Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Clearing up misconceptions regarding Anwar al-Awlaki [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)105. Good point. But we don't know that, do we?
We never got a chance to ask him. Or his teen-age son, who also was a citizen before he got turned into bug splat before questioning or trial. Here's a nice overview:
The Year in Drones
2014 Was a Good Year For Drones, 2015 Might be Even Better
by Charles Pierson
CounterPunch, Jan. 7, 2014
2014 was a good year for US killer drones. In October, the US celebrated (if that is the word) its 400th drone strike on Pakistan. Unable to attend the festivities were the 2,379 Pakistanis killed by US drones since 2004. Of these, only 12% of the victims who have been identified have been linked to militant organizations, this according to an October report from the independent British-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
Drone victims have been largely invisible to Americans. An exception is the family of Rafiq ur Rehman, a Pakistani schoolteacher. On October 24, 2012, a US drone killed Rafiqs 67-year old mother while she was gathering okra behind the Rehmans home in Waziristan in Pakistans tribal areas. A year later, on October 29, 2013, Rafiq and his two young children testified before Congress. The Rehmans were brought to Capitol Hill by Representative Alan Grayson (D-FL) and Robert Greenwald, director of Unmanned: Americas Drone Wars. This was the firstand, so far, the onlytime drone victims had testified before Congress. The Rehmans might just as well have saved themselves the trip. Only five members of Congress showed up to listen to the Rehmans testimony.
SNIP...
No Judge, No Jury, No TrialNo Problem!
US drones are lethal, but they arent toxic. Not politically toxic, not yet. Like the neutron bomb which kills people without damaging buildings, drones kill people without harming political careers. Case in point: on May 22 of 2014, the Senate confirmed David Barrons nomination to a federal judgeship. Barron had worked in the DoJs Office of Legal Counsel. While there, Barron had co-authored a memo providing Obama with legal cover for the targeted assassination of an American citizen: Anwar al-Awlaki, a US-born al-Qaeda member. Al-Awlaki was killed by a drone on September 30, 2011 in Yemen. Al-Awlakis 16-year old son was killed in a separate drone attack.
Barrons memo remained classified until a federal appeals court forced the White House to release a redacted version on June 22, 2014 after Barron had been confirmed.
Al-Awlaki is one of four US citizens killed by drones. Shall we try for five? Last February, the Associated Press reported that the Obama Administration was contemplating a drone strike on a fifth US citizen: an al-Qaeda member living in Pakistan and known by the nom de guerre Abdullah al-Shami (Abdullah the Syrian). So far, there have been no reports of al-Shamis demise. But the lesson to take away is that the Obama Administration still believes it can kill Americans without due process of law.
CONTINUED...
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/01/07/the-year-in-drones/
I, too, hate traitors. That's why I want to see Bush and Cheney and the rest of them who lied America into war without end in prison for the rest of their natural days. Rather than giving them a last request and a bullet, theirs would make a great example to deter future generations from following in their crooked footsteps.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
125 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I restrict my analysis to what was reported by military and intelligence officials.
Maedhros
Jan 2015
#56
I've written at least two OPs documenting this.....why would you think the Bush
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#85
wow. interesting. who invited him and to lecture about what? and then after being our
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#99
Interestingly, all these concerns were held with high regard when dumbya/cheney was in office..
2banon
Jan 2015
#13
The law does matter. Same reason that shooting soldiers on the battlefield is okay
geek tragedy
Jan 2015
#55
apparently, you haven't quite understood the point of this story.. better have another listen/read.
2banon
Jan 2015
#21
Where were charges filed against Awlaki, which court, what was the evidence presented?
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#113
And on what is tht 'concession' based? Where are the charges? Why is that such a difficult question
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#118
Yeah? Well just remember how many of us disagreed with the OP and those attempting to support them.
stevenleser
Jan 2015
#29
More worried about what the right wing thinks than making sure the facts are correct
JonLP24
Jan 2015
#36
Well, I wouldn't know if it would reasonably slip past him based on the available information is out
JonLP24
Jan 2015
#66
I've said in the past the real problem with al awlaki is that there is no limit on what
geek tragedy
Jan 2015
#70
Do you have any proof that the person posting this thread is actually liberal?
Renew Deal
Jan 2015
#46
There is no misconception no matter how many times you try to tell us that there is one.
stevenleser
Jan 2015
#26
standing up for the rule of law is a losing battle around here if you're perceived as sticking
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#101
Oh, I know - look at some of the posts elsewhere in this thread attacking my character
Maedhros
Jan 2015
#106
+10^10^100, this should be its own OP. Greenwald's bullshit needs more exposure. nt
stevenleser
Jan 2015
#72
You have it exactly correct....this is an embarrassment to GG. So Awlaki is being
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#75
Conspiracy theories lives in the hearts and minds of those prone to believing them.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2015
#76
Nothing ironic about it.....he also hosted 4 9/11 hijackers at his mosques. He was an operative,
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#78
I'm shocked and appalled at the number of people on this site - ostensibly Liberals -
Maedhros
Jan 2015
#81
I'm not defending al-Awlaki, I'm defending the rule of law, due process and habeus corpus.
Maedhros
Jan 2015
#93
How do you propose to protect people from various 'phobias' without a functioning rule of law?
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#103
I wonder at your American exceptionalism. Why does it make a difference if it is a citizen? nt
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#86
Why do you think Awlaki wasn't given due process? It's a common mistake of law and fact that
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#89
Mr. Awlaki not only posted hundreds of videos to YouTube telling his side of the story, he
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#119
Like I couldn't post a bunch of YouTube stuff and put ''msanthrope'' up as its author.
Octafish
Jan 2015
#120
He was in the videos, preaching hate. He had a magazine at his disposal. The ACLU
msanthrope
Jan 2015
#121
the geneva conventions? down the memory hole with them, along with everything that doesn't
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#104