American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvement with militants.
The White House is portraying the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of President Barack Obama’s toughness toward militants who threaten the United States. But the process that led to Awlaki’s killing has drawn fierce criticism from both the political left and right.
In an ironic turn, Obama, who ran for president denouncing predecessor George W. Bush’s expansive use of executive power in his “war on terrorism,” is being attacked in some quarters for using similar tactics. They include secret legal justifications and undisclosed intelligence assessments.
At least a dozen American citizens joined and fought for the SS and an unknown number fought for the Wehrmacht. When you take up arms against the nation overseas you also reasonably accept the very obvious risk that accompanies that choice…what it says on your passport is not a magic shield or a “get out of being targeted” card from Community Chest.
@malize:
In addition to that, nearly three hundred thousand American citizens were killed when they took up arms against the United States beginning in 1861.
@Aye: Turn it around another way — many Americans fought in the Spanish Civil War, with the Commonwealth forces prior to the US entry into WW2, and most famously with the AVG in China.
Their passports provided no special protection — and there was no expectation of such special protection.
Individuals make choices — and every choice comes with a reasonable expectation under the law.
If you choose to rob a bank and choose to shoot tellers and police you should have a reasonable expectation of being shot dead in return without all that messy due process.
These men who make the choice to fight on opposite side, for whatever reason, are not doing so ill-informed of the reasonable consequences of that choice…there is no special reward, nor any special vindictiveness on the part of the state, in the logical outcome of that choice arriving in their lap.
Sarah Palin was right.