U.S. Must Explain Targeted Killings of Its Own Citizens (especially the killing of a 16year-old boy)

[Cali_Democrat]

Remember, the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution prevents individuals from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law."

U.S. Must Explain Targeted Killings of Its Own Citizens
Posted by Nathan Freed Wessler, National Security Project at 3:41pm

Today the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking information about the legal and factual basis for the targeted killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen. Last month, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan were killed when unmanned drones operated by the CIA and the U.S. military fired missiles at the car in which they were traveling. Last week, al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was killed in a similar drone strike.

The killing of three American citizens raises serious and troubling questions about whether the U.S. government was acting lawfully when it placed Anwar al-Awlaki's name on a "kill list" and when it ordered the deadly drone strikes. But the government is hiding behind a veil of secrecy and is refusing to publicly release information about its justifications for killing U.S. citizens far from any active battlefield. We know from reports in the press that the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) produced a memorandum providing legal justifications for killing al-Awlaki and that he was placed on a so-called "kill list" by a secret group of government officials. The government refuses to release the OLC memo or any other information about the legal and factual bases for killing Anwar and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, however.

<snip>

Editorial pages from around the country, including the Washington Post, Washington Times, and L.A. Times, have called for greater transparency, as has the Public Editor of the New York Times.

The government must tell the public why it thinks it can order the deaths of U.S. citizens without going to court or otherwise ensuring due process of law. It is unacceptable for the government to hide behind claims of official secrecy when its actions are challenged, but then to leak carefully selected information to the press when it wants to rally support for its actions. Our FOIA request joins the chorus of voices urging real transparency and a full public debate.

Read the whole piece: http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/us-must-explain-targeted-killings-its-own-citizens

I agree 100% with the ACLU. This must be explained. I consider this to be an extremely important issue. The fact that a secret panel of government officials can put US citizens on a kill list is EXTREMELY disturbing. Do we want Republicans to be doing this if they are in the Oval Office? What's also troubling is the fact that a 16 year-old US citizen was killed by his own government without due process. A kid.

[opihimoimoi]

1. From my perch...the Gov't is saying they had no idea the kid was American...he was a victim of being

wrong place at bad time....

[Cali_Democrat]

2. You mean the CIA and the rest of the government agencies had no idea this existed?

I find that hard to believe.

[opihimoimoi]

5. How would they know.....plz explain....

[Cali_Democrat]

8. When I applied for my recent job, my citizenship was verified by my employer

rather quickly. The CIA and other government agencies can't do that?

[opihimoimoi]

10. Did the kid apply for a job?? you cannot be series man....???

[Cali_Democrat]

13. If my employer was able to verify my citizenship EASILY...

...why can't the US government verify citizenship when they have loads of intelligence resources to work with? You mean to tell me that the US government can't perform a simple task of citizenship verification?

[stevenleser]

14. This person is definitely not series...

levelheadedness not involved here.

[opihimoimoi]

23. Likely a GOPer twouble maker

[Cali_Democrat]

33. Why won't you answer my question in reply #13?

[opihimoimoi]

34. hah.......

[Cali_Democrat]

35. hah?

OK

[whatchamacallit]

26. So...

the use of 'series' in place of 'serious' is to mock freepers, right? Given the belligerent militarism displayed in here these days, one can't be too sure.

[opihimoimoi]

30. Mocking Freepers ? Tis a sport played by all sides,,,series

peace is free and popular

[customerserviceguy]

9. It didn't show up on the drone's camera

It seems like not too very many Americans are outraged about this. You can include me in that number.

[LAGC]

3. Collateral damage is one of the big risks of indiscriminatory drone strikes.

Why didn't they just try to arrest the fucker, so as to avoid innocent deaths?

[Tx4obama]

20. Because you don't just walk up to a building full of Al Qaeda members

and then say "you're under arrest".

How do you suggest Al Qaeda members can be arrested peacefully without them blowing away our soldiers?

Do you think that they are going to just lay down their weapons and surrender?

[Honeycombe8]

7. Life Lesson #4: Don't hang with Al Qaeda, and don't let your kids hang with them.

They are likely to be killed, or to kill.

[MADem]

4. The Egyptian AQ operative was the target, not the kid.

That's the bottom line. There was no intent. Accidents happen.

[Honeycombe8]

6. The report I read said that a group of Al Qaeda were killed when they were at a

barbeque or something. It wasn't "targeting" the teenager.

[Tx4obama]

21. There was NO barbeque

The two drone attacks in Shabwa were on a building that housed an Al Qaeda meeting and on two vehicles that Al Qaeda members were riding in.

al Awlaki's family started the BBQ bullshit rumor.

[lib2DaBone]

11. What.. you mean there is a problem with killing women and children?

There is a problem with torture and killing U.S. Citizens?

Please don't tell the main stream media.. or the White House.. cause they don't have a clus....

[NYC_SKP]

12. Here's the trouble with this whole thing:

The kid might be innocent and just collateral damage for being with a bunch of bad guys, so it can be argued that we should never attack if there's a single innocent in harms way.

Well, if we take that position we'll never ever be able to act because all they need to do is use human bodyguards; travel with a cadre of innocents and prevent us from ever striking.

I, for one, am not willing to let that be the required protocol, to have to either wait until they are alone (which would mean to never strike), or to have to go through some sort of international panel that doesn't exist and never will (in our lifetimes).

Anyone who is asking for some different rule of engagement is effectively saying "never engage".

Sorry, I'm not supportive of that.

I say "engage", and to innocent family members: be careful about where you are, America and NATO might take action against the company you're with and if we don't then someone else might.

