Are you for Obama Assassinating American Citizens?...

[High_Gravity]

As detestable as he is, he is still a U.S. citizen and is afforded the same due process rights as you or I.
We are playing with fire here. As much as all of us wanted to see Timothy McVeigh taken out to a courtyard and shot without due process, he was a U.S. citizen with rights.
Think about it and don't succumb to a mob mentality. You are smarter than that....I think.

The authorities were able to grab McVeigh and put him on trial, Awlaki is behind enemy lines in Yemen waging war on the US, if we are able to capture him fine but if we know where his location is a drone strike would be acceptable to me. If McVeigh fled the country and was hiding in Iran or something I would be ok with a strike on him too.

Gotcha. It's okay if it doesn't happen on U.S. soil. The precedent is still set and what's to say some future Prez deems a segment of U.S. citizens treasonous. A future predator strike may be coming to a neighborhood near you.

I get what your saying I just don't think that the fact that Awlaki happened to be born here means we should leave him be to try and kill Americans, Anwar isn't exactly a Nelson Mandela or Gandhi type you know.

 

[sinister59]

U.S. tries to assassinate U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

Discuss...



peace...

yes

 

[B. Kidd]

The authorities were able to grab McVeigh and put him on trial, Awlaki is behind enemy lines in Yemen waging war on the US, if we are able to capture him fine but if we know where his location is a drone strike would be acceptable to me. If McVeigh fled the country and was hiding in Iran or something I would be ok with a strike on him too.

Gotcha. It's okay if it doesn't happen on U.S. soil. The precedent is still set and what's to say some future Prez deems a segment of U.S. citizens treasonous. A future predator strike may be coming to a neighborhood near you.

I get what your saying I just don't think that the fact that Awlaki happened to be born here means we should leave him be to try and kill Americans, Anwar isn't exactly a Nelson Mandela or Gandhi type you know.

I'm not for leaving him be. Charge him, arrest him, and put him on trial. If he resists arrest, well, the same fate awaits him as any U.S. citizen that resists arrest.

 

[BlindBoo]

The eventual road to morphing into a fascist state begins when we set a precedent of giving a President, any sitting or future President, the unchecked and unfettered power to be judge, jury, and executioner of a U.S. citizen.

Well I for one don't think the order to assassinate US born traitor Anwar al-Awlaki was unchecked.

"...three of the 9-11 hijackers attended his services. It seems now that Major Nidal Malik Hasan was also a fan of al-Awlaki‘s teachings and attended some of his sermons "

Read more: refuting the self-promoting coward, Anwar al-Awlaki - City of Brass

I think the Drug War is leading the way to the US becoming more fascist in nature more so than the order to kill this scumsucker.

 

[High_Gravity]

Gotcha. It's okay if it doesn't happen on U.S. soil. The precedent is still set and what's to say some future Prez deems a segment of U.S. citizens treasonous. A future predator strike may be coming to a neighborhood near you.

I get what your saying I just don't think that the fact that Awlaki happened to be born here means we should leave him be to try and kill Americans, Anwar isn't exactly a Nelson Mandela or Gandhi type you know.

I'm not for leaving him be. Charge him, arrest him, and put him on trial. If he resists arrest, well, the same fate awaits him as any U.S. citizen that resists arrest.

Ok thats a good idea but how would we do it? this clown is hiding in the middle of nowhere in Yemen surrounded by devout followers, I don't see the Yemenis just letting American Infantry troops to go all up in Yemen, find Anwar and just slap the cuffs on him, you make this sound as easy as arresting the average joe.

 

[TheBrain]

Gotcha. It's okay if it doesn't happen on U.S. soil. The precedent is still set and what's to say some future Prez deems a segment of U.S. citizens treasonous. A future predator strike may be coming to a neighborhood near you.

I get what your saying I just don't think that the fact that Awlaki happened to be born here means we should leave him be to try and kill Americans, Anwar isn't exactly a Nelson Mandela or Gandhi type you know.

I'm not for leaving him be. Charge him, arrest him, and put him on trial. If he resists arrest, well, the same fate awaits him as any U.S. citizen that resists arrest.

You mean a huge pay day after he sues the cops for being rough with him? **** that sumbitch, shoot him dead.

 

[José]

Originally posted by Two Thumbs
That's entirely true. WW1 was set off from an assissination.

however, Isreal does it on a fairly regular basis, if the rumors are true, and they have suffered no consequinces for thier actions.

