Reposted : I disapprove of the manner which Anwar al-Awlaki was killed.

[Xchel]

U.S. citizen to be added to a list of persons approved for targeted killing by the CIA.

Ok we have a secret list of citizens that are supposed to be killed by the CIA, that is scary. When I look through this stuff about him I am ever more alarmed...

The FBI interviewed al-Awlaki four times in the eight days following the 9/11 attacks. [44][62] One detective told the 9/11 Commission he believed al-Awlaki "was at the center of the 9/11 story". And an FBI agent said that "if anyone had knowledge of the plot, it would have been" him, since "someone had to be in the U.S. and keep the hijackers spiritually focused".[44] One 9/11 Commission staff member said: "Do I think he played a role in helping the hijackers here, knowing they were up to something? Yes. Do I think he was sent here for that purpose? I have no evidence for it."[44] A separate Congressional Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks suspected that al-Awlaki might have been part of a support network for the hijackers, according to its director, Eleanor Hill.[44] "In my view, he is more than a coincidental figure", said House Intelligence Committee member Representative Anna Eshoo (D-CA).[75]
Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Awlaki was sought as a media source for questions about Islam and the attacks who could speak English well. He was interviewed by National Geographic[76], The New York Times and other media. He condemned the attacks, stating "There is no way that the people who did this could be Muslim, and if they claim to be Muslim, then they have perverted their religion." He also pointed to U.S. foreign policy and that others might "say that Muslim land is now invaded by the U.S., there are U.S. soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia and in the Gulf. And then, the state of Israel is an occupying force which is supported by the U.S." He presented an image as a moderate who could "bridge the gap between the United States and the worldwide community of Muslims"[77]
Writing on the IslamOnline.net website six days after the 9/11 attacks, al-Awlaki suggested that Israeli intelligence agents might have been responsible for the attacks, and that the FBI "went into the roster of the airplanes, and whoever has a Muslim or Arab name became the hijacker by default".[48]
Months after the 9/11 attacks, as the U.S. Secretary of the Army was eager to have a presentation from a moderate Muslim as part of an outreach effort to ease tensions with Muslim-Americans, a Pentagon employee invited al-Awlaki to a luncheon in the Secretary's Office of General Counsel.[78][79]
Al-Awlaki was the Congressional Muslim Staffer Association's first imam to conduct a prayer service at the U.S. Capitol in 2002.[80][81] The prayers were for Muslim congressional staffers and officials for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).[82]
The FBI conducted extensive investigations of al-Awlaki, and he was observed crossing state lines with prostitutes in the D.C. area.[24][48] To arrest him, the FBI considered invoking the little-used Mann Act, a federal law prohibiting interstate transport of women for "immoral purposes".[24] But before investigators could detain him, al-Awlaki left for Yemen in March 2002.[24][48]
Weeks later, he posted an essay in Arabic titled "Why Muslims Love Death" on the Islam Today website, praising the Palestinian suicide bombers' fervor. Months later, at a videotaped lecture in a London mosque, he lauded them in English.[24][48] By July 2002, he was under investigation for having been sent money by the subject of an U.S. Joint Terrorism Task Force investigation. His name was placed on an early version of what is now the federal terror watch list.[8][24][83]
In June 2002, a Denver federal judge signed off on an arrest warrant for al-Awlaki for passport fraud.[84] On October 9, the Denver U.S. Attorney's Office filed a motion to dismiss its complaint, and vacate the arrest warrant. It did so because prosecutors felt ultimately that they lacked evidence of a crime, according to U.S. Attorney Dave Gaouette, who authorized its withdrawal.[3] While al-Awlaki had falsely listed Yemen as his place of birth on his 1990 application for a U.S. Social Security number, which he then used to obtain a passport in 1993, he later changed his place of birth information to Las Cruces, New Mexico.[3][85] Prosecutors could not charge him, because a 10-year statute of limitations on lying to the Social Security Administration had expired.[86] The motion was approved by a magistrate judge on October 10, and filed on October 11.[8][24][87] As a result, agents were unable to arrest him when he arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in the U.S. on October 10, 2002, the day the judge signed the order rescinding his warrant

we have indicted, convicted and assasinated a US citizen with no grand jury, no trial and no appeal...that scares the hell out of me that a president can essentially order anyone assasinated....

As long as you are not a murdering bastard terrorist, you have nothing to worry about.

Makes me wonder about you.........................

