web analytics

Mmmm…Awlaki on toast

Well, well, well…Mrs Hill wins the Dead Pool with Anwar al-Awlaki, and never have I been happier to trade a dick for a dick (not counting Round 12, the Osama bin Laden round). It’s unclear quite what happened, but it apparently involved somebody’s boots on the ground, not a drone or something.

Awlaki, remember, “…reportedly spoke with, trained, and preached to a number of al-Qaeda members and affiliates, including three of the 9/11 hijackers, alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan, and alleged “Christmas Day bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab; he was also reportedly involved in planning the latter’s attack.”

Killed in the same operation, Samir Khan. Also an American citizen, this little wiggler was believed to be the editor of Inspire magazine — an English-language e-pub that hoped to inspire Muslims living in the West to drive cars into crowds, build bombs in the kitchen and generally fuck the place up.

Jake Tapper over at ABC News is having a little crow about Obama’s jihadi body count. You know what? I’m totally fine with that.

Have a little strut, boys. Pat yourselves on the back. Take a victory lap. Have a cigar. Just keep killing those bad guys, ‘K?

Funny thing is, Obama *is* better-suited to this sort of action than Bush. Because — holy shit! — can you imagine the soul-searching article some hack at the New York Times would be banging out at this very moment if George Bush had, you know, assassinated American citizens on foreign soil?

Will you join me in a little exercise? Here’s a map of the Ma’rib Governorate in Yemen, where this operation took place. Have a look. Zoom in. Zoom out. Pan around.

That, my friends, is a shithole.

Ahhhhhh…delightful.

New Dead Pool starts next Friday, 6pm sharp Weasel Blog Time (which happens to coincide with GMT).

Comments


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: September 30, 2011, 10:46 pm

I would merely note that this has a lot in common with the US government’s actions at Ruby Ridge, Waco, and others. Extrajudicial execution. For speech. Yes, the speech was hateful. But who needs the Constitution, or Rule of Law, anyway? After all, we DO have the Thugs with Guns. And Nothing Else Matters…


Comment from USCitizen
Time: September 30, 2011, 11:08 pm

Good choice, Mrs Hill! Good riddance, Al-a whackee.


Comment from Frit
Time: September 30, 2011, 11:25 pm

Reminds me of a lovely quote from the book “Jingo” by Terry Pratchett. Scene set: Mob of people wanting to take the law into their own hands, local cops arrive, and one of them gets his crossbow ready. [If you're interested, the quote is on page 129 of the paperback version.]
Vimes (The police chief): “Were you proposing to shoot these people in cold blood, sergeant?”
Sgt. Detritus: “Nossir. Just a warning shot inna head, sir.”
:lol:


Comment from Crabby Old Bat
Time: September 30, 2011, 11:27 pm

Oh good, another opportunity to treat the remains of Jihadis with respect and sensitivity (kinetic respect). The more such opportunities, the better. We grow in tolerance and understanding, and the sh!tholes of the earth are relieved of their, well, sh!t. Win-win!


Comment from Oldcat
Time: October 1, 2011, 12:49 am

Mark –

Not at all.

You make war on the USA, you take your chances. End of Story.


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: October 1, 2011, 1:03 am

I would note, Oldcat, that many of the Muslim in Chief’s Prime Mentors not only encouraged their followers to bomb and kill, but actually bombed and killed themselves. Yet they ALL seem to be amazingly alive and healthy and free, and FEW even spent ANY time in jail for doing so. While al-Awlaki, who was NEVER accused of bombing or killing anyone himself, is quite dead. But then I guess a lot depends on whose dick one is sucking, doesn’t it?

Constitution? We don’t NEED no steenkin’ Constitution.


Comment from David Gillies
Time: October 1, 2011, 1:48 am

I’d cheerfully have seen Richard Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn swing, but there’s no constitutional hurdle to be overcome in waxing al-Awlaki. His status as a US citizen does not privilege him as compared to some random Taliban in Waziristan. He set himself beyond the pale, and paid the price. I like to think that he knew this moment was coming, and spent the last few months of his life in constant, bowel-knotting terror. And I hope all his 72 virgins look like a cross between Rosie O’Donnell, Helen Thomas and Paul Reubens.


