Hmm, the CIC, according to the 5th Amendment, can kill the enemy without first getting an indictment.
Here is the text.
This presumes two things: First, that Awlaki be guilty of a "capital or otherwise nefarious crime" and there has been no such finding, so you fail that test. Second, when that specific American citizen has been declared by a court or by Congress to be an enemy in a declared war, or guilty of nefarious crimes and a source of public danger, he can be taken out. You fail that test too. You are therefore (willfully) conflating a declared war with a vague and unspecified "war on terror" where the "enemy" remains legally undefined.
Nice try, but without Constitutional merit, because it flies in the face of the separation of powers that is a central operating principle in all capital instances involving citizens, war or crime. In fact, it is arguable that the Constitution extends these protections to NON-citizens by virtue of its use of the word "person," instead of "citizen." For an American citizen to become an "enemy" that enemy needs to be named and defined by Congress or adjudicated as such by a court; else it becomes killing by executive whim, such as we see here.
By your definition, YOU are an enemy, as defined under the War Powers Act of 1933 and the Trading with the Enemy Act of the same date. So I suppose you don't care about that a bit. Worse, by your membership here on FR, you meet the criteria established by Janet Napoletano as a "potential terrorist." Ah but we know you'll sleep well because you think the government that pays your retirement can be trusted! History suggests otherwise.