mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Soap Box

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-05-11, 16:51   #243
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

97×103 Posts
Default

Wasn't al-Awlaki's teen-aged son taken out in a drone strike, along with the unfortunates who happened to be in the blast radius? Perhaps I confuse different murder-by-drone incidents. Well, no, I don't.
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/...ar-old-sister/
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 17:00   #244
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

22×52×59 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Some people having the effrontery to try to get nrs registered to vote, or to secure other rights already enshrined in law, paid with their lives. Medgar Evers. James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Mickey Schwerner. Viola Liuzzo. How many others? God only knows.
Not that the Republicans are the only ones to blame for this, but the efforts by them (predominantly) to make it harder for people to vote (extreme voter id requirements) or get representation (gerrymandering of political districts) should anger far more people than it does. Unfortunately too many (white) voters are saying "it doesn't hurt me, so it is not a problem I care about" not realizing how much long term damage it causes. They look for reasons to take away voting rights rather than looking for ways to support them. The current leadership in the US makes that easier by stacking the courts with a bunch of judges with extreme conservative agenda. I would bet that if Ginsburg died on Trump's last day of presidency that the senate would approve any Trump Supreme Court candidate within minutes.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 17:12   #245
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

13×192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman View Post
Ask the prisoners at Guantanomo.
Can you spot the fallacy here?
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 18:03   #246
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

746010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Can you spot the fallacy here?
There is none. They were held without trial in a U.S. prison. They are not prisoners
of war because there is no war. Congress has not declared one.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 19:35   #247
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

3×1,153 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
Not that the Republicans are the only ones to blame for this, but the efforts by them (predominantly) to make it harder for people to vote (extreme voter id requirements) or get representation (gerrymandering of political districts) should anger far more people than it does.
Republicans not the only ones to blame? You got that right. The Republican Party was the party of Abraham Lincoln, so the Democratic Party became the official political home of unreconstructed Southerners -- segregationists and white supremacists. This was understood in any reference to "Southern Democrats." The anti-Party-of-Lincoln sentiment made the South a Democratic Party stronghold, referred to as the "solid South."

Things began to change in 1947 when Truman ordered the desegregation of the military, and 1948, when the Democrats officially adopted a civil-rights plank in their party platform at the convention. Southern democrats, let by Strom Thurmond, walked, and Thurmond ran as a "Dixiecrat."

The final break came in 1964, when LBJ rammed through Federal civil-rights legislation. In the 1964 general election, Southern states voted for the Republican candidate, Barry Goldwater. Strom Thurmond left the Democratic Party and joined the Republican Party. And they welcomed him.

In 1968, Richard Nixon was elected President. His "Southern Strategy" was to make the Republican Party more emphatically the new political home for Southern racists. Party of Lincoln? More like the party of John Wilkes Booth...

In 1980, one of Ronald Reagan's first campaign speeches after being nominated was at the Neshoba County Fair in Mississippi, which is near Philadelphia, Mississippi, where the civil-rights workers James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Mickey Schwerner had been murdered in 1964. Reagan declared, "I believe in States' Rights."

"States' Rights," be it noted, had long been the excuse given for racism, segregation and Jim Crow.

Back in the day, it was poll taxes and "literacy tests." Now, it's gerrymandering (with the Supremes officially turning a blind eye), "documentary proof of citizenship," and making registration and polling places less accessible. At least for poor folks. And "people of color."
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 19:47   #248
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

2·4,297 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman View Post
There is none. They were held without trial in a U.S. prison. They are not prisoners
of war because there is no war. Congress has not declared one.
Explain how you can get access to them to ask anything. Reporters don't have access. Only lawyers have very limited access.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 22:01   #249
ewmayer
2ω=0
 
ewmayer's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
República de California

2×13×443 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
Sorry, but they aren't in the USA and the normal laws don't apply to them. If Cuba wanted to do something about it, they could.
ITYM "If Cuba could do something about it, it would":
Quote:
The United States assumed territorial control over the southern portion of Guantánamo Bay under the 1903 Lease agreement. The United States exercises jurisdiction and control over this territory, while recognizing that Cuba retains ultimate sovereignty. The current government of Cuba regards the U.S. presence in Guantánamo Bay as "illegal" and insists the Cuban–American Treaty "was obtained by threat of force and is in violation of international law." Some legal scholars judge that the lease may be voidable. It is the home of the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and the Guantanamo Bay detention camp located within the base, which are both governed by the United States. Since the 1959 revolution, Cuba has only cashed a single lease payment from the United States government.
The 1903 lease agreement detailed here is quite interesting: Part 1 correctly, if unironically, describes the US presence as an "occupation". I can't tell if the initial annual lease payment of $2000 payable in gold was seen by either party as reasonable at the time, or if it was always meant to be an insulting token sum. In any event, the US even welched on that pittance:
Quote:
In 1934, the United States unilaterally changed the payment from gold coin to U.S. dollars per the Gold Reserve Act. The lease amount was set at US$3,386.25, based on the price of gold at the time. In 1973, the U.S. adjusted the lease amount to $3,676.50, and in 1974 to $4,085, based on further increases to the price of gold in USD. Payments have been sent annually, but only one lease payment has been accepted since the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro claimed that this check was deposited due to confusion in 1959. The Cuban government has not deposited any other lease checks since that time.