Comment from Mrs. Hill
Time: October 1, 2011, 2:26 am

Thank you, JSOC! And thank you, Stoaty!

Thanks to the awesomeness of JSOC, the lawyers now have eternity to argue the case. As far as I’m concerned, Awlaki gave up his citizenship along with his humanity long ago. He was evil. Now he’s gone. Good riddance and pass the dick — too bad we can’t ship a whole cargo container of it to the Good Guys in Yemen!

I can wait for the confirmed kill if you like, Stoaty — don’t want to celebrate prematurely. Well, not any more than we’ve been already. ;)


Comment from Pablo
Time: October 1, 2011, 3:19 am

If al-Awlaki was plying his trade in Colorado, he’d find himself locked up. But, he packed it off to Yemen. We gots no cops in Yemen. We don’t have any courts there either.

If you don’t want to get blown up, don’t declare war on the USA.


Comment from TimB52
Time: October 1, 2011, 4:39 am

What?! No Google street view?

They really need to start stepping it up. Geesh…


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 1, 2011, 6:01 am

Don’t declare war on the USA?
Now lets see … there is no evidence that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 – a fact publically stated by your very own FBI in 2006.
The only reason you bombed the Taliban was that they asked for proof of Osamas involvement – which you didn’t have – and they were asking too much for the Caspian pipeline deal.

The cold hard facts ar that the supposed hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Egypt. Nine of those hijackers are still alive …

The cold hard facts are that members of your own government were intricately involved in the execution of 9/11.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 10:12 am

Thank you, Oceania. You can sit down now.

If they haven’t gone back on it by next Friday, Mrs Hill, I think we can take it as confirmed this time. I believe last time was a drone strike. This time, they’re being cagey about the whole business, so it was probably some kind of raid.

Personally, I’m just not getting the moral dilemma here. Speaking as an American living abroad, I don’t expect my citizenship to give me that much protection.

It’s like that whole “domestic wiretap” kerfuffle — you know, “domestic” in the sense one end was domestic and the other was international. All those years Uncle B and I were courtin’, we pretty much assumed our phone traffic was being tapped. Or potentially tapped. If either of us said “nuke” or “Osama bin Laden” the other would say, “oh, NOW you’ve got the tapes rolling!”


Comment from Anonymous
Time: October 1, 2011, 12:13 pm

sic semper proditor


Comment from thefritz
Time: October 1, 2011, 12:36 pm

Hey, who let Oceanis and Mark Matis in? The Weasel Times was my troll free pleasure. Now I got to rosin up the cross bow….


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: October 1, 2011, 12:54 pm

Maybe the US government could at least have CHARGED him with a crime? Or is that simply too much to bother with? The stench is overwhelming.

And yes, al-Awlaki was a sorry sack of shit, along with the rest of his brothers and sisters in the “Religion of Peace”. But as I said before, when “justice” depends on whose dick one happens to be sucking, there is no Rule of Law. Ayers and Dohrn should be charged with murder. Neither FedGov nor FedPig seemed to have any concerns about statutes of limitations when they went after those who they claimed killed blacks during the 60s.


Comment from Feynmangroupie
Time: October 1, 2011, 3:35 pm

There is some really fascinating discussion about the constitutionality of using drones going on over at http://volokh.com/2011/09/30/anwar-al-aulaqi-apparently-killed-by-drone-in-yemen/

There are many more articles on the subject, since it is of particular interest to them. Just Sayin’.

Being the Anarcho-Capitalist that I am, I am truly happy that he is dead, and congratulate Mrs.Hill on her impressive
deadpool wrangling.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 4:02 pm

You don’t have the protection of US law when you aren’t on US soil. It’s unclear at this point (well, it was last I checked) who took them out and could indeed have been the Yemenis. At any rate, Yemeni law applies.

We have a much clearer legal basis for Awlaki than taking out Osama, which we did without permission of the country he was in.

