Posted on 10/01/2011 5:55:13 AM PDT by Libloather
Killing of U.S.-born terrorist raises questions
By MATT APUZZO
Associated Press
Published Saturday, October 01, 2011 12:06 AM
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama steered the nation's war machine into uncharted territory Friday when a U.S. drone attacked a convoy in Yemen and killed two American citizens who had become central figures in al-Qaida.
It was believed to be the first instance in which a U.S. citizen was tracked and executed based on secret intelligence and the president's say-so. And it raised major questions about the limitations of presidential power.
**SNIP**
"This court recognizes the somewhat unsettling nature of its conclusion -- that there are circumstances in which the executive's unilateral decision to kill a U.S. citizen overseas is 'constitutionally committed to the political branches' and judicially unreviewable," Bates wrote. "But this case squarely presents such a circumstance."
(Excerpt) Read more at theeagle.com ...
It raised one question for me: can you go get the rest?
Well, at least they didn’t waterboard him.
While the dude was a US Citizen on paper he was sitting on the wrong side of the fence when the bomb dropped.
Now if he was sitting on US soil at the time I “might” have a different view.
Bonnie and Clyde were US citizens on US soil but I don’t consider them “assassinated”.
Had he even been indicted? Bin Laden was at least indicted and he wasn’t even a US citizen.
The U.S. government also notes that in January a Yemeni court sentenced Awlaki in absentia to ten years in prison for “forming an armed gang” to target foreigners and law enforcement personnel.
0bama had a lot of time to get his ducks in a row to do this.
Uh...no. He was targetted with a drone and they used facial recognition technolgy to be sure it was him.
I agree with you. It isn’t like we could really “extradite” him, could we? I see him as a “citizen” in name only and was an enemy. Plain and simple. Now, if he was on U.S. soil... I would think differently. I don’t think we should have risked one life of a S.E.A.L. or Delta (or whatever group would have been used for a raid of sorts). As I get older, I think that saying from Slingblade is true... “some people just need killin’”
Chode offered the following analysis in another thread:
when Anwar al-Awlaki came to study in the US, he came on a foreign student visa. You see, even though al-Awlaki was born in Las Cruces, New Mexico, his parents were not American citizens. In fact, after his father completed his studies here, the family returned to Yemen. Anwar would not even be considered a 14th Amendment citizen, which states “All person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Anwar’s parents were never US citizens, nor did they intend to become citizens; neither did his parents have “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States,” which is the standard according to the Supreme court decision in United States vs Wong Kim Ark.
According to the State Department, there are different rules, and, since al-Awlaki came to the US on a scholarship from Yemen, we can assume that he renounced his US citizenship, because Yemen does not recognize dual citizenship. Furthermore, his father was the Agriculture Minister in Yemen. Otherwise, why would al-Awlaki have come on a foreign student visa to study in Colorado in 1991?
al-Qaida is a terrorist orginization that has declared war on the US. This POS, regardless of citizenship, joined that orginization and furthered its cause. The enemy is the enemy and he was part of it.
Only thing that could have made it better would have been to have had a CNN news crew sitting next to him at the time - but that is just my jaded opinion only and is not meant to reflect on the majority opinion of kindhearted posters on Free Republic.
Better to be judged by nine than carried by 6.
So you think the president ought to have the power to decide, on his own, who is guilty and have him killed? Do you not realize that Obama could decide tomorrow that conservative Christians are potential terrorists due to their pro-life views? I’m as happy as the next person that this thug is dead, but we are in more danger from a government that ignores the law than we are from terrorists. The Constitution is being shredded, and none of us will be safe.
It won’t be long until my posts on Free Republic lead to drones circling high above my house.
With ALL the evidence the Government supposedly had against him, why there no indictment months ago?
Dude take off the tin foil hat.
The scum was not on US soil at the time and was engaged in warfare against the US.
When the US Government starts doing air strikes on US churches get back with me.
I see us as in WAR. Things are different in war. Granted, I see your concern about this being used as a stepping stone. I truly do. However, Conservative Christians aren’t responsible for blowing up buildings, figuring out ways to use biological weapons etc... In fact, they are more of a target to Muslim extremists like this. I agree that this is a gray area and up to interpretation; however, I am not losing any sleep over this one.
Cool
The other question is he was here preaching in a mosque, we didn't take him then?
In 1994, Awlaki earned a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from Colorado State University. By his late 20s, he had become an imam and spiritual leader, first in San Diego and later at a mosque in Falls Church, Va., outside Washington. His soft-spoken lectures on Islamic scripture were recorded and distributed internationally, making him a celebrity among English-speaking Muslims around the world. Awlaki: From San Diego Cleric To Wanted Terrorist
I would also submit to find out if he was here as an American or if he remained on a foreign visa?
It was an act of war. Some American born men fought for Germany, Italy and Japan during World War II. There were Japanese-Americans in Hiroshima. Roosevelt did not need to get an indictment in order for a P-47 to strafe any convoy that might happen to have “Americans” riding in it. The Constitution specifically gives the President the right, nay the duty, to suppress rebellions, and as a practical matter you cannot do that in a law court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.