Posted on 10/03/2011 7:24:06 PM PDT by PerryBachmann2012
(CNN) – Businessman Herman Cain previously advocated for a criminal trial in the event that al Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki was captured.
But now that al-Awlaki has been killed by a drone missile, the 2012 GOP presidential candidate is "pleased that we have one less al Qaeda member that's threatening us," according to campaign spokesman JD Gordon.
When pressed on whether Cain's feelings represent a departure from his earlier views, that al-Awlaki was an American citizen and deserved a trial, Gordon said, "It would be better to try him in court (but) if that's not feasible, we don't want him out there."
In remarks made last May and posted on the Atlantic's website, Cain says al-Awlaki, "should be charged."
"And since he's an American citizen, he should be tried in our courts," he continued.
When asked if it would be legal for President to issue a kill order for al-Awlaki, Cain said, "In his case, no, because he's an American citizen."
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
Did the attack happen in a war zone? Was he on the good guys side or the bad guys side? Would it be practical to bring all the bad guys back here for a trial? Do you really think your birth place can exempt you from being a casualty in a war? Would you care to comment on the Bin Laden situation and Seal Team 6?
Who makes that judgment? Under our Constitution, judgments in military operations are made by the Commander-in-Chief. That’s why it’s important who is elected as Commander-in-Chief.
When Truman decided to destroy two entire Japanese cities with atomic weapons, he did not have to consult with Congress or ask the permission of a judge. It was a military operation, and therefore was his judgment to make.
Killing al-Qaeda leaders overseas by a bomb from an aircraft is a military operation.
In the case of an al-Qaeda member found in an area under control of our country such as an apartment in Queens, then we don’t need to make a military strike against him, but nevertheless as a member of a foreign army who has taken up arms, he would be subject to the jurisdiction of military tribunals.
Who is more likely to sign legislation to build a fence, refuse to negotiate taxes ala Reagan, putting conservatives on the courts, dial back the agencies? Perry, Romney, or Cain. Vote for what you want. It is neither a horse race nor American Idol.
Does anyone figure the Perry pimp spamming this story and throwing rocks ought to notice there is a big glass house in TX?
>>Did the attack happen in a war zone? Was he on the good guys side or the bad guys side? Would it be practical to bring all the bad guys back here for a trial? Do you really think your birth place can exempt you from being a casualty in a war? Would you care to comment on the Bin Laden situation and Seal Team 6?
No. Bad. No. No, it was an assassination on foreign soil. Not related.
The point is, he is an American on foreign soil and was assassinated for a crime that he was never tried for. THIS IS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION. He probably is two steps away from the devil’s uncle, but he still has the same rights and you and I do.
That's true, but if
1. I take up arms in al Qaeda, which
2. is a foreign military organization which has declared war against us and which Congress has authorized the President to make war against, and
3. I am in the field outside the ability of the US or one of our military allies to bring in peacefully, then
I may constitutionally be killed in a military operation in no different manner than any other member of al Qaeda operating in the field.
We probably could go on all night about this. We probably agree on most things. But not this. I have a hard time differentiating him from Bin Laden.
Deflecting from the subject doesn't change the truth it just delays the time till people see it.
Cain was asked to sign a Pro-Life pledge and said he was Pro-Life but wouldn't sign a pledge to that effect.
Cain has proposed adding a new national sales tax without eliminating the income tax.
Cain has made it clear he doesn't know anything about foreign policy, but says he will work on it.
Cain says he's opposed to the mosque in TN, but then flip flops and says he's not.
Cain generates a lot of excitement because he is so rough around the edges and inexperienced. In a general election it won't be perceived as an asset. Also, he didn't hesitate to jump into using racial politics to smear Perry given the opportunity by the media. All in all not somebody I can vote for.
It would be refreshing for politicians to say “I’m not sure; I’ll have to look into that some more”, from time to time. The electorate would punish them for it, though. You get whom you vote for.
However, I don't think Cain can raise enough $$$ to beat Romney and the RINO establishment. And I don't think he can get a majority of delegates. Above all, I don't think he can beat back the Lamestream media, as his unfortunate interviews with Amanpour and Chris Wallace (yes he is part of the LSM like O'Reilly) showed. He was played like a fiddle on the hunting camp issue. Just wait till the LSM actually starts to ask him some tough questions.
In summary, Cain will realistically not be the nominee, but will be among Mitt's top choices for VP. He'd beat the pants off Biden in a debate.
And we're screwed again. Say hello to Pres. Romney, the third leg of the Rudy McRomney stool (and stool is the key word here). If you're looking for flip-floppery on a massive scale, just wait till Feb. 2013...
Have you read Cain’s campaign platforms on his website? You don’t sound as though you have taken the time to examine them.
Meanwhile Obama continues EPA drone attacks on ANWAR al-Alaska.
Rick Perry chaired the Gore campaign in Texas. That is a little more notable than just being “active”. He was Gore's man in Texas. I am sorry but that is an issue for me.
The person who posted this thread has been very busy since they first joined FreeRepublic a couple of weeks ago. He/she seems to spend most of his/her time attacking Herman Cain. I don't think I have seen any threads from him/her that had anything to do with the other candidate in his/her pseudonym.
Would you believe there has been some revisionist history about whether Perry held the title of Al Gore's TX campaign chairman? Seems some anonymous sources now say Perry didn't have that title. What is it with Texas and anonymous sources?
Bin Laden was not American. He did not have the Constitution on his side.
In the war on the wrong side, citizen or not, come home and be tried or stay and do battle and suffer the conseqences. Had Bin Laden been born in Cambridge Mass, we would have treated him differently?
Cain was a registered Republican prior to 2002-2003.
Your posts look like you are going postal. I’m happy you are supporting Rick Perry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.