Napolitano: Obama Has Not Hesitated To Kill Foreign and American Innocent Children

[SA210]

The Judge and panelists calling out the left on their silence and hypocrisy, for allowing the President to murder innocent children (including American children) just because Obama is "their guy", and the hypocrisy of trotting out children for his bogus speech. He's right, shame on them.


"We have a President who has not hesitated to kill foreign innocent children or American innocent children when they are in a foreign country. He loses credibility when he stands with innocent American children and says 'I'm going to keep you safe,'" Napolitano said.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tJqvi1ZUHM

[FuzzyLumpkins]

YOUTUBE!!!

[ChumpDumper]

So what?

[redzero]

Are you a Christian or a you by any chance, SA210?

[ElNono]

Napolitano believes that the 9/11 incidents including the subsequent collapse of the World Trade Tower buildings in New York City did not take place as the US government has publicly communicated. “It's "hard for me to believe that" World Trade Center building 7 "came down by itself," said Napolitano, “twenty years from now, people will look at 9–11 the way we look at the assassination of JFK today. It couldn't possibly have been done the way the government told us."

[mingus]

Liberals? Hypocrites? Noooooooo...

[boutons_deux]

Fox Repug Propaganda network. :lol

Totally supporting dubya and dickhead invading Iraq for oil, and 100Ks of civilian Iraqis slaughtered.

FRP network, like the NBA, cares.

[Winehole23]

extensively discussed here, roundly denounced by board libs.

btw, do Bill Moyers and Mother Jones count as liberal sources? Glenn Greenwald?

the fiction that the press doesn't cover the drone war and that liberals don't denounce it is easily disproved with a quick search.


http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128138
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20464
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188008
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150439
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186315
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200086
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=203865
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=204726
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154005
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117308
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191229
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201785&p=6053004&viewfull=1#post6053004
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207594
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185116&p=5424226&viewfull=1#post5424226

[Winehole23]

the screeching isn't nearly so dire as under GWB, but it would be crass overstatement to say the press and liberals have fallen completely silent.

[Winehole23]

the drone war is more than a club to beat liberals with, or it could be, if you really cared so much.

[Winehole23]

seems you don't though

[spursncowboys]

the screeching isn't nearly so dire as under GWB, but it would be crass overstatement to say the press and liberals have fallen completely silent.

Does anyone have lexis nexis. It would be interesting to search bush's years compared to obama's years in op eds.

[Winehole23]

more:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145880
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185176
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=185116
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186853&p=5491279&viewfull=1#post5491279

ACLU related: http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160260

[Winehole23]

Does anyone have lexis nexis. It would be interesting to search bush's years compared to obama's years in op eds.not much of a comparison wrt to the drone war. Bush didn't start using drones until 2008. Drone is war is bigger under Obama by at least a factor of five, and under GWB there was no due process-free assassination of US citizens. Obama thought that one up.

[Winehole23]

if I had to guess, there have been way more drone related op-eds under Obama.

[Winehole23]

simple matter of opportunity. Bush didn't do it for very long.

[Winehole23]

I'd be interested to see the results of the search, too. Anybody can guess.

[SA210]

the screeching isn't nearly so dire as under GWB, but it would be crass overstatement to say the press and liberals have fallen completely silent.

There is no doubt that they are silent and hypocritical, go back to the Bush years and the threds made in this forum at this time. Same libs wanted Bush's head on a stick. That's very different from a couple articles and mentions here and there on Obama. Waaaaay different. Pure bs for anyone to lie about that.

[SA210]

Fox Repug Propaganda network. :lol

Totally supporting dubya and dickhead invading Iraq for oil, and 100Ks of civilian Iraqis slaughtered.

FRP network, like the NBA, cares.

Well, I never supported Bush's wars, invasions, etc. So regardless of the station giving the information, the information itself it factual indeed.

Where are the outspoken anti-war democrats that hated these same policies under Bush?

The extremely loud anti-war news pieces, the anti-war Democrats from over 4 years ago have seemed to have vanished. hmm how convenient. Sorry kiddos, you have to die, because democrats thinks it's ok for their guy to do to you what they hated Bush for.

::crickets::

[boutons_deux]

In my anti-right-wing newsfeeds, I've seen no support for drone assassinations, plenty of objection to them.

google "democrat politicians against drone assassination war"

[ChumpDumper]

The SA210 echo chamber is still functioning to perfection.

[SA210]

NY TIMES: Who Says You Can Kill Americans, Mr. President?


PRESIDENT OBAMA has refused to tell Congress or the American people why he believes the Constitution gives, or fails to deny, him the authority to secretly target and kill American citizens who he suspects are involved in terrorist activities overseas. So far he has killed three that we know of.

Presidents had never before, to our knowledge, targeted specific Americans for military strikes. There are no court decisions that tell us if he is acting lawfully. Mr. Obama tells us not to worry, though, because his lawyers say it is fine, because experts guide the decisions and because his advisers have set up a careful process to help him decide whom he should kill. He must think we should be relieved.

The three Americans known to have been killed, in two drone strikes in Yemen in the fall of 2011, are Anwar al-Awlaki (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/a/anwar_al_awlaki/index.html), a radical Muslim cleric who was born in New Mexico; Samir Khan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/samir_khan/index.html), a naturalized American citizen who had lived in New York and North Carolina, and was killed alongside Mr. Awlaki; and, in a strike two weeks later, Mr. Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was born in Colorado.

Most of us think these people were probably terrorists anyway. So the president’s reassurances have been enough to keep criticism at an acceptable level for the White House. Democrats in Congress and in the press have only gingerly questioned the claims by a Democratic president that he is right about the law and careful when he orders drone attacks on our citizens. And Republicans, who favor aggressive national security powers for the executive branch, look forward to the day when one of their own can wield them again.

But a few of our representatives have spoken up — sort of. Several months ago, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, began limply requesting the Department of Justice memorandums that justify the targeted killing program. At a committee hearing, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., reminded of the request, demurred and shared a rueful chuckle with the senator. Mr. Leahy did not want to be rude, it seems — though some of us remember him being harder on former President George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto R. Gonzales, in 2005.

