Was Killing Al-Qaida’s Awlaki Illegal?

Spread the love

Loading

Earlier on Fox, Gary Johnson confessed to mixed feelings that a U.S. citizen, degenerate though he was, had been targeted for execution without due process. Honestly, I’m conflicted too: Read the exchange between Andy McCarthy and Kevin Williamson at The Corner for sharp arguments on each side. There are two difficulties here, I think. One is the fact of Awlaki’s citizenship, the other is the nature of the combat he was engaged in. No one outside of the far left disputes that if an American joins a foreign army and points a gun at a U.S. soldier on the battlefield, the soldier’s entitled to take him down. No one disputes either that officers are legitimate targets in war, not merely the infantrymen they command. (Ask Admiral Yamamoto about that.) Awlaki was an officer in Al Qaeda’s army, tasked mainly with propaganda but increasingly given to directing would-be killers like Abdulmutallab around the global battlefield. Or so we’re told; there’s endless video out there of him denouncing America and exhorting attacks on the country, but the proof that he was planning operations — the heart of the argument for taking him out — remains within the upper reaches of America’s counterterror establishment.

That’s where his citizenship comes in. If we’re going to kill one of our own without independent review of the evidence that he is in fact fighting or commanding fighters on the other side, then we’re handing the president broaaaad power to kill Americans abroad. As Danger Room says, “[S]houldn’t Awlaki’s American citizenship count for something? If nothing else, doesn’t it oblige the government to at least disclose why it asserts it can kill an American citizen?” The irony is, I doubt the feds would have trouble convincing a judge that Awlaki’s as big a threat as they suspect: Although some experts claim his role in AQ was vastly overstated, his terror ties go all the way back to 9/11. Read Tom Joscelyn’s account of Awlaki’s relationship with three of the hijackers, then read this IntelWire summary of how he spent the past 10 years, assuming more of an operational role in the last few. (And no, contrary to what some on the left might tell you, Awlaki’s journey to jihad wasn’t a reaction to Afghanistan and Iraq. It began before that.) According to one senior U.S. official, he even took an interest in using chemical weapons against Americans.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

22 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Legal? I don’t care. Just think if they had assassinated Bin laden back in the day. Look at all the people who would still be living. Ron Paul was whining about it too as well. Just one less scumbag that the ACLU and other liberals want have as a pen pal if he were in prison, and or caught and then released to start the cycle all over again.

I don’t know if this was a strictly legal means of preventing future acts of terrorism, but in this guy’s case it’s very likely to be effective.

He may have been American born but he convicted himself of treason long ago…and as far as being an officer in the Al Qaeda army, they have never observed the Geneva convention and are we not bound to give him the benefit of our observance of it. Al Q is much akin to the old pirates, considered to be the enemies of all humanity and worthy of death at any opportunity wherever found and without benefit of trial or clergy. I’d feel sorrier for running over a rabbit than for our troops sending Awlaki to visit Muhammed in Hell.

I am not comfortable with a President that justifies denying an American Citizen, no matter how Evil, their right to Due Process. The Liberal Left screamed over how Bush was a Tyrant that was going to mis-treat the American Citizens, especially that of the Poor or Ethnic groups, but here’s Obama having a Drone strike in a Nation we legally do not have authority to strike in by Geneva Convention or US Consitution Creed having an American assassinated. That is… disturbing. It’s exactly what the Left at Moveon.org used to scream about the Right trying to do.

Hell we violated Soverign airspace of Yemen to get to this American, and we violated Pakistan’s Soverign borders by attacking Osama Bin Laden. Obama did not seek Congress to Declare war on either Nation and that is a second legal problem for him if he loses the US Senate to Republicans who seek his impeachment even if he wins next election. Yeah, great, we got two baddies. But we broke our Consitutional laws and even violated Geneva Convention to do it. That is what the Left screamed Bush would be doing, yet it’s a Leftist that is doing it.

And the Peaceniks and false Quakers will always say (or scream) the same thing about any Republican president who does things like this, just as they will almost all be silent when one of their own does many more times the assassinations than George Bush ever thought of…
Awlaki confessed, or bragged, and preached in public and on e Web about what he had done and called for more.
He and his are pirates, and not the cute Hollywood kind…the cold blooded killer kind.

