A Message From Lucianne  







S-G1




























ST-GC



        
 

 
Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google


  Topic: Fox Analyst Defends Drones:
If An American Takes Up Arms
Against Fellow Citizens, ‘You
Kill The Sucker, Period’
Change your user profile.
If you are having trouble posting, please take the time to register.
Your User Name :
Your Password
  I forgot my password
Your Reply  :
Preview Reply     Post Reply
Fox Analyst Defends Drones:
If An American Takes Up Arms
Against Fellow Citizens, ‘You
Kill The Sucker, Period’

Mediaite, by Meenal Vamburkar

Original Article

Posted By:KarenJ1, 2/8/2013 11:29:09 AM

President Obama‘s drone program has elicited controversy, to say the least, but he does have some support among those who aren’t typically his biggest fans. On Friday’s Fox & Friends, Lt. Col. Ralph Peters spoke to co-host Gretchen Carlson about how the program is Obama’s one “sensible” policy. “It’s the only policy Obama has that works,” Peters said. The administration’s policy to kill not capture terrorists is a “wise” one, he added, because capturing them just sticks us with another “unfunded liability.” The bottom line:

Comments:
The only comment I would make is that we haven´t ever had anyone like the malignant, messianic narcissist 0bama in the White House. What if they started doing that here in the USA? Nothing is too far fetched with this regime.

      


Post Reply  

Reply 1 - Posted by: LudicrousSextus, 2/8/2013 11:34:42 AM     (No. 9165644)

Excuse us...but did he miss the part about - "Need not be actively involved in any plot to harm the US..." language in that epistle?

Damn funny stuff. As Senator, Obama railed against ´possible torture of a US citizen´. As president - he´s fine w/ offing ´em based on ´suspicion´ and without Due Process.

So...when people refer to Obama as a ´Constitutional Law Professor´ - and the room doesn´t immediately bust out laughing, is that some sort of ´intentional effort´ not to ´appear racist´?

It´s almost as if the entire liberal side of the country has their mouth super-glued shut on this issue. Had it surfaced under *Bush*, the media hot air produced would melt this weekend´s Northern chill in a heartbeat.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 2 - Posted by: lil dotty, 2/8/2013 11:39:07 AM     (No. 9165657)

Col. Peters, why this? Why now? You´ve never spoken as such prior. Has DC gone totally insane?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


   

 

R-G1
  
R-VAR_AD


 
Reply 3 - Posted by: snowoutlaw, 2/8/2013 11:40:23 AM     (No. 9165661)

So Peters is threating our sucker called Obama? He sure is because Obama is taking up arms against fellow citizens.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 4 - Posted by: ROLFnader, 2/8/2013 11:48:38 AM     (No. 9165681)

Good call, #1. Obama´s entire career and especially his presidency can be summed up as an ´intentional effort to not appear racist".

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 5 - Posted by: geneinnyc, 2/8/2013 11:54:49 AM     (No. 9165696)

It´s distressing that Obama has so divided the country, that many conservatives suspend judgment, if not reason on anything having to do with Obama. When acting in his role as Commander and Chief, with duty of defending the U.S., he has the right to order the killing of any military (not criminal) threat, even on U.S. soil. FDR did it when one of a group of saboteurs turned out to be an American citizen.

Which is not to say that Obama and the Dems have not been total hypocrites on the issue, but conservatives need to understand that tying Obama´s hands would tie the hands of every president who comes after him.

It is now officially less than four years before Obama leaves office. In the meantime, let´s try to minimize the damage he does till then without creating new ones of our own that will hurt us and the country after Obama´s gone.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 6 - Posted by: skedaddle, 2/8/2013 11:58:28 AM     (No. 9165705)

No, if an American kills his fellow citizens, the police catch him, provide evidence of his wrongdoing, a jury looks at it all and decides on a punishment. So far that punishment has never included a drone strike to "kill the sucker..." And if this is such a great idea, why don´t we put a drone up for the LAPD ex-cop who´s on the run for murder. Let´s just skip the capture, trial, blah, blah, blah... and "kill the sucker, period".

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 7 - Posted by: King of all trolls, 2/8/2013 11:59:16 AM     (No. 9165709)

Due process? 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments? Who needs ´em? Let the military men/women operating the joysticks handle it. They´ve done such a stellar job with Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam...

