So now we're down to "ends justify means," expecting government to just kill fellow citizens without any due process just because they (supposedly) threaten you, thus putting you on the level of Lenin, Hitler, and Pol Pot. Congratulations. Just how much of a threat was Al Awlaki to you, personally, ginning up idiot terrorists in Yemen? Really. Please list the threats he posed that were so imminent you feel it necessary to blow off the Fifth Amendment because you couldn't wait for a judge to issue a warrant.
Go the "Al Awlaki Killed" threads from last year(?) and see how many were grieving.
As I said, this has NOTHING to do with whether or not he should have been killed, but whether we should empower the administrative branch of government to kill a citizen without the due process of law pursuant to the Constitution for the United States.
You know, that document that supposedly protects you that you'd now like to water down to nothing. I guess you don't care about that.
People on here are acting like this government has never run a hit on anyone in the past.
An American citizen is not just "anyone."
That's crazy.
No, you are, as you have amply shown. You are setting up provisions just as dangerously self-destructive as was the PATRIOT Act. We didn't need warrantless wiretaps to protect this country. We needed citizens to gather evidence, round up those Muzzie thugs, bring them to a court, and get them deported.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
...
(a) IN GENERAL. — That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
If an American citizen is fighting alongside our enemies in a war authorized by Congress, and they are killed in the course of that war, what is at issue? Are they not traitors, enemy collaborators, and illegal combatants in a war against the United States? If so, why is their "citizenship" worthy of protection?
Are many of you just being inconsistent with your ideology because it's the Obama Administration pulling the trigger instead of the Bush Administration?