What makes me wonder is if we had evidence he was a terrorist where is it? Why wasn't he even indicted before he was ordered killed?

 

[Disir]

I don't think Anwar al-Awalki was a swell guy.

However, you either have evidence or you do not. Assassinating someone when you had the opportunity to bring them in sends the wrong message to all citizens and will allow those in power to decide who should be targeted for whatever reason without clear evidence. I find this a smidge dangerous.

 

[Intense]

Who needs a trial he is a terrorist!
Remember the partiot act that the TP re-upped.

hell yeah!!! The Bu$h II Doctrine

Bush Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.

sound familiar?

I NEVER vote Repub

If you voted, then you voted for a guy that is asserting the Bush Doctrine. Are we feeling at all foolish?

Not to worry, most often stupidity skips a generation.

 

[Colin]

I want to be clear it seems Anwar al-Awlaki was a bad person; however, my biggest problem is the manner in which this was carried out, who determines if one including american citizens are terrorists? Who determines if one is guilty of treason? Who determines if one is guilty of a crime? It seems that one man, the president of the united states can make that call without any charges or trial or evidence that is presented to a grand jury. This is a very dangerous policy and we as americans should not take it lightly.

I have seen on message boards today on many MSM websites THAT HE WAS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE so he should be killed, again I say, who gets to make that call considering he was never convicted of anything in our legal system.

More : http://www.hermancainforums.com/inde...pic,872.0.html

The USA and its allies are fighting a war against al Qaeda and terrorism in general. As a senior member of al Qaeda, al-Awlaki was a legitimate target for death. His activities were were well known to the authorities and he was even banned from entering Britain. Good riddance to the slimeball. I'm all for giving ALL islamic terrorists a helping hand to meet their maker!

 

[Warrior102]

I want to be clear it seems Anwar al-Awlaki was a bad person; however, my biggest problem is the manner in which this was carried out, who determines if one including american citizens are terrorists? Who determines if one is guilty of treason? Who determines if one is guilty of a crime? It seems that one man, the president of the united states can make that call without any charges or trial or evidence that is presented to a grand jury. This is a very dangerous policy and we as americans should not take it lightly.

I have seen on message boards today on many MSM websites THAT HE WAS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE so he should be killed, again I say, who gets to make that call considering he was never convicted of anything in our legal system.

More : http://www.hermancainforums.com/inde...pic,872.0.html

Face east, kneel, say a prayer to Allah.

Tissue to go along with that?

 

[Full-Auto]

U.S. citizen to be added to a list of persons approved for targeted killing by the CIA.

Ok we have a secret list of citizens that are supposed to be killed by the CIA, that is scary. When I look through this stuff about him I am ever more alarmed...



we have indicted, convicted and assasinated a US citizen with no grand jury, no trial and no appeal...that scares the hell out of me that a president can essentially order anyone assasinated....

As long as you are not a murdering bastard terrorist, you have nothing to worry about.

Makes me wonder about you.........................

What makes me wonder is if we had evidence he was a terrorist where is it? Why wasn't he even indicted before he was ordered killed?

Google for his videos......................Again attacking the country rises above criminality.

Yet I find myself sympathetic to your cause. Due to federal overreach.

 

[Xchel]

Warrior, so demanding our justice system and constitution be followed makes someone a muslim suddenly? really? Since when did it become that for one to support us following the law?

 

[Xchel]

As long as you are not a murdering bastard terrorist, you have nothing to worry about.

Makes me wonder about you.........................

What makes me wonder is if we had evidence he was a terrorist where is it? Why wasn't he even indicted before he was ordered killed?

Google for his videos......................Again attacking the country rises above criminality.

Yet I find myself sympathetic to your cause. Due to federal overreach.

again why no indictments? Evidence is given for a grand jury indictment...they missed their opportunity to capture and try him..which makes me think their evidence is nill or very slim.

 

[Full-Auto]

What makes me wonder is if we had evidence he was a terrorist where is it? Why wasn't he even indicted before he was ordered killed?

Google for his videos......................Again attacking the country rises above criminality.

Yet I find myself sympathetic to your cause. Due to federal overreach.

again why no indictments? Evidence is given for a grand jury indictment...they missed their opportunity to capture and try him..which makes me think their evidence is nill or very slim.

First, do you understand why we have military tribunals?

