Obama admin authorizes the CIA to kill a U.S. citizen overseas via drone

[cwjerome]

Of please, this isn't a battlefield, don't throw strawmen in about that. This is about the President having the ability (or claiming to have) to unilaterally execute a US citizen without trial or any sort of oversight.

This is about a battlefield. Given the conflicts of today, what do you define as a battlefield? I think you and I would answer that differently. This is a conflict where the battlespace is amorphous. If Osama was hiding in Pakistan, Yemen, or Sudan, would it be OK to drop a GBU-24 on him? Is that part of the battlefield? Then why not Awlaki? If he is directing these jihadist to attack targets, is it still just talk? Osama never strapped a bomb to his chest.

So this is a military matter, properly, and not just a law enforcement issue. The cleric works for the bad guys. This is not some guy who is ranting at some gathering here, but an individual who has moved to a country where he has some sanctuary to conduct operations ("psy ops" at a minimum to possibly directing enemy actions). Are we just to let this guy be because he fled jurisdiction and we cannot get to him to impose arrest?

We are talking about capturing or killing a US citizen who has aligned himself with, and actively supports (and probably plans for) our enemies. Allowing Awlaki the freedom of movement making speeches putting his blessings on killing of Americans is tantamount of aid and abetting him. He needs killing, the sooner the better. This is not a LE issue, it is armed conflict, and he's chosen his side.

...some randome bullshit about executive orders...

First, is this even legal? SCOTUS or someone would have to decide. That's beyond you or me. Unlimited power to execute any US citizen without oversight? Sounds un-Constitutional to me.

That certainly would be unconstitutional, but despite your zealous spin, that's not what we're talking about here. It's not UNLIMITED power and it's not ANY American citizen.

Where has anyone said the president has unlimited power to kill any US citizen? Nobody has, you know it, and you're just full of hyperbole and acting silly. Obviously Obama and his army of lawyers and advisers have determined that 1) he has some power to make a targeted strike in foreign land in the GWOT against 2) a US citizen who is a traitor to his country by joining her enemy while giving full effort toward killing Americans.

Second, IANAL, but at a minimum, a real trial that follows US law (no kangaroo courts like at Gitmo). A real defense lawyer, a real judge. Real proof, not just hearsay. Just like if you were accused of murder, you would get all privileges of the justice system, so should he. No exceptions.

That's off the top of my head, but would at least be a starting point.

Right. You may want to give him his Miranda rights, assign him 13 lawyers, and drag him out in court... if and when it was even possible to ever bring him in. But in my mind, and apparently many others, he's an enemy combatant who he gave up any rights when he became a traitor. His actions render him eligible for a revocation of his U.S. citizenship, per Title 8 United States Code Sections 1481 (a)(2) and 1481 (a)(7). Since I do not see this as an assassination of a citizen, but the targeting of an enemy combatant, I do not view your question as valid. Capture if you can, kill if you must, but stop him.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

This is about a battlefield. Given the conflicts of today, what do you define as a battlefield? I think you and I would answer that differently. This is a conflict where the battlespace is amorphous. If Osama was hiding in Pakistan, Yemen, or Sudan, would it be OK to drop a GBU-24 on him? Is that part of the battlefield? Then why not Awlaki? If he is directing these jihadist to attack targets, is it still just talk? Osama never strapped a bomb to his chest.

No, this isn't a battlefield. A battlefield would be acutal combat. We are talking about dropping a bomb (or missle) on someone when they don't know it's coming. Way different, and you should be able to understand it.

Imagine someone wanted by the police. If the police find him, adn he pulls a gun and gets shot, thats kinda equivelent to a battlefield, and is what you are trying to claim. But the police, when they find him, can't just take as sniper and kill him from 100yards away. The police can't make him "shoot on sight". I guess you can't comprehend this.

That certainly would be unconstitutional, but despite your zealous spin, that's not what we're talking about here. It's not UNLIMITED power and it's not ANY American citizen.

