CONTROL. And focus on the people who are mentally disturbed who could potentially harm people, not the law abiding citizen who actually took legal steps to owning a gun.
    uwmilf

    Answer by uwmilf at 8:11 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • "^^What constitutional right is now gone because of Obama?"Anonymous
    The right of Due Process which is the legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law.
    Michigan-Mom74

    Comment by Michigan-Mom74 (original poster) at 8:14 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • "He said neither he nor the President of the USA have the legal right to use drones, unless the person is involved in an act of terrorism against the USA..."Booklover
    There was a recent publication of a DOJ white paper or memo that reveals that the senior administration officials, not just the president himself, can authorize a drone strike targeting a terrorist suspect, even when there is no evidence that they are actively plotting attacks against the US. Then it was found out that the Obama admin authorized the assassination of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old U.S. citizen was killed by the U.S. in a country with which the US was not at war with. Although others think he was in the wrong time and place and the target was his father who allegedly worked as a propagandist for al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula
    But nothing was ever proven.

    Michigan-Mom74

    Comment by Michigan-Mom74 (original poster) at 8:25 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • It seems unthinkable. But what are we to think when he was questioned just the other day about this and he couldn't just say, "No, that would be unconstitutional." I thought, well, maybe he is just being a nerd and trying to think of any possible scenario, like he's over-thinking it. Then, I thought, after this many times he should give a straight answer. If you feel a certain way about something and its the truth, you usually respond quickly and coherently. When someone lies, they usually skate around the truth, dragging out their explanations. I think the sooner this administration is gone, the better!

    Did you hear that OBL's son in law has been captured here in the US? What'd they do? They marandized him! They'll probably want to give him a trial, Hell, maybe even food stamps, instead of throwing his butt in Gitmo where he belongs. It almost seems that terrorists are treated better than citizens.
    HHx5

    Answer by HHx5 at 8:44 PM on Mar. 7, 2013


  • ":I thought he shut down Guantanomo..."uwmilf


    Nope, its still open.  But the administration still blames Congress for making it harder to close Gitmo, yet for a second year, Obama still has signed National Defense Authorization Act of 2013, but with conditions. 


     


    You can read more here...http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/us/politics/obama-signs-defense-bill-with-conditions.html


    Michigan-Mom74

    Comment by Michigan-Mom74 (original poster) at 8:44 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

  • "Did you hear that OBL's son in law has been captured here in the US? What'd they do? They marandized him! "
    Really? OMG WTF is wrong here?!?! They actually mirandized him?? Where did you see this at??
    Michigan-Mom74

    Comment by Michigan-Mom74 (original poster) at 8:47 PM on Mar. 7, 2013

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.