[d-back]

Agree. So many Freepers are jumping on to the wrong side of this issue.

We ALL hate terrorist scum, but giving the US Govt the broad right to kill citizens abroad who they ACCUSE of terrorism is too much. Try the guy in absentia if you've got proof he's a terrorist; sentence him to death; then kill him.

Conservatives fear and loathe Government; Liberals want the Executive to have broad and unfettered power, including the power to kill its proclaimed enemies.

This issue has been turned on its ear here at FR.

[Sister_T]

We ALL hate terrorist scum, but giving the US Govt the broad right to kill citizens abroad who they ACCUSE of terrorism is too much.

Agreed. I thought taking this guy out was a good idea until I learned that he was an American citizen. And with this administration labeling former military vets, pro-lifers and others on the Right as "terrorists", what's to stop them from sending a Predator drone to the National Right To Life or veterans groups to "take them out" for their "perceived" threat to America?

[Free Vulcan]

That is the best solution I’ve heard so far, one that could get this guy off the books but not give Zero a blank check either.

[allmendream]

The Unconstitutional idea of a trial in absentia without giving a citizen the right to confront their accusers is more troubling to me than the well supported legal theory that during the conduct of a war - enemy combatants who are American citizens can and will be killed without any regard being paid to their citizenship status (see WWII, the US Civil War, etc).

Although there are trials in absentia in the USA, they are when the accused has fled AFTER the trial has commenced - thus voluntarily waiving their right to confront their accusers.

Trials in absentia for wanted fugitives is Unconstitutional - and a much more dangerous step than the wartime killing of an enemy combatant who held U.S. citizenship.