💖HEY FLOP💖

Sean, 25, Kansas City metro

[tealesbian]

absolutely obsessed with this image

[tomhoppusdelonge]

sorry for the mixed signals I don’t know what I want or what I’m doing mostly

[jimhenson-themuppetmaster]

[mrsterlingeverything]

[killer8]

???

[ouppygirlpaws]

🦠 #my crobe

[bewbin]

you were born in 2006? what are you? a Honda Civic?

[2006-honda-civic]

can i fucking help you?

[duplexide]

[dectech]

???

[stewball]

[thesnailphilosopher]

happy anniversary to the great molasses flood

[anthonyhurd]

The remaining limited edition prints of “You have this hold over me” from my solo show last summer are now up on my shop. :-)

[guerrillatech]

[anneemay]

[volaee]

Don’t forget his baby sister, Nawar.

Massacred by western imperialism.

[theculturedmarxist]

CCR and the ACLU v. OFAC & Al-Aulaqi v. Obama

Challenging the government's decision authorizing the CIA and JSOC to target and kill Anwar Al-Aulaqi in Yemen.

In June 2010, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union were retained by Nasser Al-Aulaqi, the father of Anwar Al-Aulaqi, to bring a lawsuit in connection with the government’s decision to authorize the killing of his son, a U.S. citizen who had been placed on secret “kill lists” maintained by the CIA and the U.S. military’s covert Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) earlier that year. Shortly thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury designated Anwar al-Aulaqi a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist,” which made it a crime for lawyers to provide pro bono legal services for his benefit without first seeking a license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).  CCR and the ACLU sought a license, but after the government’s failure to grant one despite the urgency created by the outstanding authorization for Al-Aulaqi’s killing, CCR and the ACLU brought suit challenging the legality and constitutionality of the licensing scheme. The government thereupon provided the license.

In August 2010, CCR and the ACLU filed suit on behalf of Nasser Al-Aulaqi, challenging the government’s decision authorizing the CIA and JSOC to target and kill his son in Yemen. Outside of the context of armed conflict, the Constitution and international human rights treaties the U.S. has ratified prohibit the state from depriving persons of life without due process, except as a last resort to protect against an imminent threat of deadly harm. Anwar Al-Aulaqi was being targeted far from the United States’ war in Afghanistan, and the standing order for his killing flew in the face of the plain meaning of the law’s imminence requirement. The district court in Washington, D.C., dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, without reaching the merits. This case is part of CCR’s work challenging unlawful drone killings by the United States and other fundamental rights violations being committed in the name of national security. 

Date Filed: 

August 3, 2010

Current Status 

The case was dismissed on December 7, 2010, on standing and because the court ruled that it raised "political questions" not subject to court review. The court did not rule on the merits of the case.

[beesandwasps]

Yeah, note that last thing: the Obama administration’s legal team specifically petitioned the court to dismiss the case on the grounds that nobody has legal standing to sue the US government for a death by drone strike, and the court agreed with this. That is actually a scarier legal precedent than almost anything else in the last 24 years.

[that0negaykid]

After all these years my DL guy I always suck off told me it’s the last time because he only lets me suck him when he’s drunk and he’s giving up alcohol so I guess no more dick for me 😭 how am I supposed to get laid now idk how to talk to people him and I only met because I bought weed from him. I’m actually kinda distraught

[malibuklaus]

[albertnatural]

Gordon Ramsay, dead at 56

His last words before being blown to pieces by A landmine

[aromacaque]

personally i think you should be able to afford a place to live with a part-time job

[aromacaque]

dare i even say that, with how much technology has advanced in america, the 40 hour work week shouldn't be as commonplace and you should still get full-time employment benefits when you're working less than that actually

[anotherdayforchaosfay]

Minimum wage used to mean the minimum a person needed in order to afford a home (rent/mortgage), food, utilities, transportation, clothes, and you know, the minimum of what is needed.

Now it means the minimum an employer can legally pay you.

It gets lower than that if you're Disabled. Then you're paid sub-minimum wage.

[guerrillatech]

[ohsoleon]