Another Inconvenient Truth
Anwar al Awlaki is dead. For those who missed the news, he was a regional commander for Al Qaeda and a terrorist recruiter. He was an Imam who had connections with 3 of the 9/11 hijackers, the underwear bomber and the Ft. Hood shooter. Killed in the same strike was Samir Khan, who ran a flashy Al Qaeda online magazine, also recruiting disaffected Muslims to terrorism. Both were turned into charred hamburger by an unmanned predator drone.
Reacting to the news, Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul questioned and argued (though not forcibly) against this targeting of these terrorists, calling it an "assassination". Why? - because both men were American citizens. On this issue Rep. Paul is 100% correct.
This is one of those inconvenient truths, but being a citizen matters, whether engaged in hostilities against the United States or not. In all the disputes over the Guantanamo detainees, illegal immigrants and French bankers having trouble keeping their pants on "rights" have been front and center. How does this not apply to these two?
We are not arguing that these men were good or innocent, just that as citizens the Bill of Rights applies. As citizens, warrants needed to be issued, arrests made, a trial held and a sentence handed down. These are rights that all Americans hold dear, and for good reason - they are the foundation of our society. The basis of a society of laws, not men.
Even Osama bin Laden received the fig leaf of "rights" legal or otherwise. A SEAL team stormed his compound ostensibly to "capture" him. It can be argued that OBL "resisted" and was fatally shot as events unfolded. This argument holds even if the clear mission orders were to kill him. Then he got a proper Muslim burial at sea. Just to underline - OBL, not a citizen. No rights need to apply.
These two, on the other hand were not targeted by a SEAL team for capture, and fatally shot for resisting, and given a proper Muslim burial. Their vehicles were targeted from 20,000 feet in the air, fired on, and we imagine the CIA is still going over the area gathering charred pieces of meat into Hefty bags for disposal. Underlining - OBL, mastermind of Al Qaeda and not a citizen. These two - mid level Al Qaeda operatives, but American citizens.
Citizens of the United States are protected by the Bill of Rights and the legal protections of the U. S. Justice system. This applies equally to Thomas Jefferson as it does to Jeffrey Dahmer, Timothy McVeigh and John Walker Lindh (the American Taliban captured during the Bush administration and cooling his heels in Federal prison at this date). It doesn't matter how vile and disgusting the acts of the citizen are. The rights apply. In all cases. No exceptions.
We've dealt with this silliness before during the Time Square bomber case. It turns out that he had been a naturalized citizen for 3 years before the bombing. Some boneheaded lawmakers tried to introduce legislation to strip him of his citizenship, indicating that they don't understand the concept of citizenship or of the rights inherent in it. We argued then for the same protections afforded to McVeigh and Lindh. It really doesn't matter if the State Department made a mistake in granting the bomber citizenship. It did. All rights apply. Period.
"But they were in Yemen..." Yeah, we get that - and bin Laden was in Pakistan. Still we took the trouble. From our standpoint, we wouldn't have minded a drone strike taking out bin Laden. Screw him - he's NOT a citizen. No rights required. Any rights we would have given him would be just us making nice.
As stated before these two today were citizens - not even naturalized, but native born. The Bill of Rights and the legal protections of our society apply. Federal law prohibits the Federal government from targeting foreign nationals for an untimely end (which is why there was all of the courtesy shown to bin Laden). One would think that the Federal government targeting American citizens would be a non-starter. But no, that pesky, old, out of date Constitution just doesn't understand.
After all - "These were terrorists!" We get that too. Hey, what did Vice-Gaffer Joe call the Tea Party members a few weeks ago? Oh, that's right, terrorists. That was just on August 1, 2011. Makes you wonder who else they might be setting up a drone for...
Common Sense Dictates
The Constitution matters. That is the core belief of the Tea Party and those who claim conservatism. Citizenship matters. Even in the case of two terrorists with Arabic names engaged in hostile acts against the United States.
