Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
Accident? Someone (wonder who?) gave an order. Understand, gave an order! This was no accident. Kiling the wrong people might be inadvertant but it was no accident. I have to ask all those dems who claimed that Bush lied because he didn't have accurate data. It's this the same thing? Another important point that the left wants to gloss over is the two intentionally dead Americans who were denied their civil rights. Obama tries to get around this by saying they hit a building and not a particular person. That is a lie. Obama gave orders to kill two Americans on purpose and two civilians inadvertantly.
By the way, the UK Guardian has put forth the numbers that for Obama to get 41 terror leaders he killed over 1,000 civlians in collateral damage....wait! Since we are not at war there is no such thing as collateral damage. So I guess they were murdered on orders from Obama.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
I guess you forgot that a few years ago Obama was bragging him personally selecting targets.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
So what you're saying is that Obama has now given permission to the CIA to kill Americans without due process. That makes me feel good as I write this on a tablet. Two notable terrorist we're Americans. That makes three. You lose again.
|
Firstly, is it possible for you to make one post that is free of syntax errors? If it is, I haven't seen it.
So now you want to give the terrorists quarter? If Obama didn't go after the terrorists, you'd be bitching about that. Instead, he goes after them and you complain about that. The one terrorist who was killed that was american was Adam Gadahn. He was a known terrorist. He was their mouthpiece and had made many videos.
As for permission to kill americans, no. Permission to kill terrorists, yes. It's called targeted killing.
"Obama authorized the CIA and the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) to fire on targets based solely on their intelligence "signatures" — patterns of behavior that are detected through signals intercepts, human sources and aerial surveillance, and that indicate the presence of an important operative or a plot against U.S. interests."
So the guy is actively pursuing terrorists where they are and suddenly that's a bad thing? I remember in his first four years, conservatives complained he wasn't doing enough. Now he steps it up and suddenly they have a problem with that. As I've said before, nothing he does will ever satisfy you. You have a problem that goes beyond the man himself.
And you didn't address your biggest fuckup; you apparently didn't know that inadvertent and accidental were synonyms. Your general lack of knowledge and your tenuous grasp of the english language, coupled with your wild conspiracy ideas, make you someone that simply can't be trusted when it comes to much of anything that matters. Prattle on though, I know you will.