Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How the NSA Helps the US Assassinate (Greenwald / Scahill) [View all]neverforget
(9,437 posts)86. yeah thanks to John Woo and his perverted
interpretation of the Constitution.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
304 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Did some folks really not know that intelligence efforts help direct military action when it occurs?
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#1
If you're going to call war "assassination", that happened back when the party was founded
ConservativeDemocrat
Feb 2014
#92
Is the drones program secret? I think its one of the most heavily debated policy items.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#10
Don't tell me, let me guess. You would have been in favor of letting the NAZIs do whatever they want
ConservativeDemocrat
Feb 2014
#93
There's a new book, just published, with all kinds of details about Operation Paperclip
Electric Monk
Feb 2014
#121
So "ridiculous" you can't manage to explain why they are not identical situations...
ConservativeDemocrat
Feb 2014
#179
Isn't it interesting that some people around here tell us metadata isn't really an invasion...
stillwaiting
Feb 2014
#206
It really isn't about terrorism at all. Other than the terror carried out during the strikes.
reusrename
Feb 2014
#219
Thanks to real journalists, like Jeremy Scahill it is no longer a secret. They sure worked hard to
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#31
It was never a secret. No supposed journalistic superheroes were necessary. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#47
For the doubters about the reason behind the phone call records, here they can read
Thinkingabout
Feb 2014
#83
The goal of wholesale surveillance, as Arendt wrote in ''The Origins of Totalitarianism''...
Octafish
Feb 2014
#128
This what these writers have written, do we ignore what Greenwald has now stated?
Thinkingabout
Feb 2014
#160
We're not supposed to notice hypocrisy like that from Greenwald, and I'm sure they will consider you
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#279
You may be right, nothing new, known much befire 2013 but some just seem to be learning
Thinkingabout
Feb 2014
#238
Thanks to world renowned and respected Journalists, like Jeremy Schahill, the Secret Drone program
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#85
NY Times mentioned Combat drone use in Afghanistan in October 2001 WAY before Scahill
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#283
It's sad that supposed Democrats would condone drone murders. We are not at war. But some
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#186
No, we didnt. There have been tons of NY Times articles on the subject since 2001.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#284
It may not be secret but it certainly is not one of the most heavily debated policy items
cali
Feb 2014
#58
Its obvious that it is. All one has to do is put the word "Drones" in a google search. 11.7 million
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#262
LINCOLN WAS SHOT IN A THEATRE! BY AN ASSASSIN! Should fit in good with your show.
Autumn
Feb 2014
#6
Did people know that the Military has replaced Due Process regarding killing American Citizens,
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#22
It's lovely that you want to give your opinion on something else, but that is not what I asked.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#24
Lol, well if you can give your opinion I don't see why you would object to getting a response to
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#35
If everyone did that, there would be no point to trying to discuss anything. That is why hijacking
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#42
Amazing, isn't it? Whenever someone reduces themselves to name calling, I have always
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#91
The topic of my thread was, "Did people not know that the military and intel work together to...
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#263
Yes, as soon as I responded, I started a thread. An OP is not the same thing as a thread. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#281
You hijacked the OP, and than tried to accuse others who brought the topic BACK on topic
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#294
Yes, I know, threadjacking is funny when you support the goals of the threadjacker.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#264
The issue is not that the military works with the intelligence community when it plans its strikes.
Maedhros
Feb 2014
#94
Yes, actually, that is the entire point of the OP. This is supposedly a big reveal.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#268
Do you know what it's called when someone tries to lead an argument using questions? Look
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#187
You're right but c'mon...let them at least think you didn't thoroughly debunk that point.
great white snark
Feb 2014
#300
Then you should probably avoid commenting and continue asking questions instead.
reusrename
Feb 2014
#233
It's not intelligence when you kill civilians and create more terrorists, duh.
grahamhgreen
Feb 2014
#148
ODS is defending these egregious violation of our Constitution that all these elected officials
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#25
Well, thank you. But one only needs to be a first grader to, and I know a few, to understand the
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#161
At least one of our DU attorneys has weighed in and said that this is already congressionally
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#11
right you are, the backers of these policies arent going to skimp on procedure
reddread
Feb 2014
#115
So, if it's OK for NSA to disregard Bill of Rights, it's OK for the president to kill who he wants.
Octafish
Feb 2014
#16
Those terms and amendments and rights have specific meanings judged by appellate courts and the
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#20
So your attempt at a point is that because an appellate court or the SCOTUS has made mistakes
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#40
Not really. Arecent court questioned the constitutionality of NSA surveillance programs and SCOTUS
Vattel
Feb 2014
#191
I'm still waiting for Sanders, Warren, or heck..even Paul to submit a repeal of the AUMF of 9/18/01.
