• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

Angry Fork
Spelling is Hard
(07-18-2013, 10:37 AM)
Angry Fork's Avatar
Thought this article was really important, didn't see another thread on it yet. I don't understand how anyone can defend the terrorism the US is committing right now.

SANA, Yemen — I LEARNED that my 16-year-old grandson, Abdulrahman — a United States citizen — had been killed by an American drone strike from news reports the morning after he died.

The missile killed him, his teenage cousin and at least five other civilians on Oct. 14, 2011, while the boys were eating dinner at an open-air restaurant in southern Yemen.

I visited the site later, once I was able to bear the pain of seeing where he sat in his final moments. Local residents told me his body was blown to pieces. They showed me the grave where they buried his remains. I stood over it, asking why my grandchild was dead.

Nearly two years later, I still have no answers. The United States government has refused to explain why Abdulrahman was killed. It was not until May of this year that the Obama administration, in a supposed effort to be more transparent, publicly acknowledged what the world already knew — that it was responsible for his death.

The attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., said only that Abdulrahman was not “specifically targeted,” raising more questions than he answered.

My grandson was killed by his own government. The Obama administration must answer for its actions and be held accountable. On Friday, I will petition a federal court in Washington to require the government to do just that.


Abdulrahman was born in Denver. He lived in America until he was 7, then came to live with me in Yemen. He was a typical teenager — he watched “The Simpsons,” listened to Snoop Dogg, read “Harry Potter” and had a Facebook page with many friends. He had a mop of curly hair, glasses like me and a wide, goofy smile.

In 2010, the Obama administration put Abdulrahman’s father, my son Anwar, on C.I.A. and Pentagon “kill lists” of suspected terrorists targeted for death. A drone took his life on Sept. 30, 2011.

The government repeatedly made accusations of terrorism against Anwar — who was also an American citizen — but never charged him with a crime. No court ever reviewed the government’s claims nor was any evidence of criminal wrongdoing ever presented to a court. He did not deserve to be deprived of his constitutional rights as an American citizen and killed.

Early one morning in September 2011, Abdulrahman set out from our home in Sana by himself. He went to look for his father, whom he hadn’t seen for years. He left a note for his mother explaining that he missed his father and wanted to find him, and asking her to forgive him for leaving without permission.

A couple of days after Abdulrahman left, we were relieved to receive word that he was safe and with cousins in southern Yemen, where our family is from. Days later, his father was targeted and killed by American drones in a northern province, hundreds of miles away. After Anwar died, Abdulrahman called us and said he was going to return home.

That was the last time I heard his voice. He was killed just two weeks after his father.

A country that believes it does not even need to answer for killing its own is not the America I once knew. From 1966 to 1977, I fulfilled a childhood dream and studied in the United States as a Fulbright scholar, earning my doctorate and then working as a researcher and assistant professor at universities in New Mexico, Nebraska and Minnesota.

I have fond memories of those years. When I first came to the United States as a student, my host family took me camping by the ocean and on road trips to places like Yosemite, Disneyland and New York — and it was wonderful.

After returning to Yemen, I used my American education and skills to help my country, serving as Yemen’s minister of agriculture and fisheries and establishing one of the country’s leading institutions of higher learning, Ibb University. Abdulrahman used to tell me he wanted to follow in my footsteps and go back to America to study. I can’t bear to think of those conversations now.

After Anwar was put on the government’s list, but before he was killed, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights represented me in a lawsuit challenging the government’s claim that it could kill anyone it deemed an enemy of the state.

The court dismissed the case, saying that I did not have standing to sue on my son’s behalf and that the government’s targeted killing program was outside the court’s jurisdiction anyway.

After the deaths of Abdulrahman and Anwar, I filed another lawsuit, seeking answers and accountability. The government has argued once again that its targeted killing program is beyond the reach of the courts. I find it hard to believe that this can be legal in a constitutional democracy based on a system of checks and balances.


