The Government Assassination of a kid from Denver.

”No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”

Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Now, as a Professor of Constitutional law I am extremely surprised that it seems the Obama Administration seems to be unaware or just ignores the 5th Amendment. To date, since the start of the “Global War on Terror” there have been at least 4 violations of the fifth amendment, once under the presidency of George .W. Bush and 3 under the Obama administration. This thread is about just one of those violations, one that many of you are probably similar with but one that I personally feel deserves much more attention than it gets.

I am talking about the extra judicial assassination of a 16 year old American kid from Denver, I am of course talking about abdulrahman al-awlaki ( Note: whilst Adbulrahman’s father Anwar Al-Awlaki was also assassinated and is the subject of much interest he is not the topic of this thread)

The Kid: Abdulrahman al-awlaki


Above, we can see the Young Abdulrahman from a young boy to the teenage cusp of manhood. He was born in Denver Colorado on August 26 1995. He was the eldest child to his mother Gihan and his father Anwar Al-Awlaki and he was raised for his first 7 years as a all American boy speaking English other than Arabic.

Abdulrahman’s father Anwar, needs no introduction, he was wanted by both the Bush and Obama administrations on accusations (but not any charges or indictments) relating to terrorism and his ties to Al-Qa’ida. As such when Abdulrahman was just 7 years old he left America to live with his grandparents in Yemen. Their his Grandfather, also American educated and a highly respected professor, raised the young Abdurahman as a all American boy. They young man enjoyed hip-hop, watched baseball and even had facebook page with a profile picture showing a young happy boy with a thick mop of curly brown hair that his cousins often teased him about.

Yet Abdulrahman was not content, by September 2011 he had not seen his father Anwar in almost two years as he was in hiding after finding out he was on a American “kill list”. The young boy and his father were said to be increadably close and he missed his father dessprety. So on the fourth of September 2011 (other sources say 15th) Abdulrahman stole $40 from his mothers purse and left a note saying that he had run away to go find his father and that he would pay her back when he returned. A few days after the family received word from their relatives in southern Yemen that Abdulrahman was with them and was safe.

Then on September 30, his father, Anwar along with another American citizen Samir Kahn were killed in a operation conducted by the Joint Special Operations Command under direction from the CIA when a armed drone launched missiles at him and killed him.

Then two weeks later on October 14th Abdulrahman was having tea with his cousins at a out door restaurant in Azzan southern Yemen when another hellfire missile struck them, killing Abdulrahman instantly. He was only identifiable because of his thick mop of curly brown hair.

This was a young American boy, only a little over a month after his 16th birthday that was killed in a drone strike. To date no one in the Obama administration has provided any excuse as to how this happened but it did. And as usual they tried to spin it.

Spin and Lies.

When this news first broke it is said that Obama was furious and seriously upset but the news that this young boy had been killed, despite him openly praising the death of his father only two weeks before. Yet the spin and the lies started as soon as the news broke of the boy’s death, according to multiple sources he was a 21 year old Al-Qa’ida militant. However shortly after this accusation first made a appearance the Al-Alwaki family provided Abdulrahman’s Birth certificate to the Washington post to put a end to this rumour.

While Obama might have been upset but this news, he also declined to discuss it, it was not until earlier this year that he actually acknowledged that the boy had died. Yet it is unclear exactly who ordered this attack and what the legal basis of the attack was. However when pushed by a reporter Obama’s Whitehouse spokesmen Robert Gibbs has this pathetic excuse:

I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don't think becoming an al Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.

I think we can all agree that Gibbs excuse is both ignorant and a little sick, he is essentially saying that it could be justified because his dad just so happened to be someone the American government accused of being a terrorist (but never proved in a court of law). It really does raise the question of who knew of this attack and who ordered it. According to investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill (Link)

A former senior official in the Obama administration told me that after Abdulrahman’s killing, the president was “surprised and upset and wanted an explanation.” The former official, who worked on the targeted killing program, said that according to intelligence and Special Operations officials, the target of the strike was al-Banna, the AQAP propagandist. “We had no idea the kid was there. We were told al-Banna was alone,” the former official told me. Once it became clear that the teenager had been killed, he added, military and intelligence officials asserted, “It was a mistake, a bad mistake.” However, John Brennan, at the time President Obama’s senior adviser on counterterrorism and homeland security, “suspected that the kid had been killed intentionally and ordered a review. I don’t know what happened with the review.”

