Have your say! "Free Speech" or Muslim bashing? Do you support Iraq troop withdrawal? Iran invasion?
  • Please read our posting policy before adding a comment
  • Target areas: Operation "Anyone But Labour" 2006
  • Sunday, February 05, 2006

    Bush regime have murder in mind

    According to this article, from Newsweek, not content with various illegal actions carried out, the regime now want to go one step further, and allow extrajudicual executions on US soil:

    In the latest twist in the debate over presidential powers, a Justice Department official suggested that in certain circumstances, the president might have the power to order the killing of terrorist suspects inside the United States. Steven Bradbury, acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel, went to a closed-door Senate intelligence committee meeting last week to defend President George W. Bush's surveillance program.
    See all recent "A Logical Voice" posts

    2 Comments:

    At 2/05/2006 10:53:00 pm, Blogger Jack said...

    Well, having been in a war I know the difference between shooting enemy and shooting civilians because your intelligence says they "might" or "could" be enemy.

    Having been in intelligence, I know how often we're wrong.

    Having seen how this admin seems most adept at cherry picking faulty intelligence and then proceeding blindly into a mess (WMD-2,400+ deaths and counting), I have little faith they'll be suddenly adept at using the power to kill people in America, citizens AND/or other.
    Having been an American, I've read American history. I realize, therefore, that even with an occupying Army of the most powerful military then known (Brits), PLUS having American/Tory sympathizers in their midst, and in numbers that often exceeded the forces that wanted to offer blood and treasure to wrest freedom from a government/monarchy that had begun giving huge tax breaks to corporations (a certain tea corp. that the nobles owned much stock in), our courageous Founding fathers made a Constitution, AND a 4th Amendment, a priority. That was so EVEN with the Saint of their day, George Washington, as the President. He, and the others, did NOT want to empower the President with the very powers that those in America, who quake at the word terrorist and would prefer a safe/calm police state, now wish to grant our Executive.

    As Benjamin Franklin wrote: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

    See, I live in NYC, worked on the construction of the Trade Center, had my daughter watch the first plane hit as she sat in a bus a block from the building and we've all been breathing the air the Bush admin lied and said was safe.
    But I still refuse to surrender America to those 19 maniacs who used our planes as their missiles.
    If we could fight many wars and many more battles to keep our Constitution supreme, I can't understand traitorous cowards who scream "surrender our sacred rights to protect me from a few dozen maniacs." That sickens me!

    Of course, as odds are Hillary will be the next Pres (not my first choice), I guess the right-wing figures they can trust the Clinton's to use all these Kingly powers (like searching your home, listening to and reading your private communication and, only when needed of course, ordering the death of your neighbor) well?

     
    At 2/06/2006 11:08:00 am, Blogger Truth Seeker said...

    Well, Jack, I think you made your point very well indeed, and I don't think I could add anything to what you've said on the subject. Thanks for commenting.

     

    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home