The government has killed a 16-year-old American boy. Shouldn’t it at least have to explain why?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/op...dson.html?_r=0
freddy
(07-18-2013, 10:42 AM)
freddy's Avatar
I used to think America was a good guy.
Angelus Errare
this looks like one of those Final Fantasy games lionhead always makes
(07-18-2013, 10:44 AM)
Angelus Errare's Avatar

Originally Posted by freddy

I used to think America was a good guy.

I'm the opposite, I never thought that.
Kandrick
GAF's Ed McMahon
(07-18-2013, 10:45 AM)
Kandrick's Avatar

Originally Posted by freddy

I used to think America was a good guy.

There is no good guy
Megalosaro
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:46 AM)
Megalosaro's Avatar
Good read. The government SHOULD be accountable to this man. Every single life taken should have some justification. "Collateral Damage" or "He wasn't the target of the attack." doesn't cut it
timetokill
I call 'em "death hugs"
(07-18-2013, 10:46 AM)
timetokill's Avatar
Yet another shameful mark on Obama's presidency.

Obama has decided that he has the power to secretly choose and execute American citizens with no due process, hell, not even acknowledgement of the kill, let alone why the person was killed.

So nice to remember that this power isn't going to end with his presidency. No, this will be Obama's little gift to the future of America as well.

God, what a depressing thought to go to sleep with tonight.
sphagnum
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:46 AM)
sphagnum's Avatar

Originally Posted by freddy

I used to think America was a good guy.

America has never been good. At times it has been more on the right side of history than certain enemies, but it's always been doing something evil in some way at any given point in its history.
JDSN
You must walk home naked, dragging behind you the Stone of Shame.
(07-18-2013, 10:48 AM)
JDSN's Avatar
Ill just quote a random comment of disgust that is usually reserved for Sharia states bullshit, it has come to the point that it fits well in this context:

Originally Posted by agrajag

These backwards ass countries need to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

DigitalDevil
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:50 AM)
DigitalDevil's Avatar
It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there may be a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.
Megalosaro
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:51 AM)
Megalosaro's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there maybe a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.

We are at war in Yemen?
Basileus777
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:51 AM)
Basileus777's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there maybe a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.

I must have missed when we declared war on Yemen. It's sad that people buy into this sort of excuse. An American citizen was murdered by our government, this doesn't bother you?
Carcetti
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:54 AM)
Carcetti's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there may be a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.

If you accept this you also accept the fact Obama & co. are totally allowed kill you randomly, provided you sit at the wrong restaurant at the wrong time.
jimi_dini
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:55 AM)
jimi_dini's Avatar

Originally Posted by Megalosaro

We are at war in Yemen?

US is at war against everyone terrorists.
Last edited by jimi_dini; 07-18-2013 at 11:13 AM.
Rocket Scientist
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:56 AM)
Rocket Scientist's Avatar
That was difficult to read.
DigitalDevil
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:56 AM)
DigitalDevil's Avatar

Originally Posted by Megalosaro

We are at war in Yemen?

It's a war against terrorism. I seriously doubt they took action on him just cuz they were bored.

I don't know anything more about this incident than I learned in this thread. I only responded because of the comment that Americans are terrorists or "evil'. That's bullshit.
teruterubozu
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:56 AM)
teruterubozu's Avatar

Originally Posted by sphagnum

America has never been good. At times it has been more on the right side of history than certain enemies, but it's always been doing something evil in some way at any given point in its history.

I see this phrase used a lot in GAF political/history threads, but I have yet to understand its meaning.
Angry Fork
Spelling is Hard
(07-18-2013, 10:56 AM)
Angry Fork's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there may be a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.

