Thursday open thread
As contraries are known by contraries, so is the delight of presence best known by the torments of absence.
What delights and torments do you know today?
March 7, 2013 - 2:31 AM
- Contact us |
- Customer care |
- Subscribe |
- Advertise |
- Submit news |
- Sign in
Coming Up
In the market for a new home? Don’t miss the Open House guide in the paper Saturday and Sunday.
March 7, 2013 - 2:31 AM
Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
15 COMMENTS
Error submitting comment
Name is required
A valid email is required (test@test.com)
Comment is required
Add a comment
Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.
Saturday, May 18, 2013
THE ROANOKE TIMES
So the US AG will not rule out strikes using drones on American citizens on American soil. This is a good thing. Think about all the money we could save on trials and such. I think we should begin by having some official target list like maybe the FBI’s “most wanted” list. Make the list and make history. Be assinated by the US govt. But then maybe that’s all too public. Maybe just have some old dude (or broad) in an office somewhere on a mountain top in WV pick the hits. Of course explosions such as the sort made by drones do sometimes take innocent children as well. That’s a small problem that can be solved easily. We just establish (or reactivate) a department within the CIA to drive up and blow them away with a 45. Let’s see now, John Smith at 1201 Main St. Got it. BANG! Or was that Jon Smith at 1012 Main??? Oh well. I’m your government and I’m going to help you.
1 – you really aren’t concerned about due process, are you?
You are not painting that picture accurately, Bubba Greene. I did not expect you to, but it still needs to be said. The AG put it in the context of Pearl Harbor and 9/11, not everyday law enforcement. He also was quite clear that using such a weapon on someone just going about their business would be wrong and unconstitutional.
–
As usual, the right wing needs to distort the truth to make their point. They used to call that propaganda.
If you make drones illegal, only the criminals will have them.
#1 Bubba….I realize you are being facetious. Hell, Bubba….those kids or the wrong person….would just be “collateral damage”.
#3 Pearl Harbor was attacked by American citizens? Who knew? And the world trade center? Thanks.
Hi Sandi! New you would be looking for meaning in your life today so I just thought, “What can ole Bubba do to help out a lost soul today?” And BAM! There you are. Funny to me that we need to “put” killing US citizens on US soil “in context”. Should I be flattered that you had “expectations” of me? I saw Senator Graham declare the notion was “preposterous” or something to that effect. He is correct of course. Think back. As a nation we have engaged in the following: Owned slaves and supported it as official govt policy. Kept women from voting. Used children to work in coal mines 18 hours a day. Sterilized insane people as well as performed those lobotomies. Placed Japanese and families of Japanese in “control facilities”.
These are just the things that come to mind quickly. So why not have someone snuffed out because they represent a threat? Think about it. Had drones been around in Clinton’s day he might have been able to get rid of Bush, junior. Think of what a blessing that would have been.
PS to hoo. You should be ashamed. Whip Duke and then drop one to Boston College. UVA’s culture of crashing is alive and well.
Bubba, let me state it another way. It is not that you “need to “put” killing US citizens on US soil “in context”, which is not what AG Holder or I said. It is that you should put the hypothetical of a sudden horrific incident into context to see that you cannot say “never” even when it seems you should be able to.
–
Did the people we laud as heroes for downing that plane in a field over Pennsylvania decide to take the lives of “American citizens on American soil” in the midst of a crisis they did not even understand? Do you condemn them for that?
–
The inestimable Senator Graham not withstanding, the notion of desperate situations calling for desperate solutions and decisions is not remotely “preposterous”. Police departments do so regularly and sometimes end up in court over it. So does the military. Decisions made in such heat can be hazardous. Obama’s decision to go for it on Bin Laden is not treated the same as Carter’s decision to go for it on the hostages in Iran…well by some anyway.
–
Precisely because “As a nation” we have done some heinous things, we do not have any credibility denying the possibility could exist for a drone to be “unleashed” on American soil and on American citizens. Even as AG Holder affirmed the highly unlikely and unseemly event happening.
–
He was being honest and realistic.
Jim Lucas. You get it! Makes me happy. There IS intelligent life in blogville.
#7 Mrs. Saunders:
-
1. There is no “context” that allows the U.S. government to assassinate citizens. As I have said before, within the context of the “war” on terror….had mixed emotions. But, hypocricy admitted…..seeing this president & this AG….has cured me.
-
2. Not a planned attack. A response to an intolerable reality. Took their own lives. All would have died (plus many others) regardless. But most pertinent….not a U.S. government action. (I have the right to defend my home, I am not asking the government to kill those who might break into my home).
-
3. We are not talking about the heat of action here. We are talking about planned assassination.
-
4. Huh?
7 – …we do not have any credibility denying the possibility could exist for a drone to be “unleashed” on American soil and on American citizens…
.
What? We’re not talking about having no control over a random whacko with a drone, we’re talking about the US Government. If our government cannot positively affirm that it – the US government – will not attack its own citizens – denying all the rights affirmed and guaranteed in the Constitution – then is there anything we CAN trust it with?
Thanks Bubba….appreciate your #6.
Lest folks think were “swapping spit in the shower”…..
Oh so “intelligent life” is only to be found if people agree with you Bubba? Who knew.
–
Wow, 89Hoo defending the government? I believe Holder made it perfectly clear that there was no conceivable context he upheld a government “attack its own citizens”. But anyone who believes there is no context for drones being used for all manner of surveillance and law enforcement up to and including a “take down” is not being realistic.
__
It is my understanding that there are already law enforcement applications in for drones. That is why the Congress is looking to make rules and controls on the program. I would pray those controls extend to the questions being asked by Rand the loon and many others who managed to not care before now and Obama. Some people are so transparent, even Lindsey Graham can see through them. ““I was going to vote against him until the filibuster, so he picked up one vote,” Graham said, laughing to reporters in the Capitol.
–
“I thought Brennan was arrogant, a bit shifty,” he said, but added that he was going to vote for Brennan because the vote had become a “referendum on the drone program.”
–
“Where were all these people during the Bush administration? I never remember anybody accusing President [George W.] Bush of ‘We’re going to kill someone in a cafe,’” Graham said.”
–
Now when he is the voice of reason, you have gone too tea-far!
Funny thing…the same dems that were against water boarding, are now in favor of giving Obama license to be judge, jury, and executioner.
-
I think drones can be useful in stopping prolonged car chases on the interstate…”everybody back off we are about to put a Hellfire missle in the passenger seat.”
-
“He was being honest and realistic.” — now thats funny I don’t care who you are.
What “same dems” would that be Al?
Well Ms. Sandi I am glad you asked
-
“The secret authorization of brutal interrogations is an outrageous betrayal of our core values, and a grave danger to our security.”
-
“…but torture is not a part of the answer – it is a fundamental part of the problem with this administration’s approach.”
-
“Torture is how you create enemies, not how you defeat.”
-
…..Words of wisdom from Barack Hussein Obama
-
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/05/fail-flashback-obama-biden-insist-waterboarding-is-not-effective-video/
-
Plus there is this….
-
“Biden said his bill would end the administration’s semantic games on what constitutes torture. . . . There is no place for the administration’s bad faith interpretation — of waterboarding and other forms of torture — to gain a toehold.”
-
“We need to send a clear message that torture, inhumane and degrading treatment of detainees, is unacceptable and is not permitted by U.S. law. Period”
-Words of wisdom from Joe Biden
-
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2007/11/08/21198/two-democrats-move-to-outlaw-waterboarding.html#storylink=cpy
-
Cannot blame Joe,he was probably plagiarism.
-
So torture is bad, killing OK.