 

[Defiant1]

I want to be clear it seems Anwar al-Awlaki was a bad person; however, my biggest problem is the manner in which this was carried out, who determines if one including american citizens are terrorists? Who determines if one is guilty of treason? Who determines if one is guilty of a crime? It seems that one man, the president of the united states can make that call without any charges or trial or evidence that is presented to a grand jury. This is a very dangerous policy and we as americans should not take it lightly.

I have seen on message boards today on many MSM websites THAT HE WAS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE so he should be killed, again I say, who gets to make that call considering he was never convicted of anything in our legal system.

More : http://www.hermancainforums.com/inde...pic,872.0.html

Do you also think we should have tried the passengers of Flight 93, posthumously. for killing the terrorists?

 

[Xchel]

I certainly do..and military tribunals also indict you and send you to trial..they don't execute you before you are ever indicted.

 

[Full-Auto]

I certainly do..and military tribunals also indict you and send you to trial..they don't execute you before you are ever indicted.

Trial where? NY Federal court? or at a military base or ship?


Do we capture or try to capture every enemy on the battle field. As much as I am sympathetic. Killing those who fight against country is something the founders expected.

 

[Xchel]

I believe the military picks time and place in a military tribunal..let them deal with it. When was he ever indicted by a military tribunal? I am cool with him being indicted and or convicted and sentenced by a military tribunal..but I do want to note this


Military tribunals generally do not consider cases where an individual is merely being accused of being a combatant on behalf of the enemy.

 

[Colin]

What makes me wonder is if we had evidence he was a terrorist where is it? Why wasn't he even indicted before he was ordered killed?

Google for his videos......................Again attacking the country rises above criminality.

Yet I find myself sympathetic to your cause. Due to federal overreach.

again why no indictments? Evidence is given for a grand jury indictment...they missed their opportunity to capture and try him..which makes me think their evidence is nill or very slim.

The evidence that shows the lowlife to be a terrorist is neither slim or non-existant. Why don't you do some research on him before making such baseless statements. It only takes the click of a Google button, but here's a starter to make it easy for you.

Anwar al-Awlaki: Al-Qaeda mouthpice who espoused a 'just do it' brand of terrorism - Telegraph

 

[Full-Auto]

I believe the military picks time and place in a military tribunal..let them deal with it. When was he ever indicted by a military tribunal? I am cool with him being indicted and or convicted and sentenced by a military tribunal..but I do want to note this


Military tribunals generally do not consider cases where an individual is merely being accused of being a combatant on behalf of the enemy.

You are ignoring the video evidence, which I believe is still available on the net.

 

[Xchel]

you aren't answering the question..if they have so much evidence why not a single indictment? News articles aren't evidence..that is hearsay.

 

[Avorysuds]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WibmcsEGLKo&feature=player_embedded]The Greatest Speech Ever Made - YouTube[/ame]

This sums up the war loving fools on these boards to me. You people are nothing new, you have always been a lost breed throughout the history of our world. Somewhere along the way some people purposely blinded themselves thinking their patriotism was somehow more important than freedom, a higher standard and being honest.

Now we kill American citizens and cheer instead of considering the long term consequences of giving Government this new power, a power based on our cheers rather than our rule of law.

Was killing this guy the way we did the only way, the best way? No.

 

[Katzndogz]

It should be a lesson for us. Even the existence of questions should be a lesson. Start trials in absentia, strip these citizens of their citizenship (wrongly given in any case) and start the convictions. We did it already. Bush did it to Adam Ghadan. Start mass trials. Mass tribunals.

 

[Sunshine]

I believe the question asked in this thread is a fair one. I also think it is fair to be overjoyed that a known terrorist is dead. BUT there is a question here that begs some consideration by American citizens. And that is:

WHY ARE WE GIVING CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS TO FOREIGN TERRORISTS AND NOT TO AN AMERICAN CITIZEN?

It was just one short year ago that a Gitmo detainee, Ahmed Ghailani, was given 5th Amendment protection during his trial is New York. And the fact that he even had a trial at all is Constitutional protection. Not only that he was BROUGHT here from elsewhere to stand trail.

Read it and weep! And give it some thought, too.


http://www.voanews.com/english/news...iven-to-Foreign-Terror-Suspect-104439193.html

There is definitely something out of place in the woodpile as to Obama and HIS war on terror.

 

[Xchel]

It should be a lesson for us. Even the existence of questions should be a lesson. Start trials in absentia, strip these citizens of their citizenship (wrongly given in any case) and start the convictions. We did it already. Bush did it to Adam Ghadan. Start mass trials. Mass tribunals.

he wasn't given citizenship, he was born with it.