Posted on 10/01/2011 2:06:09 PM PDT by airedale
The American government at the direction of the President targeted and killed an American citizen who was an unlawful combatant and a terrorist. This was a good thing in this case, but it also opened the barn door for the President deciding to kill an American citizen acting as prosecutor, judge, jury and in effect executioner without any judicial review or due process (especially interesting considering the President and his administrations instance on treating other terrorists as common criminals and giving them full due process and civilian trials== until that blew up and the Congress told them they couldn't bring them in to the US from Gitmo for a civilian trial)
Without rules and the force of the Constitution and law this power that Obama has used is open to all kinds of abuse as time goes on. Consider what the administration, Democratic members of Congress and the media have called members of the Tea Party: Terrorists, UN-American, Hostage Takers, Racists, Fascist and lots of other things. They have accused the Tea Party of violence and other illegal activities (all untrue). The same applies to people like Rush Limbaugh. What's to stop Obama from taking action against them? It might not be actually killing them rather interning them like Woodrow Wilson and FDR did. For you Democrats who read this remember you won't always hold the Presidency and the Republican who holds the office will now have apparently unlimited power to kill American citizens without due process.
The Obama administration has refused to give it's legal reasoning and justification on how this action complies with US law and the US Constitution. It's also notable that the MSM that would be screaming if a George Bush had done this and they'd even become more incensed if he refused to release the legal justification for the actions, but this is a Democrat and a god to the MSM so they'll blindly accept it.
I agree with what you say about his activities. I have no use for the guy. But in this war there are no defined battlefields; they represent no state unless some how legally Ummah is a state; the enemy wears no uniform or identification badges which creates some legal problems. They’ve never signed the Geneva Accords nor follow them. They are by definition unlawful combatants the equivalent of pirates under the law but out courts have given them the rights of lawful combatants (don’t agree with them but that’s a different story).
But based upon this precedent as President of the United States that’s what I say you’re doing so I have you whacked. That’s the standard now. The President does a finding, signs the classified document with no judicial review and he now has the right to kill any American citizen he wants. Not only that but I can kill you any where in the world including in the United States. Essentially the President now gets to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner band put out a kill order on an American citizen. What are the limits and controls? The first one may be a perfect choice but each time it gets easier to put someone on the kill list and the standard slips for what justification you need. That’s precisely why the founding fathers defined treason and the standards required to find someone guilty in the Constitution.
This all from an administration that wants to treat them as criminals and try them in civilian courts. Remember due process as required by the Constitution is for good guys and bad guys as well.
for which he later got charged with fraud
Whacked my butt, your own comment said that the battlefields are not clearly defined, they SURE ARE!
Where the enemy is? THAT’S a battlefield!
Can the President authorize the killing of a Muslim at a hotel here in the US because the President decided he’s connected to Al Qaeda but isn’t involved in an actual attack on the US? If not why not? If he can what are the limits? Is it limited to only Muslims or can he decide that RaceBannon is a threat to the US and order RaceBannon’s killing as a danger to the US. This all done on the basis of Presidential finding with no judicial review just the decision of 1 man? Without knowing the limits of the power and the legal reasoning the second is just as likely as the first.
And the charge was dropped and the warrant withdrawn per the Fox show the day he returned to the US. I don’t know enough about the passports from Yemen which he used to get his Social Security Card as a Yemeni citizen to know if it has the birth place on it. I’d guess it does. That would mean that either he committed fraud in Yemen or they have rules that allow people to enter a different birth place.
is it more dangerous to kill someone here or arrest them?
Is it more dangerous to kill someone OVER THERE or arrest them?
USE YOUR BRAIN HOUSING GROUP AND NOT YOUR RON PAUL SPONSORED MUSH BOWL!
I have since learned that under US law, if one does those things, then US citizenship is forfeited.
Thank you for the update. As it should be.
Now that Obama has opened this can of worms, he needs to clearly dilineate his reasoning, legal arguments, and rules on this sort of action.
He needs to put out his "Obama doctrine" on killing US citizens, assassinations on foreign soil, drone attacks, and extra judicial executions.
The GOP needs to push him hard for this. Plus, it will really make liberals squirm when policies on all those things comes under the "Obama doctrine."
Great tagline.
Not the issue about how dangerous it is to arrest the person. Can the President authorize the killing of a US citizen in the US without due process? That door is now open. Let’s pick a different bad guy rather than a Jahdi. How about a US citizen in the US or anywhere in the world who is the leadership of MS13. That’s as violent a international gang as you can find anywhere and involved in all kinds of nasty stuff. They’ve even been tied to Al Qaeda smuggling Al Qaeda sleeper agents into the US among other things. As a normal police action going out with the sole purpose of killing him would be flat out illegal, but the new Obama doctrine (what ever it is since we don’t know the legal reasoning behind it and this administration is so honest, consistent and transparent) would allow the President to put out a kill order on the guy no matter where he was with no effort to arrest him because the President has determined that it would be too difficult to arrest him. It would be for a senior member of MS13
You keep building up a strawman argument to try and prove your false case
This clown had foreign tuition waivers, he wasn’t even a citizen to start
second, he was NOT IN THE US
THIRD: HE WAS WITH THE ENEMY when he was killed
All issues your false argument, based on RON PAUL thinking, and that is why it fails and why you are dangerous to my freedom
He was a citizen. He was born here. My strawman as you called it was also a citizen. MS13 besides being a gang has been accused of aiding Al Qaeda which potentially moves him into enemy territory, but they are still a threat to the US.
Give me a break about Ron Paul. I’m hardly an isolationist. What I’m worried about is what can now come out of that barn now that Obama has left the door wide open. Look what he did with Libya. It wasn’t a war it was a kinetic military action which has resulted in a lot of terrorists getting manpads (man-portable anti-aircraft weapons) in the thousands. Very advanced ones too. It was a war and he went to war without Congressional approval unlike George Bush who did get Congressional approval before he took action.
You keep focusing on killing Alawki I’m concerned with the precedent. No matter how good or bad an action is in the present you have to look down the road and try to see what the potential for mischief or good an act has. The Constitution was created to protect us the citizens from the government and not thinking about actions taken by the President and or Congress and how it affects our fundamental freedoms even to take out a bad guy is folly.
Take a look what Wilson did to people who didn’t agree with him. That was the action of a Progressive who thought government knew best. He formed the American Protective League which worked with the FBI to silence opposition to his policies. They were pretty darn violent. Then there was his Sedition Act of 1918. Can you imagine where we’d be if those things hadn’t been quashed. Like Wilson Obama is a Progressive Democrat with the idea that government knows best and the constitution means very little.
In this respect, it's important to note how the Bush/Cheney administration labelled their policies concerning treatment, interrogation and imprisonment of terrorists. They are specifically identified as pertaining only to "non-citizens".
And you think his so called citizenship trumps the fact he was with the enemy, actively planning on killing YOU, and that makes all the difference!
My gowd, I hope and pray you are never elected to public office, every one will die waiting for you to dispense justice
Due Process is an important part of our freedoms. Without it you wind up with the justice of the French Revolution, Stalin or Mao
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.