Secret U.S. memo sanctioned killing of Aulaqi

[Tx4obama]

The Justice Department wrote a secret memorandum authorizing the lethal targeting of Anwar al-Aulaqi, the American-born radical cleric who was killed by a U.S. drone strike Friday, according to administration officials.

The document was produced following a review of the legal issues raised by striking a U.S. citizen and involved senior lawyers from across the administration. There was no dissent about the legality of killing Aulaqi, the officials said.

“What constitutes due process in this case is a due process in war,” said one of the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss closely held deliberations within the administration.

The administration has faced a legal challenge and public criticism for targeting Aulaqi, who was born in New Mexico, because of constitutional protections afforded U.S. citizens. The memorandum may represent an attempt to resolve, at least internally, a legal debate over whether a president can order the killing of U.S. citizens overseas as a counterterrorism measure.

SNIP

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/aulaqi-killing-reignites-debate-on-limits-of-executive-power/2011/09/30/gIQAx1bUAL_story.html?hpid=z1

p.s. There are TWO pages of the article at the link.

[teddy51]

1. That should make it ok then.. No defence, no trial, and hidden information.

This country is so Fucked.....

[TheWraith]

2. Except for, you know, his repeated proud confessions.

Funny how people always make it out like we shot some random guy, instead of a guy who was repeatedly boasting about his part in killing or attempting to kill hundreds.

[cliffordu]

11. Shhh....Facts just make them stampede.

[Tx4obama]

5. He declared WAR on the USA, and the USA took him out.

When the enemy is engaging war against you and you're not able to capture him - you take him out the best way you can!

[EFerrari]

8. Yes, that was Bush's argument for the crimes he committed

all over the world in the name of the war on terror.

[Tx4obama]

13. Not the same. In THIS case we are talking about 'one' specific individual

that declared war on the USA and 'one' specific individual that was targeted to be taken out.

That is NOT what Bush did and I believe everyone knows that.

[EFerrari]

15. No, we're not talking about one single individual. That's wrong.

Haven't you read Obama's OTHER LIST? No, because it's secret. So much for his transformational transparent administration.

The Kill List

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/09/kill-list

[kickysnana]

16. It is not legally possible for a non-government individual to declare war

Therefore it is not legally defensible to declare war on him. Therefore he needs to have a trial before he is executed. It is what our system is. We are outside of our charter and very, very wrong on so many levels.

Terrorism was what Hitler used to justify his abominable acts against individuals.

No way are you going to justify this unless you go there.

[reACTIONary]

17. I think you have to update your understanding of war...

...the world has changed quite a bit since the 18th, 19th century. It has become possible for non-state actors and organizations to effectively wage "asymmetric" war. And they are doing so, with or without "declarations". We have the right, under international law, to defend ourselves, and our government has the responsibility to do so.

[kickysnana]

19. The world never changes, it is the same game different players.

[reACTIONary]

21. Not true... one (obvious) case in point...

... the steam engine and the social / political changes that lead to the civil war. The simple fact of the matter is that the material changes in our world, and in our developing understanding of our world, lead to new, and profoundly different capabilities and opportunities and to significant changes in the way we organize, interact and live with one another.

The ability of fringe, ideologically motivated, non-state organizations to significantly (if not successfully) wage war on a global scale is one such change. As is the ability of nation-states to counter such groups using tactics, techniques and procedures that are not your grand-dad's army jeep.

The world has changed; the world is changing; and liberal, humane nation-states have to protect ourselves in a new and different environment and in new and different ways.

[kickysnana]

22. Different toys. n/t

[EFerrari]

3. Alberto Gonzalez had nothing on these people. n/t

[Supersedeas]

14. John Yoo must be smirking in his white tower right about now

[pinto]

4. Treason - The US Constitution is unusually brief on the guidelines -

3 sentences...

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A3Sec3.html

:shrug:

[Harmony Blue]

10. Outing CIA agents

falls under this....sooo...yeah...not buying what you are selling....

[pinto]

18. I'm not selling anything. Went to the source, US Constituion, and was surpised how brief the

citation was. No advocacy, just info... :hi:

[Angry Dragon]

6. 'due process in war'

A question:

The rich, bankers, the wealthy say we are in a 'class war'
War is war
The people are the government
So they say we are at war


The leaders of this country are destroying this country
and it seems that nothing or anyone is safe today

[ChandlerJr]

7. I guess that means John Yoo is off the hook now.

n/t

[Major Hogwash]

9. And that's that.

Personally, if the estate of al-Awlaki is really upset about this situation, I think they should sue the United States in federal court.
Let them file their case in New York City.
And then they would know just how much we hate Al Queda and that would be the end of all of the sniviling we are hearing today in the background.

[FarCenter]

12. Were it deemed a crime, the President could pardon everyone involved anyway

Presumably, the President could be impeached, but that is very unlikely.

[RetroLounge]

20. More hope and change from the messiah

:puke:

RL