Uh, wondering who remembers that the US summarily executed, by drone, an American citizen, Anwar Al Awlaki, who after being invited to the White House as a moderate Muslim went to Yemen to run Al Qaedas magazine? What was his crime that justified killing him on the spot? He ran a magazine for Al Qaeda. He was a jihadi propagandist, with no known or alleged operational involvement. He edited and wrote articles. Thats it. A crime, perhaps, if committed on US soil, but not terrorism. And yet, our President stated that the decision to execute this US citizen, without a trial, or even the bare courtesy of a gd indictment, was an easy one. And of course, instead of just executing him, we dropped a bomb and killed him and whomever was unlucky enough to be around. No terrorism there. Thats justice! Oh, and also easy I guess was the summary execution two weeks later of al-Awlakis 16 year old American son, who as far as anyone can tell, was just killed for shits and giggles. Do I need to point out that the outfit claiming responsibility for the French attack is the same one Al Awlaki worked for? Oh, but this isnt blowback. Its not Charlies tit for Al-Awlakis tat. Its about a cartoon. Thats the story because our enemies have to be crazy, not rational, to suit our propaganda needs. How else can you justify indiscriminate slaughter without end? Thus, whatever atrocities they commit cannot possibly relate to atrocities that we commit. Because otherwise, we might have to consider the price were paying to let sociopaths run the country.
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 03:04:01 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015