The 1903 Lease for Guantanamo has no fixed expiration date.
That last line - occupation with no expiry, voidable only if both parties agree - is the "at gunpoint" tell. The UN is rendered powerless by way of the US having veto power as a permanent member of the security council.

The lease article also gives a classic example of Obama campaign promises vs reality - in this case the campaign promise actually made it to a signed first-weeks-in-office executive order, but with the telling "postponed difficult decisions" followed by the oh-so-predictable nullification:
Quote:
In January 2009, President Obama signed executive orders directing the CIA to shut what remains of its network of "secret" prisons and ordering the closing of the Guantánamo detention camp within a year. However, he postponed difficult decisions on the details for at least six months. On 7 March 2011, President Obama issued an executive order that permits ongoing indefinite detention of Guantánamo detainees.
Now the key detail here is that in those first 2 years in office, the Dems had majorities in both houses of Congress. In other words, had Obama actually ever intended to keep his promise here, "Republican opposition" was not an excuse for not doing so.

Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 2020-05-11 at 22:05
ewmayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-11, 23:58   #250
garo
 
garo's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

1010110000112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
I think referring to the killing of Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki simply as "executing a US citizen" is disingenuous. He was waging war on the US, and was unlikely to submit to arrest (for treason, or perhaps some other charge) and transport back to the US. I suppose he could, in theory, have been tried in absentia. It might also be reasonably argued that he had effectively renounced his US citizenship.
You need to read up on this because you are confusing father and son. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki was the son and there is zero evidence he was "waging war". The best defence the Obama administration had was - its his father's fault we had to kill him.
Obama's drone policy killed a rather large number of innocent people. Anyway but we have another thread for that.

Back on topic, being a citizen is not enough to prevent you getting killed by the U.S. government without a jury trial.
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-12, 00:15   #251
garo
 
garo's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

5·19·29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewmayer View Post
The lease article also gives a classic example of Obama campaign promises vs reality - in this case the campaign promise actually made it to a signed first-weeks-in-office executive order, but with the telling "postponed difficult decisions" followed by the oh-so-predictable nullification:

Now the key detail here is that in those first 2 years in office, the Dems had majorities in both houses of Congress. In other words, had Obama actually ever intended to keep his promise here, "Republican opposition" was not an excuse for not doing so.
Oh but you may remember erstwhile board member cheesehead telling us that it was because Congress wouldn't release funding.
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-12, 01:28   #252
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

3×1,153 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garo View Post
Back on topic, being a citizen is not enough to prevent you getting killed by the U.S. government without a jury trial.
I'd say Anwar al-Awlaki (thanks for the correction, I screwed up) wasn't just an everyday citizen, and anyone who chose to hang out with him wasn't exactly an innocent bystander. He seemed to think it was all right for him to solicit the murder of me or any of my countrymen. His name being on the hit list did make it to court before he was found and killed.

His son Abdulrahman, who was killed two weeks later in a separate attack, is another matter. I don't know why his name was on the hit list. The matter of his killing was also brought to court, after the fact.

Both court cases were dismissed. I'm no legal expert, but to me the judicial reasoning seemed rather bizarre.

As far as the general proposition that drone strikes often kill a lot of innocent people is concerned, I agree.

I'd reckon a fair number of US citizens resident in this country are at much greater risk of being killed by local governments, for crimes such as "Driving while black" or "Running from the cops while black," than being killed by federal authorities.

I am certainly concerned with the Jobbernowl-in-Chief's reckless use of language; in particular, insinuating that anyone who brings to light facts unfavorable to him is a "spy" or a "traitor" who deserves to be executed. Or calling reporters "enemies of the people." Given a supine DOJ and pliant Federal judiciary, who knows what might happen? You might have to be a Republican in order to vote. Or the general election might be cancelled due to the ongoing COVID-9 emergency, since voting by mail is unacceptable to so many Republicans.

I sometimes say that the US died on November 8, 2016, and now the corpse is really starting to stink.

But I still hope I'm wrong about that.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-05-12, 05:32   #253
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

97·103 Posts
Default

[have to retract smiley]
Although, to be honest, the US killing anyone in a foreign country is of highly questionable legality, especially considering the US in a supporting role in the Saudi war crimes in Yemen, which is to say: any military action they have taken there. The US provided surveillance, and logistic support such as airborne refueling of Saudi warplanes. Taking out an open air restaurant in the alleged pursuit of some kingpin, and killing a bunch of civilians including a 16 year old US citizen seems an awful lot like [further potentially inflammatory characterizations withheld.]

Last fiddled with by kladner on 2020-05-12 at 05:44
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
May 2020 tgan Puzzles 4 2020-06-08 09:49
January 2020 what Puzzles 21 2020-02-02 14:11
U.S. Electile Dysfunction 2018 ewmayer Soap Box 174 2019-07-08 12:50
U.S. Electile Dysfunction 2016 cheesehead Soap Box 843 2016-11-09 01:02
Assignment died of dysentery kladner GPU to 72 143 2014-01-27 00:40

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:12.

Sun Sep 20 12:12:50 UTC 2020 up 10 days, 9:23, 0 users, load averages: 2.21, 2.21, 1.96

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.