Posted on 10/25/2012 7:54:33 PM PDT by opentalk
Cornered by reporters with video cameras, former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, a senior adviser to President Obama's reelection campaign, attempted to defend the kill list...
The second notable statement concerns the killing of 16-year-old American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki..
ADAMSON: ...It's an American citizen that is being targeted without due process, without trial. And, he's underage. He's a minor.
GIBBS: I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don't think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.
.. He was hit by a drone strike elsewhere... his father had already been dead for two weeks. Gibbs nevertheless defends the strike, not by arguing that the kid was a threat, or that killing him was an accident, but by saying that his late father irresponsibly joined al Qaeda terrorists. Killing an American citizen without due process
(Excerpt) Read more at m.theatlantic.com ...
“Yes, the justification is wrong. But if you are a 16 year old hanging out with people who are behind enemy lines who are plotting to kill us, I have little sympathy for you.”
I’m with you. There are lots of fun places to visit and hang out - like Australia, Germany, Italy, Peru, etc. Is it really necessary to visit a country that President Obama is blasting off the map (perhaps the only policy I respect of Obama), given all the alternatives - particularly when your pops is US Enemy #1?
From the article:
“Take Pakistan, where the CIA kills some people without even knowing their identities.”
In war, most people are killed by people who do not know their identities. What kind of P.C. is this, that you have to ask an enemy combatant for I.D. before you can strike them?
Lesseee, he was hanging out with Moslem terrorists who are plotting to kill Americans?
I’m gonna have to go with 0bamao on this one.
I mean, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Yup. I sleep well knowing a terrorist is dead, whether he’s 10, 12 or 16. The only identity I need is “dead terrorist # 2, 800, 416”. Liberals love criminals, as the saying goes..
Now the US finds it a-ok to kill the son for the sins of the father.
Wow.
Never thought I would agree with Hussein..
Don’t forget, all you Tea Partiers are “terrorists”. Watch out for attacks on your high school sons.
Dittos to that. I don’t give a rip how old the little goat humpin’ muslim terrorist is either. (Wasn’t there a video from a few years ago with some 12 year old muslim ‘head chopper in training’ sawin’ away shown?)
If the father takes his son into the armed camp of the enemy, behind enemy lines, and the son is killed in a strike on the enemy, I suppose that is killing the son for the sins of the father.
It is a bit of a stretch. This did not occur in a place where warrants could be served.
The impression that I get is that the article is trying to give that impression without any evidence that it is so.
From what I have read, the 16 year old was killed in the presence of a number of other young men around a fire by the side of a road in the tribal areas of Yemen that are not under government control.
Who else was there, and who might have been targeted and why, are not explained.
This is how countries are lulled down the totalitarian garden path. First they start with the unsavory, undesirable,poor, and powerless-unsympathetic people that no one really cares about or has a poor opinion of them for some reason.
Once that is all set up and going well they start expanding the definition of what defines this class of citizens that is not entitled to their constitutional rights.
Pretty soon everyone is under their thumb one way or another, and has no right to object, to have due process or even breath.
It's true that they were outside the US's jurisdiction; however, it's the justification offered that is so... unjust.
I also hesitate to point a finger saying he was palling around w/ terrorists for two reasons: 1) if he were then Gibbs would not make main point about the father, but about the terrorists; and 2) the government's willingness to label near anyone [who the government doesn't like] as terrorist {ex Tea Party}... this reediness to do so robs the term of its meaning and makes it utterly useless.
“Don’t forget, all you Tea Partiers are “terrorists”. Watch out for attacks on your high school sons.”
Heck, I’ll give them the coordinates if my kid is in Yemen, plotting to kill Americans.
no big deal....
just hush and watch with admiration as Obama polishes his Peace prize...
It’s not collateral damage, there was no exigent circumstance and no POTUS should have the power to assasinate 16 year old American citizens anywhere. Especially when they are not wanted for anything by anybody.
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.