No doubt, this is why Bush (and subsequently Obama) have used the language of war rather than the language of the criminal justice system to describe what we’re up against. In war, it is perfectly legal to shoot a spy on the spot.

What you do when all the enemy combatants are spies — that is, don’t wear a uniform or organize themselves in a rank structure as we understand it — I guess we’re learning that as we go along. But I’m comfortable with the way we’re handling it so far.


Comment from Sven in Colorado
Time: October 1, 2011, 4:17 pm

The man was an ex-patriot American citizen who openly and vehemently advocated the overthrow of the U.S. government and the installation of a Muslin theocratic dictatorship.

That makes him a traitor to his country. In a time of war, declared or no, his traitorous acts and connections with atrocities, the Ft. Hood shootings being the latest, made him a target for our armed forces.

Mark, you comparison with Waco and Ruby Ridge is flawed. This man was NOT on U.S. soil. He was openly advocating the overthrow of the U.S. and he was being funded by foreign governments who are working towards the same end, the destruction of all Western cultures.

Folks, we along with anyone who is not a Muslim, are in an undeclared war with a growing group of entities who are bent on putting the whole world under Shariah law and killing any and all who will not bend to that willful law!

Get a frikken clue…before the Jihad cluebat gets upside yo haid!!!!


Comment from Mrs. Hill
Time: October 1, 2011, 4:35 pm

Thanks for the congrats, but all I did was have a little faith in our guys. I threw Awlaki in the pool back in May, before the near miss — so less wrangly, more stalky?

Oh, but speaking of Stalky…
Ti-ra-la-la-i-tu!

:) <– the grin I've been wearing ever since I heard the news yesterday. I hope my third grade teacher was wrong, and my face won't actually stick this way — I'm losing Grumpy Old Lady cred by the minute!


Comment from beasn
Time: October 1, 2011, 4:50 pm

Mark, you are correct that the stench is overwhelming but just because some commie filth have been allowed to continue to poison the minds around them – due to rich daddies having ‘connections’ – doesn’t mean this turd should be allowed the same privilege.

Oceania, I thought your attitude would be different when it came to smoking ‘those’ kinds of people. *does that Demi Moore facebook eyes closed thing ‘we see right through you*


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 5:20 pm

Wisdom from my spam bucket:

I have a comment right here although not about this post, it really is regarding the website layout. I believe you should alter every now and then to generate it intersting to folks.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 5:21 pm

More wisdom from the spam bucket:

brinkka2011 says: My daughter willnot like to see this here.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 5:22 pm

Why thank you, penis enlargement pill salesman!

liking your things relating to it S


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 5:23 pm

And my favorite for today:

Wonderful line up. We are going to be linking to this wonderful write-up on our web site. Sustain the great creating.

Sustain the great creating! It’s got a real “all your base” ring to it, doesn’t it?


Comment from Osama Bean Latte
Time: October 1, 2011, 6:11 pm

“I would merely note that this has a lot in common with the US government’s actions at Ruby Ridge, Waco, and others…”

Pure bullshit. To take Waco as an example, many people, including children, US citizens all, were killed by US (ATF) agents. Several agents were shot after the assault on the compound began, also. Did David Koresh advocate terrorist activities against any US targets? No. Nor did he or his followers actually use firearms until the compound was raided. Koresh was a nutcase, but his crimes were possession of banned firearms, probable child abuse, and maybe even murder. He could have been arrested outside the compound at many opportunities. This was a botched government operation that was also completely unnecessary, but it hardly equates to action against terrorists, whether US citizens or not.

On the other hand, you must also have complained about taking Bin Ladin out too, since by your logic all he was guilty of was ‘free speech’, since he did not actually take part in 9/11 by flying airplanes. Advocating 9/11, planning 9/11 and training persons for the execution of 9/11 – hey those are just talk – what is the big deal?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 6:47 pm

It was a drone, after all:

After several days of surveillance of Mr. Awlaki, armed drones operated by the Central Intelligence Agency took off from a new, secret American base in the Arabian Peninsula, crossed into northern Yemen and unleashed a barrage of Hellfire missiles at a car carrying him and other top operatives from Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, including another American militant who had run the group’s English-language Internet magazine.

