http://blueduck37.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
blueduck37.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
politicartoons2012-03-23 02:35 pm
blueduck37.livejournal.com) wrote in politicartoons2012-03-23 02:35 pm
That's nothing compared to a glimpse inside the mind of the goddamn Zimmerman!
Edited 2012-03-23 19:13 (UTC)
What George Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin is the moral (and probably legal) equivalent of what Barack Obama did to Anwar al-Awlaki and at least two other US citizens. I'm baffled and disturbed by the lack of outrage over the latter.
Yea and gang wars are totally the same as when the United States invaded Afghanistan!
Ah, for a minute there, I thought he had an LJ.
EXCLUSIVE! MUST CREDIT POLITICARTOONS!!!
Smedley Butler famously said something like that. And I agree.
We apparently have the same thought, yo. See my latest.
the moral (and probably legal) equivalent of what Barack Obama
Yeah, law says no.
And several moral systems would disagree too.
Yes, yes, we all know how you feel your moral system and thoughts on legality (and those that agree with it) are the only right ones.
Yeah, law says no.
And several moral systems would disagree too.
Yes, yes, we all know how you feel your moral system and thoughts on legality (and those that agree with it) are the only right ones.
Yep, sweet tea and skittles are the equivalent of going between safehouses of known militants with intent to cause violence against American citizens. You're much better than this petty logical fallacy. Whether or not one likes this policy. Your argument is flawed.
"going between safehouses of known militants with intent to cause violence against American citizens"
Allegedly.
The similarity is that in both cases, we have only the killer's word that the victim was in any way suspicious.
Allegedly.
The similarity is that in both cases, we have only the killer's word that the victim was in any way suspicious.
So, pray tell... in which moral system is it permissible to kill someone entirely on the killer's word that the victim was behaving in a threatening manner?
Why ask me? I don't have knowledge of the entire 7 billion moral systems extant. Variants of nihilism, I'm sure. Chinese legalism. Bushido, depending on sincerity.
You said there were several that disagree with me, so you ought to be able to name at least one.
Allegedly.
The similarity is that in both cases, we have only the killer's word that the victim was in any way suspicious.
Oh please; you were in the military and you know there's constant SIGINT on all that, more video footage then you would find in a 50-year-old peeping tom's collection. You're just ticked off because you don't get a look at the classified intel and you can't make the government show it to you.
The similarity is that in both cases, we have only the killer's word that the victim was in any way suspicious.
Oh please; you were in the military and you know there's constant SIGINT on all that, more video footage then you would find in a 50-year-old peeping tom's collection. You're just ticked off because you don't get a look at the classified intel and you can't make the government show it to you.
No, I don't know all that. All I have is the government's word that there's a single shred of evidence implicating al-Awlaki in anything.
But you're right about one thing: I am ticked off that this alleged intel was not unclassified and shown to the public before al-Awlaki was killed in our name. Very, very ticked off. And rightfully so.
But you're right about one thing: I am ticked off that this alleged intel was not unclassified and shown to the public before al-Awlaki was killed in our name. Very, very ticked off. And rightfully so.
And since I know you're wrong about at least one of them, I doubt you know much about the other two.
Since I don't trust word one of what you say, I rather doubt all of your assertions. I've never seen you proved correct anywhere. And your history is most unsavory.
"I've never seen you proved correct anywhere."
That's good, because only charlatans are ever "proved" correct.
That's good, because only charlatans are ever "proved" correct.
No, I don't know all that. All I have is the government's word that there's a single shred of evidence implicating al-Awlaki in anything.
If it bothers you so much, reactivate your security clearance and get a government job with the NSA. Then release it all to the public. Me, I don't play armchair general.
But you're right about one thing: I am ticked off that this alleged intel was not unclassified and shown to the public before al-Awlaki was killed in our name. Very, very ticked off. And rightfully so.
Yes, I know, you don't believe in national security and classified information. I do. If they're going to make that public, I feel they might as well make our intercontinental nuclear armaments open to the entire internet to fire at will wherever they like. If you're going to unclassify one thing for your reasons, then they should unclassify EVERYTHING. All or nothing.
If it bothers you so much, reactivate your security clearance and get a government job with the NSA. Then release it all to the public. Me, I don't play armchair general.
But you're right about one thing: I am ticked off that this alleged intel was not unclassified and shown to the public before al-Awlaki was killed in our name. Very, very ticked off. And rightfully so.
Yes, I know, you don't believe in national security and classified information. I do. If they're going to make that public, I feel they might as well make our intercontinental nuclear armaments open to the entire internet to fire at will wherever they like. If you're going to unclassify one thing for your reasons, then they should unclassify EVERYTHING. All or nothing.
Don't be absurd. I can't just "reactivate my security clearance." And even if I could, you know what I'd have access to? Same thing I had access to before: the pulse frequencies of IR jamming pods. Nothing else.
"If they're going to make [their justification for killing someone] public, I feel they might as well make our intercontinental nuclear armaments open to the entire internet to fire at will . . ."
That may win the prize for the most insanely hyperbolic statement I've ever seen in this comm.
"If they're going to make [their justification for killing someone] public, I feel they might as well make our intercontinental nuclear armaments open to the entire internet to fire at will . . ."
That may win the prize for the most insanely hyperbolic statement I've ever seen in this comm.
Don't be absurd. I can't just "reactivate my security clearance." And even if I could, you know what I'd have access to? Same thing I had access to before: the pulse frequencies of IR jamming pods. Nothing else
Get upgraded so you can get a job for the NSA analyzing video footage then. Don't bitch to me about how you don't get to see classified material. My sympathy is nil.
That may win the prize for the most insanely hyperbolic statement I've ever seen in this comm.
I consider all classified material to be equivalent.
Get upgraded so you can get a job for the NSA analyzing video footage then. Don't bitch to me about how you don't get to see classified material. My sympathy is nil.
That may win the prize for the most insanely hyperbolic statement I've ever seen in this comm.
I consider all classified material to be equivalent.
This is not about satisfying myself that al-Awlaki was guilty. It's about the principle that the evidence should be made public before the government takes a life.
I don't recall seeing where enemy combatants/foreign soldiers engaged in acts of war against the USA are guaranteed a public trial or court-martial with all trial records and evidence open to the public. But hey. You can certainly ask.
I'm baffled and disturbed by the lack of outrage over the latter.
Here's (http://www.metafilter.com/90796/Is-Anwar-alAwlaki-a-meddlesome-prei-imam) your (http://www.metafilter.com/94370/Saving-Anwar) outrage (http://www.metafilter.com/107918/Anwar-alAwlaki-killed-in-Yemen).
Here's (http://www.metafilter.com/90796/Is-Anwar-alAwlaki-a-meddlesome-prei-imam) your (http://www.metafilter.com/94370/Saving-Anwar) outrage (http://www.metafilter.com/107918/Anwar-alAwlaki-killed-in-Yemen).
Page 1 of 3