Israelis "Executed" US Citizen Furkan Dogan - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

Patsfanin Philly · 09-30-2010, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.PatsFanInVa

So you don't believe in all that constitutional stuff granting people a right to a trial or anything, right?

From your comment can I conclude that you oppose the President targeting Anwar al-Aulaqi with a drone? Since he is a U.S. citizen and he hasn't been tried in court.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa · 09-30-2010, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patsfanin Philly

From your comment can I conclude that you oppose the President targeting Anwar al-Aulaqi with a drone? Since he is a U.S. citizen and he hasn't been tried in court.

The targeting of Anwar al-Aulaqi followed all US legal channels before being approved.

In January 2010 White House lawyers considered the legality of attempting to kill al-Awlaki, given his U.S. citizenship; reportedly, opportunities to do so "may have been missed" because of legal questions surrounding such an attack. But on February 4, 2010, The New York Daily News reported that al-Awlaki is "now on a targeting list signed off on by the Obama administration.

— Representative Jane Harman, (D-CA), Chairwoman of House Subcommittee on Homeland SecurityOn April 6, The New York Times also reported that President Obama had authorized the targeted killing of al-Awlaki. The CIA and the U.S. military both maintain lists of terrorists linked to al-Qaeda and its affiliates who are approved for capture or killing. Because he is a U.S. citizen, his inclusion on those lists was approved by the National Security Council. U.S. officials said it is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing. The New York Times reported that international law allows the use of lethal force against people who pose an imminent threat to a country, and U.S. officials said that was the standard used in adding names to the target list. In addition, Congress approved the use of military force against al-Qaeda after 9/11. People on the target list are considered military enemies of the U.S., and therefore not subject to a ban on political assassinations approved by former President Gerald Ford.

Anwar al-Awlaki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Brandon Five · 09-30-2010, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wistahpatsfan

If Argentina had done this there would be a carrier division on their way and Obama (as well as you, me, and most of the posters here) would be demanding an explaination and official apology...or else!

Maybe if they burned a quran they might.

Quote:

Once again, ISRAEL does whatever it wants and hides behind the neocon shield it has built in America.

Careful, your swastika is showing.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Out of curiosity: does Hamas abide by these rules?

There's 2 wrongs in that area of the world ... i take no sides. But the USA government is supposed to protect their citizens abroad to some extent. Obviously they could not protect a kid whose brain was up his azz in this case. But that does not absolve Israel of the manner in which this kid died. The USA should be more proactive here than it has been ... getting answers and getting justice if at all possible.

Hope i cleared that up in a small paragraph ... this is why I made the thread. My life in Israel or near israel should be as important as my life would be in Korea, or Syria or Canada. Politics will play a part as always ... but that does not make the lack of USA interest here right.

we have spent more time getting the 3 hikers out of Iran ... that's messed up IMO.

As for Hamas, Palestinians and Israel i wish our government would straddle the fence more. Less favoritism towards Israel and a bit more compassion to the Palestinians who are the unfortunate pawns in this mess. I know that won't happen ... but it's my opinion for what it's worth.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBradyOwnsYou

Um, yes?

And for F sakes, just because someone is born within our borders making him a US Citizen, doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to die. There are PLENTY of scumbag, idiot, terrorist, etc... citizens of the US that need to die.

You think it's okay that a 19 year kid with a camera was basically executed?

He sure needed a whack across the head for being dumb ... but he did not deserve to be shot in the head while he lay on the ship deck already wounded.

***patsfan13*** · 09-30-2010, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IcyPatriot

You think it's okay that a 19 year kid with a camera was basically executed?

He sure needed a whack across the head for being dumb ... but he did not deserve to be shot in the head while he lay on the ship deck already wounded.

If you are entering another countries waters illegally you are taking your life in your hands. If the people who are on the boat with you attack military people boarding the vessel they are putting everyone on the boat in danger.

If the 22 sec are accurate then there is something that needs to be investigated.

That said he was stupid to support Hamas and put himself in danger by trying to break a blockade.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Apparently the "law professor" running the country is not aware of that.

Olbermann on Obama's assassination program - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

Can we do it after a trial?

Not then either? I don't understand that objection then.

As someone else said earlier, I don't think we will ever know exactly what happened on that flotilla. How did they determine forensically that he was lying down wounded when he was shot in the head?

We can all site many examples after example after example. The innocent Pakistan families being killed are no less worthy of attention than this boy. Yes ... IMO Obama is a terrorist also, as was Bush, Clinton, Reagan and even Carter.

But this thread is about Furkan and if we continually deflect as governments love to do then we are no closer to remedies.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

If you are entering another countries waters illegally you are taking your life in your hands. If the people who are on the boat with you attack military people boarding the vessel they are putting everyone on the boat in danger.

If the 22 sec are accurate then there is something that needs to be investigated.

That said he was stupid to support Hamas and put himself in danger by trying to break a blockade.

The report said they had a right to deliver the aid to the Palestinian people ... have you read the report yet? How can you discuss a topic without at least having glanced over the material. it's not 100% accurate for sure but it's at least a basis for some discussion. the report, the incident, why the boat was there ... all of it is important ... not just a piece here and a piece there.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

If you are entering another countries waters illegally you are taking your life in your hands. If the people who are on the boat with you attack military people boarding the vessel they are putting everyone on the boat in danger.

If the 22 sec are accurate then there is something that needs to be investigated.

That said he was stupid to support Hamas and put himself in danger by trying to break a blockade.

This is important IMO:

Quote:

80. The Mission notes a certain tension between the political objectives of the flotilla
and its humanitarian objectives. This comes to light the moment that the Government of
Israel made offers to allow the humanitarian aid to be delivered via Israeli ports but under
the supervision of a neutral organization.

The Mission also notes that the Gaza Strip does not possess a deep sea port designed to receive the kind of cargo vessels included in the
flotilla, raising practical logistical questions about the plan to deliver large quantities of aid
by the route chosen.

Whilst the Mission is satisfied that the flotilla constituted a serious
attempt to bring essential humanitarian supplies into Gaza, it seems clear that the primary
objective was political, as indeed demonstrated by the decision of those on board the
Rachel Corrie to reject a Government of Ireland-sponsored proposal that the cargo in that
ship to be allowed through Ashdod intact.

***IcyPatriot*** · 09-30-2010, 03:14 PM

Quote:

109. In response, the captains of the various vessels stated that their destination was Gaza
and the purpose was to deliver humanitarian aid. They also asserted that the Israeli forces
did not have the right to order the vessels to change course and that the blockade referred to
was illegal.

A representative of the Free Gaza Movement spoke to the Israelis on behalf of
the whole flotilla, reiterating that the passengers were unarmed civilians delivering
humanitarian aid and that none of the ships that should be considered as any form of threat
to Israel.

At no stage was a request made by the Israeli Navy for the cargo to be inspected.
Contacts with the Israeli Navy continued until around 0200 hours when communication
equipment was jammed by the Israeli forces, cutting them off to all external
communications. However, the vessels in

.......................