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#67
Sigh....let me explain this...again. The constitutional basis for drones derives from the AUMF of
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#78
PA primarily, 3rd circuit. Am barred in other jurisdictions that I do not currently
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#109
You haven't studied or practiced law. That's why it doesnt make sense to you.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#267
I have several. IT and Journalism are just two. You still aren't a lawyer. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#272
That isn't really the case at all, is it. The AUMF is about the twin towers. Right?
reusrename
Feb 2014
#201
No...it really is the case. The AUMF of 9/18/01 empowered the President to pursue those
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#207
Um, no. And why would persons contemplated under the AUMF be charged in an Article III court while
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#229
You are saying that we are only killing folks who have already been identified.
reusrename
Feb 2014
#234
Um, no. I'm saying we are targeting people already identified. As for how the
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#235
I think we are talking at cross purposes here...why not ask me specific questions about specific
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#239
The specific people that the authorization specifically authorized for killing...
reusrename
Feb 2014
#240
Wait...are you suggesting that a specific person must be targeted by an AUMF? That's a crapload
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#243
AlQaeda and it's affiliates. Thus, we had a seperate AUMF for Iraq. Currently,
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#301
Yes. You are correct. All three branches of government have confirmed that persons
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#304
So you supported all of Bush's policies, then. All of them were Congressionally authorized. Thanks,
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#26
Iraq war conditions were not met, torture was not approved, warrantless wiretapping, etc.
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#44
Really? Then why has no one been prosecuted for what, if they eg, lied us into war, would be major
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#55
How about some lawyers who actually know what they are talking about re the US Constitution:
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#163
You can ask the person who posted that directly. They are the attorney. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#261
I don't ask for facts from internet 'experts'. We have plenty of actual experts
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#270
I know msanthrope in real life. She is an attorney, and you have no right to slander her. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#273
I don't know either of you in RL so to me you are merely strangers on the internet and you have some
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#302
What happens when a cop sees someone pointing a gun at someone and has no recourse but to shoot?
randome
Feb 2014
#29
Apparently with Ibrahaim Al- Banna, the strike target. Although reports vary...it seems the strike
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#69
Which Droned US Citizen was sending Mushroom Clouds our way? And how many bystanders do cops
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#50
I don't base my opinions on 'what ifs', I base them on facts. 'Supposing there really were
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#95
I didn't create much of a scenario. It's entirely plausible based on the guidelines in place.
randome
Feb 2014
#101
Well, you just stated the problem right there. We KNOW there are dead people, bodies, men, women and
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#169
False dichotomy fail. How bout we leave them alone and stop creating terror and horror.
grahamhgreen
Feb 2014
#154
Boots on the ground? Why would we have 'boots anywhere' unless we are being invaded with actual
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#220
I would think many of the operations prevented have not been directed at the U.S.
randome
Feb 2014
#111
Our assumption that we are the world's police force, and that we can bust in anyone's door
Maedhros
Feb 2014
#117
War is very profitable for a select group of 'contractors'. To justify war we need an 'enemy'.
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#222
Agree. But when it happens by accident, do we condemn the person who pulled the trigger?
randome
Feb 2014
#89
If the trigger was pulled on purpose, and the target was unclear, and there may be innocents
grahamhgreen
Feb 2014
#141
Nobody is able to adequately explain how the people we are blowing up with drones
Maedhros
Feb 2014
#97
I doubt that killing a few hundred people will do ANYTHING for corporate profit.
randome
Feb 2014
#104
Unless they are activists interfering with say, privatizing nationalized oil.
grahamhgreen
Feb 2014
#205
Remember "US persons" means US corporations! So a threat to corporate interests might get you the
grahamhgreen
Feb 2014
#204
Pro government assassin shills will now proceed to place Jeremy Scahill under the bus.
L0oniX
Feb 2014
#30
Things have changed here for the worse but in the outside real world, most folks are becoming more
xiamiam
Feb 2014
#147
So, some dudes in a cave in Afghanistan caused all this and 9/11 too???
blkmusclmachine
Feb 2014
#32
Amazing, wot? Here's the guy that's really made out like a bandit. Heh heh heh.
Octafish
Feb 2014
#166
for the public record, link to WSWS on Democratic support for Bush spy powers
grasswire
Feb 2014
#236
You know who got the Military Industrial Complex started down the counter-terrorism road?
Octafish
Feb 2014
#79
As you know, there is ample reason to believe the NSA's data collection is illegal.
Maedhros
Feb 2014
#173
The NSA is evidence that the terrorists have won ...and some people are fine with that.
L0oniX
Feb 2014
#194
LOL! Is that why you announced: "Bureau of Investigative Journalism wrote about it a week ago."
ProSense
Feb 2014
#132
When you post so much that's irrelevant, it's easy to miss the most important part.
Octafish
Feb 2014
#137
Obama didn't kill any people in Pakistan for a whole month?! Give that man a peace prize.
DesMoinesDem
Feb 2014
#108
You made me follow a link to your post which linked to your post which had no link to the source.
DesMoinesDem
Feb 2014
#118
That's your reply? You're right, I should just ignore your links and quotes like everyone else.
DesMoinesDem
Feb 2014
#133
Guess this is news to some but more proof the use of phone call records are being used for
Thinkingabout
Feb 2014
#113
The goal of wholesale surveillance to have info ready when time to arrest a certain population.
Octafish
Feb 2014
#153
This may have been written as a goal except Greenwald has furnished more information
Thinkingabout
Feb 2014
#159
No. They locate phones that may or may not be in the possession of a terrorist.
Luminous Animal
Feb 2014
#175
a story on RT claims the Obama admin is now contemplating the murder of another US citizen...
wildbilln864
Feb 2014
#152
Anyone who thinks this is a big reveal has really exposed themselves as one of two things...
stevenleser
Feb 2014
#271