What do you think a terrorist attack is? Are innocent civilians in Yemen (or any other country where this is happening) being terrorized or are they not?
BeerSnob
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:56 AM)
BeerSnob's Avatar
All the budget in the world and the CIA still goddamned sucks at counterinsurgency. Drone strike on a cafe? Really? The watch officer that signed off on that should be the standin for the next drone strike. Just send his ass after the HVI with a ballpeen hammer.
Vizantir
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:58 AM)
Vizantir's Avatar
Either drones or troops.

Guess which option most people will choose.
Smiles and Cries
To hell with Bono,
here's a worthy cause.
(07-18-2013, 10:58 AM)
Smiles and Cries's Avatar

Originally Posted by freddy

I used to think America was a good guy.

Top Gun - Iron Eagle I grew up with that idea from movies like those in the 80s

but still the only country in the world to drop Nukes on cities should be considered the bad guys
Kettch
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:58 AM)
Kettch's Avatar

Originally Posted by Megalosaro

Good read. The government SHOULD be accountable to this man. Every single life taken should have some justification. "Collateral Damage" or "He wasn't the target of the attack." doesn't cut it

I'm guessing they only threw out the "He wasn't the target of the attack" after they found out that he was just looking to reunite with his father rather than going to help him in terrorist activities. It took the government 1.5 years to acknowledge killing an innocent American, pretty clear they didn't consider him innocent until then.

Prime example of why a kill list without a trial beforehand is so fucked up (for the father as well, who knows if he was actually guilty without a public trial and the ability to defend himself).
Basileus777
Member
(07-18-2013, 10:59 AM)
Basileus777's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's a war against terrorism. I seriously doubt they took action on him just cuz they were bored.

I don't know anything more about this incident than I learned in this thread. I only responded because of the comment that Americans are terrorists or "evil'. That's bullshit.

Oh, the irony considering what the US gets away with by labeling people "terrorists." Is the label only inconvenient when it's not assigned by the US government?
masud
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:02 AM)
masud's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's a war against terrorism. I seriously doubt they took action on him just cuz they were bored.

I don't know anything more about this incident than I learned in this thread. I only responded because of the comment that Americans are terrorists or "evil'. That's bullshit.

Idk if I watched a restaurant full of people get vaporized by a flying robot I'd be pretty fucking terrified...
Megalosaro
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:03 AM)
Megalosaro's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's a war against terrorism. I seriously doubt they took action on him just cuz they were bored.

I don't know anything more about this incident than I learned in this thread. I only responded because of the comment that Americans are terrorists or "evil'. That's bullshit.

Sorry dude, it doesn't work like that. You can't just send troops or drones where ever the hell you want because of a vague war on terrorism
BeerSnob
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:03 AM)
BeerSnob's Avatar

Originally Posted by Basileus777

Oh, the irony considering what the US gets away with by labeling people "terrorists." Is the label only inconvenient when it's not assigned by the US government?

A terrorist organization is a marginalized group of belligerents that use force to persuade the population of a target country to acquiesce to the terrorist groups demands. As such no state, by definition can be a terrorist organization. As they have legitimate political authority. They can however use terrorizing methods in order to force their political goals. In fact the word terrorism comes from the "reign of terror".
DigitalDevil
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:07 AM)
DigitalDevil's Avatar

Originally Posted by Basileus777

Oh, the irony considering what the US gets away with by labeling people "terrorists." Is the label only inconvenient when it's not assigned by the US government?

They have admitted he was not the target right? That they made a mistake. Do the people we assign as terrorists ever do that? Or are they glad about every american, or other nation's, death?

The government should do more to explain this and make it right, no doubt. But now we are terrorists? Come on.
Tesseract
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:09 AM)
Tesseract's Avatar
shit like this is why i'm never leaving the states.
Carcetti
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:10 AM)
Carcetti's Avatar
The only thing separating this from terrorism is that it's done by a government, which somehow magically makes it not terrorism.

Just switch the actors and the victims. How does it sound now: Yemeni men blow up a cafe in America due to someone on their 'kill list' being inside at the time.
numble
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:11 AM)
numble's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

They have admitted he was not the target right? That they made a mistake. Do the people we assign as terrorists ever do that? Or are they glad about every american, or other nation's, death?

