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
gnip to this thread and my post 160
OTOH, I am not a bit surprised to see more than one fellow FReeper advocating exceptions to the Bill of Rights for selected groups or individuals.
I am all for issuing a warrant, based on probable cause, arresting the guy, trying him in front of a military tribunal or jury of his peers as appropriate, and punishing him if convicted. If found on an active battlefield opposing US interests, by all means, shoot him.
But if you think that it is OK for the President to just order someone killed, you sir, need to spend some time examining your values and, I submit, your commitment to the Constitution and the founding principles of this Nation.
First link is busted...
But I have read the legislation. Everyone thinks this is benign if you have done nothing wrong, but “wrong” is in the eye of the beholder. This is a bad bill. A VERY bad bill.
“And if his name was barack hussein obama? Think about it.”
If I answer that, I would get a visit from serious men in black suits.
Yeah. For that reason, I almost didn’t post it. LOL
But you see my point.
If an article posted on FR said that Anwar al-Awlaki had been killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a drone aircraft, everyone would have said good riddance.
If the article happened to mention that Anwar al-Awliki had been killed after being intentionally targeted by the military or CIA, at most a very few would have mentioned the due process thing and they would have been shot down.
If an article mentioned that there are a few Americans among the individuals being targeted by Predators in Pakistan, Yemen, etc., the discussion would be more evenly balanced.
But since this article mentions that the president is involved in the creation or approval of the list of targeted individuals, all of a sudden everyone is a civil libertarian.
maybe we could subcontract the hits to the MOssad?
Oh wait, we’re not on to good a terms with Israel. huh?
To Destroy a Nation
The Obama Legacy
Ya mean this never was Obama’s goal til now?
The same time this country voted for Mohammadism, I guess...
Then our military kill him as any terrorist/enemy on the battlefield and environs. No problem with that, war is war. However to just pass a death sentence by proclamation on any American Citizen is a dangerous precedent and beyond the scope of Presidential Authority.
Letters of Marque and Reprisal were the time honored method of dealing with specific enemies and are Constitutional. The President decreeing a death sentence is not.
My thought exactly. Waiting for a reliable source. Not holding my breath.
Is this being widely covered?
Ruby Ridge, Branch Davidian, Fred Hampton ...... Chicago mobsters
Actually a long list could be compiled. The list would contain citizens of various races, of various religions and ideologies, of various records from heavily criminal to extremely innocent.
Typically those of a particular race or ideology will claim that they are targeted because of their race or because of their ideology. Actually they are targeted by the gubmint because it is in the self-interest of those in control of the gubmint to do so.
Sedition is not Constitutionally protected, but the right to a trial before being convicted of sedition is.
al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico:
The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of a U.S. citizen -- the New Mexico-born 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 counterintelligence officials told The New York Times on Tuesday.Awlaki, who was born in Las Cruces while his father studied at New Mexico State University, spent years as an imam in the United States before going into hiding in his family's native Yemen, The Times said.
NM list PING!
(Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list)
And bin Laden isn't American or a head of state.
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.