ACLU files suit against Obama, Petraeus on behalf of dead Al Qaeda terrorists

Raise your hand if you think I am exaggerating with that title....ok, you can put them down now.
Civil rights groups have filed a lawsuit challenging the drone strike killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen.
The Center for Constitutional Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit in federal court in Washington on Wednesday on behalf of relatives of the victims. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, CIA Director David Petraeus and other high officials are named as defendants.
And just who are these poor victims? Let's look at some quick bios:
Anwar al-Aulaqi: "senior talent recruiter and motivator who was involved with planning operations for the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda." Email pals with Major Nidal Hassan before he shot up Ft Hood. Was allegedly the guy behind the Christmas Underwear Bomber fiasco.
Samir Khan: Pakistani American editor and publisher of Inspire magazine, an English-language online magazine reported to be published by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Samir here used to live in his mom's basement in North Carolina and has been stirring up trouble for years, and my friends at "My Pet Jawa" have been tracking him the whole time.
Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi: Son of Anwar, he was killed after the other two in a targetted strike that is claimed to have killed other AQ operatives.
ACLU for their part put up pictures of a young Abdulrahman and had this to say:
In Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta (Al-Awlaki v. Panetta) the groups charge that the U.S. government’s killings of U.S. citizens Anwar Al-Aulaqi, Samir Khan, and 16-year-old Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi in Yemen last year violated the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee against the deprivation of life without due process of law.
The killings were part of a broader program of “targeted killing” by the United States outside the context of armed conflict and based on vague legal standards, a closed executive process, and evidence never presented to the courts.
Since 2002, and routinely since 2009, the U.S. government has carried out deliberate and premeditated killings of suspected terrorists overseas. In some cases, including that of Anwar Al-Aulaqi, the targets were placed on “kill lists” maintained by the CIA and the Pentagon. According to news accounts, the targeted killing program has expanded to include “signature strikes” in which the government does not know the identity of individuals, but targets them based on “patterns” of behavior that have never been made public. The New York Times recently reported that the government counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.
Now, the last time I wrote about this subject it got 355 comments. As I noted at the time I wrote that post, the whole situation made me uncomfortable, and I wasn't sure what to think.
If anyone is reading an inherent bias on my part in the preceding, I'd love to know what that bias is, because I honestly have no clue how I feel about this whole thing. I feel uncomfortable with secret bodies not authorized by legislation authorizing things like killings. On the other hand, Awlaki needed to be ventilated and good riddance to bad rubbish. But, we should always think worst case scenario with these sorts of things. Can you envision a scenario where a US Citizen is killed abroad with a drone attack, and he didn't have what was coming to him? Probably we all can. So, what safeguard is there? That's where I get somewhat lost.
I still feel that way. I'm not crying into my pillow at night that these horrible folks got vaporized, not even a little. But I still don't know what the legal mechanism for this is. I had rather hoped at the time that there would be some statement made about how these trials took place in a FISA Court, but I still haven't heard that being the case.
You can see the picture above, that was the last article written for the Al Qaeda magazine by Samir. That's apparently not the Samir that the ACLU and his parents want to remember. From the court filing:
28. Plaintiff Sarah Khan is a U.S. citizen who has lived in the United States since 1992 with her husband and children. Her son, Samir, was born in 1985 and became a U.S. citizen in 1998.
29. Samir Khan attended elementary school in Queens, New York, and high school on Long Island, New York. After graduating from high school in 2003, he moved to North Carolina, where he attended a community college and worked part-time. He left for Yemen in October 2009.
30. Anonymous government officials have told reporters that Samir Khan was a propagandist” for AQAP. The government never publicly indicted him for any crime.
"Anonymous"? That's his magazine up there. If an "Anonymous" government official said that the bright ball in the sky is the sun, it doesn't make it not so. Just head over to My Pet Jawa and hunt through their records for "InshallahShaheed" which was Samir's online name.