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


   

 

  


 
Reply 8 - Posted by: RancherJack, 2/8/2013 12:03:05 PM     (No. 9165718)

#2 - yes.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 9 - Posted by: GreatGreyhounds, 2/8/2013 12:03:07 PM     (No. 9165719)

So, Col. Peters, if the citizens take up arms against the government within Our Borders, are you saying it´s legal to Kill us by Drone?

Sure sounds like it!

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 10 - Posted by: Coy860, 2/8/2013 12:04:54 PM     (No. 9165725)

I don´t trust this administration.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 11 - Posted by: WV.Hillbilly, 2/8/2013 12:05:09 PM     (No. 9165726)

It´s not like this is being done here in the states.
If there are US citizens in Yemen or Afghanistan that are aiding terrorists, they´re traitors and deserve to die.

As far as I´m concerned, this is the only thing that Obongo has gotten right in the last 4 years.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 12 - Posted by: JAN, 2/8/2013 12:12:02 PM     (No. 9165741)

The disconnect here is that the dems were demanding Geneva Convention rights for the terrorists at Gitmo.

Obamao wanted to bring KSM to NYC for a civil trial.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


   

 

B-G1


 
Reply 13 - Posted by: viking diver, 2/8/2013 12:19:20 PM     (No. 9165764)

funny how this government will give constitutional rights to Illegal aliens, but yet kill citizens without due process of law totally ignoring the constitutional rights of those citizens even if they are out of the country. I´m sorry but if we allow this to happen because they are and I quote "terrorists" what happens when you and I are labeled "terrorists" because of what we believe in.
We are still a nation of laws and we have the right of a jury trial, and we are to be considered innocent until convicted guilty. Those "conservatives" who have no problems with this don´t understand the Constitution of the USA and why it was written that way. Better go back and look up the period of time before the revolutionary war and find out what happened to citizens by the government controlled by the English at the time.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 14 - Posted by: krause, 2/8/2013 12:20:47 PM     (No. 9165766)

The issue is how is it controlled. I´m not in favor of giving Obama any more authority. I don´t trust him with the authority he already has. I don´t mind the killing of the Al awaki types, but why don´t we try to capture some of them and interrogate them? It´s quite obvious that Obama doesn´t want to do that.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 15 - Posted by: snowcloud, 2/8/2013 12:21:13 PM     (No. 9165767)

We´re not allowed to waterboard or put underwear on the heads of islamic terror suspects but it´s okay to KILL American citizens who are "suspected of terrorism". Ask yourselves one question: Who are considered "terrorists" these days? The world is upside down. We´re living in an Orwellian world.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 16 - Posted by: joew9, 2/8/2013 12:23:31 PM     (No. 9165773)

If it is justified to kill them then why not: capture them, torture them until they tell us everything, and then execute them. They´re just as dead. We have some useful information. Plus we aren´t killing people willy-nilly from anonymous altitudes. At least we are grabbing them and making them talk and finding out if they really should be killed.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 17 - Posted by: snowcloud, 2/8/2013 12:32:39 PM     (No. 9165790)

#13, what do you mean "when"? It´s already happening.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


   

 

R_DBL_B
  


 
Reply 18 - Posted by: southernboy, 2/8/2013 12:37:35 PM     (No. 9165806)


This is about ´lethal force against American citizens.´ It is not about ´drones.´The White Paper does not mention ´drones.´This ´White Paper´ pretty well specifies that lethal force may be used against a U.S. citizen outside the United States who ´is a senior operational leader of al-Qa´ida actively engaged in planning operations to kill Americans.´

I personally don´t see anything wrong with that position. That this action can be determined by ´an informed hi-level official´ is somewhat disturbing. Who isn´t an´informed hi-level official´ in Washington? This gives life-or-death power to un-specified people.

But then, if the ones targeted are the ones specified...again....they are planning attacks on the U.S!
But there are three sentences that stand out toward the end. I quote them below.The omission of the phrase "outside the United States" in these sentences, IMO, just might negate the focus of the whole paper.

"...A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination. In the Department´s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban...."

These sentences do concern me!