We are only required to observe the Geneva convention when fighting a nation that signed or observes it themselves, not a gang of cuthroat pirates.

…the accident of his birth on US soil doesn’t make him an American any more than if a cat crawled into the oven to give birth…doesn’t make that kitten a biscuit.

As it stands by the SCOTUS view of the 14 th admendment of the US Consitution, the two people we killed are American Citizens. They defected but are still considered by the Government to be citizens. Yemen and Pakistan reps have been giving aide and protection to these AQ members, as such we did violate Geneva Convention by assaulting a Soverign Nation now three different times that we never declared war on for reasons that are very gray areas of warrant in terms of National Security. Unlawful combatants getting aide, training and/or protection makes them charges of which ever Nation that protects them. The USSR went out of their way to hunt and kill their defectors before they could leave the Soviet territories to be protected by US or UK asylum but had to rely on covert attempts to drag back defectors via diplomacy or by kidnapping methods as to prevent the NATO mobilizing for War in west Germany. If the USSR had done a HIND or equal air strike as this drone on our soil or NATO member sovereign soil to kill a defector, it’d be deemed an invasion by our people and would have resorted to all out war. What happened in Yemen will be seen as yet another unprovoked American invasion in another Nation which will only make these two dirty souls martyrs on the enemy side.

Ok so the killed men are evil, we all get that. But considering the rhetoric from hard leftists in offices now making claim that TEA party members are terrorist, doest this type of action by our Government bother you when there is no enforcement of the 4 th? The rights and protections a US citizen is given by the Consitution is not locked to merely our borders when dealing with the US Government on a global scale it’s just those citizens abroad have to also respect their host Nation’s laws ( or should.)

Precedents have been set. Now what will we do in the future, if a President becomes a little more Liberal in determining who is an enemy and who can be assassinated by drones. Obama seems to have made this call on his own, with no oversight or legal process. What if political opponents or rivals are determined to be enemies of the state, by a President?

Do you trust Obama, the man who wanted to fund his own domestic army, with these choices? I don’t.

@Skookum: Exactly, Skook. Can Boehner be considered a terrorist for blocking legislation?

If John Walker Lindh had been killed rather than captured who would have batted an eye?
He was fighting for the other side!
When a person chooses to change teams what else can a country do but fight to prevail against that other side as it was doing before?
Should a country fight as though it is walking on egg shells so as to winnow out the American part of the enemy VS the foreign-born part?
How many more American deaths would that cause?
Awlaki was constantly engaged in trying to assist Americans who would fight jihad against America.
By him being gone (either caught OR killed) that process is slowed down.

I thought it was a strange bed fellow to see Ron Paul aligned with CAIR on this issue.

Well, the fires are out, for now, so I thought I would comment on this issue:

does anyone remember the paper put out by Napolitano’s DHS advising state and local law enforcement officers to “monitor” Iraq/Afghanistan veterans, those thought to be linked to a militia or had a NRA sticker on their vehicles and people who had pro-life or Ron Paul bumper stickers on their vehicles? I do.

I read the back and forth between Williams and other NRO pundits. Basically, William’s argument was that if we turn our back on the one thing that separates us from the rest of the world, our citizenship as Americans, that eventually the Constitution will have no meaning. Andy McCarthy’s base argument was that al Awlaki was a bad guy and needed to go. Others claimed that al Awlaki had turned his back on his nation, therefore taking him out was legitimate.

At no time in our history have we killed a U.S. citizen without due process. If assassination was the acceptable way of punishment, who more than Benedict Arnold deserved to be assassinated, yet President Washington, who could have easily had that order carried out, did not do so. In WWII, when a number of German saboteurs infiltrated our nation with evil on their minds, one of them was a U.S. citizen. FDR had them tried, and executed. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were proven to be spies for the USSR. They, also were tried, and executed. While many questioned their guilt, the Vernona Papers left no question; they were guilty. Julius Rosenberg’s code name was Liberal. Again and again, citizens of the U.S. who have committed treason against their own nation, have been tried in court and provided due process.

We now have a POTUS who has acted as judge, jury and executioner. Given that power, is there anything to prevent him from deciding that someone who belongs to a gun club is a national security “threat?” The Falls Church, Virginia mosque is a hot bed of radicalism, providing us with some of the 9-11 hijackers, Nidal Hassan, and yes, Anwar al Awlaki. Does Obama have the authority to drop a JDAM on the mosque as it has proven to be a national security threat?

Al Awlaki is dead. I can only hope that he is now learning that the whole 72 virgins thing was a lie, as he burns in Hell. But the fact remains, we honor our Constitution, and what it provides, even when it is inconvenient, or we turn our backs on it for convenience sake, and realize that the erosion of one guaranteed right sets a path for the erosion of ALL guaranteed rights.

The legal recourse, IMHO, was to try al Awlaki in absentia, impose the death penalty, and using American law, revoke his citizenship whereas he no longer had the protections of the Constitution. But that was not done and now we can legitimately ask the question: can any American on foreign soil, determined to be a threat to the U.S., be assassinated with abandonment? And are we willing to give that authority to one person, the POTUS?

One other thing: al Awlaki was no more than Baghdad Bob. Few articles mention that he was considered an Imam, someone who preached hatred for the U.S, but did not actually take up arms against the U.S.. We did not assassinate those clergy of WWII Germany that supported the Nazi government. I don’t cut al Alwaki any slack for being clergy, but is our intel so bad that we could not have kidnapped him and returned him to the U.S. to face fellow citizens who would surely allow him to seek those virgins?

With out getting into the Legal aspects of this, I say Good riddance and as someone else on another thread said, hope his 72 virgins all have the clap.

@Nan G:

Nan, the fact of the matter is that al Alwaki was nothing more than a propaganda spreader. There is NO proof that he, unlike John Walker Lindh, actually took up arms against the U.S. And what was done with Lindh? He was given Constitutional due process, tried, and found guilty. He now rots in a jail cell.

Either we honor the Constitution, even when it is inconvenient, like some who abuse the First Amendment with hatefilled rhetoric against the U.S., or we are a house built on a crumbling foundation.

The list of top level terrorists thus far eliminated on Obama’s watch: The Terrorist Notches on Obama’s Belt

A comment from the linked article:

Remember when Rudy Giuliani warned that electing Barack Obama would mean that the U.S. played defense, not offense, against the terrorists?

If this is defense, what does offense look like?

Obama’s approach to the threat of terrorism has been consistent, focused, and highly effective. Deal with it.

His approach to the 2008 economic disaster has been effective as well. What could have turned into a cascading series of system failures ending in total economic and monetary collapse didn’t. Recovery would be much farther along at this point, had there been more bipartisan cooperation and a willingness to compromise instead of increasing republican obstructionism and negative propaganda designed to destroy confidence.

We would deal with Obama much more effectively if the Senate wasn’t controlled by Democrats. Yet the Solyndra scandal may become Obama’s Waterloo. The truth is we can’t deal with Obama’s usurpation of the Constitution and with him using the treasury as a slush fund to repay his contributors. His days are numbered as are those in his administration. With the scandals that plague this man, there wouldn’t be time before he is defeated to impeach him for all the scandals he is facing.

Without a stonewalling justice department, he would already be impeached or forced to resign by this time. The truth and facts are emerging daily. The sheer mass of corruption will make it difficult to know in which direction to proceed with this vile and corrupt administration. Deal with it we all, despite the obstruction of justice and withholding of evidence he and his justice department are engaged in.

We have freedom of speech, it is obvious we have state controlled propaganda among the MSM. This latest Jihadist had the biscuit because he was in contact with other nitwits. He was essentially a propagandist for our enemies and an American citizen, does this warrant a death sentence in court?

If you are an omnipotent leader who can’t get anything done in your administration, it is definitely a plus to have your military kill these propagandists, but just maybe, I am considered a propagandist by Obama. I don’t swallow his swill and lies, and I point out many of his faults to the public. Perhaps he will have someone assassinate me.

Once you break the law, it becomes a matter of degree as to how far you will break it in the future. After all, I am sure Obama considers me an enemy; therefore, I am an enemy of his state or the Obamanation, a nation that only exists in his imagination and those of many of his lame brained followers.

Treason means Treason…. Same way No means No… Live by the Sword, Die by the Sword… Kill or be Killed….And good riddance… This person was a US Citizen ‘ in theory’ only… nothing genuine about his citizenship especially when you voluntarily hook up with the likes of AQ (our enemy)… there is a HUGE difference… This is what it really means to be UN-American… Not the absurd version(s) the Dems/Progressives/Liberals like to spew…

Faith, we have many Americans who hate this country and if Obama has his way we are going to make many more citizens who hate this country, but want to climb aboard the gravy train. The question becomes Who decides is the evil American who deserves to die. Very few Americans will lose sleep over this latest pimp bastard from the whorehouse of lunacy, but Obama has taken upon himself to decide who dies. I don’t trust him at all, but I especially don’t trust him with the power to assassinate at will. Murder is supposed to be illegal for our Army or government, but it’s okay if Obama says it’s okay. Especially American citizens, we are now saying President Obama can have you killed if he doesn’t like you. If you can tell me how or why he is authorized to murder US citizens, there are many of us waiting to read this law or decision.

Anwar al-Awlaki made a practice of lying to further his aims.
If it was convenient to admit he was born in New Mexico, USA, he would.
But for ”free money,” he lied and got $20,000 in scholarship money from a U.S. government program for his schooling in Fort Collins, Colo. When asked if Awlaki was eligible, former diplomatic security agent Ray Fournier said, “No, he is absolutely forbidden to have it.”

Awlaki was the iman at the Rabat mosque in San Diego from 1996 to 2000 where two 9-11-01 hijackers worshipped.

To claim he was not educated in Islamic law is beside the point.
A person can become an imam simply by beginning to call himself one and getting enough followers to either found a Mosque or to take an existing one over by majority.
Charisma is a major factor in who wins that position.
Ulema are the Islamic scholars, and they are not necessarily imams in Mosques.

Without the law and the Constitution we have chaos. How far are you willing to let Obama continue toward chaos.

@retire05:

At no time in our history have we killed a U.S. citizen without due process.

Well, except for the nearly three hundred thousand who died fighting for the Confederacy.

They were fighting against the US in much the same way as A a-A. There was no due process afforded those US citizens.

In WWII, when a number of German saboteurs infiltrated our nation with evil on their minds, one of them was a U.S. citizen. FDR had them tried, and executed.

No, not quite.

The one US citizen, George John Dasch, had his sentence commuted to 30 years by FDR. In 1949, Truman released him and had him deported to Germany.

One of the other conspirators, Ernest Peter Burger, had his sentence commuted to life in prison by FDR. He, too, was released in 1949 and deported to Germany.

It is truly a nice and useful piece of information. I?m glad that you shared this helpful information with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.

retire05, I like the argument you raise,
AMERICA have made laws to deal with those traitors, and why would a whole WHITE HOUSE FULL OF ELECTED PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT HOUSES be useful IF A PRESIDENT DECLARE on his own to start a war or acts of war,
this is the reason why the laws of the land are there to be obeyed by all including a PRESIDENT,
he is acting dangerously as a DICTATOR, and by doing it,
he is telling the WORLD that AMERICA has become run by only A DICTATOR WHICH HE DECLARED HIMSELF TO BE, and has given orders on his own decision, not discussed by the CONGRESS USING THEIR POWER OF LAST DECISION, according to the LAW , that is not representing THE AMERICANS abroad
ON the contrary he is adding fuel to haters proving them right, he talk but do not represent the people
that mean this PRESIDENT HAS DELIBERATLY BROKEN THE LAW, setting example to the younger generation that he is doing the right thing, so they can also. SO IS NOW THE MOVEMENT FROM
ORGANISATIONS HE INCITE OCCUPYING THE LAND ,PROTESTING ANYTHING LAWLESS JUST FOLLOWING THE EXEMPLE SET BY HIS ACTIONS, WHICH HE USE TO GAIN VOTES, AS THE SAME OTHER ACTIONS IN IMMIGRATION DEALING WIT ILLEGALS, AND BORDER CROSSING ECETERA,
WHILE PUTTING THE the officer of the law, in danger along with the citizens he swore to protect .