Al-Qaeda ‘Concerned’ about Americans Losing Constitutional Rights
Oct 10th, 2011 | 6 responses
The killing of American-born, al-Qaeda-affiliated, terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki has sparked anger among civil liberties groups and has set-off a lively and legitimate debate in our country.
In response to an article decrying the killing of American born al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist Al-Awlaki, I disputed the contention that the killing of the terrorist was Unconstitutional, illegal or amoral, or that it represented the “death of America.”
Since then, over the weekend, word leaked out about a secret U.S. Office of Legal Council (OLC) memorandum that provides legal and Constitutional justification for the action.
The memo reportedly found that “it would be lawful only if it were not feasible to take him alive, according to people who have read the document.”
Furthermore:
The memo, written last year, followed months of extensive deliberations and offers a glimpse into the legal debate that led to one of the most significant decisions made by President Obama — to move ahead with the killing of an American citizen without a trial.
The memo provided the justification for acting despite an executive order banning assassinations, a federal law against murder, protections in the Bill of Rights and various strictures of the international laws of war, according to people familiar with the analysis. The memo, however, was narrowly drawn to the specifics of Mr. Awlaki’s case and did not establish a broad new legal doctrine.
We will have to wait for the declassification and release of the entire memo to see if it “holds legal water” and to see if it changes any opinions about the killing of al-Awlaki.
While I can see, and sympathize with, Americans having qualms about the killing, there is absolutely no way that I would give a rat’s ass (sorry!) about al-Qaeda or any organization affiliated with it suddenly having concerns about the Constitutional rights of Americans.
But, believe it or not, the same gang of terrorists that massacred more than 3,000 innocent American men, women and children; the same organization that has vowed to kill more Americans—to destroy America—now is suddenly concerned about our Constitutional rights, our laws, our “freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms” and about the legality of the al-Awlaki killing.
According to the Washington Post:
Al-Qaeda has also criticized the Obama administration for killing U.S. citizens, saying doing so “contradicts” American law.
“Where are what they keep talking about regarding freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms?!” the statement says, according to a translation by SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist Web sites.
I do not claim for a second that al-Qaeda’s shockingly shameful statement will de-legitimize or in any way reflect on the valid concerns Americans have over the killing.
Nor will I entertain for a minute the notion some may have that “even al-Qaeda has more respect for the Constitution, for our laws.” To that I will simply say, rubbish!
Read more here
6 Responses to “Al-Qaeda ‘Concerned’ about Americans Losing Constitutional Rights”
It is the “not feasible to take him alive” issue that is, IMO, important. If someone takes a hostage, and they only way to stop him and save the hostage’s life is to kill the kidnapper, we allow that. Similarly, if we could have captured Anwar al-Awlaki, then killing him violated his civil rights. OTOH, if we couldn’t, then killing him was the only way for us to prevent him from killing more Americans.
I can’t figure the hubbub over nailing this guy. He denounced the U.S. citizenship and planned attacks against U. S. civilians, therefore is a traitor.
However, I still say they should have taken away his citizenship BEFORE executing him.
That’s my hope and my guess, too, dduck. Added: (that they took his citizenship away first).
However, some will have a problem with that, too.
It’s a democracy…
I fully agree with you Dorian.
Like said: You can’t get “due process” unless you surrender.
Unlike Osama Bin Hide’n, This guy was operational and most likely had quite a few people guarding him. They could glue the arrest warrant to the precision bomb if it would make everybody feel better, but no doubt death by bomb is the way.
I think it’s amusing on the one hand that Al Quaeda’s criticizing, esp. since one of the main objectives of their operations, is to stimulate crackdowns-it’s one of the most important aspects of Terrorism, one of the fundamental objectives-You make your target crack down again and again until his own population turn against him when they realize the ‘security theatre’ isn’t working, but their freedom is gone.
So, for this obvious sign that their tactics and methods have worked, to generate the response from the organization that is alleged, clearly someone in the org is unclear as to the strategic position they were trying for…
Or, they’re gloating, because it HAS worked, or they didn’t think it would and now, they’re worried because the expected Revolution has not materialized.
AS for Alwaki-the man renounced his Citizenship, thus he has divorced himself from his Constitutional rights. (For those unclear as to where this comes from, I urge reading the Constitution-not just the Bill of Rights, but the actual body of the document.) His legal status is/was no different from those American-born Germans who flocked to “Deutschland” and the banner of the Thousand Year Reich, enlisted in the SS and Waffen SS, and participated in (among other operations) the false-flag missions during the Battle of the Bulge.
Such persons, under the version of the Geneva Conventions ratified by the United States Senate, are non-uniformed enemy combatants, aka legally deserving of nothing save a bullet, bomb, or knife, and unprotected under the Laws of War.
Renunciation of citizenship means you are no longer protected by the Constitution, as you are no longer a citizen.
Back to original topic. AQ is smart in criticizing us on constitutional rights. They are not playing this propaganda to us but to those people in the world sympathetic to their cause. Just another war tactic.