They think the guy who designed the panty bomb might have been in the car, too. What a loss to the world, that genius.

From the article, the Yemenis have been trying to get this guy for quite some time.


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: October 1, 2011, 6:55 pm

Bin Laden was NOT a US citizen, and as a result not subject to the Constitutional guarantees of due process. al-Awlaki WAS a US citizen, and had NEVER renounced that citizenship to attend school in Indonesia. Roman Polanski is also a US citizen, but FedGov and FedPig did NOT choose to go after him themselves, and seem quite satisfied to let the rapist remain free.

Not even taking the time to swear out a warrant for a US citizen tells me all I need to know about US “Law Enforcement”.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 7:08 pm

The Constitution also guarantees me the right to bear arms. So why don’t I have an arsenal? Oh, yeah…because I’m not in the United States.

Anybody out there better versed in history than I am? I’m as sure as can be there must’ve been people who went over to the other side in the major wars of the 20th C, and I’m guessing ‘due process’ was pretty accelerated in those cases, too.


Comment from Argentium G. Tiger
Time: October 1, 2011, 7:22 pm

This one just disqualified himself from the next Dead Pool, and good riddance to bad rubbish:

‘Thank God he’s gone’: Clifford Olson, serial killer, dead at 71


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 7:39 pm

Very bad rubbish indeed.


Comment from David Gillies
Time: October 1, 2011, 7:42 pm

Stoaty: Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) springs to mind. The Brits stretched him with alacrity, even though he was born in the US. He obtained his British citizenship fraudulently.


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: October 1, 2011, 7:53 pm

Well SWeas, if you try to bear arms over in East Pondia, is the US gonna come after you? Or is The Boy going to do that instead? Because the Constitution merely places limits on the US government, not on that of any OTHER nation where you may be located at a given time. If Yemen did take out al-Awlaki, then it is NOT a US Constitutional problem. However, that does not appear to be the case. Drudge states Predator, and he is by far the most reliable news source I have seen over the last 10 years. And yeah, he links, but his links are reliable.

Again, al-Awlaki was a POS who deserved what he got, but for the US government to REFUSE to even APPEAR to follow the Constitutional requirement of due process under the 5th Amendment tells me all that I need to know about the US government and its “Law Enforcement” officers. That amendment, along with ALL THE OTHERS in the Bill of Rights, were SPECIFICALLY created to protect those who oppose the government. Or are you of the opinion that the 2nd amendment was put in to protect one’s right to hunt rabbits?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 8:14 pm

I don’t think anything in the Constitution was intended to protect those who oppose government so hard they join the enemy’s side in a shooting war.


Comment from beasn
Time: October 1, 2011, 8:19 pm

‘Law enforcement’ officers get their instructions from whom?
And Osama and friends, US born or not, did more than just oppose the government.
Isn’t Michael Moore out there bitching that poor Osama, ‘with legitimate gripes’, should have been ‘tried’?
Spare me the vapors.

Let’s talk about the stench of the gubmint targeting private citizens who have done nothing other than not contribute to them…….i.e. Gibson Guitars. This sort of thing is way worse than giving terrorists dirt naps.


Comment from Mark Matis
Time: October 1, 2011, 9:30 pm

Well, SWeas, what do YOU think the Bill of Rights was intended to protect? Again, al-Awlaki was NEVER accused by the US of attempting to bomb or shoot ANYBODY. He was accused of asking OTHERS to do so. And WHY, over the course of 10 years, did the US government NOT CHOOSE to ever issue a warrant for his arrest? Could that be because no court would agree to do so?


Comment from Mrs. Hill
Time: October 1, 2011, 10:07 pm

Awlaki was unquestionably a leader of AQAP.

