PDA

View Full Version : Herman Cain agreed with Paul and Johnson on Al-Alawki Assassination




Endgame
10-03-2011, 12:31 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a1_73OyiWQ&feature=youtu.be&t=7m11s

Well that's... shocking. We'll see if he goes back on it later.

jct74
10-03-2011, 01:07 AM
Wow, nice find. This should probably be in Ron Paul Grassroots Central or Opposing Candidates since it is relevant to the campaign to have one of the so-called "top-tier" candidates agree with Ron Paul on this, after he took heat all week for it.


edit: here's the clip cut out, I'll repost it here up top


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow

jct74
10-03-2011, 02:04 AM
here's more from Cain in a different interview:


President Obama has said that he has the authority to assassinate American citizens if he's declared them an enemy combatant in the War on Terror. Al Awlaki is one guy who is on the official government list where he can be taken out. Do you have any thoughts on that? Is it a good policy because it allows us to take out Americans who may have joined Al Qaeda? Or is it a bad policy-

Well first of all, this is the first that I have heard - you're saying it's okay to take out American citizens if he suspects they are terrorist related. Is that what you said?!

Yes, that's what I said.

I've got to be honest with you. I have not heard that. I had not heard that's something that he said. I don't believe that the president of the United States should order the assassination of citizens of the United States. That's why we have our court system, and that's why we have our laws. Even if the person is suspected of being affiliated with terrorism, if they are a citizen of this country, they still deserve the rights of this country, which includes due process. Osama bin Laden was not a citizen of the United States of America. So I would not have changed the decision the president made in that regard. But if you're a citizen, no, it is not right for the president to to think he has the power to have you assassinated. No. He has the power to make sure you're locked up, but you have to go through due process.


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/05/herman-cain-spying-on-americans-is-okay-but-not-assassinating-them/239400/

dannno
10-03-2011, 02:15 AM
Hah, so much for Cain being the next GOP flavor of the month..

Rudeman
10-03-2011, 02:45 AM
My respect for Hermain Cain increased a bit, we'll see if he's willing to stick with it.

jct74
10-03-2011, 03:11 AM
My respect for Hermain Cain increased a bit, we'll see if he's willing to stick with it.

I doubt it. But more importantly this makes Ron Paul look a lot better when a mainstream candidate agrees with or at least at one time agreed with Ron's position that was panned by so many. And it will make teocons' heads explode to see their candidate of the week agreeing with Ron Paul on such a controversial issue. Any teocon that bashes Ron Paul on al-Awlaki send them this video.

Rudeman
10-03-2011, 03:22 AM
I agree that it does help support Ron Paul's position. It's been a challenge debating those teocon folks but it has provided me some entertainment debunking each bs reason they try to come up with. This could be the final nail to their coffin.

We'll see if Cain has the fortitude to stick to this statement or if he'll fold.

fearthereaperx
10-03-2011, 03:34 AM
This is from back in May..hasn't he voiced his opinion, along with the other candidates, for the killing already?

rp08orbust
10-03-2011, 03:39 AM
Apparently he has in fact flip-flopped:


Cain added a couple of interesting elements to his stump speech — an exhortation in full support of the Second Amendment, and an explanation of his foreign-policy philosophy, complete with his assurances of complete support for Israel. In a brief Q&A with our panel after his speech, Cain told the crowd that he fully supported Barack Obama’s decision to strike Anwar al-Awlaki.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/02/video-cains-presser-at-teacon-midwest/

Edit: I watched the entire video but heard nothing about al-Awlaki. It would be good to catch Herman Cain on video agreeing with Obama before we proclaim his flip-flop so that he can't undo it.

rp08orbust
10-03-2011, 06:03 AM
Bump for anyone who can find footage of Cain defending Obama on the al-Awlaki assassination. Ed Morrissey from HotAir.com claims it was in a Q&A session on Sunday, but I couldn't find it in the video he linked to at http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/02/video-cains-presser-at-teacon-midwest/

jct74
10-03-2011, 06:08 AM
cool, someone clipped the video posted in the OP and put it up on youtube


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow

fearthereaperx
10-03-2011, 06:17 AM
cool, someone clipped the video posted in the OP and put it up on youtube


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQw1xkAEow

I made the first comment

TheState
10-03-2011, 06:20 AM
Thanks for the info, I sent this to politi fact. Maybe they'll feature it on their flip-flop page.

rp08orbust
10-03-2011, 06:21 AM
Thanks for the info, I sent this to politi fact. Maybe they'll feature it on their flip-flop page.

We need proof that he has flip-flopped.

TheState
10-03-2011, 06:22 AM
We need proof that he has flip-flopped.

Hopefully they can dig it up for us. If he hasn't, that's still good news for us since it shows another supporter of RP's position.

William R
10-03-2011, 06:24 AM
nice find

Enforcer
10-03-2011, 07:40 AM
You should know that the statutory law that allowed Obama to assassinate an American without Due Process is the the so - called "Patriot Act."

The so - called "Patriot Act" has been used in the United States against citizens that were never connected to any form of terror. For example, an elderly grandmother was raided on the word of a paid snitch. The snitch claimed that this woman was a drug dealer. In fact, it was an innocent grandmother in her 80s. Police raided her home and murdered her.