In other words it would seem that at least some in the Obama camp seem to have suspicions. It would seem that they ordered the attack to target a suspected Al-Qa’ida operative but in the end killed abdulraham. Furthermore according to this source John Brennan, Obama’s senior counterterrorism advisor suspected that they (JSOC/CIA/Whitehouse) may have killed him intentionally and as such ordered a review of events.

Final Thoughts

Whatever the truth it remains unclear, as yet no one has provided any solid explanation as to why this kid was killed, he was a American citizen, granted protection under the fifth amendment yet agents of the American government killed him. As such the Centre for Consitutional Rights has filed a Law Suit against US Government for their role in the killing of Abdulraham and the other two Americans killed under Obama’s drone wars.

Abdulraham was an American citizen he had no proven connection to terrorists nor was he in anyway a threat to national security yet he was assassinated by his own government.

If he was still in Denver and a group of armed FBI agents walked into his home under direction from the Whitehouse and executed him by shooting him in the head, there would have been riots on the streets and demands for justice. People would demand Obama’s impeachment, they would demand that those responsible directly for his death be on trial for committing a capital crime. This would have been a huge scandal. Yet because it took place in Yemen its go on mostly unnoticed, it was only a blip on the news coverage at the time, just another victim of the drone wars.

Only it wasn’t, it was much more this sets a precedent for the extra-judicial assassination of American citizens even if they are minors. This raises some massive questions for America and where the line should be drawn legally.

If they, the American government and its agents, can assassinate a young American boy for no reason then refuse to answer any questions regarding this crime to the people and get away with it then where the hell is the line?!?!?!

Lastly I will leave you all with this touching video.

f he was still in Denver and a group of armed FBI agents walked into his home under direction from the Whitehouse and executed him by shooting him in the head, there would have been riots on the streets and demands for justice.

No because they didn't in this case. Clearly the boy did not try and knife them...it was blatant. So this is our new world, our new country, no trials needed no proof needed there are many innocent young and old persons who have died in this false war!

Law enforcement officials say a Chechen associate of one Boston Marathon bombing suspect was unarmed when an FBI agent shot and killed him a week ago, according to the Washington Post. Initial reports indicated he had attacked the agent, possibly with a knife.

www.theblaze.com...

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Well done again!
I mentioned this problem in a post in an unrelated thread by another member yesterday.
It is a major breach of our Constitution by a supposed Constitutional scholar.... and no one in the Congress or MSM even questions it.
SMH.

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Now is the time for outrage, Now is the time for protest, before its too late.

Remember where we are, remember those list of who qualifies as a terror threat.

Constitutionalist, people who talk of liberty, preppers, conspiracy people, etc.

WE may reach a time where our outrage over this means we are a target of it, NOW is the time to write every rep we have DEMANDING DUE process for every Citizen, where ever they are, no matter their crime.

Period.

ETA: might help people get it...

First they came for the Terrorist,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Terrorist.

Then they came for the Whistle Blower Hacker,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Whistle Blower Hacker.

Then they came for the journalist and reporters,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a journalist or a reporter.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

So, working off of Gibbs statement regarding the father of the boy and that if he was actually concerned about his children then he should have chosen a different vocation and not become an Al Quaeda operative does that mean sasha and malia are fair game for anyone who thinks the current administration is operating under terrorist principles? At the very least there will be some fringe figure who would think such a thing. I personally would hope that the shedding of children's blood for the crimes of the parents would cease immediately and for the sake of the POTUS I would hope I'm wrong but Gibbs ignorant statement certainly leaves that particular door open.

Good summary, though heavy on the appeal to emotion in my personal opinion.

I think Article 3 of the Constitution, describing treason is also worth reviewing.

OtherSideOfTheCoin

If he was still in Denver and a group of armed FBI agents walked into his home under direction from the Whitehouse and executed him by shooting him in the head, there would have been riots on the streets and demands for justice.

