Al-Qaida questions US commitment to “human rights”

Yeah, that’s what I said. You see, al-Qaida thinks it’s perfectly fine for their “forces” to attack US citizens, military and anyone else who will not submit to their perverted view of Islam. But if we kill a US citizen who is actively planning to attack the United States, we’re violating his human rights.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. From The Washington Post.

Al-Qaeda has also criticized the Obama administration for killing U.S. citizens, saying doing so “contradicts” American law.

“Where are what they keep talking about regarding freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms?!” the statement says, according to a translation by SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist Web sites. …

In a statement, [Samir Khan’s] family said that, Khan was a “law-abiding citizen of the United States” and “was never implicated of any crime.”

“Was this style of execution the only solution?” the family said. “Why couldn’t there have been a capture and trial?”

There are questions concerning Anwar al-Awiaki’s authority within the al-Qaida organization in Yemen, but he has been tied to the failed Christmas Day underwear bomber and the Fort Hood attack. There’s been plenty of legal-types discussing the basis for the administrations decision to blow the guy away via super drone, but if someone has attacked you multiple times and continues to plan future attacks, I think he’s fair game – US citizen or not.

If you happen to be hanging out with that particular type of low life, don’t expect to be spared.

Filed in: Featured, News Tags: 

Related Posts

Bookmark and Promote!

From the owners: This section is for comments from Radio Vice Online's registered readers. Never assume the owners of this site agree with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use - a must read if you wish to contribute here - may lose their posting privileges. Just because we've let a similar comment stand in the past does not mean we'll let it stand in the future.

15 Responses to "Al-Qaida questions US commitment to “human rights”"

  1. Shared Sacrifice says:

    There’s only one thing more funny:  Achmed the Dead Terrorist!     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go           He suffers from premature detonation…  he set the timer for 30 minutes but it went off in 4 seconds:) 

  2. ricbee says:

    That’s like the UN putting Libya on the Human Rights Council”,that has no credence & neither does Al-Qaida. Even tho it does give some cause for reflection.

  3. Plainvillian says:

    Islam being such a paragon of egalitarianism and tolerance,  should we really care about their propaganda?  Samir Khan was collateral damage in a target rich environment.  Next!   

  4. Lucinda says:

    “But if we kill a US citizen who is actively planning to attack the United States, we’re violating his human rights.”
    I see it as preventing an enemy combatant from violating the human rights of countless US citizens.
    Shared Sacrifice, thanks for the laugh! “you’re all bones!” “It’s a flesh wound.” hahaha

  5. Eric says:

    We’re living in a parallel universe.  Captain Kirk visited on of these places many years ago. Beam me up Scotty!

  6. phil says:

    Make glass, not war.

  7. Dimsdale says:

    Oh yes, the AlQies are the “go to guys” for human rights.   How do they spell “human rights”?  I think it is “kill the infidel” (including other Muslims who disagree with us even slightly).

  8. Anybody but Obama says:

    The UN is irrelevant. Look out for Agenda 21 which our government is implementing little by little. Another off shoot from Agenda 21 is ICLEI, all coming to a town or city near you.

  9. NH-Jim says:

    Instead of a missile, should our military have just captured him and saw his head off?  Isn’t that the Al Q way of doing things?

  10. Murphy says:

    We merely allowed him to praise Allah in person……… let Allah sort them out. Me thinks they will find out that Allah is not too happy with them. IMHO

  11. Lynn says:

    Will have to ask SOS, but wasn’t Khan’s terrorist involvement Treason and you can be shot on the spot for that. Well anyways, it’s OK with me.

© 2008-2015 Radio Vice Online Inc. All rights reserved | FAQ | Terms of Use | Advertise
Implemented and managed by Spider Creations LLC.