Where has anyone said the president has unlimited power to kill any US citizen? Nobody has, you know it, and you're just full of hyperbole and acting silly. Obviously Obama and his army of lawyers and advisers have determined that 1) he has some power to make a targeted strike in foreign land in the GWOT against 2) a US citizen who is a traitor to his country by joining her enemy while giving full effort toward killing Americans.

Are you trolling? You can't be serious? What on earth do you think an executive order is?

Here, let me help you: Wiki link

Read that and learn something. Learn that Executive orders do not have anything to do with Congress, and do not demand any oversight. The President can make an executive order regarding ANYTHING HE WANTS. Nothing, except a judicial challenge, can stop him. That is fact, I don't understand how you can comprehend that.

Let me say it again, hopefully it will sink in: The President is claiming unlimited power to assassinate US citizens without oversight or due process. There is no way to claim that he HAS to only use it on "supposed" terrorists. Nothing. We simply writes " I order that <insert name here> if found, be terminated", or something like that. That's all it takes. No proof necessary. Do you have real facts that say that this can't be used on ANY US citizens?

And again, post some PROOF that Obama has done anything to make sure that this person is actually guilty before ordering his death. Again, PROOF. All I get from you is "they must know", or "it's obvious". Put up some real facts. Show some real evidence.

I bet you would care if someone messed up and put your name on that order. Then you would care about rights. But I guess in your mind, everyone is guilty until proved innocent (except if it is you, of course).

Right. You may want to give him his Miranda rights, assign him 13 lawyers, and drag him out in court... if and when it was even possible to ever bring him in. But in my mind, and apparently many others, he's an enemy combatant who he gave up any rights when he became a traitor. His actions render him eligible for a revocation of his U.S. citizenship, per Title 8 United States Code Sections 1481 (a)(2) and 1481 (a)(7). Since I do not see this as an assassination of a citizen, but the targeting of an enemy combatant, I do not view your question as valid. Capture if you can, kill if you must, but stop him.

So you don't think US citizens have rights? Good to know. When are you moving to North Korea? They would lkove your ideas there. Guilty until proven innocent, torture, execution of anyone Kim doesn't like by (gasp!) decree. You would love it there.

And again, I love you blind devotion to the government. I mean, all people they say are terrorists are really terrorists, right? I mean, they haven't been wrong like over 50% of the time, based on all the people they let go from Gitmo. It's not like they kidnap and torture the wrong people by accident, right? But you blindly believe, and drink the kool-aid.And what's worse, you actually like doing it. Pathetic. Just believe what you want, and ignore the rest, must make for a nice life.

How anyone can support execution of US citizens without anything is beyond me. Just shows how pathetic our citizens have become, when they blindly accept tihs to "feel safe" in that dreaded "Global war on terror".

 

[cwjerome]

No, this isn't a battlefield. A battlefield would be acutal combat. We are talking about dropping a bomb (or missle) on someone when they don't know it's coming. Way different, and you should be able to understand it.

So we disagree on what a battlefield can look like. Check.

Imagine someone wanted by the police. If the police find him, adn he pulls a gun and gets shot, thats kinda equivelent to a battlefield, and is what you are trying to claim. But the police, when they find him, can't just take as sniper and kill him from 100yards away. The police can't make him "shoot on sight". I guess you can't comprehend this.

So we disagree that this is a police action. Check.

Are you trolling? You can't be serious? What on earth do you think an executive order is?

Here, let me help you: Wiki link

You keep talking about executive orders and I have no idea why. Check.

So you don't think US citizens have rights? Good to know. When are you moving to North Korea? They would lkove your ideas there. Guilty until proven innocent, torture, execution of anyone Kim doesn't like by (gasp!) decree. You would love it there.

I never said US citizens don't have rights. You... putting words into my mouth, unable to comprehend a basic argument, and basically acting like a child. Check.

And again, I love you blind devotion to the government. I mean, all people they say are terrorists are really terrorists, right? I mean, they haven't been wrong like over 50% of the time, based on all the people they let go from Gitmo. It's not like they kidnap and torture the wrong people by accident, right? But you blindly believe, and drink the kool-aid.And what's worse, you actually like doing it. Pathetic. Just believe what you want, and ignore the rest, must make for a nice life.

More random nonsense, a fantasyland you've developed, not having anything to do with my position. Check.

How anyone can support execution of US citizens without anything is beyond me. Just shows how pathetic our citizens have become, when they blindly accept tihs to "feel safe" in that dreaded "Global war on terror".

Too bad I don't know of 'anyone who supports the execution of US citizens without anything.' If after all this that's your analysis of my position then you're operating on emotion and willful ignorance. Slow down kiddo and deep a deep breath. In case you are willing to understand my position and not just regurgitate pre-made nonsensical quips, I'll summarize for you again.

I believe this is part of our larger war against AQ (and organized, global Islamic terrorism in general) and basically a military matter. The battlespace is amorphous and exists wherever these enemies hide and operate.

I believe the targeting of a US citizen is legal in this situation because of his treasonous decision to join our wartime enemy in foreign lands and operate against the US, threatening American lives.

If you do not believe these things then I suggest you write your congressman, give your president a call, and perhaps file a lawsuit. Good luck.

 

[Noobtastic]

I can't believe what I am reading.

How can anyone support this????

Our government now has the right to murder AMERICAN CITIZENS in the name of "anti-terrorism."

How is this okay? If Americans are committing crimes then they get the American treatment: DUE PROCESS.

In Israel, every once a year an Israeli Arab or Druze is found to be an active members of Hezbollah or Hamas.

In spite of this, the government cannot go ahead and order his assassination. Why? Because he is an ISRAELI!!

Same fucking deal with America. We can't just go and kill citizens because they may or may not be members of Al-Qaeda/Taliban.

Unacceptable! Fuck you guys should just go move to Russia if you love this kind of shit.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

@cwjerome:

I am sorry you are clueless, but if you are unwilling to admit to basic FACTS, there isn't much anyone can do to talk to you, since you believe what you believe, regardless of evidence, and no one can convince you.

But again, to lay it out so everyone can see how intentionally obtuse you are:

Fact: Obama signed a Presidential order to execute this guy
Fact: Presidential orders have NO oversight, no proof needed
Fact: Nothing stops Obama from doing this on anyone
Fact: There are no facts in the media reports about oversight
Fact: Obama could write an order tomorrow with your name on it

Fact: The President is executing a US citizen by executive authority, with no due process or judicial review

If you have specific, factual evidence to refute any of this, go for it. But waving your hands, or saying "it's obvious" or "you think" doesn't cut it. Also throwing out personal attacks really shows you have nothing to argue with.

I've asked you several times for PROOF that there is oversight. You have yet to post anything

I have asked several times for your reasoning that Obama can't do this to anyone. You refuse to post anything.

You whole argument to support this is this:

You just don't get it. Proof of oversight? It's basic knowledge of a chain of command that goes up to Obama, then Congressional oversight and then constitutional muster from the court. They operate on best possible evidence. We kill our own people in combat accidentally. Mistakes happen. But to claim there is no oversight is weird. Because for some strange reason, you expect to be included in the decision making process. Does some battle captain in Afghanistan have to call you up before making his decisions as well?

You concept of oversight is basically the gov policing themselves, which isn't oversight at all. And then you write about Congressional oversight, which is not even an option, as I explained since this is an executive order.

Here is a hint:

Executive order = executive branch
Law = Legislative branch

Do you see they are different?

You will blindly believe, yes blindly, no one has proved all the accusations, this despite the governments repeated proven lies and mistakes. As I pointed out:

-Government lied about everyone at Gitmo being guilty. Over half were released and innocent.
-Government lied about WMD in Iraq. The Congressional commission found there was no evidence
-Terror watch list - It's secret, something like 200,000 people are on it, and most shouldn't be on it. Congressman have been on it mistakenly. Of course, it's secret, so they won't admit you are on it, nor will they take you off.

These are examples of MAJOR mistakes by the government, where they did and continue to be wrong >50% of the time. Which means they are less accurate then flipping a coin. Do you have anything to dispute this?

But yet you will still take their word without any proof. Pathetic. I wonder if you will take Obama's word when he says that the deficit will go down without raising taxes. Somehow I doubt it. I guess you just pick and choose what you believe in.

I doubt you will post anything, or at best throw in a few insults and some hand waving to make yourself feel better. But as a reminder, you have yet to post ANY evidence that supports your position.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Not really. If this was Bush doing it I might have a problem because of his history, bullshitting us to get us into wars. I just wouldn't trust him. On the other hand there are the Wingers who'd support Bush doing this but not Obama because they are convinced he's some kind of Muslim Marxist Nazi out to destroy Amerika.

Might? You can barely make a post without somehow bringing up Bush, neocons, wingnuts, etc. You'd think at your age you would be able to do more than call people names.

 

[blackangst1]

We are talking about capturing or killing a US citizen who has aligned himself with, and actively supports (and probably plans for) our enemies. Allowing Awlaki the freedom of movement making speeches putting his blessings on killing of Americans is tantamount of aid and abetting him. He needs killing, the sooner the better. This is not a LE issue, it is armed conflict, and he's chosen his side.

....who is STILL protected by the US Constitution. Or supposed to be.

 

[Red Dawn]

Might? You can barely make a post without somehow bringing up Bush, neocons, wingnuts, etc. You'd think at your age you would be able to do more than call people names.

Cool, I have my very own stalker

 

[cwjerome]

@cwjerome:

Fact: Obama signed a Presidential order to execute this guy
Fact: Presidential orders have NO oversight, no proof needed
Fact: Nothing stops Obama from doing this on anyone
Fact: There are no facts in the media reports about oversight
Fact: Obama could write an order tomorrow with your name on it

Fact: Obama did not sign a presidential order to execute this guy. A presidential order is an "executive order" and that has nothing to do with this issue. Obama (as Commander and Chief) made a military decision to allow the targeting of a US born citizen (who has joined our enemies overseas -a group we at war with- and actively engages in acts to threaten American lives) for "kill or capture."

I have asked several times for your reasoning that Obama can't do this to anyone. You refuse to post anything.

The argument is that this cleric has joined who we at war with in foreign lands and works with them to threaten American lives, which makes him a valid, legal target in regards to our combat operations. It's a fucking simple argument I have explained to you. Disagree, fine... but that is the reasoning and the reason behind why he cannot just do this to anyone.

It's one of those rare, situational contexts where definitions and understandings are complicated. Like when German American citizens helped the Nazis overseas... they became targets. Or even the Civil War... did Lincoln obtain permission from the courts or involve due process in the combat death of each and every Confederate KIA?

I understand it's a difficult subject and I do believe we need further clarification and possibly Federal Court "oversight" to determine constitutionality. But I agree with Obama and understand the rationale. If the Supreme Court came back tomorrow and said he cannot do it I would have no problem with that, but at this stage I tend to think Obama has a strong case.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

<I still got nothing, I can't defend what I think but I know I am right>

Well, I called, it, you still can't argue anything based on facts.

BTW, I think I found an article that you might like (and resemble):

Link

It's sad that this article is so true of so many people nowadays.

If you are so authoritarian that you are comfortable with giving the President unlimited power to execute any US citizen, well, I hope at least you are hopefully a minority, kind of like the birthers and truthers.

Because I can't imagine that anyone that actually cares about this country, just give up all concept of our constitutional rights, and basically give a blank check to the President to kill anyone he wants.

You want to give your rights up since you are afraid, fine. But don't take my rights away just because you are afraid of terrorists. I like my rights, and don't want them taken away by weak willed people that are so afraid they will do anything to feel safe.

 

[cwjerome]

Well, I called, it, you still can't argue anything based on facts.

Re-read above... I presented you the only fact that matters, the fact that invalidates your so-called facts, and basically your face got owned. All this bullshit about executive orders you're hyperventilating about doesn't exist.

If you are so authoritarian that you are comfortable with giving the President unlimited power to execute any US citizen [...] just give up all concept of our constitutional rights, and basically give a blank check to the President to kill anyone he wants.

?
And you're a dumb piece of shit that cannot come close to articulating my position. Carry on.

 

[werepossum]

This.

Anwar al-Awlaki is running for his life in Yemen supporting members of AQ, complicit with conspirators in the Cole bombing, connected to 4 9/11 hijackers, Hasan at Hood, Farouk the Under-Roos Bomber, and now Times Square.

He could voluntarily surrender and return to the US to 'argue' his innocence, or possibly be tried in abstentia.

Why give him the platform in abstentia for his 'jihad' propaganda when he has actively recruited extremists in the US with Ali Al-Timimi ?

Maybe we could paint "You have the Right to remain Silent" on the HellFire with his name on it ....
--

LOL! Works for me.

I agree. The SCOTUS should look at this and the Patriot Act as soon as possible. This is not a left vs right issue.

Yeah, it's a far left versus everybody else issue.

Interesting idea that the executive branch of our government has the power to accuse a citizen of a crime, not in any court where these facts could be adjudicated even in absentia, just accuse them, and then unilaterally decide to execute that citizen based upon that accusation alone.

This could never possibly be abused. I promise.

Not everything qualifies for a trial, no matter how much lefties like them. This is war, not wire fraud, and war does not fit into our civilian legal system. The best you can do with war is fight it by the accepted rules of war, by which this man has made himself a valid target. (Welcome back, BTW.)

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

And you're a dumb piece of shit that cannot come close to articulating my position. Carry on.

It's a free country. You want to be intentionally ignorant, it's your choice. But expect people to call you out on it.

If you would like to explain your magical concept that executing a US citizen by exectuive order is legal, and also how it will only be used on "real" terrorists (as opposed to falsely accused terrorists, or simply innocent people the someone made a mistake on), feel free to show us. Show us how he can't put a wrong person's name down. Or your name. Of course, you can't, so you will continue the insults, since that is all you have. Pathetic.

But as it stands, there is nothing, nothing that prevents Obama from putting your name down tomorrow. No law, no oversight, nothing. Sorry you are incapable of understanding that, but that's not my problem.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Yeah, it's a far left versus everybody else issue.

[

Funny how everything you disagree with becomes magically "far left". I never realized that defending the constitution is "far left". Could you enlighten us on how you came up with this amazing political concept?

I guess any R's that oppose this must be a RINO, right? Because true believers would never oppose unlimited executive authority I guess. Yep, all those republicans must all be wussy lefties in disguise.

Not everything qualifies for a trial, no matter how much lefties like them. This is war, not wire fraud, and war does not fit into our civilian legal system. The best you can do with war is fight it by the accepted rules of war, by which this man has made himself a valid target. (Welcome back, BTW.)

A US citizen commits a crime, which is what this guy is accused of (note to you, note the "accused" part). You can't determine guilt or innocent without a trial, which he hasn't had.

You commit a crime, you get a trial. He commits a crime, he gets a trial. You may not like the laws of this country, but you are required to abide by them, just like everyone, including the President. Still not sure how following the law is somehow "far left", but I guess you must have gotten that from Beck or Rush or someone, and are just blindly repeating that phrase.

 

[Red Dawn]

It's a free country. You want to be intentionally ignorant, it's your choice. But expect people to call you out on it.

If you would like to explain your magical concept that executing a US citizen by exectuive order is legal, and also how it will only be used on "real" terrorists (as opposed to falsely accused terrorists, or simply innocent people the someone made a mistake on), feel free to show us. Show us how he can't put a wrong person's name down. Or your name. Of course, you can't, so you will continue the insults, since that is all you have. Pathetic.

But as it stands, there is nothing, nothing that prevents Obama from putting your name down tomorrow. No law, no oversight, nothing. Sorry you are incapable of understanding that, but that's not my problem.

Lets see, this isn't being done in secret, it's well publicized. If any of us were put on that hit list and we were not aiding and abetting the enemy like that traitor there's no way they'd get away with it. Now if this was done in secret it would be a totally different story.