With this analogy it would be worthwhile discussing the term "Extra-judicial" which is a strict legal requirement for these drone strikes. Outside the bounds of our judicial system. If the FBI had jurisdiction and resources to arrest someone in Somalia it would not be "Extra-Judicial".

Do the protections of the Constitution follow American citizens around the globe, whatever countries they reside in, and whatever traitorous violence they plan and undertake against America?

This would seem to afford a dangerous immunity for those plotting to kill Americans? placing them beyond the reach of our Justice system and the jurisdiction of our law enforcement, but still afforded all the protections of the same?

This incident was deeply disturbing and it was also one that very clearly started to outline the newer divisions in Congress. It isn't just simple D/R up there on the Hill anymore. I think there are some new fault lines starting to form between the statists/TPTB and some others who might have slightly different agendas.

I think drone strikes are horrendous. They cause way to many civilian casualties. I also think we have no business to be there in the middle east to begin with. As much as some people would like to believe it. Our military is not a bunch of bomb crazy cowboys blowing up everything that moves. A lot more goes into planning even a single strike than most people can imagine. And even then things still go wrong with these strikes.

That said, I think a 16 year old is fully capable of pulling a trigger and committing acts of terrorism.

As harsh as this may sound, I couldn't care less if the boy was an all American boy who enjoyed hip-hop, watched baseball, and had facebook page with a profile picture showing a young happy boy with a thick mop of curly brown hair that his cousins often teased him about.

I only care what he did, not what he looked like... Also, a birth certificate only proves to me where he was born not what organizations he is affiliated with. At least that is not on mine...

I think the problem with this particular case, and many others, is transparency. If it was a mistake and he was in the wrong place at the right time fess up. If he was targeted for a reason present the reason.

Indigo5
Good summary, though heavy on the appeal to emotion in my personal opinion.

I think Article 3 of the Constitution, describing treason is also worth reviewing.

OtherSideOfTheCoin

If he was still in Denver and a group of armed FBI agents walked into his home under direction from the Whitehouse and executed him by shooting him in the head, there would have been riots on the streets and demands for justice.

With this analogy it would be worthwhile discussing the term "Extra-judicial" which is a strict legal requirement for these drone strikes. Outside the bounds of our judicial system. If the FBI had jurisdiction and resources to arrest someone in Somalia it would not be "Extra-Judicial".

Do the protections of the Constitution follow American citizens around the globe, whatever countries they reside in, and whatever traitorous violence they plan and undertake against America?

This would seem to afford a dangerous immunity for those plotting to kill Americans? placing them beyond the reach of our Justice system and the jurisdiction of our law enforcement, but still afforded all the protections of the same?

edit on 30-10-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

This is a moral question not a legal one.

Morally do free men and women deserve a trial.

Do their children deserve to face execution for their parents sin.

Just because the current admin has structured a system to justify their actions, an extra branch of the judiciary to sit as executioner to MAKE it legal.

Doesn't make it Moral, Doesn't make it Justice, Doesn't make it American.

America has step far outside normal Morals, and needs to be held accountable, Enhanced interrogation (torture), extraordinary rendition (kidnapping), Arbitrary Assassination (drone strikes), Capturing Meta Data... (spying on the innocent throwing out presumption of innocence).


Maybe I am crazy, but I believe everyone deserves a trial (even one in absentia which the US has legal rules for and does not use in these cases) NO matter their stated crime, period.

Anything less is tyranny and terrorism in and of it self.

reply to post by Indigo5

Do the protections of the Constitution follow American citizens around the globe, whatever countries they reside in, and whatever traitorous violence they plan and undertake against America? 
There you have it folks. The 16 year old that is the subject of this thread was a terrorist. .. according to some.
His father was accused of being a terrorist. .. according to the goon that had him killed.

reply to post by overratedpatriotism

That said, I think a 16 year old is fully capable of pulling a trigger and committing acts of terrorism.

As harsh as this may sound, I couldn't care less if the boy was an all American boy who enjoyed hip-hop, watched baseball, and had facebook page with a profile picture showing a young happy boy with a thick mop of curly brown hair that his cousins often teased him about.