In another instance, a man was targeted by the LEO community on the word of one of the GBI's "Confidential Informants." A plan was hatched to raid the man's home, kill him and claim he resisted arrest. Somehow the Atlanta Journal Constitution got wind of the plot and exposed the GBI agent that initiated the action. In court, the agent tried to hide behind the so - called "Patriot Act" as justification for his actions. After an exhaustive look into this guy's background, the AJC's chief editorial writer concluded that the man had "never been a threat, imminent or otherwise."

Obama may have used the law, but it was the "conservatives" that forced that bill through Congress. Both sides are complicit in the murder of innocent people. I have personal knowledge (meaning more than a tv report or two) about these activities that deny to people the constitutionally guaranteed due process.

LibertyEsq
10-03-2011, 08:01 AM
tweeted - should spread this

asurfaholic
10-03-2011, 08:22 AM
So easy, find out if herman caint supports the patriot act. If yes, then he is talking out of both sides of his mouth. Either he fully supports following the constitution, and that requires not supporting the patriot act, or he is shallow and has no true principles on the issue.

sailingaway
10-03-2011, 10:32 AM
I think even Johnson's 'agreement' was kinda pale, stock, and vague. Cain's was, as far as I am concerned, momentary. When was the last time he stuck to anything once it was disputed?

I'm not going to spread it; I think it makes him look better than he is.

jmdrake
10-03-2011, 10:36 AM
I think even Johnson's 'agreement' was kinda pale, stock, and vague. Cain's was, as far as I am concerned, momentary. When was the last time he stuck to anything once it was disputed?

I'm not going to spread it; I think it makes him look better than he is.

Then remix it showing Paul's statement on the assassination versus Cain's. This is an issue that's currently hurting us. Tying Cain to it helps us because it means our enemies can no longer attack Paul on this without attacking Cain. Cain will probably flip flop on this as soon as the pressure is on anyway.

TonySutton
10-03-2011, 10:46 AM
It might be worth reviewing more media from around the time the assassination link was first released and see if we can find more talking heads and politicians speaking in favor of the constitution on this topic.

V3n
10-03-2011, 12:14 PM
It might be worth reviewing more media from around the time the assassination link was first released and see if we can find more talking heads and politicians speaking in favor of the constitution on this topic.

There was a lot written about this all through 2010.. Here's a start... (http://www.google.com/#q=kill+list&hl=en&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:1/1/2010,cd_max:12/31/2010&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=CfqJTvesBcuBtgeu1uXBBQ&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=5&ved=0CCIQ_AUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d379678dfb0eb899&biw=1280&bih=870)

I'm also reading a lot on Executive Order 12333 section 2.11 (http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12333.html#2.10) - which prohibits assassination and was signed into law by Ronald Reagan. I want to write the title "Ronald Reagan agreed with Ron Paul" -everybody says they are looking for the next Reagan..

This article (http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-04/justice/us.assassination.policy_1_assassination-prohibition-cia-lawyers?_s=PM:LAW) is interesting, but doesn't really say a whole lot.

V3n
10-03-2011, 01:00 PM
Here's an angle I'm working on..

On January 3, 2001, Congressman Bob Barr introduced the Terrorist Elimination Act of 2001 (http://www.copvcia.com/free/pandora/assassination_ban.html) which would repeal Ronald Reagan's Executive Order 12333 section 2.11 which prohibited assassinations. Meaning the White House could then create kill lists, and eliminate their enemies, just as it has done, without even worrying about breaking the Executive Order..

Now get this... according to "The Rude Pundit" (http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2005/07/pre-911-mindset-before-911-so-like-who.html):

Bill O'Reilly, on March 2, 2001, suffering from what the right might call a post-Clinton mindset, was quite squeamish about giving the President unlimited power to kill foreign leaders under the Terrorist Elimination Act of 2001. Said O'Reilly to Representative Bob Barr (who would undergo another kind of change of heart post-9/11), "See, I'm worried about that kind of power being put in the hands of even the president, because as I've said, we've seen some pretty dubious things go on in that Oval Office...I would vote against this bill, Congressman, if I were in Congress."

Bill O'Reilly agreed with Ron Paul! I'm now trying to find video or anything to confirm the quote above..

ZanZibar
10-03-2011, 01:14 PM
Here's an angle I'm working on..

On January 3, 2001, Congressman Bob Barr introduced the Terrorist Elimination Act of 2001 (http://www.copvcia.com/free/pandora/assassination_ban.html) which would repeal Ronald Reagan's Executive Order 12333 section 2.11 which prohibited assassinations. Meaning the White House could then create kill lists, and eliminate their enemies, just as it has done, without even worrying about breaking the Executive Order..

Now get this... according to "The Rude Pundit" (http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2005/07/pre-911-mindset-before-911-so-like-who.html):


Bill O'Reilly agreed with Ron Paul! I'm now trying to find video or anything to confirm the quote above..Yeah, it's funny to watch people's ideological inconsistency like a fish flopping around out of water.