Basically, if it's done, it's not bragged about later.

The consequences of Israel's extra judicial killings and overall repression of the palestinian people came in the form of two giant craters in the heart of Manhattan.

Poor America, paying the price of a land conflict that it isn't even hers.

 

[B. Kidd]

Whatever the rationale for U.S. citizen assassination lists, I'm just not as eager as some here to see a major pillar of constitutional citizen rights get shredded. Once the line is crossed, there is no going back.

 

[Contumacious]

The eventual road to morphing into a fascist state begins when we set a precedent of giving a President, any sitting or future President, the unchecked and unfettered power to be judge, jury, and executioner of a U.S. citizen.

Awlaki is no different than Bin Laden or Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, except that he happened to be born on American soil, why should that make him untouchable? he is engaged in a war against the US and is fair game.

As detestable as he is, he is still a U.S. citizen and is afforded the same due process rights as you or I.
We are playing with fire here. As much as all of us wanted to see Timothy McVeigh taken out to a courtyard and shot without due process, he was a U.S. citizen with rights.
Think about it and don't succumb to a mob mentality. You are smarter than that....I think.

Why?

Wasn't McVeigh avenging the massacre at Mt Carmel where US citizens were slaughtered without due process of Law?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[G.T.]

With the stipulation that they've becoming an enemy combatant in a war vs. terrorists? Yes.

OK then... Define Enemy Combatant and Apply it to this American.



peace...

A sworn member of the enemy army, during a war with said enemy.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Projecting again?

How am I projecting?

For 8 years the left screamed of torture and war crimes - now suddenly it's okay to assassinate US citizens.

What OTHER than sheer partisanship accounts for the sudden, 180° flip-flop?

Or perhaps you'd like to see a few more dead Americans on American soil so you could have the chance to berate the President for not protecting us from a known threat?

When you were attacking Bush, is that what you wanted?

But then again perhaps you're an Anwar al-Awlaki fan huh?

We should make an attempt to take him alive, if he resists, put a slug in the ******'s brain.

 

[bodecea]

But that's an awfully sticky wicket. Imagine if other nations followed that premise. Imagine if Saddam offed GW Bush in order to prevent the deaths of thousands of Iraqis.

He did, or at least he tried to assassinate George HW Bush.

I assume you approved of that, yes?

Well, we all know what "assume" gets you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well, we all know what "assume" gets you.

I assume you would climb a tree to get a banana, oh feral one.

 

[Contumacious]

Assissination, as gruesome as it is, can prevent a lot of horrid things from occuring and keep a total body count very low.

If the UN, did kill gaddafi, early, thousands of people would be alive today. Instead, we are killing soldiers that are following orders.

But that's an awfully sticky wicket. Imagine if other nations followed that premise. Imagine if Saddam offed GW Bush in order to prevent the deaths of thousands of Iraqis. I don't think that use of said policy would go over too well.

Well Saddam did try to kill Bush Sr when he visited Kuwait after the Gulf War, I am sure Al Qaeda wouldn't mind killing Obama or Hillary if they could it would be a good rep boost for them, I am sure they would do it if they could.

HUH?

WTF?

DO you have evidence that Saddam was suicidal?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[MaggieMae]

U.S. tries to assassinate U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

Discuss...



peace...

Al-Awlaki is a traitor by his own admission and is designated a "targeted kill." The term and action of an "assassination" is commonly reserved to state leaders, which he is not. Al-Qaeda has no "state."

Assassination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Targeted killing
Targeted killing is the intentional killing–by a government or its agents–of a civilian or "unlawful combatant" targeted by the government, who is not in the government's custody. The target is a person taking part in an armed conflict or terrorism, whether by bearing arms or otherwise, who has thereby lost the immunity from being targeted that he would otherwise have under the Third Geneva Convention.[30]
...
In The Impact of 9/11 and the New Legal Landscape: The Day That Changed Everything?, the point is made that "There is a major difference between assassination and targeted killing.... targeted killing [is] not synonymous with assassination. [Mixed legal opinions] Assassination ... constitutes an illegal killing."[34] Similarly, Amos Guiora, Professor of law at the University of Utah, writes: "Targeted killing is ... not an assassination", Steve David, Johns Hopkins Associate Dean & Professor of International Relations, writes: "there are strong reasons to believe that the Israeli policy of targeted killing is not the same as assassination", Syracuse Law Professor William Banks and GW Law Professor Peter Raven-Hansen write: "Targeted killing of terrorists is ... not unlawful and would not constitute assassination", Rory Miller writes: "Targeted killing ... is not 'assassination'", and Associate Professor Eric Patterson and Teresa Casale write: "Perhaps most important is the legal distinction between targeted killing and assassination".[35][36][37][37][38]