International law regarding members of terrorist organizations [from the Claremont Institute, here]:

“Individuals who join such an unlawful force, therefore, are not entitled to prisoner of war status even if individually they did not violate the laws of war. Rather, they are to be treated as unlawful combatants, essentially members of an international criminal conspiracy of terrorists, and can be prosecuted as such before a military tribunal. Indeed, the old rule in international law, which has not been fully abrogated, was that such individuals could even be subjected to summary execution. A 1977 Protocol to the Geneva Convention provides that unlawful combatants be afforded certain procedural rights that were not previously required by international law, but the United States is not a signatory to that Protocol.”

Summary execution. Done.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 1, 2011, 10:16 pm

I think we’re probably talking past each other at this point, Mark. I don’t believe the constitution protects citizens who defect to the other side in time of war. But there’s argument all over the web about the legalities of the Awlaki slaying at the moment.

All’s I know is, for once I’m glad Obama is in the Oval Office.


Comment from Joan of Argghh!
Time: October 1, 2011, 11:40 pm

Unlawful combatant. Unaligned with a nation (except the Nation of Islam.) Waging war under no flag or certain insignia. In plain terms: target practice.

Had we captured him he would be subjected to military and/or criminal prosecution of the capturing State. And would then be executed. Either way, an unlawful combatant is not covered by Geneva Convention rules. Play fast and loose with the clear concept of war and you takes your chances.


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 2, 2011, 1:43 am

What is good for the goose – is good for the gander.

Should I pop down to the local pub and find an American to execute for the unlawful killings of children in Iraq? Or perhaps for that poor farmer who was killed and touted as Osama bin Laden?

Osama died long time ago. He was on dialysis.
Think about it? Cancer patients out-live dialysis patients.

In the process of the USA chasing ‘terrorist ghosts’ – the same terrorists it is now funding in Libya … the USA has destroyed itself.

So what was it all about again? oh yes, US bases on Holy Muslim lands … which you can no longer afford to maintain.

Looks like you lost another war … but in this case – we told you so!


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 2, 2011, 6:49 am

So someone tell me that this guy was a US citizen?

And someone in the WhiteHouse had to sign off the State sponsored killing of a US citizen in the first place?

Was there no trial?
Who provided the Evidence?
Did he have the right to face his accusers?
And who passed this one off?

Obama?


Comment from MIke C.
Time: October 2, 2011, 7:26 am

Some folks on here seem to be confused over the difference between US law enforcement procedures and military actions. You’re several centuries behind the curve on this discussion, guys. Even in strictly military actions, this is an old argument, going back at least to the dawn of riflemen in the 1700s, when trained individuals with accurate weapons actually shot at (and killed) individuals rather than standing in a mass and just unleashing a cloud of lead in the general direction of an opposing mass of soldiery. Nowadays, military actions can be much more focused, so the highest value targets are naturally selected, rather than just leveling entire cities, which the US military is perfectly capable of doing. The fact that Awlaki was technically a US citizen has absolutley nothing to do with him being a target in a military operation, nor should it. Lincoln did not send hordes of law enforcement offices into the South to serve hundreds of thousands of arrest warrents on people he believed to be US citizens, like it or not, now did he?

If you’re going to indignently argue these sorts of matters, why not just get back to the basics and stick to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? It has at least as much validity in the real world.


Comment from MIke C.
Time: October 2, 2011, 7:27 am

BTW, SWeasel, are you certain that image isn’t Jerry Garcia on toast?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 2, 2011, 8:42 am

Awlaki’s mug shot. He was picked up twice for soliciting prostitutes.

What IS it with these guys?

Still, ’twas his ex that got him.


Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: October 2, 2011, 6:02 pm

Comment from Oceania
Time: October 2, 2011, 1:43 am

What is good for the goose – is good for the gander.

Should I pop down to the local pub and find an American to execute for the unlawful killings of children in Iraq?

Of course. Just make sure they’re actually Americans, and not a government plant. I’ll enjoy reading about your trial. I’ll bet they even have high-speed internet access in your local pokey, so we won’t have to miss any of your scintillating conversation. :)


Comment from steve
Time: October 2, 2011, 9:30 pm

I blame George Bush!