The government should do more to explain this and make it right, no doubt. But now we are terrorists? Come on.

They still classify anyone considered a military-age male killed in these strikes as an enemy combatant, even civilians.

When the LAPD shoots up and injures people accidentally, they need to pay $4.2 million. Here, they can just hand wave it away.
BeerSnob
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:14 AM)
BeerSnob's Avatar

Originally Posted by Carcetti

The only thing separating this from terrorism is that it's done by a government, which somehow magically makes it not terrorism.

Just switch the actors and the victims. How does it sound now: Yemeni men blow up a cafe in America due to someone on their 'kill list' being inside at the time.

http://www.economist.com/node/21532311
It happens, or something almost like it. Although in Yemen the U.S has some bizarre quasi-legit agreement with the Yemeni government that allows the U.S to pursue targets in their country. Although I read that that may have ended.
Liha
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:20 AM)
Liha's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

I only responded because of the comment that Americans are terrorists or "evil'. That's bullshit.

americans are friendly people, the government is the devil. A nobel prize winner kill random people and exported weapons for several billion dollars.
Last edited by Liha; 07-18-2013 at 11:22 AM.
youngwerther
Banned
(07-18-2013, 11:23 AM)
This is what apathetic citizenship leads to.
MisterFalcon
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:25 AM)
It's carefully avoided mentioning the full name in the article but it's talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki and his son. They're not just two random people the US decided to kill for shits and giggles.
jimi_dini
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:28 AM)
jimi_dini's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

The government should do more to explain this and make it right, no doubt. But now we are terrorists? Come on.

Explain the difference between:

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb gets dropped on it. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was the US government and that it was an "accident" and the bomb was meant for someone else. Additional note: this happens all the time in your country.

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb goes up. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was so called "terrorists" and they wanted to hit some politician. Additional note: this may happen quite a lot as well.

People can call the former terrorism as well, especially because the former doesn't just happen ONCE in those countries. It happens all the time. Because people in those countries will be afraid of even just sitting in a cafe (or actually anywhere) fearing that they might get killed because of US "accidents".

Where is the difference between that and people fearing for their lives because of so called "terrorist attacks"? In case of US government it's even worse, because it's a whole country that is doing those things using gigantic budgets. And they are not doing this shit in their own country, but in other countries. I wouldn't care, if US government dropped bombs in US. Oh right, it's "accidents". Maybe officially called "terrorists" should use the same excuse.

Or maybe it's okay, because it's not happening in US. If say North Korea would drop bombs on US to kill suspected terrorists, but instead "accidentally" killed innocents left and right, you would also not call them terrorists?
Last edited by jimi_dini; 07-18-2013 at 11:32 AM.
Polari
(07-18-2013, 11:28 AM)
Polari's Avatar


Put this lowlife war criminal on trial already, and the one before him.
Burger
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:29 AM)
Burger's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's a war against terrorism. I seriously doubt they took action on him just cuz they were bored.

You should hope nobody in your government decides you might be a terrorist.
Last edited by Burger; 07-18-2013 at 11:32 AM.
Aaron
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:31 AM)
Aaron's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

They have admitted he was not the target right? That they made a mistake. Do the people we assign as terrorists ever do that? Or are they glad about every american, or other nation's, death?

The government should do more to explain this and make it right, no doubt. But now we are terrorists? Come on.

If you've seen some of the documentaries on terrorists, they do in fact make mistakes and cause unintended collateral damage. Doesn't really matter though. Any killing of civilians is a terrorist act, no matter who commits it. US included. Just because the US can get away with it doesn't make it right. Terrorism isn't a nation. You can't go to war with an idea. Dropping bombs will never wipe it out. In some cases, it only makes it stronger.
JDSN
You must walk home naked, dragging behind you the Stone of Shame.
(07-18-2013, 11:32 AM)
JDSN's Avatar

Originally Posted by MisterFalcon

It's carefully avoided mentioning the full name in the article but it's talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki and his son. They're not just two random people the US decided to kill for shits and giggles.

