Call me a hard-line conservative (although not a Whiskey Rebellion Partier!) but I find it unacceptable that the U.S. government has ordered the assassination of a U.S. citizen without a trial. Times of London today:
The Obama Administration has taken the unprecedented step of authorising the killing of a US citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, linked to the plot to blow up a US airliner on Christmas Day.
This comes on top of the administration’s assertion that based on a Presidential finding it can jail anyone it pleases indefinitely without charge, and kidnap them abroad and send them to third countries for interrogation, indefinite imprisonment, or God knows what. Glenn Greenwald laid bare the consequences of the first position in Salon in January:
[T]he administration is claiming the power to imprison whomever it wants without charges whenever it believes that — even in the face of the horrendously broad “material support for terrorism” laws the Congress has enacted — it cannot prove in any tribunal that the individual has actually done anything wrong. They are simply decreed by presidential fiat to be “too dangerous to release.” Perhaps worst of all, it converts what was once a leading prong in the radical Bush/Cheney assault on the Constitution — the Presidential power to indefinitely imprison people without charges — into complete bipartisan consensus, permanently removed from the realm of establishment controversy.
As to rendition, in case you forgot, LA Times from February of last year:
Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States.
My problem with all of this is that, as Lord Acton observed, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” We left the kingly power of life and death over one’s subjects in the dustbin of history long ago in this country, and rightly so. These policies show contempt for the rule of law, and imply a world of trouble for all of us down the road.
joets says
I think it would be way more fun to drag him back here before we kill him.
bob-neer says
From Instaputz:
<
p>
jconway says
This is incredibly troubling and anyone who considers themself pro-life or in favor of a limited government should be troubled by this, alongside anyone who favors civil liberties. The constitution still applies-using your logic JoeTS why not just shot criminals in the street without a trial? I am sorry but thats gestapo territory right there.
joets says
Jeez…I assumed that what you guys would imply from “drag him back here” I meant a trail… did you think I meant drag him back here and just pop him behind a shed? What would be the point of that?
smadin says
…is that you think there’s anything “fun” about any part of this.
kirth says
who went to the head to have a cigarette, and when asked about the smoke smell, stupidly joked that he was trying to set his shoe on fire?
<
p>Resets the bar for when we use deadly force, if Aravosis has his way.
howland-lew-natick says
I’m reminded of the story about boiling live frogs. Just put them in a pot of temped water and slowly increase the temperature until they boil. They don’t jump out because they get used to the temperature – and then it’s too late. So the story goes…
<
p>No doubt the story of executive approved assassination was released for the media to get tacit approval by the mass of voters to show that this part of the Bush-Obama administration is just as tough as the first part. How many voters will say “Finally crackin’ down on them terrorists? Maybe he ain’t no Mooslem after all!”
<
p>Ah, yes, “Guantanamo houses the worst of the worst.” and then it turns out a shade different. WMD? Saddam and Osama buddies? And on and on…
<
p>What we’re looking at is the water in our own cauldron increasing. How soon before other enemies of the state are targeted? What about the bloggers? Raising questions, causing doubt as to the quality of our leaders. Not trusting in what they are told. Is this not treason?
<
p>{Hmmm, all those guys on the front lawn dressed in black space suits… Why all the M-16s? Is it rabbit season or duck season? I’ll just close my eyes and enjoy the hot tub…}
lasthorseman says
Is the SWAT team on their way.
couves says
Obama is sending enemy combatants to US civilian courts while authorizing the assassination of a US citizen. You can’t say he wears an ideological straightjacket, can you?
<
p>I thought Scott Brown was over the top in calling for treating US Citizens (found in the US) as enemy combatants. Is Obama trying to reach across the aisle with this? This announcement seemed to coincide with his new nuclear weapons policy that has been under fire from the right. Is the timing (but not the decision) meant to deflect criticism by looking pragmatic and tough? It just seems odd to me that this decision would even be announced prior to actually carrying out the killing.