Posted on 04/07/2010 7:24:39 AM PDT by kristinn
In late January, I wrote about the Obama administration's "presidential assassination program," whereby American citizens are targeted for killings far away from any battlefield, based exclusively on unchecked accusations by the Executive Branch that they're involved in Terrorism. At the time, The Washington Post's Dana Priest had noted deep in a long article that Obama had continued Bush's policy (which Bush never actually implemented) of having the Joint Chiefs of Staff compile "hit lists" of Americans, and Priest suggested that the American-born Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was on that list. The following week, Obama's Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, acknowledged in Congressional testimony that the administration reserves the "right" to carry out such assassinations.
Today, both The New York Times and The Washington Post confirm that the Obama White House has now expressly authorized the CIA to kill al-Alwaki no matter where he is found, no matter his distance from a battlefield. I wrote at length about the extreme dangers and lawlessness of allowing the Executive Branch the power to murder U.S. citizens far away from a battlefield (i.e., while they're sleeping, at home, with their children, etc.) and with no due process of any kind. I won't repeat those arguments -- they're here and here -- but I do want to highlight how unbelievably Orwellian and tyrannical this is in light of these new articles today.
Just consider how the NYT reports on Obama's assassination order and how it is justified:
The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of an American citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is believed to have shifted from encouraging attacks on the United States to directly participating in them, intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Tuesday. . . .
American counterterrorism officials say Mr. Awlaki is an operative of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate of the terror network in Yemen and Saudi Arabia. They say they believe that he has become a recruiter for the terrorist network, feeding prospects into plots aimed at the United States and at Americans abroad, the officials said.
It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said. A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president. . . .
"The danger Awlaki poses to this country is no longer confined to words," said an American official, who like other current and former officials interviewed for this article spoke of the classified counterterrorism measures on the condition of anonymity. "He’s gotten involved in plots."
No due process is accorded. No charges or trials are necessary. No evidence is offered, nor any opportunity for him to deny these accusations (which he has done vehemently through his family). None of that.
Instead, in Barack Obama's America, the way guilt is determined for American citizens -- and a death penalty imposed -- is that the President, like the King he thinks he is, secretly decrees someone's guilt as a Terrorist. He then dispatches his aides to run to America's newspapers -- cowardly hiding behind the shield of anonymity which they're granted -- to proclaim that the Guilty One shall be killed on sight because the Leader has decreed him to be a Terrorist. It is simply asserted that Awlaki has converted from a cleric who expresses anti-American views and advocates attacks on American military targets (advocacy which happens to be Constitutionally protected) to Actual Terrorist "involved in plots." These newspapers then print this Executive Verdict with no questioning, no opposition, no investigation, no refutation as to its truth. And the punishment is thus decreed: this American citizen will now be murdered by the CIA because Barack Obama has ordered that it be done. What kind of person could possibly justify this or think that this is a legitimate government power?
(Excerpt) Read more at Salon.com
He’ll go after Rush, Beck, Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, FOX news.
And Jim.
He has money, power and a mandate to de-construct America, by removing such favored people he creates antagonism, he wants America to become divided along racial and party lines.
Its easier to then attack the smaller herds.
We must become the BIG WHOOPASS HERD, the MOTHER of all HERDS, unstoppable, period.
When they ran this on foxnews I didn’t get it, but the title of this article makes the point.
Sure the guy probably does deserve to be shot, but with all Obama is doing to protect foreign terrorists...it makes you wonder why it’s ok to kill a US Citizen without due process.
This is incredible. I may have to visit the DU to see how they are responding...this *should* be giving them fits.
Wow from Salon no less.
Its one think to kill an enemy on the battlefield (even an American citizen) its another altogether to authorize the assassination of an American citizen outside of a military action.
From Salon, no less.... I think the reality of the guy they married at the quickie Vegas wedding has begun to sink in....
From Salon, no less.... I think the reality of the guy they married at the quickie Vegas wedding has begun to sink in....
Sorry, I didn’t feel like embedding all the links in the article.
If we can't get him in America, he should be targeted ... wherever he is.
No, but it's an interesting piece nevertheless, because of the venom directed toward The 0ne by this denizen of the left.
DU has the NY Times article posted, but not one response to it. They must have their heads in the sand on this one.
If an American citizen acts as an enemy combatant, he should bear the same risks as any other enemy.
Freepers are next.
>>Sorry, I didn’t feel like embedding all the links in the article.
booo, hissssss :)
DU has the NY Times article posted, but not one response to it. They must have their heads in the sand on this one.
It’s called “selective indignation”.
Obama probably dreaded getting embarrassed by this guy.
Of course, had the target been Sarah Palin, Greenwald would have had no problem with it. Only the killing of terrorists could upset him.
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.