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf


  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 19 - Posted by: MattMusson, 2/8/2013 12:48:30 PM     (No. 9165826)

Whenever you expand the power of government - always remember that Adolf Hitler was voted into office.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 20 - Posted by: Poca Dot, 2/8/2013 1:03:05 PM     (No. 9165850)

Excuse me, what part of "take up arms against the United States" confuses you? We are at war. If Bush did this we would back him. Why not Obama?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 21 - Posted by: Delilah, 2/8/2013 1:07:57 PM     (No. 9165859)

Killing 16 year old boys is not part of my agendy in fighting the war on terrorism and I doubt it was part of Bushes. Allowing Obummer and his minions to get away with this is a big mistake. Think HITLER!

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


Reply 22 - Posted by: Axeman, 2/8/2013 1:25:15 PM     (No. 9165879)

Hmm, let look at that headline quote.
If an American, say like the DHS, takes up arms, say like 1.6 billion bullets, against fellow citizens, unlike say illegal aliens or jihadis from the ME, then you kill the sucker, period.
Be careful what you wish for.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    3 persons like this.


   

 



 
Reply 23 - Posted by: Philipsonh, 2/8/2013 1:30:56 PM     (No. 9165892)

In too many ways, Fox Cable News has gone
off the rails. At one time, it was THE channel to watch, for me. About a year ago, I felt that enough was enough and cut my viewing time to just a few hours a week, so that all I now watch on TV is sports and some movies. A perfect example, on The Five, which someone else in our home had turned on Thurs, Feb 7, these 5 idiots were LAUGHING and making jokes while the videos of Flash Mobs destroying peoples business were being displayed. To me these 5 people were sickening. They are so enamored with each other that they are like a blob of protoplasm that reacts in one manner and it is no longer even a news program, or informational. Fox Cable Channel in a nutshell.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 24 - Posted by: jlw509, 2/8/2013 4:20:09 PM     (No. 9166201)

As Americans, we believe in a God-given (not Congress-given, not Court-given, not even Constitution-given, but "God-given") Right to Life, which does not mean "pacifism" but which does at least mean you have a right not to be intentionally targeted and killed unless you have been found guilty of a capital crime or are presently involved in an act of aggression.

We also believe (Constitution, 14th Amendment) that a citizen must not be deprived of life, liberty or property without Due Process of Law.

And that is not synonymous with "The Say-So of the Powerful".

There are excellent reasons why these rights are so prominent in our Declaration of Independence and in the U.S. Constitution. It´s because if you give some "informed high official" a license to kill, you have given him a power not safely placed in the hands of any human being.

This is the kind of tyranny that gives tyranny a bad name.

And for conservatives to want to limit the government´s power to tax us, but not the government´s power to kill us --- people, this is insanity beyond all telling.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.


Reply 25 - Posted by: jack44, 2/8/2013 6:03:29 PM     (No. 9166336)

I´m with #11. If they are on a foreign battlefield (which is often indistinct in this time of irregular combatants) cavorting with the enemy, then I say vaporize them if we can. We use drones because they cannot be reached any other way and the risk is nil. Obviously, this does not pertain to any action within our borders, so maybe we need language to emphasize that.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    2 persons like this.



Post Reply   Close thread 722644




Below, you will find ...

Most Recent Articles posted by "KarenJ1"

and

Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)




Most Recent Articles posted by "KarenJ1"



Progressive Insurance
National Review Online, by Victor Davis Hanson    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 10:08:10 PM     Post Reply
How do you ensure that you won’t be ostracized, denounced, or fired if you are a media celebrity, captain of industry, or high public official? For some, sexist banter is certainly no problem. Stand-up comedian Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a c–t and a tw-t, but suffered no ill consequences. David Letterman joked on air that Sarah Palin’s 14-year-old daughter had had sex with Alex Rodriguez during a New York Yankees game. There was no downside to that either. President Obama tosses around “sweetie” as he wishes. No problem with that. No one believes Barack could be condescending to women.

