October 1, 2011 at 9:56 pm
#735720
chrisma
Participant
It makes no sense to argue that there was no evidence against this man while simultaneously claiming that he was not killed due to his “rhetoric”.
I agree it makes no sense, and that’s not at all what I was arguing. I didn’t say there was no evidence. I said that we (that is the public) don’t know the strength (breadth, depth, detail) of the evidence that the Obama administration supposedly has on him, implicating him in actually planning or participating in attacks on the US and it’s citizens.
His rhetoric is a matter of public record, and it was inflammatory and violent, but I don’t believe for a moment that it’s the reason he was assassinated. Not every loudmouth jihadist gets this kind of ‘special attention’ from the U.S..