Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)

11. Do you know the reason his father was sought?

Reply to delrem (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 5, 2014, 12:01 AM

Apr 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Judge tosses lawsuit over drone deaths of Americans [View all] MindMover Apr 2014 OP

Just goes to prove you can file suit for anything. Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #1

The bin Laden family are friends of the Bush's, one of the US's first-families. delrem Apr 2014 #3

Also, the ones killed on 9/11 was not involved in conflicts, I am so sure this kid was not Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #5

"perhaps in the future"??? delrem Apr 2014 #6

well, do you know what the future may have been for the 15 year old? Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #7

He's dead. The US killed him. Period. delrem Apr 2014 #8

Like the price of 9/11? Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #9

The fact that the US killed him with a drone has nothing to do with "9/11". delrem Apr 2014 #10

Do you know the reason his father was sought? Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #11

He is not his father. delrem Apr 2014 #12

His father recruited followers to follow his commands. Again do you know the reason his father was Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #13

OK. I write you off. Goodbye. delrem Apr 2014 #14

It's quite simple: JoeyT Apr 2014 #17

The son wasn't the target of the strike that killed him (nt) Recursion Apr 2014 #19

he knows this damn well. nt. dionysus Apr 2014 #20

Who was the target of 9/11? I am still waiting on the answer. Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #24

What does a kid who was 3 or 4 years old in 2001 have to do Cal Carpenter Apr 2014 #32

You have turned have the whole picture before understanding. Still Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #36

That's one of the vilest defenses I've seen of that particular incident. JoeyT Apr 2014 #16

Yes I continue to site 9/11, still I do not hear the reason why the father was targeted. Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #25

It doesn't matter why the father was targeted. JoeyT Apr 2014 #34

Then the rest of the world can say it doesnt matter, the father should have protected Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #37

Seriously?? 9/11 justifies guilt-by-proximity in drone strikes? cprise Apr 2014 #30

Gosh. Whatever happened to the Right to sue government for a redress of grievances? Octafish Apr 2014 #2

You still have that right; but it's proportional to the amount of free speech you have pffshht Apr 2014 #15

The next big thing: proportional voting. Octafish Apr 2014 #22

Err... they did sue. Recursion Apr 2014 #18

Uh, I meant the Justice part. Octafish Apr 2014 #21

So, the court applying the relevant case law on this question... Recursion Apr 2014 #23

What law says it's OK for a president to kill Americans without trial? Octafish Apr 2014 #26

In this case, the 2001 AUMF Recursion Apr 2014 #27

That may trump the Constitution for you, but not for me. Octafish Apr 2014 #28

Military targeting of US citizens goes back to 1791 Recursion Apr 2014 #29

So, you're OK with that? Octafish Apr 2014 #31

What a weird question Recursion Apr 2014 #33

No. I found yours to be an odd answer. Octafish Apr 2014 #35

This is why I opposed the 2001 AUMF as written Recursion Apr 2014 #38

A 16 year old American boy was killed for no good reason. Octafish Apr 2014 #39

Several hundred younger Pakistanis have, too Recursion Apr 2014 #40

The opposite of despair is anger Demeter Apr 2014 #4