Rory Reid Slams BLM as
´Losers´ on Nevada TV
NewsBusters, by P.J. Gladnick    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:53:37 PM     Post Reply
Sheesh! Talk about a complete ingrate... Many people suspect that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) instigated an over the top paramilitary confrontation with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy at the behest of Senator Harry Reid especially since the new BLM director, Neil Kornze, was an aide to Reid. So how does Harry´s son, Rory Reid, thank the BLM rangers for putting their lives at risk over desert tortoises that are being euthanized by the Feds? Why, he slams them as "losers" on Las Vegas television station KSNV where Rory serves as a commentator from the left. You can see Reid in

Washington Elite Nutritionist Goes
After Bubba Watson For Celebrating
Masters Win at Waffle House
NewsBusters, by Tom Blumer    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:39:38 PM     Post Reply
After his Masters victory, pro golfer Bubba Watson celebrated with his family at a Waffle House. Pictures tweeted from there went viral. Waffle House appreciated the appreciation. What´s not to like about this great story? Apparently some self-appointed nanny state-loving guardians of nutrition like Katherine Tallmadge believe that Watson set a bad example for Americans by eating there. Oh, and with her powers of telepathy, she just knows that Watson´s a complete phony about what he really eats. She went after Watson on one of Neil Cavuto´s Fox programs yesterday, and in doing so caught talk show host Rush Limbaugh´s

Biden Tells Boston Bombing
Survivors, ´It Was Worth It´ (Video)
Breitbart´s Instablog, by Debra Heine    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:28:18 PM     Post Reply
Less than a minute into his speech at the Boston marathon bombing memorial on Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden went tragically off script and told the crowd of Boston bombing survivors that "it was worth it." After expressing how impressed he was with the tribute, he said somberly, "let me say to those ´quote survivors,´ my God, you have survived and you have soared. It was worth it. I mean this sincerely - just to hear each of you speak. You´re truly, truly inspiring." The audience sat in stunned silence until Biden declared, "I´ve never heard anything so beautiful than

CNN National Security Analyst:
Right More Deadly Than Al Qaeda
Breitbart´s Big Journalism, by John Nolte    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:21:28 PM     Post Reply
Without mentioning reports that the man accused of shooting up a Jewish Community Center over the weekend was apparently a fan of the left´s Max Blumenthal, CNN National Security Analyst Peter Bergen exploited the murders to claim the American Right is more deadly than jihadists. In fact, since 9/11 extremists affiliated with a variety of far-right wing ideologies, including white supremacists, anti-abortion extremists and anti-government militants, have killed more people in the United States than have extremists motivated by al Qaeda´s ideology. According to a count by the New America Foundation, right wing extremists have killed 34 people in the

Exclusive - Sen. Sessions Comes
Out Swinging Against Secretive
House Immigration Push
Breitbart´s Big Government, by Matthew Boyle    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:07:41 PM     Post Reply
RAW VIDEO: Sen. Jeff Sessions sits for interview with WSFA 12 News Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and arguably the leading intellectual force against amnesty in Congress, is coming out hard against a proposal backed by Majority Leader Eric Cantor to grant amnesty to illegal alien DREAMers who enlist in the military. “We are now in a period of very large troop reductions. The last thing this nation should be doing is to provide those few slots to persons who illegally entered the United States or who overstayed their visas while denying young Americans the

Bill O’Reilly to Conservative Guest:
‘That’s Right-Wing Paranoia’
Mediaite, by Matt Wilstein    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 8:55:54 PM     Post Reply
It’s not every day that Bill O’Reilly accuses someone else of expressing “right-wing paranoia,” but that’s what happened Tuesday night when he faced off with Fox News contributor Monica Crowley over a proposed solution to the controversy over voter ID laws. O’Reilly began his show by giving a soft endorsement to an idea put forward by former President Bill Clinton that would add photos to social security cards, which American citizens are already required to have in their possession. “I am all for combating voter fraud by using voter I.D.,” Crowley told O’Reilly. “My issue with the social security card in particular



Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)



Ben Carson: White House wanted
apology for ‘offending’ Obama

54 replie(s)
Daily Caller, by Alex Pappas    Original Article
Posted By: StormCnter- 4/15/2014 5:22:51 AM     Post Reply
Neurosurgeon Ben Carson says the White House wanted him to apologize for “offending” President Obama after he famously delivered a conservative message at the National Prayer Breakfast last year. Carson, the former director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, recalls the events surrounding his 2013 speech in his new book, One Nation: What We Can All Do To Save America’s Future. The Daily Caller obtained an advance copy of the book, which is set for release May 20. “He did not appear to be hostile or angry,” Carson writes of Obama, “but within a matter of minutes after the conclusion of

