It's fairly obvious the government can and will do whatever they want.
"TSA imprisons Oscar winners on their way to the ceremonies" isn't something Obama wants to see in every newspaper on Monday morning.
Haha, yeah, that would never happen -- oh, except for that one time when it almost did (nominee only, not the winner):
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/palestini...
But can see how one might have these objections:
* It would be a way to make an example out of "collaborators". Presumably in the future the next Greenwald would think twice before embarking on this kind of project.
* It would also be a way to prove to themselves and the rest of the world that "nobody really cares and public in general supports the Government".
Regarding the last issue. There is a hidden danger in these revelations and that is despite all the talk and all the press, it seems the general public is not too interested in the topic after all. This in turn serves as a signal to the executive branch and to the NSA that they need not worry much and can even increase the intensity of their programs.
They have no problems going after very, very big name journalists with huge organizations behind them.
Now you might say they could have let him go. But we did let Al-Baghdadi go, and equally charismatic islamist and look what that led to.
Not every U.S. citizen criminal gets a trial. For example if you go on a shooting rampage, and a cop kills you, well no trial, because you couldn't be captured. That's the way this situation was handled in yemen. Why? Because the Yemeni government tried him in absentia and ordered him to be captured dead or alive. If you commit a crime in another country you are subject to their laws.
Face it it's an exception that statistically 1 out of 300000000 would have a concern over. So lose the hyperbole it's not going to serve your case as well as more factual statements would.
Wow! Edgy stuff. You should present your evidence, it would be the news story of the decade. You do have evidence I presume? It's not as if you would write something so outlandish based purely on conspiracy theories?
Two weeks later: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/anwar-...
Both of the above were US citizens killed by drones abroad. One of them was not even an adult yet, by US law.
I hope you're not saying I'm one of them/a spook/lizardman. Because I really like this website and it depresses me that it's slowly being infected with the conspiracy mindset.
[Citation Needed]
>basically no-one would define it as "execution".
I would.
A simple search would show you that your assertion is mere bravado and puffery, attempting to paint things in a black and white light. "Almost everyone" and "basically no-one" are weasel words. The issue is nuanced.
Published news articles calling it execution:
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a14627/obama-lethal-pre...
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/05/obama-k...
http://socialistworker.org/2013/02/12/execution-by-drone
Some cross-aisle input: http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/02/06/drone-strikes-murder-mob...
Academic journals debating the implications of drone warfare:
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...
http://se.asee.org/proceedings/ASEE2013/Papers2013/157.PDF
http://www.e-ir.info/2013/07/18/just-war-theory-and-the-ethi...
A book on the topic:
Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control: http://goo.gl/cghukG
Though, frankly, I picture you more like the cross-section mentioned in this excerpt (pg. 210, bottom of the page):
https://books.google.com/books?id=RcGZ_x96exgC&lpg=PA210&ots...
The academic articles that you've glossed over explicitly point out that further attention needs to be given to the frameworks within which we look at drone tactics:
From the second academic journal link: "In targeted attacks, with surgical precision, key targets are picked off discriminately. This is far too reminiscent of murder, and does not give the target a proper right to defend themselves against the accusations or discrimination. This issue needs to be considered in further detail."
Note that this comes from an engineering journal, likely targeted at a similar audience as the crowd that makes up HN. It doesn't take any sort of farfetched opining to agree that the issue is more than just "Execution? T/F?".
That is the black/white logic of a toddler or Disney movie.
>"We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim."
>"We are not at war with terrorism. We are at war with Islam."
>"The erection of a mosque upon the ashes of this atrocity will also be viewed by many millions of Muslims as a victory — and as a sign that the liberal values of the West are synonymous with decadence and cowardice."
>"Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies."
Plus several more along those lines.
I agree with both Harris and Greenwald to varying extents here, but where exactly did Greenwald mislead people on what Harris has said about Islam? One may think Harris is right or wrong and may disagree with Greenwald taking the stance that Harris is wrong, but I think Greenwald painted an accurate picture of what Harris thinks about the issue.
Snowden approached him because of his attitude and willingness to stand up to the government, but also worked with reporters like Barton Gellman.
What are you, an NSA puppet or something?
Then again, police harass people for no good reason all the time, so the TSA could very well have the same culture. Not a huge fan of security theater.
EDIT: stand corrected, the harrassement by the DHS agents described in this is pretty horrible
Of course they did break into my suit case and destroy my pad lock but hey ho, at least they left me a friendly note.
Anyway I think it's important that both sides of the coin are represented here, people are more likely to write about negative experiences in general.
^We were on honeymoon in Orlando which probably accounts for the generally positive reception :)
Based off of similar discussions I've had with other people on flights like this, a really good first approximation of the stopping time is "color of skin."
And they act the same way too, looking at you as if you were a criminal and asking you questions barking.