:patriot:

[stevenleser]

16. That is way too reasonable of an approach! nt

[mkultra]

28. Yup, this level outrage requires selective blinders

Its the absolutist position that requires no one ever be killed. If the government starts taking out political targets, then ill care.

[JNinWB]

36. Excellent explanation.

I asked on another thread if we KNEW that the son was with the targets. No one responded because that IS the question to ask before railing against Obama for "targeting" an "innocent child".

[msongs]

15. and Obama wonders why so many people see the US as an out of control killer nt

[Tx4obama]

17. The drone was NOT 'targeting' al-Awlaki's son

The drone was targeting an Egyptian man named al Bana.
---


And regarding al-Awlaki and his son ...


Anwar al-Awlaki

SNIP

In "44 Ways to Support Jihad," another sermon posted on his blog in February 2009, al-Awlaki encouraged others to "fight jihad", and explained how to give money to the mujahideen or their families after they've died. Al-Awlaki's sermon also encouraged others to conduct weapons training, and raise children "on the love of Jihad". Also that month, he wrote: "I pray that Allah destroys America and all its allies." He wrote as well: "We will implement the rule of Allah on Earth by the tip of the sword, whether the masses like it or not." On July 14, he criticized armies of Muslim countries that assist the U.S. military, saying, "the blame should be placed on the soldier who is willing to follow orders ... who sells his religion for a few dollars."In a sermon on his blog on July 15, 2009, entitled "Fighting Against Government Armies in the Muslim World," al-Awlaki wrote, "Blessed are those who fight against American soldiers, and blessed are those shuhada (martyrs) who are killed by them."
SNIP
http://www.aabout.biz/2011/09/anwar-al-awlaki.html
---

Did you catch that? " ... raise children "on the love of Jihad."

He and his SON can not be compared to a average American father and son.
al-Awlaki's son has lived in Yemen since 2002 - he was NOT raised like an American,
The son was raised 'on the love of Jihad'.

Some folks have said that the 'son' was targeted - that is not true, it was an Egyptian named al Bana that was the target.
The son was killed in the drone attack that killed al Bana.
There is no evidence that the 'son' was innocent or evidence that he was a member of Al Qaeda.
But considering the son has lived with his TERRORIST father in Yemen since 2002, and his father believe everyone should raise their children 'on the love of Jihad' --- there is NO logical way to say that the 'son' was a peace loving American citizen.
And the 'son' was not some innocent bystander that some criminal grabbed as a hostage, the son went there were the Al Qaeda members were on the night of the drone attack on his own free will, even the family said the son went to Shabwa from Sana after he heard about the attack on his father.

[izquierdista]

18. Maybe he leered at Sasha or Malia

I'll bet those Jonas boys will think twice about it!

[Tx4obama]

19. Why was al-Awlaki's son in the vehicles that the drone attacked

It was reported that al-Awlakis' SON was killed in the SAME drone attack that killed al Bana.
al Bana was killed when the drone hit two sport vehicles that were transporting TERRORISTS.
If everyone thinks the son was completely 'innocent' then what was the son doing hanging around with a TOP AL QAEDA TERRORIST? Please answer that one.
I for one think that the US did not know that al-Awlaki's son was in the car with al Bana.
-----


SNIP

The first strike late Friday targeted a house in the Azan district of Shabwa, but hit just after Al Qaeda militants had a meeting in the building, security officials and tribal elders said.

They said a second strike then targeted two sport utility vehicles in which al-Bana and the six others were traveling, destroying the vehicles and leaving the men's bodies charred. It was not clear whether other participants in the meeting were targeted in separate strikes.

SNIP

[mkultra]

29. Thats a better question, what kind of father drags his son into a war with him

[Clio the Leo]

22. At least 260,000 American citizens were killed w/out due process...

.... and yes, some of them were 17 and younger.



War is, as they say, Hell.


I believe if I were going to worry about injustice, I'd do so for the poor kid in the the urban prison who didn't have the cash to hire a good attorney LONG before I'd concern myself with Awlaki.

[The Northerner]

24. K&R n/t

[SkyDaddy7]

25. This coming from the same person who equated...

the way Gaddafi was killed to how African Americans were killed during & after Reconstruction...One of the most DISGUSTING post I have yet to see on DU! UNREC!

[opihimoimoi]

31. T/Y I was wondering bout this guy....:o)

[Cali_Democrat]

32. I do indeed feel that Gaddafi WAS essentially killed by a lynch mob

Check the video. I still stand by that post. Unfortunately for you...you will never be able to take my opinion away from me. EVER.

[JNinWB]

38. Where is your evidence that the son was targetted?

This is your assertion in your OP.

So, where are your facts?

Or, is your OP just alarmist misinformation

[SkyDaddy7]

39. If you did not notice I actually...

Did quite the opposite of trying to take your opinion away from you...I made sure everyone knew what your opinion was & how absurd it is!

I love Freedom of Speech because it allows people with ABSURD ideas to alert the rest of us who they are.

Just to be clear...I do not want to take away your opinion but whether you said what you said in the heat of the moment & your inflated ego prevents you from simply doing the correct thing & admitting you should have used a different comparison or you really believe such an absurd comparison...The fact is your comparison was not only absurd but disgusting!

[AtomicKitten]

37. It's selective outrage as in selecting the side opposite of Obama in all matters.

[SkyDaddy7]

40. YES, you nailed it!

They will jump through as many hoops as possible & even go as far as defend dictators or nasty regimes in order to attack, insult and/or disrespect President Obama...SAD!

[BklnDem75]

27. He'd probably be alive longer...

If he was out chasing girls instead of hanging around people plotting to kill others. Bad decisions are bad.