PDA

View Full Version : US APPROVES ASSASSINATION OF OWN CITIZENS...WITHOUT TRIAL


zakmac12
07-Apr-10, 18:31
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of an American citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is believed to have shifted from encouraging attacks on the United States to directly participating in them, intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Tuesday.

Mr. Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and spent years in the United States as an imam, is in hiding in Yemen. He has been the focus of intense scrutiny since he was linked to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., in November, and then to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25.

American counterterrorism officials say Mr. Awlaki is an operative of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate of the terror network in Yemen and Saudi Arabia. They say they believe that he has become a recruiter for the terrorist network, feeding prospects into plots aimed at the United States and at Americans abroad, the officials said.

It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said. A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president.

But the director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, told a House hearing in February that such a step was possible. “We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community,” he said. “If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.” He did not name Mr. Awlaki as a target.

The step taken against Mr. Awlaki, which occurred earlier this year, is a vivid illustration of his rise to prominence in the constellation of terrorist leaders. But his popularity as a cleric, whose lectures on Islamic scripture have a large following among English-speaking Muslims, means any action against him could rebound against the United States in the larger ideological campaign against Al Qaeda.

The possibility that Mr. Awlaki might be added to the target list was reported by The Los Angeles Times in January, and Reuters reported on Tuesday that he was approved for capture or killing.

“The danger Awlaki poses to this country is no longer confined to words,” said an American official, who like other current and former officials interviewed for this article spoke of the classified counterterrorism measures on the condition of anonymity. “He’s gotten involved in plots.”

The official added: “The United States works, exactly as the American people expect, to overcome threats to their security, and this individual — through his own actions — has become one. Awlaki knows what he’s done, and he knows he won’t be met with handshakes and flowers. None of this should surprise anyone.”

As a general principle, international law permits the use of lethal force against individuals and groups that pose an imminent threat to a country, and officials said that was the standard used in adding names to the list of targets. In addition, Congress approved the use of military force against Al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. People on the target list are considered to be military enemies of the United States and therefore not subject to the ban on political assassination first approved by President Gerald R. Ford.

Both the C.I.A. and the military maintain lists of terrorists linked to Al Qaeda and its affiliates who are approved for capture or killing, former officials said. But because Mr. Awlaki is an American, his inclusion on those lists had to be approved by the National Security Council, the officials said.

At a panel discussion in Washington on Tuesday, Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California and chairwoman of a House subcommittee on homeland security, called Mr. Awlaki “probably the person, the terrorist, who would be terrorist No. 1 in terms of threat against us.”

See...I just remember learning about something called...oh what was that scrap of paper? Oh yes, the CONSTITUTION. And a little part saying nobody would be deprived of life...liberty...and property without a trial...

Oh well, who cares about that outdated little scrap of paper?

Mantis
07-Apr-10, 18:32
Jesus, seems Obama is taking matters into his own hands, and it's not going to be pretty.

zakmac12
07-Apr-10, 18:40
What happens when a government breaks its own rules...?

Mantis
07-Apr-10, 18:47
What happens when a government breaks its own rules...?

I call shenanigans on them?

Kevin
07-Apr-10, 19:52
What happens when a government breaks its own rules...?

http://api.ning.com/files/9PqBdxmrmAmiMq-kbkrvisUjKm1SCRy083opRjbBxKk1HVJfB9TJjWjTEJsWuaAY4 HU6XoKGSLuDSmPRbpN4htsy9Y26Zm2D/revolution.jpg

And damn it Zak, I came here to post this. Seems the tables have turned eh?

zakmac12
07-Apr-10, 20:09
And damn it Zak, I came here to post this. Seems the tables have turned eh?

We are one and one we are.

It is for the collective good.

Clearly.

Jesse the Great Tsar
07-Apr-10, 22:30
We are one and one we are.

It is for the collective good.

Clearly.

Lol, I wonder what you're referencing...

CCCP
07-Apr-10, 23:24
Zak, your pretty philosophical and everything, but do you really think there could ever be a successful coup in the US? I sure don't. Conspiracy theories can and could be true, but I don't think they are. You may think of me as stupid, but I believe almost everything the government tells me I'm a very patriotic person. Also, is your source credible?

President Camacho
08-Apr-10, 00:32
CCCP has it right, the US is never going to change, it will stay the same or collapse. my money is on collapse.

Mantis
08-Apr-10, 04:23
I'd like to see a coup in the US. get rid of the currently piece of shit government and try to pull the country from it's hole, but I doubt it will happen, sadly.

AiRsTrIkE
08-Apr-10, 07:21
I'd like to see a coup in the US. get rid of the currently piece of shit government and try to pull the country from it's hole, but I doubt it will happen, sadly.

Oh no, I wouldn't mind living in the United Socialist States of America at all. Definately not. I wasn't using those liberties anyways. Free press? Doesn't exist anyways. Bear arms? Hell, it's illegal to have a pistol here in Chicago, no harm there. So why the hell not just change our name and elect Obama for life?

Mantis
08-Apr-10, 13:03
Oh no, I wouldn't mind living in the United Socialist States of America at all. Definately not. I wasn't using those liberties anyways. Free press? Doesn't exist anyways. Bear arms? Hell, it's illegal to have a pistol here in Chicago, no harm there. So why the hell not just change our name?

Because Obama would have you lol killed if you so much as wrote it?

MerX Back 91
08-Apr-10, 16:34
Terrorists have rights?

USSA!

zakmac12
08-Apr-10, 17:37
Terrorists have rights?

USSA!

He's still a citizen. He still has a right to a fair trial. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

zakmac12
08-Apr-10, 17:42
Also, is your source credible?

Last time I checked, the New York Times is credible. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/world/middleeast/07yemen.html?hp)

Zak, your pretty philosophical and everything, but do you really think there could ever be a successful coup in the US? I sure don't. Conspiracy theories can and could be true, but I don't think they are. You may think of me as stupid, but I believe almost everything the government tells me I'm a very patriotic person.

If the world were perfect, I'd take the Jeffersonian approach and say that once the government gets too corrupt and too unconstitutional, then the people will rise up and overthrow it and reinstate a constitutional government.

Realistically, I don't think that's the case.

If there were a "revolution", it wouldn't be a coup, it'd be a full out revolution, the nation would collapse, the government would restructure, good chance a dictatorship would pop up in its place and so on and so forth.

And I don't trust the government, they are out for one thing, preserving the status quo, preserving their power. They have a very poor record (http://www.amazon.com/Lies-Government-Told-You-Deception/dp/1595552669) as far as truths go.

I wouldn't say that you're stupid, not at all, naive, possibly, not stupid.

Freet
08-Apr-10, 17:48
Trial huh?

So all we have to do is send this guy a summons.

Good plan.

zakmac12
08-Apr-10, 17:53
Trial huh?

So all we have to do is send this guy a summons.

Good plan.

Try to capture him.

If he fights back with lethal force, shoot him and kill him.

It's not that complicated.

He's still a US citizen, if we start to disregard rights for certain people on assumed evidence, then what's next?

Mantis
08-Apr-10, 17:54
And if he's done nothing, then they should have no problem capturing him, because innocent people usually don't fight back.

Freet
08-Apr-10, 17:56
Capturing him is one thing...getting him back to the US to stand trial might be a whole nother issue.

Snuffy the Evil
09-Apr-10, 15:32
Didn't he renounce his US citizenship a while ago? He's a member of al-Qaeda, right? Doesn't that make him an enemy combatant, and therefore legal to be shot?

Mantis
09-Apr-10, 15:37
Didn't he renounce his US citizenship a while ago? He's a member of al-Qaeda, right? Doesn't that make him an enemy combatant, and therefore legal to be shot?

Not technically, if they find him unarmed and not trying to go all jihad on them, they aren't supposed to be allowed to shoot him, but with Americans, you never know what will happen.

President Camacho
09-Apr-10, 19:29
Didn't he renounce his US citizenship a while ago? He's a member of al-Qaeda, right? Doesn't that make him an enemy combatant, and therefore legal to be shot?

firstly, there is no such thing as al-Qeada.

secondly, the dude is in Yemen, the only reason the president needed to give the call was because he's from america and somebody asked. threats are threats no matter where they come from.

Thrasher9294
09-Apr-10, 20:47
ITT: Emo faggots who will take everything for the worst also fags

Mantis
09-Apr-10, 20:50
ITT: Emo faggots who will take everything for the worst also fags

ITT?

President Camacho
10-Apr-10, 23:32
ITT: Emo faggots who will take everything for the worst also fags

seriously, go back to 4chan.

Thrasher9294
11-Apr-10, 00:53
seriously, go back to 4chan.

you know because the only people who say itt are there

also, I could say retarded shit and do everything for the lulz on some shitty website but oh wait

Also, this place is pretty much the equivalent of a shitbowl just like 4chan.

I could be a fag, spewing memes and how "OMG BOXXY IS LIEK THE HAWT ADVICE DOWG ITS A NEW MEME LOL I LISTEN TO METAL MUSIC NOSTALGIA YOU LOSE" but I don't, and I won't.

There's a difference, and apparently saying "IN THIS THREAD" OMG HORRIBLE YOURE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL WEBSITE
wouldnt be the first site you've ruined

I'm not Goro this time
11-Apr-10, 05:01
There's also a difference between typing in caps all the time and actually contributing.

Freet
11-Apr-10, 05:59
you know because the only people who say itt are there

also, I could say retarded shit and do everything for the lulz on some shitty website but oh wait

Also, this place is pretty much the equivalent of a shitbowl just like 4chan.

I've said this before but it bares repeating....How "good or bad" a forum might be is due directly to it's members and how they choose to contribute. Some actually care enough to give some thought to their posts and how they will be perceived by others. We call these people contributors. We like these types and do what we can to keep them around. Others just spew shit to get attention. Most of the shit spewers complain about, well, everything, but can't be bothered to help correct the problems. We call these guys trolls. We tell trolls to go fuck themselves.

I could be a fag, spewing memes and how "OMG BOXXY IS LIEK THE HAWT ADVICE DOWG ITS A NEW MEME LOL I LISTEN TO METAL MUSIC NOSTALGIA YOU LOSE" but I don't, and I won't.

Read above.


There's a difference, and apparently saying "IN THIS THREAD" OMG HORRIBLE YOURE RUINING THIS BEAUTIFUL WEBSITE
wouldnt be the first site you've ruined

So you are trying to ruin this site? Are you doing so because I deleted your thread?

Mantis
11-Apr-10, 13:24
You want 4chan? You can't handle 4chan!