Of course if this guy wants to avoid getting killed all he has to do is turn himself in, he'll be given a fair trial. This is no different than some murderer on the lam who's apprehension is preffered but if he resists then he suffers the consequences.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Lets see, this isn't being done in secret, it's well publicized. If any of us were put on that hit list and we were not aiding and abetting the enemy like that traitor there's no way they'd get away with it. Now if this was done in secret it would be a totally different story.

Of course if this guy wants to avoid getting killed all he has to do is turn himself in, he'll be given a fair trial. This is no different than some murderer on the lam who's apprehension is preffered but if he resists then he suffers the consequences.

So it's OK for the President to unilaterally order the execution of a US citizen, as long as he says we are doing it, instead of secretly doing it? Really? That's your defense?

Since when does secret or not have any bearing on legality? Oh right, it doesn't.

You may not like it, but he is a US citizen, just like all of us. You don't get to treat him differently just because of you call him a terrorist. He probably is, but he is a US citizen, and gets all his rights. Abide by the laws of this country.

 

[Red Dawn]

So it's OK for the President to unilaterally order the execution of a US citizen, as long as he says we are doing it, instead of secretly doing it? Really? That's your defense?

Since when does secret or not have any bearing on legality? Oh right, it doesn't.

You may not like it, but he is a US citizen, just like all of us. You don't get to treat him differently just because of you call him a terrorist. He probably is, but he is a US citizen, and gets all his rights. Abide by the laws of this country.

He's not being treated any differently than a wanted murderer or traitor.

 

[Tristicus]

We should do this more often.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

He's not being treated any differently than a wanted murderer or traitor.

That's total bullshit, and you know it. Since when does the police issue a "shoot on sight" for an ACCUSED murderer, let alone a convicted murderer.

Tell me when sniper teams have deployed across a city to hunt for a murderer, and when they see him, they execute him on sight regardless of what he is doing.

You want to post some examples of this happening? We'll be waiting.

 

[Red Dawn]

That's total bullshit, and you know it. Since when does the police issue a "shoot on sight" for an ACCUSED murderer, let alone a convicted murderer.

Tell me when sniper teams have deployed across a city to hunt for a murderer, and when they see him, they execute him on sight regardless of what he is doing.

You want to post some examples of this happening? We'll be waiting.

Easy, anytime there's a Cop Killer on the loose. Also traitors in the time of war are always targeted.

 

[nick1985]

That's total bullshit, and you know it. Since when does the police issue a "shoot on sight" for an ACCUSED murderer, let alone a convicted murderer.

Tell me when sniper teams have deployed across a city to hunt for a murderer, and when they see him, they execute him on sight regardless of what he is doing.

You want to post some examples of this happening? We'll be waiting.

Dude, that happens all the time as Red pointed out.


lol

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Easy, anytime there's a Cop Killer on the loose. Also traitors in the time of war are always targeted.

Please post a link where a police agency or FBI was after a suspect, and executed him without trying to arrest him. Show us when they publicly announce a "shoot on sight" order saying don't even bother trying to arrset him, just kill him.

Otherwise, I call bullshit. And don't post something where someone tried to resist, and got shot. I mean a suspect was walking on the street, and was gunned down by the FBI/police.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Dude, that happens all the time as Red pointed out.


lol

I was walking in a mall last week and BAM the guys head next to me exploded. Sniper picked him off. Scared the hell out of me but it happens more than you think. Only thing that sucked is that the cops refused to pay my dry cleaning bill. Turns out the guy was shoplifting. Doubt he'll try that again!

 

[Red Dawn]

Please post a link where a police agency or FBI was after a suspect, and executed him without trying to arrest him. Show us when they publicly announce a "shoot on sight" order saying don't even bother trying to arrset him, just kill him.

Otherwise, I call bullshit. And don't post something where someone tried to resist, and got shot. I mean a suspect was walking on the street, and was gunned down by the FBI/police.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dillinger

 

[Fear No Evil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dillinger

Red was actually in Dillinger's gang. :twisted: