Friday, September 30, 2011

Either You Believe in the Constitution, or You Don't

Murdering Anwar al-Awlaki for anti-American rhetoric is the same thing as murdering Glenn Beck for anti-Islamic rhetoric.

I'm not defending any of al-Awlaki's hate propaganda, but he was an American citizen. He hadn't killed anybody or plotted to kill anybody.

Either you believe in due process, or you don't. Either you believe that the laws of this country are equally accessible by American citizens, or you don't. Either you believe in legal protections for America, or you don't.

Anwar al-Awlaki didn't commit any crimes. He "inspired" people to commit crimes, supposedly. Whenever some right wing idiot goes around intending to attack "liberals," right wing pundits always shrug off any responsibility; those same people think it's right and just that al-Awlaki was held responsible for the same thing they deny is possible: that hate rhetoric inspires violence.

I think it's creepy. It's creepy today watching people who denigrate Obama as a tyrant celebrating an exercise of tyranny. These idiots who really think that rolling the tax rate back to what it was 20 years ago is tyranny are creaming their jeans over the Administration murdering an American citizen for exercising free speech. Supposed liberals are, too, though how liberal it is to kill someone for saying something you don't like I can't really say. Liberals are as big a bunch of hypocrites as conservatives are.

You don't uphold the Constitution by violating it. Plain and simple.

You either believe in the Constitution, or you don't.

12 comments:

Cal's Canadian Cave of Coolness said...

I am wondering what you think of the 'occupation' of Wall Street. Will it make a difference or is it just another useless effort?

Roger Owen Green said...

Oh, it's Constitutional - they have their justifications. (Psst - but it's a SECRET...)

And in answer to Cal? Yes. It reminds me of antiwar protests I participated in. Sometimes it felt useless in the moment. But over time, it seemed to have galvanized public opinion. So the real answer is Too Early To Say. Though the excessive force used would suggest they are already touching a nerve.

SamuraiFrog said...

Pretty much what I was going to say, Roger; too early to say. I'm too cynical about anything political to say that they'll make an immediate difference, but it is nice to see people finally getting pissed off about something.

Autumn said...

Since when can you get in trouble for inspiring people to do anything? People have their own free will, and you are supposed to have the right to say what you want here.

He must be less American then the rest of us, so he gets fewer rights.

I don't think he sounds like a fantastic person, but if you've got nothing on him, you can't just change the way America works so you can kill him.

Oh wait, yes you can, because of this stupid never ending war on terror. Which can never end and is justification for anything you want to do.

Sorry, it turned into a rant..

James said...

Occupy Wallstreet is a feeble gesture because it's still trying to use hippie protest methods of drum circles and chants and bullshit from the 60's.

In short, it's not organized, doesn't have uniform demands, and no one will take it any seriously than any other protest because it is driven by a force that is easily dismissed: the hippie college students.

Seriously, if you want to be taken seriously in protest, you pick out a list of demands, dress as professional as possible, and you act as professional as possible. No one is scared of fucking hippies. In fact, people hate hippies. People pay attention to uniform professionalism. It's serious then.

Dr. Monkey Von Monkerstein said...

Hahahahahaha, James is obviously on the side of our Wall Street oppressors. He uses all the Fox Noise talking points. Well done James! Defend the status quo at all costs!

SamuraiFrog said...

Well, James has a good point about hippies. I do hate hippies. A lot.

Zarathustra said...

Anwar al-Awlaki committed TREASON against hios own country. Our Constitution says the punishment for that is Death.... Case closed!

James said...

Dr. Monkey? I don't watch fox news. Until recently, I didn't even have cable. I get my news primarily from the huffingtonpost. I'm pro-choice, support health care reform (ie - universal health care), and want to see wall street properly regulated and subject to better oversight. I want higher taxes on the rich, a jobs bill passed, and gay rights enacted. Admittedly, the stock market/derivatives are not something I'm familiar enough with to say what exactly has to happen, and it's something with which I'm trying to familiarize myself.

In short, I consider myself something of a liberal.

But what I said isn't about whether or not people should be protesting; they should. It's about their method of protesting being wholly ineffective. We've seen these kinds of protests before in America, with hippie drum circles and angry youths raging against the man with no clear list of demands. They always, ALWAYS fail.

To be taken seriously means being professional. Being professional means that you look professional, and you come prepared, with a clear list of finite demands. People do not ignore professionals. They ignore bitching hippies because hippies are never fucking happy.

In summary, what do you think would get more attention in the news, and ultimately get heard? A bunch of disorganized college students chanting while drumming, dressed like the just rolled out of bed, or a bunch of angry people in suits and ties all calling for the same set of demands?

SamuraiFrog said...

Actually, Zarathustra, the Constitution only defines treason. There is legislation requiring the death penalty (or a fine and imprisonment), but it also requires a trial. I agree it was treason.

Again, I'm not defending al-Awlaki or what he said. I'm chilled that our Administration now gives itself the power to kill someone without trying them in court.

Zarathustra said...

Wake up, our gov't hhas been killing people for 230 years..........

SamuraiFrog said...

Well, that MUST make it right, then. Good argument. Very convincing.