The proper course of action for these two was capture and trial, followed by sentencing. We like a trial for treason, with an execution to follow. If during the course of capture, they resisted, and were fatally shot, well then it's on them. Blowing them to bits with what is essentially a video game controller was not a proper course of action. It just shows the continued disrespect to the Constitution that has been apparent in this Administration since day one.
If Barry is counting on this for a bump in the polls, we think that he is (again) sadly mistaken; as mistaken as the country was on Election Day 2008. Common Sense says that we need to correct that mistake in 2012.
RLB
Categories: Rights and Responsibilities, Constitutional Issues, Terrorism
Tags: Framers intent terrorism war on terror
What We need to look at here is that they had ample time to surrender, and chose not to! Ask the children at Waco about this. Criminals barricaded in their safe house are always allowed the same chance to surrender, then the government comes in and burns their house down!I am NOT saying what happened was right! I just hold this up as an example of what to expect! Notice like those involved with Fast and Furious , DO You see any of them brought to trial ? NO!They are ALL promoted!
Reply to this
Bottom line is that it was a de-facto summary execution of a U.S.-born citizen. Sure, this particular one had ties to terror groups, but how long will it be until the regime declares that the T-Party is a "terror group" and sends drones after those people ?
- Either the bill of rights pertains to ALL American citizens, or it will end up applying to NONE of us. (even alleged criminals are entitled to due process and a trial, are they not ?)
Reply to this
As far as I'm concerned his citizenship expired when he took up arms against America. What would the Founding Fathers do? Pardon my French, but they would have shot that #$@$^$#^#$^!!!!!
Reply to this
The Bill Of Rights --
hardly applies to TRAITORS -- United States Constitution .
Was Barbary Pirates War "DECLARED" by Congress ??
Reply to this
Actually the Bill of Rights does apply to traitors. Google Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.
Reply to this
Hi Gary - actually the Rosenbergs were convicted and executed for espionage. Tokyo Rose was treason. McVeigh went down for murder and the use of weapons of mass destruction - oh and terrorism. Still American citizens get the benefit of the Bill of Rights. That was, at least up til today, non-negotiable.
Reply to this
When you leave your home country to throw in your lot with a bunch of medieval troglodytes bent on the destruction of Western Civilization and the utter negation of everything worthwhile that's happened since the Enlightenment, don't be surprised when fire and death come screaming down out of the sky on top of you.
I don't agree with very much this administration does, but in this case, I don't have a lot of sympathy for a traitorous piece of dung who would've gladly killed every person debating his fate on this board, whether they agreed with it or not. He gave up his right to due process when he joined his little death cult.
For everyone who's championing his rights, come on... We didn't gun down someone coming out of the Elks Club in Omaha, and we and didn't assassinate an American exchange student in France or London -- we splashed a known, unrepentant TERRORIST in Yemen, and anyone who is trying to turn this into a civil rights case is either being deliberately obtuse or hopelessly naive.
Reply to this
If you allow any American citizens to be killed in any manner by the Administration without our laws being followed....then you cannot rule out them being killed coming out of the Elks Club in Omaha either...because you just opened the door. You put US all in jeopardy....you are the hopelessly naive to ever believe those who are trying to tear apart our Constitution are in any way looking out for US. Any citizen of the United States has been afforded certain rights...and you and them want to pick who you think it applies to? Not up to you or me...I choose to be Christian....you gonna come after me for that? No one hives up their right to due process because they join something you or I disagree with...inalienable rights. Our Constitution is under attack from every side...of this Administration but I draw the line when you kill an American citizen because you disagree with his beliefs. Shame on you, you should know better!
Reply to this
The whole issue of targeting an American citizen (albeit a treasonous one) from the sky leads to this, they knew where he was they knew the car they knew what collateral damage would be incurred- they knew a great many things that could have lead to his capture and trial at the instance the command was given to kill and not capture. This could be you. The precedent of sanctioning a hit by our president on an American citizen is tremendous and Ron Paul is right to question this. We should all question this.
Reply to this
"An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates his duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." - Thomas Paine
Due Process of Law - Is the U.S. Constitution just a "List of Suggestions?" Or, should we pretend that the constitution does not exist when it doesn't suit your or someone's agenda? How often and for whom should we toss out the 5th Amendment and 14th-Section-1 Amendments?
Reply to this
We are in a war against terrorism. Anwar al Awlaki was an illegal enemy combatant, and, therefore, fair game in a military operation. Even through carried out by the CIA, it was a legitimate action of this war. al Awlalki, although a citizen and covered by the Constitution, put himself at war with his country. It was never going to be practical to go into the mountains outside Sanaa to arrest him and bring him to justice. This whining about Constitutional and Civil Rights does not apply here. al Awlaki put himself in this position by waging war against the United States. He paid the consequences. So be it. ~Dave the Old Dude
Reply to this
I think that if we're going to go through the trouble of trying to capture Osama Bin Laden, that's the least we should be doing for people with American citizenship. Isn't it all about the Constitution with you people?
Reply to this
Yeah that's a tough one. I think it's the right thing to do but it certainly could be abused. Maybe they should try them inabsentia and do a global broadcast of all those they are tryig to offer for themto show up or have someone represent them inabsentia. Then if thry are convicted sentence themto death and send a CIA execution drone out
I would be good with that and feel like they had been offered a chance and due process
Just because they don't show is not a defense
Reply to this
I say that anyone who willingly joins Al Qaida or any other group bent on killing Americans, well, they forfeit their right to life. I say ice every one of them.
Reply to this
Nah, I'm on the side of the Constitution. This is a hard pill to swallow, but like the author says, citizenship matters. I like Jeff's idea, but in the cold hard light of day, an American citizen needs to be brought in, if possible and tried for treason. Doing it this way just opens up the door to killing other undesirable citizens. Remember the Niemoller quote:
Reply to this
"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller
Reply to this
Thanks for Sharing, it is so true and too many miss the point totally.
Reply to this
I do think a LOT of the recent killings , are simply a political "I won over terrorists" ploy that our president is using... and that would be a bad thing, if it is true..
Reply to this
The way the Founders set up our legal system is that we are innocent until proven guilty in-so-far-as man has a capacity and burden to prove guilt in a court through a jury of peers. They understood when man's courts and laws fail, then the person would be judged in the after-life (since many in this thread don't believe in an after-life, I understand your apprehension)
That said, we know he's pretty guilty. He was judged by 10s of millions of his countrymen to be so, he would not turn himself in to be judged by the court system. So Maybe George Washington and Thomas Jefferson will judge him less harshly in the after-life.
Reply to this
if any of these people were killed . which i am not sure of , i cant accept they have the same rights as for burial at sea ,for a muslim'this is not good the only time a muslim can be buried at sea is when they drown in the ocean this is truth validate it so we ...didnt give them a muslim burial as they cannot do this ... dont be so easily fooled peeoples they probably arent even dead no proof no evidence no nothing strange indeed as they paraded husseins dead sons all over iraq think
Reply to this
Ok. seriously. The one guy was a recruiter of idiots, and the other guy ran a website. Farrakhan and Jerimiah Wright have preached as bad and no one is saying we should pop a cap in either of them. Zuckerberg is an Obama tool, and other than FB users, no one wants any harm coming to him. Still we arm a predator to take these guys out? I don't know. Well, I do. I'm not on board.
Reply to this
Excellent points Robert...excellent blog!!
While I was a bit "meh" about this story when I originally heard it, I am now incensed by it, because of the broader implications it presents. See, I originally figured this strike to be just a desperate, pathetic attempt by Obama to get a boost in the polls. I still think that it is an attention getting ploy, because ol Barry can't stand not having ALL the attention on him, and with the GOP debates of late, he must be attention starved like you read about. But this attack on natural born US citizens also demonstrates that our president and his administration have less regard than they should for a person's legal rights as an American citizen. Which is odd since Obama himself has had the validity of his own citizenship called into question.