From the nytimes:

Then, on Oct. 14, a missile apparently intended for an Egyptian Qaeda operative, Ibrahim al-Banna, hit a modest outdoor eating place in Shabwa. The intelligence was bad: Mr. Banna was not there, and among about a dozen men killed was the young Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who had no connection to terrorism and would never have been deliberately targeted.

The kid was innocent, he is the focus of the letter.
Nathan Muir
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:36 AM)
Nathan Muir's Avatar

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

It's war. This may have been a mistake, or there may be a good reason it happened. My opinion is that it should not have happened, but I can't get on the "Americans are terrorists" train. Sorry.

Originally Posted by DigitalDevil

The government should do more to explain this and make it right, no doubt. But now we are terrorists? Come on.

You realize you were the first person to use the "Americans are terrorist" phrase?

Also, the U.S. is not at war with Yemen. And "terrorists" should never be used as a surrogate for whatever country the U.S. feels like attacking. As this story dictates though, among many others like it, the U.S. does use "terrorism" as a justification on whatever location it pleases.
Last edited by Nathan Muir; 07-18-2013 at 11:38 AM.
BeerSnob
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:36 AM)
BeerSnob's Avatar

Originally Posted by jimi_dini

Or maybe it's okay, because it's not happening in US. If say North Korea would drop bombs on US to kill suspected terrorists, but instead "accidentally" killed innocents left and right, you would also not call them terrorists?

Does North Korea have an agreement with the U.S to pursue and kill U.S members of an international organization that has previously attacked North Korea and it's interests? If not then it's provocative act by one state against the other's population, an act of war in short. If said agreement does exist, then the action is legally considered collateral damage of a joint operation between the U.S and North Korea. In any case it means North Korea really needs to tighten up it's rules of engagement because killing non-combatants is the biggest sin in Counter-Insurgency.
Johnlenham
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:39 AM)
Johnlenham's Avatar

Originally Posted by jimi_dini

Explain the difference between:

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb gets dropped on it. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was the US government and that it was an "accident" and the bomb was meant for someone else. Additional note: this happens all the time in your country.

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb goes up. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was so called "terrorists" and they wanted to hit some politician. Additional note: this may happen quite a lot as well.

People can call the former terrorism as well, especially because the former doesn't just happen ONCE in those countries. It happens all the time. Because people in those countries will be afraid of even just sitting in a cafe (or actually anywhere) fearing that they might get killed because of US "accidents".

Where is the difference between that and people fearing for their lives because of so called "terrorist attacks"? In case of US government it's even worse, because it's a whole country that is doing those things using gigantic budgets. And they are not doing this shit in their own country, but in other countries. I wouldn't care, if US government dropped bombs in US. Oh right, it's "accidents". Maybe officially called "terrorists" should use the same excuse.

Or maybe it's okay, because it's not happening in US. If say North Korea would drop bombs on US to kill suspected terrorists, but instead "accidentally" killed innocents left and right, you would also not call them terrorists?

This.

The USA is basically leading the next generation of these countrys right into the arms of "terrorist" groups.
People having their family blown away week after week and yet the USA has the balls to call them terrorists when they are doing things like this. Mind blowing.
MisterFalcon
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:41 AM)

Originally Posted by jimi_dini

Explain the difference between:

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb gets dropped on it. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was the US government and that it was an "accident" and the bomb was meant for someone else. Additional note: this happens all the time in your country.

- You sitting at a cafe. Bomb goes up. Your girlfriend dies because of it. Later you get told that it was so called "terrorists" and they wanted to hit some politician. Additional note: this may happen quite a lot as well.

