Switch Theme:

U.S. Gov't Seeking Approval to Assassinate a U.S. Citizen  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Eternal Plague

The United States is looking to kill a U.S. born Islamic cleric because they believe he is a terrorist and must be put on a hit list for people who must die for their crimes against America.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/1108/US-says-it-has-legal-authority-to-kill-American-born-Anwar-al-Awlaki

Washington
Responding to a lawsuit challenging the legality of including an American citizen on a secret government “kill list,” a Justice Department lawyer argued in federal court on Monday that the US government has the legal authority to target and kill a US-born Islamic cleric believed to be hiding in Yemen.

Douglas Letter, the Justice Department’s terrorism litigation counsel, while stressing that he was neither confirming nor denying the existence of such a list, told US District Judge John Bates that Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks had authorized the executive branch to use all “necessary and appropriate” force against Al Qaeda and associated groups.

He said the Obama administration has determined that the targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki would be legal and justified to safeguard US national security.

“If we use lethal force we do so consistent with the law,” Mr. Letter said.

His arguments were part of a government effort to win dismissal of the lawsuit, which is being argued by the American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer told the judge that the administration’s plan would violate constitutional protections and international law.

“What the government is doing is imposing the death penalty without trial,” Mr. Jaffer said.

“The consequence of accepting the government’s argument is that the president will have the unreviewable authority to order the assassination of any citizen of the United States” without judicial review, he said. “It is a question that the president alone will decide.”

Alarmed at that broad assertion, Judge Bates invited Letter back up to the podium to respond.

“It is ridiculous to say our argument leads to the conclusion that the president can assassinate who he wants,” Letter said.

He said the administration’s efforts are aimed “against somebody who is formally and officially designated as a global terrorist, who is attempting to carry out operations continually in order to kill Americans.”

Mr. Awlaki is a leader of the Yemen-based group Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which claimed responsibility for the makeshift bombs recently discovered in air cargo bound for the US.

On Monday, he was quoted in a video displayed on militant websites urging Muslims to take up arms against Americans.

“Don’t consult with anybody in killing the Americans,” he said in the video. “Fighting the devil does not require a fatwa, nor consultation, nor prayers seeking divine guidance. They are the party of Satan and fighting them is the obligation of the time,” he said.

Awlaki is said to have played a role in preparing Umar Abdulmutallab, the Christmas bomber, for his aborted effort to down a jetliner near Detroit in 2009.

The ACLU lawsuit was filed by Awlaki’s father, Nasser, on behalf of his son, whose whereabouts are unknown. He is said to have gone into hiding in January and is believed to be in a remote section of eastern Yemen.

The lawsuit does not seek to prevent the government from carrying out targeted killings. Instead, the ACLU is asking Judge Bates to examine the government’s criteria for placing Awlaki on the alleged kill list.

To justify lethal action, the ACLU suit says, the government must be able to demonstrate that the targeted killing is necessary to prevent a direct and imminent threat to public safety. In addition, the suit says, the government must be able to show there are no non-lethal options available to neutralize a threat from Awlaki.

The government is asking Bates to throw the lawsuit out, arguing that Awlaki’s father does not have legal standing to bring the challenge. Letter said if Awlaki wanted to challenge the US government’s alleged “kill list” he could turn himself in to the authorities and litigate the issue himself.

Letter warned the judge that if he allowed the suit to move forward he would be placing the judiciary in the position of having to second-guess real-time decisions made by the president and his military and intelligence advisors.

Judge Bates said federal judges are already engaged in a similar enterprise, examining whether Guantanamo detainees are being held in accord with the law. In addition he said the government must obtain judicial approval before it can engage in electronic surveillance of US citizens overseas.

Jaffer said the lawsuit doesn’t seek to impose judicial review of real-time decisions of the president. “We are not asking for the court to get involved at all,” he said. “Just to set general limits.”

In contrast, Jaffer said, the government’s position is to exclude judicial oversight from the process. “They are not just arguing that the court has no role to play now,” he said. “They are arguing that he courts have no role to play, period.”

Judge Bates peppered the lawyers during the two-hour hearing with pointed questions exploring the full range of both sides’ arguments. He said he would work quickly to issue a decision, but set no deadline.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/09 04:06:52


   
Made in us
Combat Jumping Rasyat






It's not a very secret hit list.

In this situation Mr. Letter should have just said, "What hit list?" Then when a Predator drone smeared Anwar al-Awlaki across a two bedroom apartment; shrug and say something like, "We didn't do it." while giving each other high fives on the down low.

Instead he made the classic mistake of trying to defend something while trying to deny it. It's like trying to defend burning crosses while denying being a racist, you look stupid.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2010/11/09 04:23:25


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Mesopotamia. The Kingdom Where we Secretly Reign.

"Barack Obama Okays Civilian Assassination! News at Eleven!"

That would get some asses in the seats, by God.

I guess my opinion is, in short, that if you make yourself into an enemy combatant I suppose that you shouldn't be surprised when you are treated like one.

Drink deeply and lustily from the foamy draught of evil.
W: 1.756 Quadrillion L: 0 D: 2
Haters gon' hate. 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon





Hey, at least some of the time I agree with Barack.

I have no problem with the US assassinating people, especially if they've declared themselves as enemies of the US, and if we're transparent about it.

It's not like we're skulking around lying about it. We're trying to kill him. Good.

It's a standard thing. If somebody is born in the US, leaves, joins a foreign military, and then we meet him on the battlefield, do we have to avoid killing him, so he can have a trial?

Now, I realize that the combatant status of this cat isn't that clearcut, but I don't really care. It's clear enough for me. If you're on the record as being at war with the US, and you're hanging out with people we're trying to kill, then you can go ahead and die.

If you'd prefer to be tried in court, hey, hop on a plane and have your day in court.



=====Begin Dakka Geek Code=====
DA:70+S++G+++M+++B++I++Pw40k00#+D++A++++/wWD250T(T)DM++
======End Dakka Geek Code======

http://jackhammer40k.blogspot.com/ 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





Given the limitations of the US to act in countries on the other side of planet, and considering the risk these people present, I don't have a problem with assassination necessarily.

The problem ,for me, is that you can't just decide something needs doing and start doing it. The rule of law doesn't work that way. You have to be granted a power to start using it, and a power like this is too big a deal to fudge on.

If it was legally passed, and contained judicial oversight that required the case establish the person represents a clear threat in the future and can't be apprehended through any other practical means, then I'd be okay with it.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
Crafty Bray Shaman





NCRP - Humboldt County

The ACLU needs to die.

Jean-luke Pee-card, of thee YOU ES ES Enter-prize

Make it so!

 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: