Tapper vs. Carney: Was Awlaki Death Constitutional? (Video)

ABC News ^ | 9/30/11 | Jake Tapper

[Bokababe]

Tapper to Carney: "Do you not see at all... does the Administration not see at all how a president asserting that he has the right to kill an American citizen without due process and that he's not going to even explain why he thinks that he has that right, is troublesome to some people?"...

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=14642685

[Bokababe]

Just remember that: 1. Obama (and Holder) wanted to read Miranda rights to combatants. 2. Obama wanted to close down Gitmo. 3, Obama wanted to give terrorists civil trials and not military trials. 4. The Left was screaming about wire tapping terrorists. And now he just blew up an American citizen

Bingo!!!!!

Present company excluded, why don't most conservatives understand how and where to really attack Obama where he lives and breathes with his voters?

[Larry - Moe and Curly]

Bin Laden wasn’t a US citizen.

While I agree that this scumbag needed to die, when the President starts targeting American Citizens, for whatever reason, justification can be found for targeting ANY American Citizen. It always starts with the most obviously deserving and works its way down from there to just about anyone.

As it is, conservatives are already terrorists in the eyes of the government. How long will it be before Hellfire missiles start landing on the houses of Tea Party activists?

[cpa4you]

I’m about as conservative as they come. I have a little angst about the administration’s attitude.

If an individual did the same (shoot a fleeing felon) they’d be arrested for murder!

[Bokababe]

BS ~ AlAwlaki had a choice ~ he knew he was wanted. He could have arranged to surrender at any time. He didn't. Wasn't OUR FAULT that he evaded delivery of a warrant. That's the nature of war. It usually happens outside of court.

I really don't give a damn about al Awlaki per se. He probably got what he deserved. But it is the principle of the thing -- and it is these professed and undelivered principles on which Obama is vulnerable. And it is these principles which protect us all from Obama or any other president who decides he wants to push the envelope even further without ever even answering to the American people why.

[Servant of the Cross]

Just imagine the public reaction of then Senator 0bama if President Bush had done such a thing.

[cruise_missile]

I thought of Saul Alinsky when I posted this. “Make them keep their rules. Point out their hypocrisy.”

The guy was obviously a bad guy. If this had been Bush the Left would be talking impeachment for blowing up an American citizen. For denying him his due process.

Bet we don’t hear a peep out of the ACLU.

This is the first time I think we (U.S. Government) have openly killed an American citizen on purpose. And bragged about it.

[muawiyah]

There are no principles at stake in this case EXCEPT ONE ~ it is Obama's job to protect us from enemies.

This guy declared himself an enemy and made war on us.

I am glad Obama finally figured out what the job is about.

Now you? I don't know what we can do about your problem. You want Obama to answer to the American people "why"? I think you are confounding two talking points. First off American Presidents answer to the American people on election day, or if they get impeached by Congress.

Secondly, "why"? Every swinging d**k in this country knows why. Someone who doesn't realize we were attacked by this puke and his cronies ~ that they made war on us ~ that they tried to kill us ~ .............. well, anyway, you should see a doctor.

[muawiyah]

In many states the Castle Doctrine says you can use deadly force against an assailant or robbery.

Yes, you can shoot a fleeing felon in enough places to keep you happy!

[muawiyah]

They just added another 280,000 to the count of Confederate war dead.

Now who is it you think killed all those people?

Maybe US Government bullets?

[cruise_missile]

Two U.S.-Born Terrorists Killed in CIA-Led Drone Strike

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/30/us-born-terror-boss-anwar-al-awlaki-killed/#ixzz1ZUunmMrr

[runninglips]

IF we would have declared war, I would agree. Targeting people for assassination, whether it be OBL...or Al Walaki is very dangerous ground....tit for tat comes into play. We do not want these crazies targeting our elected officials or judges.

[runninglips]

BING BING BING...you echo my thoughts very closely

[Patrick1]

Just our citizens?

[runninglips]

No, killing a guy in the process of a raid, or a sweep when he resists is no problem. The US govt has prosecuted outstanding Marines, for very similar things though. It seems that if you are a soldier, and in fear of imminent reprisals, you must wait to be fired upon. If you are in the political class, you just identify who must die, and kill them. THAT is a hypocrisy that should not exist. We are either at war, with the intent to kill all bad guys until they yell “uncle” or we are not.

[cruise_missile]

Obama wanted to call this a man made disaster. Not a war.

Now Obama and company are calling it a war.
Where it is legal to blow up Americans.

Things are a changin’.

Remember when Gitmo was a bad bad bad thing.

[MrBambaLaMamba]

Bonnie and Clyde, Dillinger.
Awlaki.

Rooseveltian due process.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Obama made the call he was supposed to make. The idea that some clown can sit overseas, intentionally and permanently removing himself from the jurisdiction of our legal system, and organize/launch attacks against Americans with impunity because he's a U.S. citizen, is nuts. We didn't put Superman capes on German-Americans who fought for Germany in WWII, and we shouldn't put one on this guy for fighting for AQ.

Those who say we should push this to make him look like a hypocrite should realize that it makes us look like hypocrites at the same time.

[Gunslingr3]

What law trumps the Constitution?

"No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." 5th amendment, Bill of Rights

I don't agree the President has the authority to declare, without due process of law, that someone is an enemy of the state and can be exectuted.

What do you do when the President declares you an enemy of the state?

"Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration." - “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, Department of Homeland Security, April 7, 2009

**********

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

[Patrick1]

Couldn’t agree more. I took your comment to mean if we kill one of theirs with a drone they will do the same to us. I don’t agree that is something we should fear.

Rules of engagement should be clear. As Patton said, you never win a war by dying for your country, you win it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.

We have certainly lawyered up the war against Islamo Fascism.

[MarkL]

If Obama had any balls, he'd actually come forward and say, "This POS had actively waged war against the USA, and was directly responsible for a number of deaths of American citizens. He was not a criminal. He was an illegal enemy combatant, who is in no way covered by any of the covenants, accords, or agreements regarding warring parties. He was behind the slaughter of non-combatants, while hiding behind other non-combatants, placing them in direct danger. Had he been captured alive, the US military would have been within their rights to shoot him on sight."

Mark