This part of the lawsuit apparently had the opposite effect as it was intended, at least for me:
Senior government officials, including Defendant Panetta and President Barack Obama, have acknowledged the responsibility of the United States for killing Anwar Al-Aulaqi. On the same day the strike was carried out, DOD published a news article stating that “[a] U.S. airstrike . . . killed . . . Anwar [Al-Aulaqi] early this morning” and that he had been “high on the military-intelligence list of terrorist targets.”
Yeah, well good for them. I feel a little better everytime I read it, because it means there are fewer folks out there trying to hurt my family, including my brothers and sisters that are still deployed to Afghanistan.
So, I still remain concerned about the way the law of this works, but I'm not losing sweat over these guys here. What say you?
* To comment without a Facebook account, please scroll to the bottom.








Comments
Anonymous (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 8:48pm
Permalink
Perhaps in a US drone or
Perhaps in a US drone or strike team takes out one of these jihadists, we should look at it from their point of view. That is to say "Inshallah". Who are the ACLU to question the will of Allah?
john seamon (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 8:58pm
Permalink
aclu
Step on is to calm down. 2nd, think. It is scary that anonymous CIA types can decide who dies without some form of due process. Yet it seems clear that we are targeting terrorists and murderers.And they are hiding from prosecution. So this is our dilemma. How to eliminate a serious threat withoutsacrificing our core values. That is the very reason for this suit. To raise or maintain our awareness of this issue and these deadly acts before they become routine and acceptable because then it becomes way too easy to expand them to others who are perhaps less deserving.Constitutional protections apply to all, not just those we like or are popular. It is the fact that they protect the less popular, unsavory and despicable which makes them precious. A lawsuit is the best mechanism to resolve the conflict between competing core values{nat'l security and due process}. A courtroom is the only place to resolve such a conflict in a civilized society.There are countless places where questions of who lives, who dies and who decides are settled without a courtroom. Places like Irag, Afghanistan where angry, passionate people use guns, bombs and violence . In that process innocent children die. So does justice, liberty and civilization. We are supposed to be a land governed by laws rather than men. Think how important that is. Whether one distrusts, dislikes or even despises the men of the right or the left, the Obamas or the Cheneys the issue is the dsame...why trust those men with life and death if one does not trust their judgement with anything else? The likely outcome of this lawsuit is the identification of flaws in the process of making such decisions, or flaws in implementing them, or perhaps even flaws in the granting, delegation or even assumption of the authority to perform such acts. A system of laws which eliminates such flaws guarantees we remain a country governed by laws which guide, enlighten and limit the power of the men we charge with safeguarding all of our constitutional protections, regardless of left or right orientation.And if you think about it, that is even more important when we are governed by those whose judgement we do not trust. In order for our system to work as intended, it must protect everyone..even those who do not respect or value it. Because when that happens, we can be certain it will protect those of us who do. So relax Americans. All is well . Thisis the essence of America. This is the greatest system at work.
Captain Todd (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 9:03pm
Permalink
ACLU
Wow, and to think I gave up telling lawyer jokes to be P.C. Be carefull with your 'charitable' giving folks. There is a war going on, don't ya know?
Raymond S Parker Sr (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 9:17pm
Permalink
ACLU
As far back as I can remember, there has been very little that the ACLU has done to justify their existance. In fact, the more I hear about them, the more I feel that this organization is subvertive of the American way of life and wants to subjugate the American People to any and all terrorist threats. For all I can see, they are at least partially the cause of 9/11 with the kind of activities that they try to use the law to justify. In my opinion, they should be indited for treason and be outlawed within the United States fo America. They do a lot of harm to all the people in their attitude and actions toward this great republic. If it were me who made the decision, I would have them arrested, tried in Federal Court, and deported to the countries that would be sponsors of terrorism. They deserve nothing less.
Mike C. (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 9:43pm
Permalink
It's About the Money, Not Justice!
They are lawyers protecting their jobs and salaries. They rely on headlines and settlements.
They are not out for justice or the American ideals, despite the name of the organization. Otherwise I would expect they would have sued Al-Queda for depriving 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" of 2,753 9/11 that died. But since Al-Queda will never be able to pay, they instead go against the US for 3 terrorists. It's all about the money, not justice!
Stephen L Pendergast (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 10:24pm
Permalink
Justice for all
This sort of thing is not without precedent during national crises. Lincoln denied Habeas Corpus during the Civil War for rebel spies, and many were imprisoned without trial. FDR interned Japanese-american citizens during WW2. The Constitution is not a suicide pact, and we must be able to defend ourselves. At the same time, separation of powers would indicate the independent Judiciary needs to be involved before a death sentence is passed, particularly on US citizens. Our founding fathers had experience with Star Chamber proceedings in England and insisted on it. FISA should be used to try these types in absentia before assassination is used to check and balance the executive.
Dayton (not verified)
July 19, 2012 - 11:02pm
Permalink
aclu
I already have a very low opinion of the aclu. Now it's even lower. They don't represent anyone unless the gain is high publicity. All they do is find loopholes where they can screw the most people out of what is rightfully theirs and take away the rights provided under the Constitution for the Citizens ofThe United States of America.
I think they all should be made guests at Guantanamo!
V.A. Vet. (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 12:14am
Permalink
ACLU SUIT
What the F*** I sent 20 years of my life in the Military for assholes like this ?????. Now the government can spent more of our Tax dollars on this bull. Put all of the ACLU on the First Military transport going to the GULF region and us them for bait.
Susan (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 12:48am
Permalink
ACLU
Give us a flippin break. ACLU get a life! Where was the ACLU for the victims of 9-11 or the families who have lost love ones at the hands of these terrorist? This is a sad day for America. I want to thank all our Armed Forces men and women for all they do. Unfortunately because you all do your job so well we have to endure idiots like the ACLU.
Bob Westcott (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 6:12am
Permalink
ACLU
I agree that the ACLU is defending things that I don't like, BUT they are defending the LAWS of the country. We should be changing the laws NOT condeming any group that defends our laws. If you don't like somthing then help change it by law not just say it is bad and blame the messager
Dave (not verified)
September 16, 2012 - 12:46pm
Permalink
Well said Bob. What half the
Well said Bob. What half the folks here can't understand is the law is the end, not a means to another end. Once you compromise one citizens' right to due process through special circumstances NO MATTER THEIR CRIME it is a slippery slope towards an even worse degree of facism and dictatorship.
Al-Awlaki was a shiester, but when a government can kill a citizen for expressing extremist views and hate speech its pretty much over. One day you will want to exercise your rights of free speech and realize they're not there, you'll end up in a re-education facility or worse. (Brandon Raub, ex marine arrested for "extremist" facebook post and forced to undergo pshychiatric therapy)
This is how it begins, we all clearly believe the views of those killed to be abhorrent until one day views we hold to be true are defined as offensive to the state. The kill list will grow, the mission of terrorist killers will experience creep. The discussions today hold serious warnings for tomorrow.
Believe me if you can't draw the parallels I'll draw them for you: If this country ever tries to have another revolution there will be due process free detention camps and drone assasinations aplenty, the best bet we have is to stop the assault on civil liberties NOW even when it happens to people we hate.
Oh, and Hey mister NSA Guy *waves*
Paul G (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 7:48am
Permalink
ACLU lawsuit
This is what the ACLU should be doing. Don't get me wrong, the world is a better place without Al-Aulequi; however, this lawsuit is the consequence of not following our Constitution and the rule of law. No American citizen can be relieved of life, liberty, or property without due process. Anwar Al-Auleqi, an American citizen, should have been tried in absentia if he could not be apprehend and if convicted by a jury, then given a death sentence, stripped of his citizenship and targeted. Where is the line for who is on a “kill list”? Who will be next, anyone that speaks out against the policies of the current administration? As distasteful as this lawsuit by the ACLU is, having a small group of people that happen to be in power now deciding in a dark room who should be on a target list this week is not what we served our country to protect.
GulfWarVeteran-... (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 8:27am
Permalink
Those who think they deserve due process.....
Comment to Russ Butler and anyone who feels the same way. On September 11, 2001 they forced their "KILL at all costs" mentality against our country. Hate and anger is the way of life for these idiots. Their organization does not hate us because we are trying to force our freedom on them, Terrorists are brainwashed anyone who are not Muslim Extremist and agree with "Jihad". You have every right to say your opinion and that is why so many men and women who served this country gave their lives so you could give your opinion. I was proud to serve to preserve the rights of Americans, Not Terrorists!!! You keep thinking the way you do, but when the war hits our front doors again, and it is coming, you will change your mind, the bastards deserve to die and the second amendment gives me and other Citizens the right to defend ourselves against governments foreign and domestics. You mentioned due process; So these bastards trying to kill Americans is not a reason to defend our freedoms? I pray we don't have to depend on you and terrorist sympathizers to defend our freedoms.
Southern patriot (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 8:33am
Permalink
Permalink
The ACLU, once a viable watchdog for civil rights has degenerated into a fanatical anti American and anti religious freedom group. Wher do they get off during the government for anything???
Isn't the ACLU funded by Congess?? I think I found a good budget cut!!!!!
Ray Mongeau (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 8:59am
Permalink
ACLU seem to be the same people as Vietnam war protesters
ACLU remind me of the war protesters in the late 60's. We lost that war not on the battle field but here at home. We can not lose this war this war is to destroy the U.S. and the free world. I do not believe that a conventional force can defeat the the terrorist - we need to hit and move out as necessary. I did not care much for Bush but agree with him when he said, If your country harbors terrorist we will go in and take them out. We need more special elite forces involved in hitting terrorist no matter what country or nation they reside, train, or operate within.
Cramer (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 9:09am
Permalink
ACLU
A bunch of LOSER LAWYERS that cannot get real jobs!
Ben (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 11:40am
Permalink
Loser Lawyers
These "loser lawyers" pride themselves in taking the rights of millions away while to give the right to one or two. And they usually get paid by YOUR TAX Dollars.
Jim Delaney (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 11:44am
Permalink
CCR & ACLU
I wonder how these organizations can go so far from their origins. That they now have to defend traitors.
Why can't they work for the teachers that are denied representation in courts and have salaries frozen or even reduced in the past five years. Legislators are trying to kill the American Education System of free primary education. Where is the ACLU AND CCR???
Paulrod (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 12:42pm
Permalink
ACLU suit
Mothax, I can't fault you for being of two minds on this. We're dealing with situations never even conceived by the Founders, much less the average citizen. I never did like the ACLU, and there was a time when they were on a list of subversive organizations. They are neither American, nor civil, and sure don't care for American liberties, all of which makes them the only triple lie outside of "meal, ready to eat". The philosophical problem is that our liberty provides our enemies with the means to destroy us, and, if we are to survive, we have to go against what we are all about.jZaYT Personally, I'd change the definition of treason to include acting for, or providing support, in any form, to any avowed or identified enemy of the United States. That definition would include taking up arms, or acting to harm any civilian or military American. What these so-called citizens are doing is clearly treasonous, and they SHOULD be fair game outside the country. If they are beyond arrest and legal prosecution, they should be greased, but our own laws make it difficult. Start with the definition of treason. When I was an exchange student/tourist in Vietnam, the fighter pilots going North had a pool related to who would skrag Jane Fonda. Nobody collected, but it would have been a good deed. redefining treason is the way to begin. And, using drones rather than risking the life of even one GI is perfectly acceptable.
Bob L (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 1:17pm
Permalink
ACLU
ACLU ACTIVISTS CURRENTLY LOUSING UP THE USA
JOHN ELIOT (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 1:36pm
Permalink
AQ "NON-COMBATANTS"
ALL I CAN SAY TO ANY AQ "NON-COMBATANTS" IS: HEY, SHIT HAPPENS!
S Young (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 1:54pm
Permalink
Following Orders
Last time I took an oath of enlistment..it says "...I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
So, no matter what, if they were a threat to the American way of life then they probable got what they deserved!
Ksikkihkini Siksika (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 3:30pm
Permalink
ACLU
American Criminal Liars Union
SGT. Joe McGovern (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 5:20pm
Permalink
ACLU TO SUE GOVT
I'm a disabled Vet who fought in Iraq.. WHERE WAS THE ACLU AND THEIR FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS WHEN MY SOLDIER FRIENDS WERE BEING KILLED BY THE DOZEN PER WEEK BY IED AND EFP'S ??
WHEN WE ARRESTED THE INSURGENTS RESPONSIBLE,,WHY WAS THERE NO LAWSUIT BROUGHT AGAINST THOSE GROUPS THAT MURDERED OUR MEN AND WOMEN?? I WAS UNDER THE IMMPRESSION THAT ACLU STOOD FOR.......AMERICAN. CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION!!!
NOT AL QAEDA. OR MAADI MILITIA!!! I SAY THE NEXT REALLY VIOLENT AND DEVASTATING WAR THAT COMES TO PASS WE TRAIN AND SUIT UP THE ACLU WITH ALL OF IT'S MEMBERS AND SEND THEM AWAY TO FIGHT FOR 15 MONTHS AT A TIME!!!
Joe Meadors (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 6:36pm
Permalink
The American Legion National Organization Hypocrisy
One could come away from reading the article with the conclusion that the National Organization of The American Legion takes umbrage at protecting those who do harm to our military.
If one does, one would be wrong.
Ask the National Organization how many times they have rejected resolutions asking the US government to conduct an investigation of the June 8, 1967 attack on the USS Liberty.
During the attack:
• We were attacked by unmarked aircraft;
• Our radios were jammed on both US Navy tactical and international maritime distress frequencies;
• Life rafts we had dropped over the side in anticipation of abandoning ship were deliberately destroyed by machine gun fire from the attacking torpedo boats;
• Attacking torpedo boats slowly circled the torpedoed and sinking ship while firing upon USS Liberty crewmen who ventured topside to help our wounded shipmates; and,
• Two flights of rescue aircraft that had been launched from Sixth Fleet aircraft carriers were ordered recalled while we were still under attack and calling for help.
Among the awards won by the officers and crew of the USS Liberty are the Medal of Honor, two Navy Crosses, eleven Silver Stars, twenty Bronze Stars, nine Navy Commendations, 208 Purple Hearts, 294 Combat Action Ribbons and the Presidential Unit Citation which makes the USS Liberty among the most decorated ships in US Navy history.
On June 8, 2005 we filed with the Department of Defense a War Crimes Report. A copy of that report is available at http://goo.gl/r3Qcl and the exhibits included in the War Crimes Report are available at http://goo.gl/sn9q9. The Department of Defense has refused to conduct an investigation of the allegations contained in the War Crimes Report.
The National Organization of The American Legion apparently feels the US government has acted properly in allowing War Crimes to be committed by and against the United States during the attack on the USS Liberty as well as during the subsequent and ongoing cover-up of those War Crimes.
tom elson (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 7:38pm
Permalink
ARE YOU SERIOUS
It's official the world has lost it's mind. Sueing for dead terrorist, have you lost it. I thought ACLU stood for American Civil Liberties / Not let's see how we can mess up america more. What a missguided organization, I'm ashamed you use America in your name!
James Ennes (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 7:40pm
Permalink
USS Liberty
Mr. Meadors is totally correct.
For details and confirmation read the War Crimes report in http://goo.gl/r3Qcl. With some measure of support from AL we might have the Congressional investigation this treachery calls for.
Pete Douglass (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 7:50pm
Permalink
The ACLU the true Terrorists
I think that a few drone strikes on the ACLU (All Corrupt Lawyers Union) would be a good idea. I think it would even qualify as a “public service”. “If they won’t stand behind our troops they should stand in front of them!” Remember these are the same Anti-American bastards that filed the Death Valley and Soledad Cross suits with the 9th “Circus” Court and supported the Westboro Baptist Church protesters at the funerals of our fallen hero’s, many killed by terrorists.
Bruce Knowles (not verified)
July 23, 2012 - 2:23pm
Permalink
ACLU
I whole-heartedly agree...If they can't stand behind our country and its troups, put them in front of them. Alternatively, hang 'em all for treason.
John Oliff (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 8:20pm
Permalink
A C L U
I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with the ACLU. Given the gradual but continuing loss of our individual rights and liberties it is not a stretch to see the next kill list consist of veterans (terrorist, according to DHS),political rivals or, any other group that they wish to silence. Every American should be mad as hell at a government that is above the law
Bernie Schiefer (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 8:52pm
Permalink
ACLU Suit vs. U. S.
Let's find out who supports this ACLU and boycott them. How an organization like this is permitted to exist in our ciountry is unbelievable. They need to be obliterated!
MACLU suitearvi... (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 9:00pm
Permalink
ACLU suite
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck swims like a duck and flies like a duck, ITS A DUCK.
sign this a WW2 and Korean VET
warren loendorf (not verified)
July 20, 2012 - 9:34pm
Permalink
aclu
Anyone, and especially any veteran, who would contribute to this organization must have fought on the other side while he or she was in the service of our country. Only in the Greatest Country in the World could this happen. We do have our freedoms which all have, even the #@*&% of the aclu.
rkp (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 12:34am
Permalink
ACLU
You people talk as if these people had a constitution to give up. Rmember who we are taking about here.
Jerry Compton (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 12:55am
Permalink
ACLU
The content and sometimes the vocabulary of many of the comments to this article betray the authors as ignorant (not knowledgeable) or perhaps blatantly working to their own agenda (dishonest) relative to the 'rule of law and order' that this country is founded on. Their penchant for name calling as a means to further their cause perhaps betrays an even more alarming concern for their overall intelligence. The rule of law and order is not a difficult concept to understand. The rules are established by due processes of the various branches of our government working within their established frameworks, established for each, by our Constitution. The law, so established, is to apply equally to all - whether they be individuals, commercial organizations, or government divisions, etc. The ACLU is a major defender of these concepts, though in some instances it may seem to some to be on the 'wrong side' of an issue. In taking this action, the ACLU is not defending these individuals for the evil they have reportedly brought to humanity, rather, the ACLU is defending their right to due process of law and their right to be found innocent or guilty in a public accessible process by a legal authority empowered to make that decision. Death is available as an appropriate action by federal authority if the circumstances so warrant. No such due process had taken place in this instance. In taking this action, the ACLU is trying to assure that due process is properly applied for all future such instances. Do not abhor this kind of ACLU action, for you may one day find that it is you that are beholding to their fervor for the rule of law and order. Do not fear their actions because everything they do is fully within those same tenants of law and order. They would be the first to defend you if proper law and order were not applied to you by your accusers. As such I support this action by the ACLU. There is an alarming trend for some branches of government - especially the military and its associated 'security' groups to exceed their authority. We don’t want them making their own laws and taking action on their own. This case will likely come before the Supreme Court - let’s let them do their job. Perhaps there is a legal basis for what was - done, let’s find out.
Ranger 2/75 (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 8:46am
Permalink
aclu
We are a nation of laws - lots and lots of them, because we have lost our common sense and decency.
ronald dudley (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 3:37pm
Permalink
It's unfortunate the ACLU
It's unfortunate the ACLU chose this path but our country was asking for this problem. When we first became involved in this conflict, the left was running around [ including many of the democrat politicians] claiming this conflict should be subject to the geneva convention and that any P O W captured should be held for trial. this alone guarantees all terrorist with constitutional rights. If this is the case, then the ACLU [ unfortunatly ] have a case. You could say that Obama is getting his just desserts because he, I believe, was one of those politicians who believed in this constitutional rights garbage for terrorist. personally I don't care about the terrorist. this shows that one must be carefull when spouting off about any subject because it may come back to bite them in the behind
USAF Veteran (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 3:46pm
Permalink
I have been wondering for a
I have been wondering for a long time now how we will ever end this terrorist campaign being waged against our country. We’ve tried being nice and giving them money and weapons only to have them turned against us. We went to war to avenge 9-11 only to kill more of our military and spend trillions of tax dollars on a wasted culture. I don’t believe anyone in the Middle East really wants any kind of peace, warring and feuding has been their way of life for centuries. Disagreement is what feeds them. Now an organization wants to provide them with an opportunity to acquire even more money through our court system to spawn more violence against us. This is not an ending it is fueling the fires. If for some reason the ACLU happens to be successful we will have a never-ending line of militants tying up our court system in an effort to cash in. The Islamic continually condemn our capitalism, but are always the first in line to take the dollars. As far as the right of the American citizen killed by a drone, he gave up hose rights when he sided with the enemy. We all make choices, and we live and sometimes die by those decisions. Let’s not try and second-guess his decision and just be thankful we saved court costs.
Bob Maguire (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 5:14pm
Permalink
ACLU
Anybody who is not an American citizen has no legal standing!
Rickey Carrow (not verified)
July 21, 2012 - 9:24pm
Permalink
ACLU
I would like a President,a President canidate, a Governor, a Senator, a State Rep; a Postman, anybody "SAY" this is ONE UNION that needs to be Dismantled! Here I'll say it "THE A.C.L.U. NEEDS TO BE DISMANTLED".
Joe (not verified)
July 22, 2012 - 9:06am
Permalink
ACLU, HS US and other lobiest organizations
The ACLU, HS US are lobiest organizations that are allowed to take in huge sums of money as "donations" in order to continue to whittle away our freedoms! Try to find any new media that has the balls to do an exposea on them, I dare you. People in our country need to wake up and make sure your donations go to good causes and these types of national groups are not what they represent themselves to be one wants to defend terrorists and the other wants to take away our animals but both are funded by people who really don't read between the lines as to what they really are!
USAALLTHEWAY (not verified)
July 22, 2012 - 9:30am
Permalink
ACLU the real terrorist
ACLU is the real traitor. These people they are representing made a choice to forsake the USA. Once they made that choice there are consequences. They got what they deserved. When a person deliberately chooses to step outside the law to do harm then he reliquishes his rights by his action. Shame on the ACLU They are the ones who should be done away with ...they are selling out our country.
EdMorales11B (not verified)
July 22, 2012 - 9:19pm
Permalink
ACLU
This message is in response to Russ Butler:
Mr. Butler, I understand where you are coming from, but let's face facts; these people were not born here, they became naturalised citizens. Aa naturalised citizen,they take an oath to uphold our laws and swear allegiance to the U. S. Under immigration laws, the U.S. government can denaturalize these citizens for being affiliated with "Nazis, Communists, Terrorists, or other similar groups". Once denaturalised, they shoudn't be afforded the same status as a U.S. citizens. Also, natural born citizens are executed for treasonous acts. If these people are planning attacks on our soil or against our people, then they are enemies of the state and should be treated accordingly.
Gilbert Wells (not verified)
July 23, 2012 - 1:12pm
Permalink
I was an ACLU cooperating
I was an ACLU cooperating attorney in Virginia for more than 20 years during the 1960s - 1980s. In 1990 I retired to Portugal and formed a Legion post. After reading communications from the Legion for a short time I opened an "Archive of American Legion vs ACLU" to document the waste of Legion resources in its actions against the ACLU.
Is anyone interested?
J. Swartzwelder (not verified)
July 24, 2012 - 11:43am
Permalink
ACLU treachery.
The United States of America, via the President, declared war on terrorism after 911. The Congress overwhelmingly voted to authorize and fund the war, Democrats and Republicans. Any citizen engaged in acts of war against the United States of America is an enemy combatant and subject to the full range of military options, to include deadly force.