10 years ago I was pining away, hoping that the US would declare war on al Qaeda and whatever other of these militant groups could be reasonably associated with 9-11.

If Bush had approached the Senate….he would have had his declaration of War.

The problem of Gitmo would have simply gone away….Put a POW camp up in the Pribilof Islands somewhere (for the climate), and hold them for the duration of the war….

And as for “enemy combatants” like Awlaki…let the fine pink mist fall where it may. “Command and control” assets are legitimate targets of war.

The fact that we neglected to declare war has left us in this “legal” limbo….


Comment from steve
Time: October 2, 2011, 9:45 pm

I don’t think anything in the Constitution was intended to protect those who oppose government so hard they join the enemy’s side in a shooting war.

That sounds very 1863-ish.


Comment from steve
Time: October 2, 2011, 9:52 pm

Well, SWeas, what do YOU think the Bill of Rights was intended to protect? Again, al-Awlaki was NEVER accused by the US of attempting to bomb or shoot ANYBODY. He was accused of asking OTHERS to do so. And WHY, over the course of 10 years, did the US government NOT CHOOSE to ever issue a warrant for his arrest? Could that be because no court would agree to do so?

Conspiracy to commit murder makes you equally guilty as those who pulled the trigger. Current law in may states holds that any death that comes as a result of the commission of a felony can result in a charge of murder.

I think the big issue here is why you would strain so hard to offer forgiveness to him, when you would have to reach less far to find appropriate justification for his snuffing.

And I would offer this….No secret was made of the fact that this guy was on our “capture or kill” list. Were he troubled at all about this he might have “turned himself in”?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 2, 2011, 10:13 pm

More wisdom from the spam bucket:

because i’m scared to death. something popped up saying warning. and stuff about viruses and malware. and i dont know wat t odo cuz norton 360 expired a long time ago. and this is my aunt’s computer. so i’m just scared of getting in trouble for this cuz i have been looking up porn.

This one was promoting UK sites that teach you how to unlock your phone.


Comment from Nina
Time: October 2, 2011, 11:12 pm

Stoaty, you get some strange spam.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 2, 2011, 11:32 pm

Comment spam is the best. Mostly, they try to hump your leg and hope you’ll let them stay. Like telling you how awesome your -=penis enlargement=- blog is.


Comment from Can’t hark my cry
Time: October 3, 2011, 12:38 am

Hunh. Sort of a training ground for those who want to grow up and write for confessional magazines. >>wonders how confessional magazines are doing in today’s market. . .<<

Too bad there's no way you can forward them to somebody's inbox. Not that I would have a preferred candidate for such treatment, or anything like that. Nope, not me.


Comment from Oh Hell
Time: October 3, 2011, 2:13 pm

Treason = traitor = dead tango. Congrats on your dick, Mrs. Hill.


Comment from David Gillies
Time: October 3, 2011, 3:34 pm

If I were in possession of a membrum virile beyond the normal parameters (e.g. approximate shape, size, colour – fire engine red, including warning labels, handle, arming pin – of a fire extinguisher, and possibly filled with C4, etc.) what should I do? I ask on behalf of Oceania. I favour controlled explosion in situ. That big a dick could take out half a block if you don’t do things smart.


Comment from Goober
Time: October 3, 2011, 5:59 pm

Holy crap, people, this guy was an american citizen who was just executed for crimes he’d never stood trial for! I don’t care how nasty the bastard was, if he’d committed crimes against America, then he has to HAS TO HAS TO have a trial before we just off him. F**k, I can’t believe that so many of you would willingly cede non-judicial executorial priviledges of AMERICAN CITIZENS to our government and not even consider the ramifications!

Ruby Ridge?


Comment from Goober
Time: October 3, 2011, 6:05 pm

Oh, and nobody is trying to “frogive” him or say that he wasn’t guilty. I am just not all that excited about a government that says “well, he’s guilty!” without a trial of any sort, and then bombs the crap out of their own citizens. I’m also not particulary worried about whether he was on US soil or not – a US citizen is a US citizen, wherever on Earth he stands, and agents of the US government do not have the power to summarily execute US citizens without a trial, conviction, and sentencing first. This is wrong, people. Absolutley positively wrong. You don’t want your government thinking it can do these things.


Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: October 3, 2011, 7:17 pm

Goober: he was an enemy propagandist operating on foreign soil in a theatre of war. The accident of his place of birth has precisely zero effect on whether he was a valid or legal target.

He was not executed. He was killed during a completely legal combat operation against an enemy of the United States.

Let me put it yet another way: his death was no more immoral than that of any other combatant.

Then again, you probably think that WWII was an immoral war of aggression by the United States for racist conquest or something, right?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 3, 2011, 8:08 pm

Repeat: enemy propagandist operating on foreign soil in a theatre of war.

Ruby Ridge was American citizens on American soil in their own homes doing…well, we’re not sure. Possibly nothing illegal.

I can’t even begin to draw a line between the two.


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 3, 2011, 8:57 pm

So what happened to two Democratically Elected New Zealand Prime Ministers who were murdered by the US government?

I bet you can’t draw a line between those two either?
Were they enemies of the USA?
Did they get a trial?

Do you go around killing your Allies?


Comment from MIke C.
Time: October 3, 2011, 9:52 pm

Goober,

No, he wasn’t. He was an enemy soldier (self-declared, repeatedly) killed in war.

Do you have some sort of reading comprehension problem?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 3, 2011, 10:41 pm

Yes, Oceania. We felt threatened by the growing power and influence of New Zealand and felt we had to send a message. The bodies are just collateral damage.


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 4, 2011, 3:17 am

I wouldn’t joke about that Sweasel – epsecially when you don’t know about it, and you don’t know how pissed off people are about it.

They were both killed for their anti-nuclear stance. Apparently you Yanks feel threatened by democracy.


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 4, 2011, 4:01 am

I remember reading a case report that my grandfather published in his duties in WW2 in the Pacific on a sub-chaser. Louis Mountbatten later received a copy. It hasn’t been released yet – but I will disclose some contents here.

An American cruiser was alone without escort, and ended up getting grounded on a reef. She could not be floated off, and no tender could arrive in time. As she was in an area that she was not meant to be in – she was in trouble.

An American squadron of bombers turned up and saw her stuck, and immediately started attack runs upon the grounded ship – as no US ship was meant to be in the area. The captain ran out US flags on the deck, but the pilots never recognised their target even then. As bombs started exploding, inside the ship, the Captain ordered his gunners to open fire.
A Q vessel visited the bombed out remains after the event and documented it. The Americans were having their own little war all by themselves in the Pacific – killing large numbers of their own.

Everywhere you go – Americans are a complete disaster.
That’s why I respect, and support those that you kill. After all, they are fighting against all odds deperately because they have nothing else to lose, and their cause is just.

You don’t even know why you are fighting, and can’t understand why you are losing.
Osama bin laden was right.


Comment from Argentium G. Tiger
Time: October 5, 2011, 4:11 am

Oceania asks, “So what happened to two Democratically Elected New Zealand Prime Ministers who were murdered by the US government?”

And the names of those two former Prime Ministers of NZ would be, what exactly?


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 5, 2011, 9:34 am

Careful, Argentium. If you get any on you, it won’t come out in the wash. You can try soaking it out and scrubbing it out…


Comment from Oceania
Time: October 6, 2011, 3:32 am

My first contender is the RH David Lange, poisoned with an amyloid which caused kidney failure.


Comment from Argentium G. Tiger
Time: October 6, 2011, 11:22 am

Lange had diabetes, and before his death, his right leg had to be amputated below the knee. (Having seen some pour souls go through the last stages of diabetes, that’s not an uncommon complication.)

I’m sure the amyloidosis complicated things, but it very much looks like the man’s diabetes was what took him.

And your 2nd candidate?

Write a comment

(as if I cared)

(yeah. I'm going to write)

(oooo! you have a website?)


Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.


<< carry me back to ol' virginny