{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/5/2013 8:25:16 PM
9
So basically they believe they can kill whenever they think they ought to.
Well, that's comforting. I, for one, feel [i]incredibly[/i] safe.
English
-
Which is why every citizen should own a weapon.
-
Quit blowing this out of proportion. No one's going to kill you.
-
Prove it.
-
Nobody wants to kill you -- you're fine.
-
It's the principle of the matter that's important here. We shouldn't be letting the gov't summarily execute citizens absent a proper trial and conviction.
-
Um, I don't know if you actually read my post or the article, but they can't just "kill whenever they think they ought to". They can only kill when they believe you are an operational leader of a group that might have some relation to Al-Qaida. An operational leader is someone who is a leader in the operational sense. And intelligence isn't necessary in the decision because, as we've learned from the war in Iraq, intel is overrated. Also, they can only kill when capturing the target instead might be risky, with "risky" meaning "not-unrisky". And the only people in the entire government who can give the order are high-level ones, which means people who are above the lower-level officials. Lower-level officials are the ones below the higher-level officials, in case that wasn't clear. Gosh.
-
you realize anyone who(any of the list): protests, belongs to a political activist group, owns guns, owns more than 2 weeks worth of food, mentions rights or freedom or liberty or tyranny in public speech is now a "suspicious person" according to the US government, right? it's their version of this, pretty much.
-
-
I second that!