Targeted killing has been used by governments around the world, and become a frequent tactic of the United States and Israel in their fight against terrorism.[30][39] The tactic can raise complex questions and lead to contentious disputes as to the legal basis for its application, who qualifies as an appropriate "hit list" target, and what circumstances must exist before the tactic may be employed.[30] Opinions range from people considering it a legal form of self-defense that reduces terrorism, to people calling it an extra-judicial killing that lack due process, and which leads to more violence.[30][33][40][41] Methods used have included firing a five-foot-long Hellfire missile from a Predator or Reaper drone (an unmanned, remote-controlled plane), detonating a cell phone bomb, and long-range sniper shooting. Countries such as the U.S. (in Pakistan and Yemen) and Israel (in the West Bank and Gaza) have used targeted killing to kill members of groups such as Al-Qaeda and Hamas.[30] In early 2010, with President Obama's approval, Anwar al-Awlaki became the first U.S. citizen to be approved for targeted killing by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).[42][43]

 

[Uncensored2008]

Al-Awlaki is a traitor by his own admission and is designated a "targeted kill." The term and action of an "assassination" is commonly reserved to state leaders, which he is not. Al-Qaeda has no "state."

State or POLITICAL figures, sparky. Al Qaeda is absolutely a political organization.

Martin Luther King was assassinated. Malcolm X was assassinated. Neither was head of a state, but due to their position as political leaders, the murder was an assassination.

"Targeted Kill" is a euphemism for state sponsored murder. These murders become assassinations when the target is a person of political prominence.

Obama ASSASSINATED OBL, and seeks to assassinate Al Awlaki.

 

[MaggieMae]

Al-Awlaki is a traitor by his own admission and is designated a "targeted kill." The term and action of an "assassination" is commonly reserved to state leaders, which he is not. Al-Qaeda has no "state."

State or POLITICAL figures, sparky. Al Qaeda is absolutely a political organization.

Martin Luther King was assassinated. Malcolm X was assassinated. Neither was head of a state, but due to their position as political leaders, the murder was an assassination.

"Targeted Kill" is a euphemism for state sponsored murder. These murders become assassinations when the target is a person of political prominence.

Obama ASSASSINATED OBL, and seeks to assassinate Al Awlaki.

Didn't read the quoted material from the link, I see. What else is new...

The CIA (an agency of the US government) didn't assassinate MLK or Malcolm X. The question in the OP was whether it is legal for the CIA/US to do an assassination now (or something to that effect). Pay attention.

 

[mal]

Al-Awlaki is a traitor by his own admission and is designated a "targeted kill." The term and action of an "assassination" is commonly reserved to state leaders, which he is not. Al-Qaeda has no "state."

State or POLITICAL figures, sparky. Al Qaeda is absolutely a political organization.

Martin Luther King was assassinated. Malcolm X was assassinated. Neither was head of a state, but due to their position as political leaders, the murder was an assassination.

"Targeted Kill" is a euphemism for state sponsored murder. These murders become assassinations when the target is a person of political prominence.

Obama ASSASSINATED OBL, and seeks to assassinate Al Awlaki.

Didn't read the quoted material from the link, I see. What else is new...

The CIA (an agency of the US government) didn't assassinate MLK or Malcolm X. The question in the OP was whether it is legal for the CIA/US to do an assassination now (or something to that effect). Pay attention.

So you aren't for Trying Terrorists, Specifically American Citizens?...

Noted.



peace...

 

[Hot Wire]

It should be alright to bump off muslim pigs no matter where they are from.

 

[theHawk]

Muslims aren't real Americans anyway, so yes I support it.

Are you trying to be funny?

Or do you actually think it's OK for us to break the law and murder people that piss us off, just b/c the are muslims?

I don't think its against the law to order attacks on enemies in foreign countries. If an "American" is waging war against us and is overseas, with terrorists, then yes we can kill him.

I was merely suggesting that when we identify such folks, we should also strip them of their citizenship.