Discussion 3 - Killing a US citizen

[Blanca BusaLess]

He was an American citizen and no matter where he was his rights still apply to our system of justice.
I dont speak Yemeni so I can't say he was a terrorist. Was he outspoken against the USA amd it's govt and policies? Yes. Was he ever tied directly to any acts of terrorism or did he just talk alot of anti us crap on the Internet? I personally don't know. Our govt used his location and their propaganda to justify assassinating him. Would they have killed him if he had been living in and broadcasting from Arkansas? It is a dangerous practice to partake in when you target and kill individuals. How will we ever be able to complain when somebody does the same to a person we like? If Al Qaeda targets and kills a US senator or congressman in same style assassination how will we be able to say it ain't right?

All I know about Awlaki is what I've heard from the media. They say he praised the guy who shot all the troops on base last year. They say he praised the attacks on 9/11. I think they said he was somehow connected to the attack on the Uss Cole. They say alot of things about him. Are they true? I don't know. The media can say anything they want about anybody and within 24 hours a good guy can be seen as the devil.
Targeted assassinations on the whole I do not agree with.
Like Busa1166 says why can't they just disappear? Why make it public? Why have CNN brag about it?

Was Awlaki a bad guy and did he deserve what he got? Most likely.
But we brought back an American Taliban John Walker Lindh I think was his name. This guy actually fought against our troops and may have killed one or two along the way. Because he was an American they brought him back and put him on trial. Awlaki talked alot online and he got whacked.
But you look at the alternative. Arrest him, put him on trial where he may speak in his defense and influence more to his cause. Put him in prison where he would certainly have gained more followers or kill him on foreign soil amd move on? Tough decisions for a tough world we live in.

 

[dadofthree]

He was a terrorist. By the way they got two american born terrorist last week.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

What exactly is a 'Terrorist'? Does going online and talking in Anti American trains of thought make you one?
If you ideologically agree with someone who attacks or has attacked the USA does that make you one?
At what point in time does what you are doing cross the line from exercising your freedom of speech to becoming a terrorist? Can you be or become a terrorist just from things you may write or say without any physical actions? I say freedom of speech because in this case Awlaki was a citizen and had those rights. I believe the only way you lose your rights is if you in writing forfeit your citizenship. Being an American carries alot of weight when you are abroad. I may be wrong but I think you'd still have your rights as an American if you were in Yemen. Due to things he said maybe our govt revoked his?

I know there are many things that can make you a criminal but I wonder what makes one a terrorist?

 

[Spkrdctr]

The Federal Govt kills people without trial quite regularly. Randy Weaver, The people in Waco TX. Scores of others in raids. It is WAY, WAY too late to get excited about the Govt whacking US Citizens. Get on the wrong side of the law and the FBI/ATF will take you out without a care in the world. Heck, TSA does the job on people almost daily. Not killing, but ignoring their rights and treating them like third worlders.

 

[kitchener rider]

I beleave these guys know the odds and there is only two outcomes, one is death and in their minds they win if they live or die. They win both ways because if they are alive they keep preaching if they are killed they become a god to the thousands of others that are now pissed off even more at the u.s.. Do I think this guy got what he deserved, sure I do. Its also better than the costly trial and jail cell he was entitled to. There is a judicial system in the military that seems to be missing here. He got what he deserved but it was wrong. Best part of it is after they announced it cnn was hard at the fear war saying increased threat. Your media is an effing joke... but I cant complain aslong as there is war I stayed employed and with the united states always sticking its nose where its not needed I will never be unemployed.

 

[BUSA CRUSEN]

You guys are nuts! We shouldn't have killed him, YET. Send the Delta boys in there to give him a free ride back to the U.S. Next we would have to make a small exception to the Cruel and Unusual Punishment in the Constitution to allow it for him. I would then want to put him in on a trailer touring every U.S. town so everyone could throw crap at him, spit in his face, or whatever. When that is done we could take a democratic vote on how to finish him off.
These people are wanting to kill every man woman and child inside our country (minus the muslims we already got). Why do people have so much sympathy for terrorists when they want to chop off the head of your wife/husband/son/daughter/brother/sister/mother/father?
Maybe we should just give all these pieces of garbage the trial they deserve in our country. We could bring them halfway over on a ship, then let them try to swim the rest of the way. They won't get one ounce of sympathy from me.

 

[Bosshound]

Ok, Then we should have revoked his Citizenship from the United States, then Killed the Mother Fudger. As Long as he was a Citizen he had rights like you and I. When we start breaking our own rules then how can we expect other countries to Embrace Democracy ? Or Respect the United States and its Constitution.........

 

[VIPER]

he renounced his citizenship himself. thats the plan simple facts. when you openly support and declare war against your own country you have renounced your citizenship and there for have no right.

 

[chrisjp]

my argument is at what point are you considered an enemy of the state...citizen or not. if we let the government and the media decide for us...we are screwed so captain....no we did not have the right to assassinate at will on our own citizen...serial killers were more direct in killing US citizens than im sure he was. rant rave plan ..but did he execute his rants..raves...plans...or did he goad others into doing it for him...again....criminals in the united states have killed more citizens in week than i bet this one guy actually accomplished. lets say malcom x was a terrorist...he supported uprising against the government and citizens. lets say your local militia. you seriously don't think you are changing the government by voting in a two party system that only removes 1/3? so if you speak out against the government ...plan for the inevitable that EVERY government has experienced to bring about change for the good of the people...WE THEN CAN BE ALL DEFINED AS TERRORISTS if we let the government go unchecked in its decision making. so NO THIS WAS NOT RIGHT. our laws state all men deserve fair trial...if he was in the middle of picking up his ak or cell phone to detonate a bomb...no...rights went out the window...was he targeted during a attack....no....i believe he was a bad person that got just as bad people to do his dirty work for him....he is a accomplice unless someone was given the opportunity to present proof of him IN ACTION pulling the trigger...building the bomb...otherwise he was a consultant. due process not arbitrarily designating

 

[Deal]

There's an interesting angle of this argument that seems like it's being overlooked by some, and taken as a given by others. I don't think any of us think that a person who sets out to deliberately and maliciously destroy our way of life should be allowed to continue. The issue here Is not about whether any of us wants to see this individual or his set of ideals supported by our legal system, but rather about the level of danger involved when we allow any set of circumstances or justifications to allow us to bypass due process of law. In other words, if you have a danger, and everyone agrees to allow the threat or appearance of that danger to justify bypassing a persons rights, how far out of hand could it get? Right now we can probably all agree, more or less, that threatening and/or comitting violence on innocent Americans for the purpose of bringing down the entire nation is probably not something we're ok with. On the other hand, if we say that anything that threatens the nation allows us to just go take somebody out, what happens when disagreeing with your current president, senator, governor, mayor, whatever begins to constitute a "threat to the nation"? I mean, they were duly elected, right? So therefore they must directly represent America and everything it stands for, right?

In any case, I'm perfectly happy to see this guy removed from the global equation. I don't think tut this level of behavior is acceptable. Disagreeing is one thing, attacking people who have moving to do with the things you are protesting is a while bother issue... I just wanted to provide some food for thought to those who figure that as soon as you label someone a terrorist, it's Ok to go take them out. It's not the action itself that's problematic, it's the potential precedent being set...

 

[RYC1966]

The old phrase of on the ranch or off the ranch comes to mind...it is a group men + women who do things many people want to do and many people can't do...it is in the best interest of a group of leaders do what they can with the info that they have right or wrong for a given culture...laws aside when thoughts change and the high rollers decide that the players in the game need to be changed some bad things happen. I cannot say enough that I support what I believe in and at the same time I don't know what will happen next but I feel it is in my best interest to agree for the sake of people doing what they do under given orders. War has changed from wearing armor and standing in a line for a formal greeting...if cultures could see the differences and stay away from each other for their own reasons there is so much to gain. The hardest class to keep my mouth shut was the history of religion...I am not right or wrong with my beliefs but many people will die for their culture and that is a high degree of honor for those that believe the same way. A bad apple is a bad apple no matter where it is.

 

[jellyrug]

He was an American citizen and no matter where he was his rights still apply to our system of justice.
I dont speak Yemeni so I can't say he was a terrorist. Was he outspoken against the USA amd it's govt and policies? Yes. Was he ever tied directly to any acts of terrorism or did he just talk alot of anti us crap on the Internet? I personally don't know. Our govt used his location and their propaganda to justify assassinating him. Would they have killed him if he had been living in and broadcasting from Arkansas? It is a dangerous practice to partake in when you target and kill individuals. How will we ever be able to complain when somebody does the same to a person we like? If Al Qaeda targets and kills a US senator or congressman in same style assassination how will we be able to say it ain't right?

All I know about Awlaki is what I've heard from the media. They say he praised the guy who shot all the troops on base last year. They say he praised the attacks on 9/11. I think they said he was somehow connected to the attack on the Uss Cole. They say alot of things about him. Are they true? I don't know. The media can say anything they want about anybody and within 24 hours a good guy can be seen as the devil.
Targeted assassinations on the whole I do not agree with.
Like Busa1166 says why can't they just disappear? Why make it public? Why have CNN brag about it?

Was Awlaki a bad guy and did he deserve what he got? Most likely.
But we brought back an American Taliban John Walker Lindh I think was his name. This guy actually fought against our troops and may have killed one or two along the way. Because he was an American they brought him back and put him on trial. Awlaki talked alot online and he got whacked.
But you look at the alternative. Arrest him, put him on trial where he may speak in his defense and influence more to his cause. Put him in prison where he would certainly have gained more followers or kill him on foreign soil amd move on? Tough decisions for a tough world we live in.

Blanca, this is a quote from expedia:

"The War on Terror (also known as the Global War on Terror or the War on Terrorism) is a term commonly applied to an international military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom with the support of other North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) as well as non-NATO countries. Originally, the campaign was waged against al-Qaeda and other militant organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.[1]

The phrase War on Terror was first used by US President George W. Bush and other high-ranking US officials to denote a global military, political, legal and ideological struggle against organizations designated as terrorist and regimes that were accused of having a connection to them or providing them with support or were perceived, or presented as posing a threat to the US and its allies in general. It was typically used with a particular focus on militant Islamists and al-Qaeda.

Although the term is not officially used by the administration of US President Barack Obama (which instead uses the term Overseas Contingency Operation), it is still commonly used by politicians, in the media and officially by some aspects of government, such as the United States' Global War on Terrorism Service Medal."

Are there international laws, federal laws, or constitional writings that prohibits the use of "War on Terror", or "Oveseas Contingency Operations" should someone from your own country be perceived as a "Terrorist" or "Militant Organisation" threat, or otherwise be perceived as fighting with a terrorist regime from Islamic soil?

Is "assasination" and "war" the same thing, or are they totally differrent?

 

[TWT racer]

Off with his head! No need for due process for terrorists...American citizens or not.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Well..... about time someone said like it is Charlie, or.... SHOULD BE at least !!!
With all this "due process" going on because this **** was a US citizen, you can only imagine what all the recruiters are saying now. "perfect, we've got all these homegrown boys here, lets use them so they can't prosecute us"
FYI, this is only getting worst

 

[BusaBret]

Stallone's character in Cobra, " as long as we have to play by these bull**** rules and they dont we are gonna lose"

Posted at 150 mph via Tapatalk

 

[RussellJ]

Punishment for treason is death? Correct? I dont think we needed a trial to prove him guilty

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

Punishment for treason is death? Correct? I dont think we needed a trial to prove him guilty

So Russ other than Internet hate speech and public anti American statements what are the crimes he committed a trial would not be needed for? just asking. I only know him as one more guy CNN has labeled bad.

 

[E Zurcher]

If you take up arms against the United States and are a US citizen you are a traitor and should be hanged by the neck until dead.

Those arms may be an airplane, bomb or words that lead others to do the same.

I say Kill them all and let God sort them out. Hell kill them all anyway! F****N Terrorists!

 

[jellyrug]

So Russ other than Internet hate speech and public anti American statements what are the crimes he committed a trial would not be needed for? just asking. I only know him as one more guy CNN has labeled bad.

He was not a prisoner of war, as he was not captured, so a trial was not possible.

Other than what you know from CNN, there is more:

Evidence that he was a Regional Commander for al-Qaeda in 2009, something he himself did not hesitate to proclaim.

The Yemeni government began trying him in absentia in November 2010, for plotting to kill foreigners and being a member of al-Qaeda, and a Yemenite judge ordered that he be captured "dead or alive"

With a blog, a Facebook page, and many YouTube videos, he had been described as the "bin Laden of the Internet". U.S. President Barack Obama described Awlaki as "the leader of external operations for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula".

In short, Awlaki knew exactly what he was doing, had full opportunity to clean the slate from wrong perceptions if he so wished and he did not hide his intentions.

 

[RussellJ]

So Russ other than Internet hate speech and public anti American statements what are the crimes he committed a trial would not be needed for? just asking. I only know him as one more guy CNN has labeled bad.

Well from the fact he openly denounced us and his hate for the US by joining a terror organization I think is enough.

 

[Blanca BusaLess]

So now anyone who 'denounces' us, whatever that means or anyone who is a member of a 'terrorist' group can be targeted and killed without consequence?


I'm not in any way supporting Awlaki. I'm just trying to see where and or how we draw the line between just an enemy and someone we actively seek to kill. Not everyone agrees with us. There are militia groups here in the USA who have denounced us and sworn to do us harm. Can they be killed too? If his name had been Seamus O'grady would the same have happened to him? Is our govt more scared of and quicker to act when it's a 'terrorist' of Muslim origin?

On the supportive side. I think it incredibly awesome that we have the capability to take anyone out at anytime and do it with minimal civilian injuries.