First time visitor? Learn more.

Ron Paul, CAIR and the ACLU Agree: Killing Al-Awlaki Was Wrong

by huckfunn ( 13 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, CAIR, Elections 2012, Headlines, Islam, Islamic Terrorism, Islamists, Jihad, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Politics at September 30th, 2011 - 1:23 pm

 

No surprise here. Open any can of nuts and Ron Paul will be right on top.

ACLU Statement:

ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer said, “The targeted killing program violates both U.S. and international law. As we’ve seen today, this is a program under which American citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government without judicial process, and on the basis of standards and evidence that are kept secret not just from the public but from the courts. The government’s authority to use lethal force against its own citizens should be limited to circumstances in which the threat to life is concrete, specific and imminent. It is a mistake to invest the President – any President – with the unreviewable power to kill any American whom he deems to present a threat to the country.”

CAIR Statement:

“As we have stated repeatedly in the past, the American Muslim community firmly repudiated Anwar al-Awlaki’s incitement to violence, which occurred after he left the United States. While a voice of hate has been eliminated,we urge our nation’s leaders to address the constitutional issues raised by the assassination of American citizens without due process of law.

Ron Paul Statement:

“No I don’t think that’s a good way to deal with our problems,” Paul said in a media avail after his remarks at the Politics + Eggs event here. “He was born here, Al-Awlaki was born here, he is an American citizen. He was never tried or charged for any crimes. No one knows if he killed anybody. We know he might have been associated with the underwear bomber. But if the American people accept this blindly and casually that we now have an accepted practice of the president assassinating people who he thinks are bad guys, I think it’s sad“. (Editor’s note: Boo fooking hoo)

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

13 Responses to “Ron Paul, CAIR and the ACLU Agree: Killing Al-Awlaki Was Wrong”
( jump to bottom )

  1. yenta-fada
    1 | September 30, 2011 2:27 pm

    Someone is messing around with those ‘heart’ votes. Nice to see a Muslim from the ACLU telling infidels how to behave./


  2. 2 | September 30, 2011 2:30 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    Muck the Fuslims!

    :P


  3. Speranza
    3 | September 30, 2011 2:33 pm

    How come we criticize Israel for doing the same?


  4. 4 | September 30, 2011 2:43 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    All the
    Caliphate
    Loves
    Us!


  5. yenta-fada
    5 | September 30, 2011 2:48 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    How come we criticize Israel for doing the same?

    I’m having days of quiet desperation over the Middle East. Actually, I’m not all that quiet, but nobody listens.


  6. yenta-fada
    6 | September 30, 2011 2:49 pm

    Macker wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:

    All the
    Caliphate
    Loves
    Us!

    :-)


  7. Philip_Daniel
    7 | September 30, 2011 3:35 pm

    I don’t think Paul quite gets it…
    Al-Awlaki was an ISLAMIC IMPERIALIST bent on world conquest fisabeel Allah, according to his own admission…

    The wars with the Persian and Roman Empires were unprovoked and were for the prime purpose of spreading the truth to humanity. The Muslim messenger to the Persian leader said: “Allah has sent us to deliver the servants of Allah out of servitude of one another into the service of Allah, and out of the narrowness of this world into the vastness of both this world and the afterlife and out of the oppression of religions into the justice of Islam.” There is no conciliatory tone in this statement and no inclination on part of its deliverer to live in “harmony” with followers of different religions. It was clear to the virtuous Muslims then, who had proper understanding of what their duties towards Allah were and who had pride in Islam, that all religions were false, and that all systems of government were oppressive, and that only Islam can offer mankind salvation in both this world and in the Hereafter. They understood that by approving others in their ways they are not doing them a favor, and they are not acting tolerantly towards them but they are doing them a disservice by not showing them the way of truth that would save them from eternal torment. Exceptions were made for the Jews and the Christians, where they were allowed to retain their religious practices as long as they paid the jizyah in a state of humility. They were made to know that their religious practices were false, that Islam does not approve of either Judaism or Christianity, and that they are considered to be misguided and are destined to Hellfire. The early Muslims let the Jews and the Christians know this in the clearest and most unambiguous manner. They did this out of concern and care for them…
    The pagans of Arabia were fought because they were pagans, the Persians were fought because they were Zoroastrians and the Romans were fought because they were Christian. The great Muslim Sultan Mahmud Sabaktakeen fought against the Hindus because they were Hindus and he personally led his army in a risky campaign deep into the land of India with the sole objective of destroying the most revered idol in all of India. He was fighting because of this “difference of religion”…
    Allah جل جلاله says:
    “And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah” (TMQ Surah al Anfāl: 39]
    The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
    “I was instructed to fight mankind until they testify that there is no one worthy of worship except Allah”.
    Fighting fī sabīlillāh can also be for the objective of spoils of war…
    In fact, the classical scholar Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali states that the purest and best form of sustenance for the believer is that of ghanīmah (spoils of war) because it was the source of living Allah has chosen for His most beloved of creation, Muhammad . صلى الله عليه وسلم
    The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “My sustenance was made to be under my spear”.


  8. 8 | September 30, 2011 4:11 pm

    ROTFLMAO… Well if Ron Paul, CAIR and the ACLU all Agree it was the wrong thing to do, that means it was the right thing to do. Mwahhh


  9. 9 | September 30, 2011 5:49 pm

    Does due process require the presumption of innocence? When the American has openly confessed his enmity to his nation? In other words an open confession of treason should be enough to forfeit civilian due process. “Kill or capture” executive order for military enforcement is recognition of enemy combatant status -- self-imposed -- by terrorists.

    Paul and others who think due process -- which is now becoming substantive due process under liberal judiciaries -- is some kind of ritual that must be adhered to as a witch-doctor adheres to mumbo-jumbo in order to keep this country on a moral footing are irrational and superstitious.

    We are developing a hybrid due process between war and law to deal with these enemy-citizen mass-murdering combatants.


  10. mfhorn
    10 | September 30, 2011 6:09 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    Further proof, if it was needed, that Prawn Roll is nuttier than a stack of fruitcakes. A ‘Republican’ in agreement with the ACLU, ‘CAIR’ (which I don’t) over offing a terrorist, and who would even consider Dennis Kucinich as a Cabinet member, has about as much business in the party as Michael Moore.


  11. yenta-fada
    11 | September 30, 2011 6:16 pm

    @Overlook

    “We are developing a hybrid due process between war and law to deal with these enemy-citizen mass-murdering combatants.”

    THAT IS A THREAD & an excellent encapsulation of a major problem.
    Perhaps you can submit that as a post to the blog admins.


  12. lobo91
    12 | October 1, 2011 12:19 am

    Fuck Ron Paul, CAIR and the ACLU.

    Add them to the list, as far as I’m concerned.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David