In a significant new blow to al-Qaida, U.S. airstrikes in Yemen on Friday killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American militant cleric who became a prominent figure in the terror network's most dangerous branch, using his fluent English and Internet savvy to draw recruits for attacks in the United States.

The strike was the biggest U.S. success in hitting al-Qaida's leadership since the May killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. But it raises questions that other strikes did not: Al-Awlaki was an American citizen who has not been charged with any crime. Civil liberties groups have questioned the government's authority to kill an American without trial.

http://www.google.com/...4a37b7d65f64ef08bd3d

Predator drones are their own judge and jury.

I am willing to bet that lots (by no means all) of us would be willing to tolerate an exception to due process rights in the particular case of al-Awlaki, given the nature of his goals and the impracticability of arresting and charging him. Just as a lot of us (by no means all) would be willing to tolerate an exception to the First Amendment for the likes of Fred Phelps.

The challenge, of course, comes from the fact that in order for such rights and protections to be there for the rest of us, they have to be guaranteed for the most odious of us, too.

An interesting question this prompts, then, is whether this is any different than the OBL assassination? Does it matter that it was carried out by drones rather than a SEAL team? Does anyone think the SEALs were there to take OBL into custody and he was only killed because he resisted? Does it really matter that he was a US citizen? Is it somehow ok for our government to execute people without trial, as long as they are foreign citizens?

I think many of us are very suspect of the war in Iraq and the war in Afganistan. But there is a legitimate war going on. There are actually people out there who have declared themselves our enemies and made clear their intent to do us harm.

They are not nation-states. But they are at war with us.

This person is one of them. In war the enemy is a valid target regardless of nationality and certainly without trial. The bloodiest war that the USA has ever fought by far was a war against it's own citizens.

I have absolutely no problem with our military taking out any enemy of this nature anytime anywhere in the world. Infact I would suggest that any president make that a declaration of DOCTRINE.

I have always thought that these groups were valid targets... long before 911. I also thought it was foolish that we were not going after them aggresively long ago. I am glad we are doing so now.

It is however complicated by the fact that we have two illegitimate major wars going on in Iraq and Afganistan.

It is also seriously complicated by the lack of trust in the office of the presidency.

For example When shrub started beating the drums of war for IRAQ I had serious doubts. I just did not see Saddam as a serious threat. However I felt I had to give the president the benefit of the doubt and believed he and congress must have access to information I did not. Hell that's his job. That's why we have a president and congress.

I was wrong and the President was dead wrong. We should have impeached him as soon as no WMDs were discovered or at the very least voted him out.

I also have grave doubts about Obama and who he really works for. SO it is natural to have doubts about whether this guy was really the enemy. If the facts are as reported I am just fine with taking him out. But CAN WE TRUST THE FACTS AS REPORTED??

As much as I try, I just can't get outraged about this. We're at war. The guy was not innocent. I understand the due process concerns, the 5th amendment concerns, the whole impersonal Orwellian drone thing, and above all, the whole slippery slope concern about this being used on other perceived enemies, but I find nothing wrong with taking out an enemy propagandist.

http://www.google.com/...4a37b7d65f64ef08bd3d

Predator drones are their own judge and jury.

Predator drones are their own judge and jury.

Al-Awlaki was charged in absentia in Sana'a, Yemen, on November 2 with plotting to kill foreigners and being a member of al-Qaeda. .. On November 6, Yemeni Judge Mohsen Alwan ordered that al-Awlaki be caught "dead or alive".

In a video posted to the internet on November 8, 2010, al-Awlaki called for Muslims around the world to kill Americans "without hesitation", and overthrow Arab leaders. He said that no fatwa (special clerical ruling) is required to kill Americans

Due process is the legal principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law. Due process holds the government subservient to the law of the land protecting individual persons from the state. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law it constitutes a due process violation which offends against the rule of law.

Heart disease: 616,067
Cancer: 562,875
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 135,952
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 127,924
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 123,706
Alzheimer's disease: 74,632
Diabetes: 71,382
Influenza and Pneumonia: 52,717
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 46,448
Septicemia: 34,828

...
In the US, there are roughly 17,000 murders a year, of which about 15,000 are committed with firearms. ...

An enemy combatant was killed during a war. Sounds pretty straight forward to me.

Don't think it's actually necessary, but see above - there was an order from a Yemeni judge demanding that he be brought back "dead or alive". Some undisclosed combination of Yemeni and US forces implemented that court order on Yemeni soil. Sounds like due process even by the narrowest of definitions.

Derp.


Dan, you, if you don't think there is a difference between allowing someone to use a product that may lead to health problems, then you are not engaging your full thinking ability. If you think that 1000 one off murders committed by 1000 different people is the same as one small group of people murdering 1000, then you have a pretty strange perspective.

???????

???????

Holy shit! Do you see what happens when I don't proof read?

Uh, if Jaques or Joe could come in here and translate this shit for me, that would be great. It's kinda like when your hand writing is so bad you can't read it 5 minutes later. I don't know what it says.

I thinks I was saying selling cigis is not the same as murder.

For example, in the USA, about 1,000,000 people die every year from smoking.

Good riddance.

Curt

I don't know the numbers, but I do know that no criminal act was committed. People want the ciggis, so other people make ciggis and sell them. Nothing wrong with providing a desired service. It is completely different.