US Born Yemen mullah Anwar Awlaki now shovelling coal

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I saw a show last night where the subject of the constitutionality of his assassination was raised. The government says it's legal. When asked under what authority, they can't comment because the authority is classified.

He wasn't in the US Army, or in the US Navy at the time, so that exclusion fails. So it appears his Constitutional rights were violated.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I saw a show last night where the subject of the constitutionality of his assassination was raised. The government says it's legal. When asked under what authority, they can't comment because the authority is classified.

The US lost its cherry long ago. She can't wear white, and pretend she is a virgin anymore.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The US lost its cherry long ago. She can't wear white, and pretend she is a virgin anymore.

Benny said it best, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Benny said it best, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

I blame all the vegans. America should enjoy a juicy burger once in a while, without having to pretend it's tofu.

[Captain Oates 911]

The US is at war with terrorists - terrorists as defined by people who are actively engaged in attacking the USA and Americans at home and abroad.

In ww2, the US and Britain (governments), thought nothing of killing 30,000 or 100,000 people in one night - and most of those were civilians who had never plotted to attack the US. Examples - Hamburg/Dresden/Hiroshima

US cops kill US Citizens every week because those people threaten the lives of cops or others

This Malarky geezer was plotting to kill people in the USA and so was more deserving of being killed than ww2 civilians or some convenience shop robber armed with a 22 pistol

In other words, it was no more than what people read in their local paper every week where a cop kills someone to protect themselves or others from a lethal threat. Cops can only do that where peaceful arrest is not practicable and that was certainly the case here.

I believe the Moslem outrage on VJ and generally, is more to do with this guy's religion than any primary concern for the US constitution which is a smokescreen - and the constitution affords no protection for US Citizens actively attempting to kill other US Citizens in circumstances where arrest is impracticable.

I applaud the US government for their actions in killing deviant Moslems and anyone else who is actively engaged in the terror killing of Americans and I urge them to do more.

Moslems living in the West would aid the assimilation of themselves and their families if they were to join me in that thought.

If they are ambivalent, or talk convoluted weasel words, they encourage and foster red neck Moslem haters. Be clear which side you are on because at the moment you are not clear.

Panam flight 103 passed directly over my house in the UK, nine minutes before the passengers were blown into the freezing dark night sky at 36,000 feet. This kind of terrorism is just horrible and if the perpetrators cannot be arrested because they are armed and dangerous, they should be stopped by the usual law enforcement action before they can kill any more.

Bonny and Clyde (US Citizens) got theirs (from the gov), and Malarky got his. That is all that happened here and it was quite unremarkable in reality.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I believe the Moslem outrage on VJ and generally, is more to do with this guy's religion than any primary concern for the US constitution which is a smokescreen

You believe it, Alan, but can you prove it? No. However, a mixed group of people have expressed concern about the constitutionality of the killing, not just Muslims. You haven't offered any motive for why the non-Muslims disagree with you. Why not?

You only hone in on "the Moslems", as usual. I'm Muslim, and I haven't stated an opinion on the killing. IR5 is Muslim, and he seems to agree with you. Are you lumping us in with "the Moslems" anyway coz we're all alike to you?

If you have a disagreement with someone and you criticize them, why don't you focus your criticism on that person or persons rather than making it sound like you're criticizing the entire 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet. That would at least make a create a bright line between you and bigots, who are being critical of an entire group based on the actions or opinions of a few.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Sofiyya

[skiptex 225]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/30/worshippers-at-al-awlakis-old-mosque-not-glad-hes-dead-but-its-helpful/

CNN Story from his former Mosque

[Captain Oates 911]

You believe it, Alan, but can you prove it? No. However, a mixed group of people have expressed concern about the constitutionality of the killing, not just Muslims. You haven't offered any motive for why the non-Muslims disagree with you. Why not?

You only hone in on "the Moslems", as usual. I'm Muslim, and I haven't stated an opinion on the killing. IR5 is Muslim, and he seems to agree with you. Are you lumping us in with "the Moslems" anyway coz we're all alike to you?

If you have a disagreement with someone and you criticize them, why don't you focus your criticism on that person or persons rather than making it sound like you're criticizing the entire 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet. That would at least make a create a bright line between you and bigots, who are being critical of an entire group based on the actions or opinions of a few.

To try and ignore the religion of this guy and the part that a corrupted version of Islam plays in the war on terrorism is simply stretching credibility too far

This whole thing is an issue which involves Islam at its very core and you know it and so does the rest of the world.

I still don't hear you arguing with my examples of say, Bonny and Clyde - you never ever engage or answer any of these issues but simply try to keep focus on Moslems as victims of prejudice - because that is your only agenda and you are not interested in making comparisons with other law enforcement actions or wartime situations etc

Your unwillingness to leave your core agenda shows all your posts to be off topic because you simply wont debate the points which concern whether this killing was any different to the killing of US Citizens by the government on a daily basis when that person cannot be peacefully apprehended

Why wont you discuss that ? After all this rather transparent ducking and diving, you cannot blame me and others for doubting your motives in not condemning what this guy was engaged in or suggesting how he could have been peacefully arrested - and you haven't !

Until you do, you deserve my suspicions about the degree to which you disapprove of him

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Despite the fact that you appended your response to my post, none of this addresses anything in it.

Try following your own advice, bro.

To try and ignore the religion of this guy and the part that a corrupted version of Islam plays in the war on terrorism is simply stretching credibility too far

This whole thing is an issue which involves Islam at its very core and you know it and so does the rest of the world.

I still don't hear you arguing with my examples of say, Bonny and Clyde - you never ever engage or answer any of these issues but simply try to keep focus on Moslems as victims of prejudice - because that is your only agenda and you are not interested in making comparisons with other law enforcement actions or wartime situations etc

Your unwillingness to leave your core agenda shows all your posts to be off topic because you simply wont debate the points which concern whether this killing was any different to the killing of US Citizens by the government on a daily basis when that person cannot be peacefully apprehended

Why wont you discuss that ? After all this rather transparent ducking and diving, you cannot blame me and others for doubting your motives in not condemning what this guy was engaged in or suggesting how he could have been peacefully arrested - and you haven't !

Until you do, you deserve my suspicions about the degree to which you disapprove of him

[Captain Oates 911]

He wasn't in the US Army, or in the US Navy at the time, so that exclusion fails. So it appears his Constitutional rights were violated.

What about Bonny and Clyde

US Citizens killed by an arm of government because they were threatening life and could not be safely arrested

Where is the difference between that and this guy ?

Would someone please tell me coz I do not get it

Why is this guy less deserving of a fatal response than Bonny and Clyde ? Why ?

I think he was very many more times more dangerous and more threatening to life than Bonny and Clyde.

Anyone care to disagree on this point ?

ps if anyone thinks these guys can be safely arrested, call the CIA because they have a contract for you

Edited October 1, 2011 by Alan the Red

[sandinista! 1,816]

Again, completely different scenarios being presented, that are not apt in the least. It's more like sending a drone into an inner city neighborhood that the police *know* has been the center of orders for drug related hits, or sending a drone into new jersey because the real life version of tony soprano ordered hits on people when he was in that general area. It's an assassination, none of these killings taking place when the "bad guy" is currently in the commission of a crime other than that of their existence. It's a dangerous precedent, whether it was awlaki, or a murdering drug dealer or mobster. You can throw down bigoted assumptions about posters on here right and left all you want- they'll resonate with the people dumb enough to subscribe to the same warped mindset. And everyone else will see them for the garbage they really are. It's not a "Muslim thing" anymore than it's an ex military, gun owning guy thing as when Charles wrote he agreed with my first post. (sorry to pick on you again Charles, you secret Muslim you)

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

What about Bonny and Clyde

US Citizens killed by an arm of government because they were threatening life and could not be safely arrested

Where is the difference between that and this guy ?

Would someone please tell me coz I do not get it

Why is this guy less deserving of a fatal response than Bonny and Clyde ? Why ?

I think he was very many more times more dangerous and more threatening to life than Bonny and Clyde.

Anyone care to disagree on this point ?

ps if anyone thinks these guys can be safely arrested, call the CIA because they have a contract for you

A police ambush where the suspect is given an opportunity to surrender, and then using deadly force when the armed suspect failes to do so in response, is not the same as a calculated illegal assassination with no warning, or attempt to capture.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[Captain Oates 911]

Again, completely different scenarios being presented, that are not apt in the least. It's more like sending a drone into an inner city neighborhood that the police *know* has been the center of orders for drug related hits, or sending a drone into new jersey because the real life version of tony soprano ordered hits on people when he was in that general area. It's an assassination, none of these killings taking place when the "bad guy" is currently in the commission of a crime other than that of their existence. It's a dangerous precedent, whether it was awlaki, or a murdering drug dealer or mobster. You can throw down bigoted assumptions about posters on here right and left all you want- they'll resonate with the people dumb enough to subscribe to the same warped mindset. And everyone else will see them for the garbage they really are. It's not a "Muslim thing" anymore than it's an ex military, gun owning guy thing as when Charles wrote he agreed with my first post. (sorry to pick on you again Charles, you secret Muslim you)

At last, some real meat there and you have come out of your hiding place and engaged

ok forget the Moslem thing and lets accept that him being a Moslem is NO part of your interest in this and its just a coincidence that you and he are/were of the same faith

Firstly, the drone was not fired into a populated area killing civilians - so forget new jersey. It was every bit as targeted as any police bullet fired at a corner shop robber in Chicago

Secondly, you have not attempted to show how this killer could be safely arrested. You always duck that one and it is noticeable.

Lets stick to the the law and the constitution and tell me how its different to a cop using a sniper rifle to kill a kidnapper/hijacker in downtown Los Angeles. This guy was actively and currently and imminently engaged in killing Americans. I am flying to the UK soon and he wanted to kill me and he didn't care if he killed you too

I say its no different to the rules around any police action and the CIA just use bigger weapons that's all

Are you seriously suggesting he could have been peaceful apprehended by my local cop or anyone else ?

I love it that you have moved to this real area of debate on the constitutionality of the circumstances

Edited October 1, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I love it that you have moved to this real area of debate on the constitutionality of the circumstances

That's been the issue since page one

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

While the use of targeted drone strikes against prominent al-Qaida figures is hardly nothing new and has been ongoing for many years now, what makes the case of both al-Awlaki and Khan unlike that of those who have been slain before them is the fact that both were American citizens.

Al-Awlaki was born in Las Cruces, New Mexico to Yemeni parents and received Bachelor and Masters degrees in engineering and education from Colorado State University and San Diego State University. He was studying for his Ph.D at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., but dropped out a few years ago to focus on militant activity.

Khan was born in Saudi Arabia but was raised in the New York City borough of Queens. He had previously lived in Charlotte, North Carolina for six years before leaving for Yemen in 2009.

The drone attack by the CIA against al-Awlaki and Khan is the first time in that agency's history that it has killed U.S. citizens abroad.

President Barack Obama authorized the CIA to kill al-Awlaki on sight back in Spring 2010.

The decision to add him to the U.S. hit list required a National Security Council review because of his citizenship.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/312179#ixzz1ZYUlMg7D

Edited October 1, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv