NYC Reacts to Death of American Al-Qaida Cleric, Media Finds Neocons On The Streets

reply to post by beezzer


Translation: We can kill anyone we want anywhere we want as long as we label you a terrorist.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by OldCorp

 

I do agree with you.
This is the White House reasoning though.

For a Presidential executive order to have an American killed to have any legitimacy in my eyes, that order MUST be reviewed by someone other than the President himself before it is implemented. I'm sorry but that is just too much power for one man to control. The right to be accused of a crime in court and to present a defense is one of the most basic of rights in civilized society, going back to the Magna Carta. Not even the King had the power to order the death of one of his subjects without a trial of some sort.

But al-Awlaki was never charged was he? Nobody that had any role in the decision to take his life other than the President himself got to see any "evidence" of his guilt, and he was never given the opportunity to mount a defense. One of the reasons given that "proved" al-Awlaki's guilt were his alleged ties to the underwear bomber. Those ties were reported by several news organizations, including NPR, but the details had to be retracted because they were proven to be inaccurate.

NPR reported that according to unnamed U.S. intelligence officials he attended a sermon by al-Awlaki at the Finsbury Park Mosque. Khalid Mahmood, the Labour MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, who resigned as trustee of the mosque, pointed to the NPR report in expressing "grave misgivings" with regard to the stewardship of the mosque.

The Finsbury Park Mosque stated, however, that:
Neither Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab nor Anwar al-Awlaki has ever been invited to attend NLCM since we took charge of the mosque in February 2005. We can be certain that neither man has been given a platform at the mosque in any form and in the case of Anwar al-Awlaki we can be confident that he would not have been able to enter the mosque without his presence being brought to our attention.

Abdulmutallab was also reported to have attended a talk by al-Awlaki at the East London Mosque, which al-Awlaki may have attended by video teleconference, according to CBS News, The Daily Telegraph, and The Sunday Telegraph. However, The Sunday Telegraph later removed the report from its website following a complaint by the East London Mosque, which stated that "Anwar Al Awlaki did not deliver any talks at the ELM between 2005 and 2008, which is when the newspaper had falsely alleged that Abdullmutallab had attended such talks." ~ WIKI

Really? This is where i have a major problem with this. Obama's decision to have him killed was based in part on unsubstantiated newspaper reporting that was later retracted for inaccuracy! There was never any "evidence" presented to the President based on anything but hearsay. Al-Awlaki preached against the policies of the United States, and encouraged Muslims to wage Jihad; that much is a given. Is it illegal? Most likely. Still, the penalty for providing aid and comfort to a terrorist organization is NOT death! I would suggest you read this entire statute - it is VERY informative.

U.S. CODE TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B >§ 2339B.
Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations.
(a) Prohibited Activities.—
(1) Unlawful conduct.— Whoever knowingly provides material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both, and, if the death of any person results, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
SOURCE: Cornell University

The government (Obama) can't even play by their own rules! The MAXIMUM sentence al-Awlaki could have received in a courtroom was LIFE in prison, even if his actions - not the actions of someone inspired by his words - resulted in the death of another person. Not even the President has ever accused al-Awlaki of being directly responsible for anyone's death, so how can the death penalty even be on the table?

I really hope some smart constitutional lawyer uses this to levy criminal charges against Obama before Congress to get him impeached, and (in a perfect world) imprisoned. The man is a bully, a liar, a fraud, and now you can add murderer to his list of accolades.


Another ETA: Guess what I found while I was reading the blog you linked? A story about Obama in school:

Obama: Ethics was not my favorite subject in school.

Oh the LULZ!!!

projection.

USA is now the biggest threat to humanity & rhe world over. from now on it will throw around the word 'terrorism' cuz that is what it is, the Earth's biggest terrorist ever.


s khan was 15yo when 9/11 happened. today, CNN & other MSM announce Obama's proclamation of a 'victory' in the fight against al-Quaeda. what, something new? nope, the usual incident of some US drone flying all over foreign territory freely as if it owns the sky, took out a few more terrorists and presto look America, the world is little more safer now for us all.

10yrs passed. what happened. we all know what happened to america, and thats most important. but what about at the individual level? how'd this Pak-American Queens, NY school kid turn into a full blown 'terrorist' we are all supposed to (accordin to potus et al) delighted to have killed?

a quick closer look at s khan's patethic life bio:

came to America at the age of 7

referred to himself as 'a typical American Kid' even years after 9/11 (according to ny times)

born in Riyadh, Saudi Arab

pakistani parents

between 2001 & 2003, joined Islamic Organization of North America

IONA summer camp was the beginning of his transformation, he stated to the NY Times:
"what I wanted to do with my life: be a firm Muslim, a strong Muslim, a practicing Muslim."

his organization's website guidelines preach nonviolence:
"Through active resistance the movement will use all constitutionally sanctioned means to bring about just changes in social, political, and economic practices. This includes non-violent direct action and civil disobedience."


he became a 'jihadi' web geek working out of his parents basement, started blogging by 2003 promoting Islam in North America.

2004 relocated to Charlotte, NC with fam

2005 blog called "Inshallahshaheed" (if God wills martyr)

his favorite video was a suicide bomb attack in Iraq:
"It was something that brought great happiness to me," he said. "Because this is something America would never want to admit, that they are being crushed."

2007 (21) he moved to Yemen (thru to 2011)

at some point between 2009-2010 he befriended an undercover FBI who pretended to convert to Islam but later broke his cover.

"I am proud to be a traitor to America, my faith took a 180-degree turn, I knew I could no longer reside in America as a compliant citizen."

"My beliefs had turned me into a rebel of Washington's imperialism. My faith and convictions gave me strength to lambast the greatest tyrant of our time. It angered and frustrated them, while it left me in a state of peace and joy. What they were doing and continue to do in the Muslim lands is what I felt, totally unacceptable to my religion."

so it was his beliefs, faith and convictions, "a typical American kid" raised here since the age of seven, had to die for being a security risk given maybe his islamic kitchen bomb instructions or whatever.


the most recent issue gives the editor's name as Yahya Ibrahim. U.S. analysts say they *believe* that was a Khan pseudonym.

theres always 2 sides to a story. Samir's death is that of a martyr 2-fold. he died as a supposed martyr for his cause Islam,

and i reason that he also died for keeping the War on Terrorism alive & strong, because they could have done something other than murdered the 'terrorist' but again like the killing of Ted Osman, its all in haste for a cause and the greater good.


heres the analog: a judeochristian terrorist that hates the mideast, go there and terrorizes them mideasterns. when he goes back to the judeochristian west, the mideast goes there and kills him. is that okay?

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli



i agree with you. great post.



it sucks that kaaahn! was riding with alawaki, collateral damage and a 2-fer.

but you walk with the lame, you learn how to limp.

alawaki (sp) sorry, was tied to fort hood too.

he was an enemy combatant, declared by enough people to make obama order his take-out. doesn't matter if he was a citizen. he motivated people to kill, like manson. yeh, he should have got the death penalty and so should have OJ and we know how that turned out.

i respect all you guys here, i'm just being logical, i hope.

this was not a law enforcement issue, it is war and thus has different ROE.

yes, it would have been nice if they could have snatched him and put him in gitmo but that probably was too risky for our personnel.


i'm sure obama didn't have it in for this guy personally and he doesn't have the power to arbitrarily order someone killed and people will do it.

as beezer said, he was on the wrong side and lost.


by, gone, see ya, wouldn't want to be ya.


as the op's vid, the sentiment was there but the articulation was lacking, i can see how some would think less

of these people, unfounded and spinable.

you don't have to be a neo-con to agree with what happened, do you?

an aggressive campaign against an enemy. keep them on their heels till they give up.