Obama Generation Losing
Interest in Obama

46 replie(s)
Wall Street Journal, by James Freeman    Original Article
Posted By: Desert Fox- 4/14/2014 4:23:09 PM     Post Reply
President Obama inspired a generation of young people to support his historic election in 2008. And in 2012, despite the struggles of his first term, Mr. Obama still managed to win the support of a full 60% of voters age 18-29. But the man who once dreamed of being a transformative leader in the Reagan mold is inspiring few of those young people to follow his lead. "For all the talk about the movement that elected Mr. Obama, the more notable movement of Obama supporters has been away from politics. It appears that few of the young people who voted

Why You Should Be Sympathetic
Toward Cliven Bundy

44 replie(s)
Powerline, by John Hinderaker    Original Article
Posted By: Toledo- 4/15/2014 8:40:58 AM     Post Reply
On Saturday, I wrote about the standoff at Bundy Ranch. That post drew a remarkable amount of traffic, even though, as I wrote then, I had not quite decided what to make of the story. Since then, I have continued to study the facts and have drawn some conclusions. Here they are. First, it must be admitted that legally, Bundy doesn’t have a leg to stand on. The Bureau of Land Management has been charging him grazing fees since the early 1990s, which he has refused to pay. Further, BLM has issued orders limiting the area on which Bundy’s cows can

Megyn Kelly and the
Sandberg Head Shaker

38 replie(s)
American Thinker, by Richard F. Miniter    Original Article
Posted By: magnante- 4/15/2014 9:16:05 AM     Post Reply
Megyn Kelly’s "Kelly File" is a great news show. She’s incisive, informed and customarily handles the toughest guest with aplomb. But her lengthy interview of Facebook C.O.O. Sheryl Sandberg about her second book in the Lean In series Lean In: For Graduates was a head shaker. Amazing that she of all people allowed Sandberg to restring the same old, same old, shamed, and shopworn feminist myths about women and girls and then jangle it in front of her viewing audience like something new out of the box. Indeed Kelly all but genuflected in front of this woman. Kept her on thru

Chelsea Clinton no longer
ruling out politics

35 replie(s)
The Hill (Washington DC), by Judy Katz    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 4/14/2014 11:57:36 AM     Post Reply
Chelsea Clinton says when people ask her these days whether she wants to go into politics, her answer isn’t an automatic “no.” The 34-year-old former first daughter told Fast Company in an interview published Monday, “for so long the answer was just a visceral no. Not because I had made any conscientious, deliberate decision, but since people had been asking for as long as literally I could remember, it was no." Now, the only child of former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton explains, "I live in a city and a state and a country where I

Glaring limits of the Civil Rights
Act: We need to redistribute wealth

34 replie(s)
Salon Magazine, by Matt Bruenig    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/14/2014 7:20:41 PM     Post Reply
Although the Civil Rights Act, the landmark legislation which just reached its 50th anniversary, made great strides in desegregating the economy, economic discrimination is still widespread, and anti-discrimination legislation alone can never rectify the economic damage inflicted upon blacks by slavery and our Jim Crow apartheid regime. The Civil Rights Act was a mild reform, all things considered, but one conservatives fought with vigor and one many conservatives are still bitter about to this day. When the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, the primary purpose was to root out discrimination in public accommodations (like hotels and movie theaters)

White is not right: Campus admins ask
for help weeding out white people

31 replie(s)
Daily Caller, by Robby Soave    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 7:47:18 PM     Post Reply
Western Washington University sent a questionnaire to students asking them for advice on how the administration could succeed at making sure that in future years, “we are not as white as we are today.” The question notes that WWU’s racial make up does not perfectly reflect the nation at large, and asks students to consider strategies that other universities have used to focus on skin color as the paramount indicator of a student-applicant’s worth. The president of WWU has stated that his explicit goal is to reduce the white population on campus, according to Campus Reform. “I’ve said before and I’ll say it


Post Reply   Close thread 722644





Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google


© 2014 Lucianne.com Media Inc.

~~~c~~~