There is also option 3, the most common one: your girlfriend dies in a terrorist attack with no politician as target, just one to kill as many random people as possible.
Phat Michael
Member
(07-18-2013, 11:43 AM)
Phat Michael's Avatar

Originally Posted by JDSN

Ill just quote a random comment of disgust that is usually reserved for Sharia states bullshit, it has come to the point that it fits well in this context:

yep that was posted in a Dubai thread about "what a shithole" it was. and how people would never dare travel there because of how corrupt the government is. then a thread like this comes out.
k_trout
Banned
(07-18-2013, 11:47 AM)
im always left asking myself

when is muder acceptable?

so many good and evils
and us and them
and they started it - revenge justice etc

but really what it all boils down to is that question

edit: and dont say self defense cause ill just then ask
when is someone NOT allowed to defend themselves from being murdered?
Last edited by k_trout; 07-18-2013 at 11:52 AM.
sinxtanx
(07-18-2013, 11:49 AM)
sinxtanx's Avatar

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs stated that the drone killing of Anwar al-Awlaki's son was justified and that the boy "should [have] had a more responsible father."

ಠ_ಠ
Megalosaro
Member
(07-18-2013, 12:08 PM)
Megalosaro's Avatar

Originally Posted by sinxtanx

ಠ_ಠ

I'm sure he wouldn't be saying the same thing if his son Ethan was drone'd
Phat Michael
Member
(07-18-2013, 12:11 PM)
Phat Michael's Avatar
have any other countries sent drones to north America? I never hear of drone retaliation at all.
nastybastard
Junior Member
(07-18-2013, 12:13 PM)
nastybastard's Avatar

Originally Posted by Vizantir

Either drones or troops.

Guess which option most people will choose.

I'd assume most people would choose not killing innocents. Why are Americans not protesting in the streets about this? Your commander in chief is playing God using bullshit reasoning as justification.

Thousands of people joined the Occupy Wallstreet movement and that was about money. People march in the streets for gay rights. Celebrities jump on these bandwagons left right and center. (Probably not because they care but for the PR boost)

This is about innocent lives. The apathy sickens me. Maybe out of sight really means out of mind in this situation. Disgusting.
Last edited by nastybastard; 07-18-2013 at 12:22 PM.
BeerSnob
Member
(07-18-2013, 12:14 PM)
BeerSnob's Avatar

Originally Posted by Phat Michael

have any other countries sent drones to north America? I never hear of drone retaliation at all.

Eh the Japanese used balloon bombs called Fu-Go in the 1940's, to little effect. Again though Pakistan and Yemen have a shady ass standing agreements allowing these drone strikes.
Last edited by BeerSnob; 07-18-2013 at 12:17 PM.
Baby Jesus
Member
(07-18-2013, 01:27 PM)
Baby Jesus's Avatar

Originally Posted by k_trout

im always left asking myself

when is muder acceptable?

so many good and evils
and us and them
and they started it - revenge justice etc

but really what it all boils down to is that question

edit: and dont say self defense cause ill just then ask
when is someone NOT allowed to defend themselves from being murdered?

The answer to your question has two parts, imho. I think...:

a)When you are told it is. When your government, religion, cult-leader, parent, news reader, sports hero or ultimate authority tells you it is. If you boil it down, that's all that seems to be left, imo.

edit: and dont say self defense cause ill just then ask
when is someone NOT allowed to defend themselves from being murdered?

Clearly there are cases that can be isolated. I don't think you can entirely divorce the two concepts - not sure if there are even two concepts.

b)When you are in a personal survival situation - when you, in person, are attacked by another person or persons. This scenario can be evoked or manipulated by a).

Good and evil are just abstract values dependent upon a (shared) frame of reference. Relativistic ethics in action. Sorry if that sounds a bit depressing.

Look: smileys :D :D
Last edited by Baby Jesus; 07-18-2013 at 01:31 PM. Reason: half asleep

Thread Tools