He didn't do anything!

That's the point, he just happened to have the wrong last name.

So far the Obama administration has failed to provide any reasonable explanation for this killing and some have strong suspicions it was deliberate.

There is no transparency

butcherguy
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Do the protections of the Constitution follow American citizens around the globe, whatever countries they reside in, and whatever traitorous violence they plan and undertake against America? 
There you have it folks. The 16 year old that is the subject of this thread was a terrorist. .. according to some.
His father was accused of being a terrorist. .. according to the goon that had him killed.

A better question is should the US government be bound by its own internal laws in any action it takes.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

in the last 13 years particullary we have allowed them to change the Government, For transient causes, might as well start using the Founding documents as TP at this point for all the outrage things like this cause.

reply to post by butcherguy


Hey Butch...If you choose to invent and assign statements and conclusions to me that I did not state, then I have no interest in entertaining such BS.

benrl

This is a moral question not a legal one.

Morally do free men and women deserve a trial.

Do their children deserve to face execution for their parents sin.

Do we ask such questions on a battlefield? What if the enemy by definition has no allegiance to a geography, has staked out no geographic field of battle and has made innocents their declared target?

Do you believe that it was the United States Government's intent to Kill the boy?

Indigo5

benrl

This is a moral question not a legal one.

Morally do free men and women deserve a trial.

Do their children deserve to face execution for their parents sin.

Do we ask such questions on a battlefield? What if the enemy by definition has no allegiance to a geography, has staked out no geographic field of battle and has made innocents their declared target?

Do you believe that it was the United States Government's intent to Kill the boy?

Battlefield my ass these are assassinations in peoples homes, while they sleep, while they celebrate weddings.

Call all combat age people insurgents, it may help you and dick cheney sleep at night, but no one else is buying that crap New-speak 1984 nonsense.

Are we at war in Pakistan? if we aren't that is no battlefield, its illegal actions abroad against a sovereign nation.

ETA: Sorry misspoke, YEMEN, christ I can't even keep track of who we are bombing.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Ah.... Thank you for personalizing this story and placing a face on our victim. He was a real cute boy, and my oh my, look at that smile. Not the angry face of a terrorist.

Killing one innocent civilian, no matter their nationality, is one too many. And murdering an American citizen without due process is an even greater atrocity since it also undermines our constitution. Thus, his murder consisted of two crimes. Who ever ordered this strike should be in jail, so why aren't they?

reply to post by Indigo5

Do you believe that it was the United States Government's intent to Kill the boy?

I think you are raising some very interesting points.

But this really caught my attention.

I dont think that it matters if they meant to do it or not, what matters is that nobody has ever been held accountable for it. If it were a accident then something should be done to make sure it does not happen again, apologizes made and if necessary people punished. if it was a deliberate act then all those involved in making the decisions should be punished. The problem is the lack of transparency they killed a 16 year old American and so far no one seems to have been held accountable to that act.

Good article OSOTC,
I notice that part of the Fifth opens with person, not citizen. If that's how it is written, it should apply to everybody.
It matters not since with the Baghdad video, at least two war crimes were committed and nothing done about that.
The US department of defense holds about 99 American detainees, so where's the Fifth there?
Then there were/are? Faux case detainees, God knows how many held in Guantanamo. The Fifth doesn't apply any more, probably never did for some people.

reply to post by Indigo5


I don't disagree wholly with you except that Gibbs' answer seemed to suggest that he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So, now we have an administration who not only assassinated targets from afar, but doesn't mind taking out civilian collateral damage while doing it. Women and children in some cases ... of course, I know that muslim terrorists are infamous for hiding behind such human shields, so how far are we willing to go to take out these targets?

Do we need to declare war on the countries they're in? But they aren't in a nation ... so ...

Now we have our administration adding in American citizens to category of collateral damage in order to get a successful strike, and joking about it. That's the part that really makes my blood boil. The joke. It sort of demonstrates how little human life actually means to these people and it's no part of anyone I want in charge of me.

You know if America revolts, the drones will come. And they will come hot and heavy, so if you're on the wrong side and you love your family, you better stay far, far away from them.