So, even though Congress has the absolute power under the Constitution to receive these documents, the Democratic-controlled Senate has not fought this president to get them. If the senators did, and the president held fast to his refusal, they could go to court and demand them, and I believe they would win. Perhaps even better, they could skip getting the legal memos and go right to the meat of the matter — using oversight and perhaps legislating to control the president’s killing powers. That isn’t happening either.

Thank goodness we have another branch of government to step into the fray. It is the job of the federal courts to interpret the Constitution and laws, and thus to define the boundaries of the powers of the branches of government, including their own.

In reining in the branches, the courts have been toughest on themselves, however. A long line of Supreme Court cases require that judges wait for cases to come to them. They can take cases only from plaintiffs who have a personal stake in the outcome; they cannot decide political questions; they cannot rule on an issue not squarely before them.

Because of these and other limitations, no case has made it far enough in federal court for a judge to rule on the merits of the basic constitutional questions at stake here. A pending case filed in July by the families of the three dead Americans does raise Fourth and Fifth Amendment challenges to the president’s killings of their relatives. We will see if the judge agrees to consider the constitutional questions or dismisses the case, citing limitations on his own power.

In another case, decided two weeks ago, a federal judge in Manhattan, Colleen McMahon, ruled, grudgingly, that the American Civil Liberties Union and two New York Times reporters could not get access, under the Freedom of Information Act, to classified legal memorandums that were relied on to justify the targeted killing program. In her opinion, she expressed serious reservations about the president’s interpretation of the constitutional questions. But the merits of the program were not before her, just access to the Justice Department memos, so her opinion was, in effect, nothing but an interesting read.

So at the moment, the legislature and the courts are flummoxed by, or don’t care about, how or whether to take on this aggressive program. But Mr. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, should know, of all people, what needs to be done. He was highly critical when Mr. Bush applied new constitutional theories to justify warrantless wiretapping and “enhanced interrogation.” In his 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama demanded transparency, and after taking office, he released legal memos that the Bush administration had kept secret. Once the self-serving constitutional analysis that the Bush team had used was revealed, legal scholars from across the spectrum studied and denounced it.

While Mr. Obama has criticized his predecessor, he has also worried about his successors. Last fall, when the election’s outcome was still in doubt, Mr. Obama talked about drone strikes in general and said Congress and the courts should in some manner “rein in” presidents by putting a “legal architecture in place.” His comments seemed to reflect concern that future presidents should perhaps not wield alone such awesome and unchecked power over life and death — of anyone, not just Americans. Oddly, under current law, Congress and the courts are involved when presidents eavesdrop on Americans, detain them or harshly interrogate them — but not when they kill them.

It is not just the most recent president, this one and the next whom we need to worry about when it comes to improper exercise of power. It is every president. Mr. Obama should declassify and release, to Congress, the press and the public, documents that set forth the detailed constitutional and statutory analysis he relies on for targeting and killing American citizens. Perhaps Mr. Obama still believes that, in a democracy, the people have a right to know the legal theories upon which the president executes his great powers. Certainly, we can hope so. After all, his interpretation might be wrong.

Vicki Divoll is a former general counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and former deputy legal adviser to the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/who-says-you-can-kill-americans-mr-president.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


================================================== =======================================

^^^^ lol If that was done under Bush, this forum would be as crazy as it was over 4 years ago, outraged, upset, calling for criminal charges, impeachment, etc. And the news would be covering it daily.

lol Murdering Americans without due process of law, hypocrites

[LnGrrrR]

Well, I never supported Bush's wars, invasions, etc. So regardless of the station giving the information, the information itself it factual indeed.

Where are the outspoken anti-war democrats that hated these same policies under Bush?

The extremely loud anti-war news pieces, the anti-war Democrats from over 4 years ago have seemed to have vanished. hmm how convenient. Sorry kiddos, you have to die, because democrats thinks it's ok for their guy to do to you what they hated Bush for.

::crickets::

You mean, the Democrats on here that consistently hold Obama to task the same way they did Bush? Could you even provide ONE example that shows the hypocrisy of board liberals? One?

I mean, assuming you could read this. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

SA210 doesn't even care about the children -- he only cares about his own self-righteousness.

[SA210]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vk86cs6j_pQ






NY TIMES: Who Says You Can Kill Americans, Mr. President?


PRESIDENT OBAMA has refused to tell Congress or the American people why he believes the Constitution gives, or fails to deny, him the authority to secretly target and kill American citizens who he suspects are involved in terrorist activities overseas. So far he has killed three that we know of.

Presidents had never before, to our knowledge, targeted specific Americans for military strikes. There are no court decisions that tell us if he is acting lawfully. Mr. Obama tells us not to worry, though, because his lawyers say it is fine, because experts guide the decisions and because his advisers have set up a careful process to help him decide whom he should kill. He must think we should be relieved.

The three Americans known to have been killed, in two drone strikes in Yemen in the fall of 2011, are Anwar al-Awlaki (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/a/anwar_al_awlaki/index.html), a radical Muslim cleric who was born in New Mexico; Samir Khan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/samir_khan/index.html), a naturalized American citizen who had lived in New York and North Carolina, and was killed alongside Mr. Awlaki; and, in a strike two weeks later, Mr. Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was born in Colorado.

Most of us think these people were probably terrorists anyway. So the president’s reassurances have been enough to keep criticism at an acceptable level for the White House. Democrats in Congress and in the press have only gingerly questioned the claims by a Democratic president that he is right about the law and careful when he orders drone attacks on our citizens. And Republicans, who favor aggressive national security powers for the executive branch, look forward to the day when one of their own can wield them again.

But a few of our representatives have spoken up — sort of. Several months ago, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, began limply requesting the Department of Justice memorandums that justify the targeted killing program. At a committee hearing, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., reminded of the request, demurred and shared a rueful chuckle with the senator. Mr. Leahy did not want to be rude, it seems — though some of us remember him being harder on former President George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto R. Gonzales, in 2005.

So, even though Congress has the absolute power under the Constitution to receive these documents, the Democratic-controlled Senate has not fought this president to get them. If the senators did, and the president held fast to his refusal, they could go to court and demand them, and I believe they would win. Perhaps even better, they could skip getting the legal memos and go right to the meat of the matter — using oversight and perhaps legislating to control the president’s killing powers. That isn’t happening either.

Thank goodness we have another branch of government to step into the fray. It is the job of the federal courts to interpret the Constitution and laws, and thus to define the boundaries of the powers of the branches of government, including their own.

In reining in the branches, the courts have been toughest on themselves, however. A long line of Supreme Court cases require that judges wait for cases to come to them. They can take cases only from plaintiffs who have a personal stake in the outcome; they cannot decide political questions; they cannot rule on an issue not squarely before them.

Because of these and other limitations, no case has made it far enough in federal court for a judge to rule on the merits of the basic constitutional questions at stake here. A pending case filed in July by the families of the three dead Americans does raise Fourth and Fifth Amendment challenges to the president’s killings of their relatives. We will see if the judge agrees to consider the constitutional questions or dismisses the case, citing limitations on his own power.

In another case, decided two weeks ago, a federal judge in Manhattan, Colleen McMahon, ruled, grudgingly, that the American Civil Liberties Union and two New York Times reporters could not get access, under the Freedom of Information Act, to classified legal memorandums that were relied on to justify the targeted killing program. In her opinion, she expressed serious reservations about the president’s interpretation of the constitutional questions. But the merits of the program were not before her, just access to the Justice Department memos, so her opinion was, in effect, nothing but an interesting read.

So at the moment, the legislature and the courts are flummoxed by, or don’t care about, how or whether to take on this aggressive program. But Mr. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, should know, of all people, what needs to be done. He was highly critical when Mr. Bush applied new constitutional theories to justify warrantless wiretapping and “enhanced interrogation.” In his 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama demanded transparency, and after taking office, he released legal memos that the Bush administration had kept secret. Once the self-serving constitutional analysis that the Bush team had used was revealed, legal scholars from across the spectrum studied and denounced it.

While Mr. Obama has criticized his predecessor, he has also worried about his successors. Last fall, when the election’s outcome was still in doubt, Mr. Obama talked about drone strikes in general and said Congress and the courts should in some manner “rein in” presidents by putting a “legal architecture in place.” His comments seemed to reflect concern that future presidents should perhaps not wield alone such awesome and unchecked power over life and death — of anyone, not just Americans. Oddly, under current law, Congress and the courts are involved when presidents eavesdrop on Americans, detain them or harshly interrogate them — but not when they kill them.

It is not just the most recent president, this one and the next whom we need to worry about when it comes to improper exercise of power. It is every president. Mr. Obama should declassify and release, to Congress, the press and the public, documents that set forth the detailed constitutional and statutory analysis he relies on for targeting and killing American citizens. Perhaps Mr. Obama still believes that, in a democracy, the people have a right to know the legal theories upon which the president executes his great powers. Certainly, we can hope so. After all, his interpretation might be wrong.

Vicki Divoll is a former general counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and former deputy legal adviser to the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/who-says-you-can-kill-americans-mr-president.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


================================================== =======================================

^^^^ lol If that was done under Bush, this forum would be as crazy as it was over 4 years ago, outraged, upset, calling for criminal charges, impeachment, etc. And the news would be covering it daily.

lol Murdering Americans without due process of law, hypocrites

[ChumpDumper]

Honestly though, I never had too much of a problem with drone strikes even under Bush. Had the CIA and military not bitched over who was going to pay for the things they could have been used much, much sooner against terra. Whether we want to call it war or not, it's war.

[DMX7]

Honestly though, I never had too much of a problem with drone strikes even under Bush. Had the CIA and military not bitched over who was going to pay for the things they could have been used much, much sooner against terra. Whether we want to call it war or not, it's war.

Same here... you can go through every one of my many many criticism of Bush. Drone attacks was not one of them.

SA210 just comes across as an ankle-biting, bitter, partisan hack hiding behind "da kidzzzzzzz".

[ChumpDumper]

I mean, Jesus -- how many thousands of kids did we kill bombing Berlin, Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hirosihma, Nagasaki? Sure, we started out the war thinking we could just get away with "precision bombing" strictly military targets, but that shit just didn't get the job done so we ended up just blowing up everything and everybody.

SA210 would be demanding Truman's being tried as a war criminal. Some of those airmen might still be alive, dude. You need to go Wiesenthal on those motherfuckers if you are morally consistent.

[InRareForm]

Whether we want to call it war or not, it's war.

Don't wars end?

[ChumpDumper]

Don't wars end?On your schedule?

[boutons_deux]

another anti-conservative article against weaponized drones

King: I Have a Dream. Obama: I Have a Drone.

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14012-king-i-have-a-dream-obama-i-have-a-drone

So, as usual, Napolitano and his fellow shitbags are lying.

[SA210]

Same here... you can go through every one of my many many criticism of Bush. Drone attacks was not one of them.

SA210 just comes across as an ankle-biting, bitter, partisan hack hiding behind "da kidzzzzzzz".

This is 100% pure bullshit and spin just like the others in here. First off it's a lie to say I'm partisan. F Bush and Obama. This is about the truth, f party lines. I also tore into Rand Paul for endorsing Romney. You come off as a liar with blind accusations with nothing to back it up other than simply jumping on the bandwagon of changing the subject and ignoring what's really going on with his foreign policy.

The main point isn't exclusively drone strikes, it's his foreign policy overall and I've been consistent on this, whether it's Obama or Bush. Obamas drones, secret kills lists, NDAA, expansion of illegal wars, it goes on and on. It is a FACT, Democrats nationwide and in senate, Congress, and in this political forum cried words of possible impeachment, murder, investigations, and all kinds of things on Bush, and nothing even remotely close to that on Obama even though he has lied about his promises to end all this bullshit and promised transparency and has done some things that are even WORSE than Bush (KILLING AMERICANS, NDAA).

Just go back to the threads on Plame-Gate, everyone was so angry and OUTSPOKEN, upset and outraged at the Bush administration for outing a CIA agent that disagreed with his policies. Everyone was up in arms about it, so crazy, remember? Oh but Obama actually MURDERING Americans without charge or due process, nah, not a big deal. lol Stop the bullshit, stop your damn lying, assumptions and subject changing. Enough spin.

There should be a scandal on Fast and Furious alone, there should be a scandal all over the television like hell on Obamas NDAA and Secret Kill Lists, there should be a scandal on his illegal drone strikes that kill children with NO Declaration of war in any country whatsoever and his expansion of illegal war. There should be a scandal on television being covered on his attack on innocent whistelblowers and lies about transparency. All these things should have been covered during the debates and the elections and they weren't covered at all, and they are ALL scandals, each on there very own. Just like Plame-Gate, each one of these things should be scrutinized. And shame on anyone ignoring that fact and shame on yall for supporting such a lying murderous corrupt piece of shit. Those crimes make him no better than Bush.

Had Bush targeted and murdered 3 Americans with no proof, no charges or due process of law, in ILLEGAL actions in countries we have NO DECLARATION OF "WAR" in, this forum's head would explode, and it would be a scandal covered daily all over the media. Chris Matthew's head would fkn explode. Fuck your lies about that. You know it's true.

lol I love the spin though, it's pretty pathetic and very telling for some of you, really. lol Not even supposed to be at war right now. Trolls always coming in here and changing the subject and attacking the poster, tells me they are squirming and spinning because they don't want to admit they are wrong. Your little bullshit excuses that ya'll are against the policies as if that's good enough, but yet ignoring how outspoken and outraged people were at Bush. lol Major difference.

Some of yall can keep trying to spin it and attack me, but nothing changes the truth. You can't change the fact that Obama has killed 3 Americans with no charge or trial.

Some of you are flat out certainly living a lie.

[DMX7]

If you think more children died as a result of Obama's foriegn policy than of Bush's then there's no hope for you. Your blind visceral hatred of Obama has clearly clouded your judgement.

[redzero]

SA210 ducked another one of my questions again. He's probably preemptively labeled me a troll so he can justify ignoring posts.

[Latarian Milton]

the war is ended as long as no more amiercan soldiers get killed and who gives a fuck about the shitty living creatures? therefore the war in iraq had legitimately lasted for 8 years

[ChumpDumper]

This is 100% pure bullshit and spin just like the others in here. First off it's a lie to say I'm partisan. F Bush and Obama. This is about the truth, f party lines. I also tore into Rand Paul for endorsing Romney. You come off as a liar with blind accusations with nothing to back it up other than simply jumping on the bandwagon of changing the subject and ignoring what's really going on with his foreign policy.

The main point isn't exclusively drone strikes, it's his foreign policy overall and I've been consistent on this, whether it's Obama or Bush. Obamas drones, secret kills lists, NDAA, expansion of illegal wars, it goes on and on. It is a FACT, Democrats nationwide and in senate, Congress, and in this political forum cried words of possible impeachment, murder, investigations, and all kinds of things on Bush, and nothing even remotely close to that on Obama even though he has lied about his promises to end all this bullshit and promised transparency and has done some things that are even WORSE than Bush (KILLING AMERICANS, NDAA).

Just go back to the threads on Plame-Gate, everyone was so angry and OUTSPOKEN, upset and outraged at the Bush administration for outing a CIA agent that disagreed with his policies. Everyone was up in arms about it, so crazy, remember? Oh but Obama actually MURDERING Americans without charge or due process, nah, not a big deal. lol Stop the bullshit, stop your damn lying, assumptions and subject changing. Enough spin.

There should be a scandal on Fast and Furious alone, there should be a scandal all over the television like hell on Obamas NDAA and Secret Kill Lists, there should be a scandal on his illegal drone strikes that kill children with NO Declaration of war in any country whatsoever and his expansion of illegal war. There should be a scandal on television being covered on his attack on innocent whistelblowers and lies about transparency. All these things should have been covered during the debates and the elections and they weren't covered at all, and they are ALL scandals, each on there very own. Just like Plame-Gate, each one of these things should be scrutinized. And shame on anyone ignoring that fact and shame on yall for supporting such a lying murderous corrupt piece of shit. Those crimes make him no better than Bush.

Had Bush targeted and murdered 3 Americans with no proof, no charges or due process of law, in ILLEGAL actions in countries we have NO DECLARATION OF "WAR" in, this forum's head would explode, and it would be a scandal covered daily all over the media. Chris Matthew's head would fkn explode. Fuck your lies about that. You know it's true.

lol I love the spin though, it's pretty pathetic and very telling for some of you, really. lol Not even supposed to be at war right now. Trolls always coming in here and changing the subject and attacking the poster, tells me they are squirming and spinning because they don't want to admit they are wrong. Your little bullshit excuses that ya'll are against the policies as if that's good enough, but yet ignoring how outspoken and outraged people were at Bush. lol Major difference.

Some of yall can keep trying to spin it and attack me, but nothing changes the truth. You can't change the fact that Obama has killed 3 Americans with no charge or trial.

Some of you are flat out certainly living a lie.Again -- so what?

What are you going to do about it besides bitch about it on a message board?

Not immunize your child in protest?

Mission accomplished.

And you had two people here who aren't particularly bothered by this policy if you actually read other people's posts.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm glad other people are figuring out SA210 is a right wing shill who sanctimoniously pretends to hate Bush with the hope it gives his criticism of Obama more credibility.

[ElNono]

You mean, the Democrats on here that consistently hold Obama to task the same way they did Bush? Could you even provide ONE example that shows the hypocrisy of board liberals? One?

I mean, assuming you could read this. :lol

pretty much.

[Blake]

SA210 dropping spin bombs mixed with outright lies.

somebody not on his ignore should applaud the meltdown.