William above makes a great comment about our founding fathers. Our nation takes its roots in the flight of millions of people over many, many years to this great land to escape persecution and tyranny. The Puritans, Pilgrims, many other religious sects, as well as even the Irish diaspora from famine and disease exacerbated by the tyrannical rule and neglect of the British crown ate all examples of our nation being the nation that will stand up against tyranny and despotism. Our founding fathers and their descendants never forgot that. That is WHY we are afforded the right of being innocent until proven guilty. We are all, as US citizen given DUE PROCESS OF LAW. That way a TYRANT that might somehow get elected or appointed to the office of ...oh...let's say POTUS....or even Attorney General of the US, would not be able to just go around having folks he didn't like assassinated. Folks such as those who might see him defeated in subsequent elections, those who are outspoken about his failures or unfair policies, or those accused of treason or terrorism (which in the case of the 2 recent Al Qeada deaths is fairly clear cut, but often treason and terrorism is in the eye of the beholder...or beheader...)
Don't get me wrong...I feel these guys needed to be brought to justice, but the right way. The AMERICAN WAY. We are often looked up to by the rest of the world as a beacon of hope that a fair democratic process CAN work...and can ENDURE the hardships and "messy-ness" of this world. Sometimes it is hard being a role model...but our integrity is worth the trouble, isn't it?? And simply doing the right thing is its own reward, no matter the cost. Yes...a drone is always going to be easier, all the way around. But sometimes (most if the time...) doing the RIGHT thing isn't easy. Ask any parent or head of a household. And as the head of the "US household", so to speak, Obama needs to be prepared to do the HARD things...the RIGHT things...the HONORABLE things...the NOBLE things.
In short, he needs to do the AMERICAN things.
Reply to this
The argument that you give here is the same one that causes us to lose to these fanatics. Our "rules" are more important than winning. They don'tfollow rules. They just kill people randomly. At least we killed someone specifically. I'm not going to lose a minute's sleep over it.
Reply to this
So I'm not clear on something? Did these guys actually kill anybody, or just do PR work for OBL? Or is it that they helped someone to help someone to help someone to blow something up? Like how many degrees of seperation between these guys and an actual terrorist act? I'm not clear on why these two were targeted for a drone strike, over say people who actually killed someone.
Reply to this
Yes the young man they killed was a citizen of the United States, he was an alleged terrorist and/or becoming a terrorist, the military knew where he was and instead of arresting him and allowing him his due process legal counsel , to be judged by his peers, they were ordered to shoot him down with an American drone, which is how he died. This was before POTUS signed the NDAA and was possibly a test run to see how much they could get away with. The point is not what they may or may not have done. The point is it was an American citizen not even given his inalienable rights .. you have rights that can not be challenged or denied or disputed and by the order of POTUS those rights were taken away and that means POTUS believes he can do that to ALL of US .
Reply to this
An American Citizen still has rights no matter what, as an American citizen does that mean the United States Government has the right to kill me because I join a group the US does not like or condone? Hell no it is absolutely In Total Opposition to our Constitution...next you will want to take out those with brown Kait and brown eyes....or maybe those over 40 ...we've had a good run...how much more could we possibly contribute....We are all entitled to certain rights...including life....(one of the first things you should remember).....liberty....I can think...and ....do things my way....not yours....my way.....so Stop Destroying Our Rights....My Rights....these were AMERICANS.....What next if they are Christians.....you gonna take them out with drones? You have to be kidding me....we have Laws and Rights and No American citizen should be gunned down in any manner Without Our Government coming to their aid....then Again IT SHOULD SCARE THE HELL OUT OF YOU ...IF OUR GOVERNMENT IS KILLING AMERICAN CITIZENS FOR THEIR BELIEFS....I DON'T CARE IF THEY ARE DIFFERENT...BRING THEM IN AND PROSECUTE THEM UNDER OUR LAWS....anything else is the Murder of an American Citizen By its Own Government....And Anyone involved in Those Murders of American Citizens Including the POTUS should be charged with their murders and tried in a court of law just like you would be for killing another! It is the law and all must abide by our Constitution.
Reply to this
Okay anyone will any sense at all will know that its just a matter of time when killing Americans on US SOIL is just a signature away
Reply to this