[from occupied ga]

Let's set a precedent where the government can kill a US citizen in anothen country without going through the judicial process, and then let's lower the bar to let the government kill anyone whom they claim is a "terrorist" any time any place again without due process. After all it's to keep the children safe. Monumentally bad idea.

Which is the greater risk, some supposed terrorist or the entire US government with due process gradually removed?

[Free Vulcan]

Yep. That’s why Justice is dragging it’s feet. It doesn’t want to do the due diligence because it wants to set the precedent, and slide it all under the rug.

Then old Joe Wysyzofbnyk, humble retired plumber from Skokie IL is now a terrorist because he’s a big property rights guy that fights predatory zoning and EPA land grabs.

[driftdiver]

So an American terrorist in a third world hellhole is a threat to the US.

But non-Americans with ties to terror organizations and activities are safe to allow into our country as immigrants.

The world according to bam bam.

[RJS1950]

If they want to, they will do all of that anyway regardless of geographic location.

At this point, this dirtbag needs to be put into a bag in the dirt. He is working overseas to kill americans and just as the GITMO detainees do not merit due process, neither does he.

There were american citizens who fought for the Nazis in WWII and we didn’t wring our hands over killing them on the battlefield; we killed them as enemy combatants. Muslim terrorists deserve no less.

Now, is Obama using this to bolster his image; you bet he is but that makes no difference either. Those of us who understand that he is the enemy are not going to look more highly on him if he kills this POS through whatever means. Those who now look at him favorably, regardless, will still admire him for his “bravery”.

[null and void]

Which is the greater risk, some supposed terrorist or the entire US government with due process gradually removed?

Precisely.