[spursncowboys]

if I had to guess, there have been way more drone related op-eds under Obama.
doubt it. That was kind of my point

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

SA210 dropping spin bombs mixed with outright lies.

somebody not on his ignore should applaud the meltdown.
I like how butthurt he gets when people make fun of his parenting skils

[SA210]

If you think more children died as a result of Obama's foriegn policy than of Bush's then there's no hope for you. Your blind visceral hatred of Obama has clearly clouded your judgement.


:lmao More spin and dodging from all the morons living a lie.

Why can't you talk about his murder of Americans without charge or trial? Bueller?...Bueller???

Why can't you talk about his assault and attack on whistleblowers?

Why can't you talk about his lies on transparency? Where are the CSPAN televised goings-on that he promised? Where are the 5 day bill reviews? Where are the records of proof for justification for kill lists and drone strikes, who is he really murdering, why? Why are Americans on those lists? Why can't he show us WHY they are on those lists?

Why can't you talk about his murder of children with no legal authorization or declaration of war?

Why can't you talk about all these policies that should be televised scandals?

Why can't you talk about the truth that all these types of policies, that Dems shouted against over 4 years ago?

Why can't you talk about how Obama ran against such policies instead of spinning it now into.. ":cry but but but Bush killed more kids :cry" lol.

This was all supposed to stop remember, suckers? What happened to ending it all? Electing him for change, twice? Talk about that, you hypocritical sheep. Yall sound pathetic, the excuses and compromising yall do to try and make it all right. lol

Why can't you or ANYONE show me proof that I supported Republicans on this board when Bush was in office? lol I'd love to see it.

Spinning and lying yalls way out of the truth, sorry excuses for scum

Keep living the lie. lol

[Blake]

A Ferris Bueller blast?

Boom snap

[DMX7]

:drunk

[SA210]

:tu That's what I thought.

[LnGrrrR]

So, SA can't provide the name of even one board liberal. Figures.

[SA210]

:lmao More spin and dodging from all the morons living a lie.

Why can't you talk about his murder of Americans without charge or trial? Bueller?...Bueller???

Why can't you talk about his assault and attack on whistleblowers?

Why can't you talk about his lies on transparency? Where are the CSPAN televised goings-on that he promised? Where are the 5 day bill reviews? Where are the records of proof for justification for kill lists and drone strikes, who is he really murdering, why? Why are Americans on those lists? Why can't he show us WHY they are on those lists?

Why can't you talk about his murder of children with no legal authorization or declaration of war?

Why can't you talk about all these policies that should be televised scandals?

Why can't you talk about the truth that all these types of policies, that Dems shouted against over 4 years ago?

Why can't you talk about how Obama ran against such policies instead of spinning it now into.. ":cry but but but Bush killed more kids :cry" lol.

This was all supposed to stop remember, suckers? What happened to ending it all? Electing him for change, twice? Talk about that, you hypocritical sheep. Yall sound pathetic, the excuses and compromising yall do to try and make it all right. lol

Why can't you or ANYONE show me proof that I supported Republicans on this board when Bush was in office? lol I'd love to see it.

Spinning and lying yalls way out of the truth, sorry excuses for scum

Keep living the lie. lol


lol spineless morons


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aiAdL8yy1Q

[redzero]

lol still ducking my posts
lol coward who puts people on ignore because he has no response

[SA210]

:lmao More spin and dodging from all the morons living a lie.

Why can't you talk about his murder of Americans without charge or trial? Bueller?...Bueller???

Why can't you talk about his assault and attack on whistleblowers?

Why can't you talk about his lies on transparency? Where are the CSPAN televised goings-on that he promised? Where are the 5 day bill reviews? Where are the records of proof for justification for kill lists and drone strikes, who is he really murdering, why? Why are Americans on those lists? Why can't he show us WHY they are on those lists?

Why can't you talk about his murder of children with no legal authorization or declaration of war?

Why can't you talk about all these policies that should be televised scandals?

Why can't you talk about the truth that all these types of policies, that Dems shouted against over 4 years ago?

Why can't you talk about how Obama ran against such policies instead of spinning it now into.. ":cry but but but Bush killed more kids :cry" lol.

This was all supposed to stop remember, suckers? What happened to ending it all? Electing him for change, twice? Talk about that, you hypocritical sheep. Yall sound pathetic, the excuses and compromising yall do to try and make it all right. lol

Why can't you or ANYONE show me proof that I supported Republicans on this board when Bush was in office? lol I'd love to see it.

Spinning and lying yalls way out of the truth, sorry excuses for scum

Keep living the lie. lol

[SA210]

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Quoting yourself and lmaoing it?

Fucked up, dude.

Have you rounded up the WWII airmen yet, Simon?

[SA210]

:lmao More spin and dodging from all the morons living a lie.

Why can't you talk about his murder of Americans without charge or trial? Bueller?...Bueller???

Why can't you talk about his assault and attack on whistleblowers?

Why can't you talk about his lies on transparency? Where are the CSPAN televised goings-on that he promised? Where are the 5 day bill reviews? Where are the records of proof for justification for kill lists and drone strikes, who is he really murdering, why? Why are Americans on those lists? Why can't he show us WHY they are on those lists?

Why can't you talk about his murder of children with no legal authorization or declaration of war?

Why can't you talk about all these policies that should be televised scandals?

Why can't you talk about the truth that all these types of policies, that Dems shouted against over 4 years ago?

Why can't you talk about how Obama ran against such policies instead of spinning it now into.. ":cry but but but Bush killed more kids :cry" lol.

This was all supposed to stop remember, suckers? What happened to ending it all? Electing him for change, twice? Talk about that, you hypocritical sheep. Yall sound pathetic, the excuses and compromising yall do to try and make it all right. lol

Why can't you or ANYONE show me proof that I supported Republicans on this board when Bush was in office? lol I'd love to see it.

Spinning and lying yalls way out of the truth, sorry excuses for scum

Keep living the lie. lol

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/530634_10151683110358849_1301523065_n.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

I'll take that as a no.

[Winehole23]

doubt it. That was kind of my pointback it up. I backed up mine. ACLU, Bill Moyers, Mother Jones and Glenn Greenwald don't count?

[Winehole23]

plus, what all was expressed in this forum, which you continue to ignore in favor of the lies you heard in the echo chamber. one thing's for sure, you didn't bitch about it here first.

[boutons_deux]

The Shadow That Hangs Over Obama's Second Term
Read more: President Obama Killing - Is President Obama Evil? - Esquire (http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/president-obama-evil-011813#ixzz2IWsQ74Ve) http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/president-obama-evil-011813#ixzz2IWsQ74Ve

[spursncowboys]

back it up. I backed up mine. ACLU, Bill Moyers, Mother Jones and Glenn Greenwald don't count?
I can't. I just remember the drum beat against it when Bush was in office. Also my point was about the small amount of time Bush was compared to Obama. The MSM has had well enough time to do to BHO what they did to Bush, in regards to drone attacks.
I, like i did when Bush was in office, do not understand what the big deal is about drone attacks. If you are against collateral damage then be against it. If you feel like it's not fair then say it. But IMO I don't understand.
You didn't back anything up. You just gave a little more context towards my simpleminded question. My complete idea if you just went by numbers that if you went by the top 20 newspapers op eds, top 20 largest cities' most popular newspaper op eds, and the most influential political magazine op eds, there is a huge difference from Bush's years to Obama's. For most people this is an accepted part of life- media bias. I'm kind of in that group. That is why I just put the one sentence question without really explaining more.
However, going by my 'not so good' memory, I remember the vicious editorials about Bush using the drones. Drones attack is a good control since it was never a real main story-in Bush's years or Obama's.

[spursncowboys]

plus, what all was expressed in this forum, which you continue to ignore in favor of the lies you heard in the echo chamber. one thing's for sure, you didn't bitch about it here first.
What echo chamber?
What am I ignoring?

[boutons_deux]

"the drum beat against it when Bush was in office"

because you kept being reminded by it that you were on the wrong side of the dubya/dickheads bogus war for oil that kills 100Ks more civilians than Barry?

and who was beating the drums? It sure wasn't the right-wing hate machine, nor MSM, all of whom remained silent or supported the Iraq invasion.

[Clipper Nation]

I'm glad other people are figuring out SA210 is a right wing shill who sanctimoniously pretends to hate Bush with the hope it gives his criticism of Obama more credibility.

Tbh, he's claimed to be economically leftist on here before, so he's not even a right-wing shill.... he's more of an Alex J:lolnes shill, tbh...

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Tbh, he's claimed to be economically leftist on here before, so he's not even a right-wing shill.... he's more of an Alex J:lolnes shill, tbh...
Alex Jones has pretty right wing, tea party economic views (which makes sense seeing that he's a multi-millionaire who benefits from Bush/Obama welfare for the rich).

It's probably another example of SA210 pretending to be a true independent.

[Winehole23]

What echo chamber?
What am I ignoring?@ SA210 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2902). it was late, dude.

[LnGrrrR]

For someone who hates drones so much, SA sure loves to drone on himself.

[mavs>spurs]

well that was funny

[LnGrrrR]

well that was funny

:lmao Yeah, it was lame, I know. Hey M>S, gonna go shooting today or watch the playoffs?

[Clipper Nation]

:lol SA210
:lol "Being a leader" by posting on SpursTalk
:lol Shitty YouTube takes
:lol Political forum version of LkrFan

[redzero]

SA210 is extremely delusional. He makes no attempt whatsoever at making sense, and he ignores everything people who disagree with him post.

[mavs>spurs]

Playoffs tbh I got no dog in either fight tho

[SA210]

:lol SA210
:lol "Being a leader" by posting on SpursTalk
:lol Shitty YouTube takes
:lol Political forum version of LkrFan


"Youtubes!" Got anything new fake Liberal sympathizer? lol You didn't answer any of the common sense questions in here either like the other trolls (but your spin is to yell "youtubes" and follow suit with the rest lol). What did you really say here, how did your unfunny comment move any conversation forward? Why did you pretend like I didn't bring up any valid points or questions? lol Another example of a fake Libertarian running around the message boards doing an embarrassing chump-like impression of trolling the boards, lying and exaggerating and offering nothing at all lol. What's it like being a follower? Alex Jones shill lol what a moron.


SA210 is extremely delusional. He makes no attempt whatsoever at making sense, and he ignores everything people who disagree with him post.

:lol Look who's delusional. I posted real facts, and you pretend it never happened? Many in here are delusional who pretend the President hasn't murdered American boys with no charge, crime or trial. lol You can run and deflect, but the truth remains :tu lol

What's delusional about this sheeple boy?


:lmao More spin and dodging from all the morons living a lie.

Why can't you talk about his murder of Americans without charge or trial? Bueller?...Bueller???

Why can't you talk about his assault and attack on whistleblowers?

Why can't you talk about his lies on transparency? Where are the CSPAN televised goings-on that he promised? Where are the 5 day bill reviews? Where are the records of proof for justification for kill lists and drone strikes, who is he really murdering, why? Why are Americans on those lists? Why can't he show us WHY they are on those lists?

Why can't you talk about his murder of children with no legal authorization or declaration of war?

Why can't you talk about all these policies that should be televised scandals?

Why can't you talk about the truth that all these types of policies, that Dems shouted against over 4 years ago?

Why can't you talk about how Obama ran against such policies instead of spinning it now into.. ":cry but but but Bush killed more kids :cry" lol.

This was all supposed to stop remember, suckers? What happened to ending it all? Electing him for change, twice? Talk about that, you hypocritical sheep. Yall sound pathetic, the excuses and compromising yall do to try and make it all right. lol

Why can't you or ANYONE show me proof that I supported Republicans on this board when Bush was in office? lol I'd love to see it.

Spinning and lying yalls way out of the truth, sorry excuses for scum

Keep living the lie. lol

[spursncowboys]

@ SA210 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2902). it was late, dude.gotcha.

[redzero]

:lol Look who's delusional.

:lol still you


I posted real facts, and you pretend it never happened?

I never pretended that what you claimed is false. The fact that you keep claiming that I did against all evidence makes you delusional. :lol


You can run and deflect, but the truth remains :tu

:lol I never tried to deny or deflect that. You are unbelievably stupid, since I told you repeatedly that I didn't necessarily disagree with you on this matter, yet you still have it in your delusional mind that I disagree with you on this matter.


What's delusional about this, sheeple boy?

:lol You are.

It's pretty ironic that you called me a "sheeple" even though you were the one who blindly opposed my point.

I asked you ONE question about God, and you fabricated this entire story about how I am a board liberal who defended Obama's foreign policy, based on absolutely nothing.

[SA210]

:lol still you



I never pretended that what you claimed is false. The fact that you keep claiming that I did against all evidence makes you delusional. :lol



:lol I never tried to deny or deflect that. You are unbelievably stupid, since I told you repeatedly that I didn't necessarily disagree with you on this matter, yet you still have it in your delusional mind that I disagree with you on this matter.



:lol You are.

It's pretty ironic that you called me a "sheeple" even though you were the one who blindly opposed my point.

I asked you ONE question about God, and you fabricated this entire story about how I am a board liberal who defended Obama's foreign policy, based on absolutely nothing.

So then you agree that Obama should be tried, criminally? Are you ready to call for this and for his impeachment?

[redzero]

So then you agree that Obama should be tried, criminally? Are you ready to call for this and for his impeachment?

I already told you that if you call God a murderer, I will call Obama a murderer.

Obama caused the deaths of people.
Those deaths were unnecessary.
Therefore, he's a murderer.

You agree with that, right? If so, you should also agree that:

The God of the Bible caused the deaths of people.
Those deaths were unnecessary.
Therefore, the God of the Bible is a murderer.

It's simple logic. Whether you answer "yes" or "no" changes nothing Obama did, no matter how hard you lie. All your answer shows is whether you are a hypocrite or not. Period.


I am not defending Obama. I couldn't care less whether you think he's a murderer or not. The fact that you have concocted this fantasy where I am secretly defending Obama, based on absolutely nothing, just shows how delusional you are.

[SA210]

I already told you that if you call God a murderer, I will call Obama a murderer.

Obama caused the deaths of people.
Those deaths were unnecessary.
Therefore, he's a murderer.

You agree with that, right? If so, you should also agree that:

The God of the Bible caused the deaths of people.
Those deaths were unnecessary.
Therefore, the God of the Bible is a murderer.

It's simple logic. Whether you answer "yes" or "no" changes nothing Obama did, no matter how hard you lie. All your answer shows is whether you are a hypocrite or not. Period.

But what if someone were a believer in Christ and Christ's message of loving thy neighbor? Would you call Jesus a murderer?

[redzero]

But what if someone were a believer in Christ and Christ's message of loving thy neighbor? Would you call Jesus a murderer?

Yes, since Jesus is God. That's Christianity 101.

If you agree that he is a murderer, then you won't be a hypocrite.

[SA210]

Yes, since Jesus is God. That's Christianity 101.

If you agree that he is a murderer, then you won't be a hypocrite.

No, not really. Some would say that Jesus is not God, but God's son. That he is A god.

[SA210]

:lol still trying to play a game and change the subject. Spin denied

I'll wait for you to answer the questions raised on Obama's criminal acts :tu

[redzero]

No, not really. Some would say that Jesus is not God, but God's son. That he is A god.

I don't care about what some say. What do you say? Are you a Christian? If so, you believe that Jesus is God. Period.

But why are you even making a distinction? I asked you if GOD is a murderer. Why can't you answer that simple question?

[redzero]

:lol still trying to play a game and change the subject. Spin denied

You really, really, really lack reading comprehension. I don't know how many times I have to tell you why I am asking this question.


I'll wait for you to answer the questions raised on Obama's criminal acts :tu

:lol Guess you aren't as against murder as you claimed.

[SA210]

I don't care about what some say. What do you say? Are you a Christian? If so, you believe that Jesus is God. Period.

But why are you even making a distinction? I asked you if GOD is a murderer. Why can't you answer that simple question?


:lol claiming you know what all "Christians" believe. Many "Christians" believe that Jesus is not God. Shows what you know.

I'm not participating in your spin anyway, son.

[SA210]

:lol Guess you aren't as against murder as you claimed.

Of course I am, that's why I have the guts to say Obama should be impeached and charged, unlike you. lol

[SA210]

Too much owning in these threads :lol It's pathetic

[redzero]

:lol claiming you know what all "Christians" believe.

:lol That's what Christianity IS. That's like saying that some Muslims don't believe that Muhammad was a prophet.


Many "Christians" believe that Jesus is not God. Shows what you know.

That's called heresy. Look it up.

And what others believe is irrelevant to what you believe. Do you believe in God?


I'm not participating in your spin anyway, son.

Says the guy who brought Jesus up and tried arguing about him when I asked if GOD was a murderer.

[redzero]

Of course I am, that's why I have the guts to say Obama should be impeached and charged, unlike you. lol

You don't have the guts to say that God is a murderer for doing the exact same thing.

:lol hypocrite

[SA210]

:lol That's what Christianity IS. That's like saying that some Muslims don't believe that Muhammad was a prophet.



That's called heresy. Look it up.

And what others believe is irrelevant to what you believe. Do you believe in God?



Says the guy who brought Jesus up and tried arguing about him when I asked if GOD was a murderer.

lol It's just funny that you tried trolling and you got trolled right back. The ONLY reason you brought faith into a topic completely unrelated to faith is because you somehow felt personally defeated or offended by the topic and it's factual content whether you admit that or not, so you were desperate to find some type of "technicality" gotcha question to hide your personal feelings on the thread's facts. Simple as that.

So just for the heck of it, I pointed out the fact that not all Christians believe that Jesus is God, and you can't handle it. It's not hearsay. MANY Christians believe this. lol I myself do not believe that Jesus is God (let's see how you attempt to twist that statement, I really can't wait lol). Don't make a fool of yourself any longer because I have said this before and I wouldn't want to rub it in your face and make you look dumber than you already do :lol

You lost bro. Accept it. Your President is a criminal murderer, stop being a sore loser about it :lol

[redzero]

lol It's just funny that you tried trolling and you got trolled right back. The ONLY reason you brought faith into a topic completely unrelated to faith is because you somehow felt personally defeated or offended by the topic and it's factual content whether you admit that or not, so you were desperate to find some type of "technicality" gotcha question to hide your personal feelings on the thread's facts. Simple as that.

Lying and projecting. Simple as that.


So just for the heck of it, I pointed out the fact that not all Christians believe that Jesus is God, and you can't handle it.

I don't give a flying fuck. It's all bullshit. You making this distinction is irrelevant.


It's not hearsay.

Yep. It's called "heresy."


MANY Christians believe this.

I don't care.


I myself do not believe that Jesus is God

Then why even bring Jesus up when I asked you a question about GOD? Answer my question about GOD, then, and leave Jesus out of this.


Don't make a fool of yourself any longer because I have said this before and I wouldn't want to rub it in your face and make you look dumber than you already do

:lol How does my question make me a fool? Your argument makes no sense.

I ask you a question about God.
You bring up Jesus.
I state that it doesn't matter.
You then say that you don't think Jesus is God, which makes bringing him up in a question about God pointless.


You lost bro. Accept it. :lol

Your argument is a non sequitur. You never actually answered my question.

And on a side note, Jesus believed in God's teachings, which makes him a supporter of a murderer.

[DMX7]

SHEEEPP, I said!!!

[Clipper Nation]

Of course I am, that's why I have the guts to say Obama should be impeached and charged, unlike you. lol
Nothing says "guts" like posting on a message board! :lol

[SA210]

Nothing says "guts" like posting on a message board! :lol

Nothing says pussy more than a poster waiting for another poster to be offline so she can talk smack, and yet still ignore the actual topic originally brought up. :lol

[Clipper Nation]

Nothing says pussy more than a poster waiting for another poster to be offline so she can talk smack, and yet still ignore the actual topic originally brought up. :lol
I didn't wait for you to be offline, I had just read this thread again when I posted that.... you fail, SheepleDrone :lol

[SA210]

I didn't wait for you to be offline, I had just read this thread again when I posted that.... you fail, SheepleDrone :lol

Only a pussy goes around message boards telling unfunny jokes day and night and contributing nothing ever like their idol chump. lol

lol fake libertarian

lol waiting for posters to be offline

[redzero]

I see you still ducking my question.

Why don't you pull another non-sequitur out of your ass? Or maybe you should just lie and accuse me of defending Obama , because you think anybody who questions you must be Pro-Obama.

[Winehole23]

(chopped liverpudlian)

[SA210]

I see you still ducking my question.

Why don't you pull another non-sequitur out of your ass? Or maybe you should just lie and accuse me of defending Obama , because you think anybody who questions you must be Pro-Obama.

I'm sorry you lost, son. I don't need to answer any spin questions. :tu This topic isn't about what you wanted to turn it into. You failed.

lol sore loser

[cdcast]

Damn SA210, instead of making all these threads, stick to one and put all your BS there.
You can call it "SA210's Self-Rightous Bullshit Thread of the Hour ".

[SA210]

Damn SA210, instead of making all these threads, stick to one and put all your BS there.
You can call it "SA210's Self-Rightous Bullshit Thread of the Hour ".

Butthurt much? Sorry to go off script from your typical left/right paradigm bullshit lol

[redzero]

I'm sorry you lost, son. I don't need to answer any spin questions. :tu This topic isn't about what you wanted to turn it into. You failed.

lol sore loser

Yeah, because the answer to the question, "Do you think the God of the Bible is a murderer?" is "I believe in Jesus Christ."

:lol illogical responses
:lol lame attempt to claim victory
:lol still can only lie about me and my political views, because you have no comeback.

[SA210]

:lol still desperate

[Winehole23]

alternet giving Obama a pass: http://www.alternet.org/world/bomber-chief-20000-airstrikes-presidents-first-term-cause-death-and-destruction-iraq-somalia

[SA210]

"President Obama Wants To Protect Children? Why Not End U.S. Drone Strikes?"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldUHR_8-piY

[cheguevara]

turning a blind eye to murder of children by american bombs

the american way

Obama is 100% true american

[LnGrrrR]

To be honest, I'm starting to hope that Obama bombs even more children to piss SA210 off.

[ChumpDumper]

To be honest, I'm starting to hope that Obama bombs even more children to piss SA210 off.Damn, you beat me to it in the other thread.

I'm glad I'm not alone, at any rate.

[cheguevara]

people wishing death on innocent babies rather than making use of the ignore feature

this is the society we live in :lmao

[Winehole23]

fake umbrage on behalf of purely notional dead babies? I think you just unlocked a new level.

[GoodOdor]

SA210 cares about babies.....why doesn't he care about his own though? :depressed

[TeyshaBlue]

alternet giving Obama a pass: http://www.alternet.org/world/bomber-chief-20000-airstrikes-presidents-first-term-cause-death-and-destruction-iraq-somalia

lol alternet.
lol nobel peace prize.

[SA210]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/265121_560077890671648_298326419_n.jpg

[Clipper Nation]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/265121_560077890671648_298326419_n.jpg

Wrong thread, B.... http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208478

[ChumpDumper]

I can't wait to see what happens when S210 sees drone contrails in the sky.

:smchode:

[SA210]

I wonder why they attacked us..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYKY2F8jy4U&bpctr=1359102814

[ChumpDumper]

Do the Russians pay you per link or is it a salaried position?

[TSA]

If only you were paid per meaningless post.

[TSA]

How you like my new look?