DICK RICE (not verified)
July 24, 2012 - 3:43pm
Permalink
TERRORIST/ACLU/OIL COMPANIES/POLITICIANS/LAWYERS.
HOW IN THE WORLD ARE WE "FREE" AMERICANS GOING TO SERVIVE THIS MULTI-PRONTED ATTACK
FROM THE JUBJECTS?
DICK RICE (not verified)
July 24, 2012 - 3:46pm
Permalink
THE SUBJECTS ARE : TERRORISTS
THE SUBJECTS ARE : TERRORISTS/POLITICIANS/OIL COMPANIES/LAWYERS AND THE ACLU!
William Davis (not verified)
July 24, 2012 - 6:27pm
Permalink
ACLU
I have mixed feeling regarding the ACLU suit aganist the government . No I am not a bleeding heart liberal or anti american communist . I am an ex veitnam era veteran who grew up during the 40's , 50's and 60's . I am a red blooded american who has seen the occuring changes in society as well as
what the current political landscape is dishing out . My point of view won't change anyone's mindset
and I don't expect it will . I do not defend the ACLU but over the years they have made some good judgements . They fought the battle for the Scopes Trial with Clarence Darrow for the defense 1925 .
Japanese Internment camps during World war two speaking out about the atrocity .In 1954 they joined forces with the NAACP regarding segregation in public schools . Roe vs Wade womens rights
1973 . 1969 protecting free speech . 1978 protecting free speech Skokie Illinois (Nazi Party) . Not saying I agree there but free speech is our constitional right ! The list goes on and on folks . I don't agree with everything the ACLU represents and yes they have had issues as well . But with the current
political climate and a ineffective congress in residence . Well nuff said there . I have no sympathy for the american citizens targeted by the drone strike . They chose their own demise .Did they deserve what they got ? Hell yes ! If the ACLU wants to file suit let them ! It's irrevalent ! These folks are dead and gone . It makes no sense to put boot on the ground to try and capture these individuals and risk the lives of our troops . If the drone can target specific individuals for certainity do it . However if the government seeks to put drones in US Airspace I would have second thoughts invasion of privacy being one . We have enough of Big Brother now . I guess what I'm trying to say is the ACLU was a good organization and they can be again . Do not condemn until you see what you may have lost !
Nevada Todd (not verified)
July 26, 2012 - 4:59pm
Permalink
Yemen isn't in the war zone
If these terrorists were in the war zone, taking active part, then I would have applauded the wonderful capabilities and strategy against enemy combatants.
There is no reason we couldn't have gone into Yemen and abducted these scumbags (or at least attempted it and shot anyone that picked up a weapon). It would have been relatively easy since we are not at war with Yemen or any of its neighbors. Also, and this would have been MUCH easier, try them in absentia, then kill them with the full support of the Constitution.
The American Constitution is VERY CLEAR on the matter, all American Citizens are to be given due process of law before being deprived of life. I neither know NOR CARE about your feelings on the AMERICAN CONSTITUTION, it is THE SUPREME LAW of the United States and any government official, elected or not, that violates it should be immediately removed from their government job and placed in public stocks so we can throw rotten fruit at them, sieze all holdings, bar them from ever receiving government benefits, and anything else we can think of as fitting punishment for violating the law of the land. I don't care if it is a cop forgetting to mirandize someone or a president murdering Americans overseas.
As to those idiots over at the ACLU, it is nice to see that they are actually supporting the Constitution for once instead of trying to rewrite it.
This administration already believes American Servicemen are terrorists, and most Americans now say that this administration can and should murder terrorists overseas. That doesn't make me feel safe when on leave on the beaches of South East Asia.
American Constitution, more important than ANY OTHER ANYTHING, and to HELL with anyone that disagrees.
Josmar (not verified)
August 2, 2012 - 10:30pm
Permalink
ACLU
What they want is money from legal fees, because we like to pay those people to waste our tax money. This should be illegal, or at least charge ACLU the legal fees.
Pages
Add new comment