babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Obama under fire for ordering murder of two U.S. citizens
October 1, 2011 - 12:12am
However, it must never be forgotten that he is better than McCain or Palin - right? Huh?
Debate rages over whether U.S. had right to target al-Awlaki
This quote, from the link posted by Unionist, pretty sums up the issue quite well:
Note that the question of U.S. citizenship, correctly, does not enter into Amann's formulation of the issue. Much of the liberal criticism coming from the U.S. seeks to protect U.S. citizens, while having no problem with targeted assassinations of others.
BTW, remember the outrage over Muammar Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein "kiling their own citizens" - which was used as a prime liberal argument for "humanitarian" intervention and regime change? I guess attacks on the USA are now justifiable on the same basis.
..a good discussion on democracy now.
With Death of Anwar al-Awlaki, Has U.S. Launched New Era of Killing U.S. Citizens Without Charge?http://www.democracynow.org/2011/9/30/with_death_of_anwar_al_awlaki
The Due-Process Free Assassination of US Citizens Is Now Reality (and vid) - by Glenn Greenwald
http://politics.salon.com/2011/09/30/awlaki_6/
"...Despite substantial doubt among Yemen experts about whether he even has any operational role in Al Qaeda, no evidence (as opposed to unverified government accusations) was presented of his guilt. When Awlaki's father sought a court order barring Obama from killing his son, the DOJ argued, among other things, that such decisions were 'state secrets' and thus beyond the scrutiny of the Courts. He was simply ordered killed by the President: his judge, jury and executioner..."
Absence of Evidence: The Progressive Policy of Imperial Murder - by Chris Floyd
http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2169-...
"In the coming days, we are certain to hear loud, full-throated praise of Barack Obama's murder of uncharged, untried American citizens. And most of these encomiums will come from heartsworn, true-blue 'progressives'--the very people who, savagely denounced George W Bush for his 'murderous tyranny' when he carried out the very same crimes, in the very same way, in the very same place.
And they will be telling us, yet again, why we must must must support Barack Obama in his quest to win one more term atop the greasy pole of power.
This is not just the usual partisan amnesia, this is not just moral blindness: it is active, open, undeniable complicity with evil."
'learning from the best!' Brad Lavigne NDP
Paul, a staunch Libertarian, said in New Hampshire Friday that it's "sad" if "the American people accept this blindly and casually," adding that "nobody knows if he ever killed anybody," According to the Wall Street Journal. the Texas Republican lawmaker said United States officials "have never been specific about the crime."
The ACLU said the killing was a violation of both U.S. and international law.
"As we've seen today, this is a program under which American citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government without judicial process, and on the basis of standards and evidence that are kept secret not just from the public but from the courts," said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director for the ACLU. "The government's authority to use lethal force against its own citizens should be limited to circumstances in which the threat to life is concrete, specific and imminent. It is a mistake to invest the president - any president - with the unreviewable power to kill any American whom he deems to present a threat to the country."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20113962-503544.html?tag=strip
Question: If it is okay for the US to send drones equipped with Hellfire missiles to kill one of their citizens (eg al-Awlaki) in a country it is not at war with (eg Yemen), is it then okay for other countries with Drone technology to send them into the US (or other countries they are not at war with) to kill one of their citizens? Why or why not? Seems to me Obama has set a dsturbing precedent.
ETA: Wasn't it was George Bush who said he would take the fight to the terrorists wherever they are...?
Obama is setting no precedent he is merely following the age old imperial dictum that might makes right. Of course no one else has the might so they do not have the imperial right. Of course if NATO was to split into factions then all bets are off since many of those second rate countries still have imperial fantasies.
Drone technology is not limited to the USA according to the CBC. Sooner or later it'll be widespread.
Fuck him... good riddance...
Any drone strike on a NATO ally would be considered an act of war no matter who the target was. The offending country would then have its cities subjected to some good old shock and awe capitalism.
Great cartoon in pagina12.com.ar today:
A: I see Obama has just killed another top Al Qaeda leader.
B: Yes, isn't he sly! He's probably angling for a second Nobel Peace Prize.
When Palin shoots something running away from an airplane, it's usually just a moose...
Thats only because she doesn't own her own drones.
Speaking of airplanes, CNN reported yesterday that the latest threats may be remote controlled gas-powered model airplanes that can carry a 50 pound load of biochemical materials or anthrax and flown into populated areas. Another payload could be 50 pounds of high-explosive material.
Obama Boasts of Assassinating American Citizens in Yemen - by Bill Van Auken
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/oct2011/alwa-o01.shtml
"In response to Friday's killing of Awlaki, ACLU deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer said that the 'targeted killing program violates both US and international law.' He charges that under his program, 'American citizens far from any battlefield can be executed by their own government without judicial process, and on the basis of standards of evidence that are kept secret ot just from the public but from the courts.'
Jaffer warned: 'It is a mistake to invest the President - any President - with the unreviewable power to kill any American he deems to present a threat to his country.'
There is mounting speculation in Yemen that the link between his [President Saleh's] return and Awlaki's death was more than coincidental; that the regime provided assistance in the killing of the US-born cleric in return for Washington's aid in suppressing the mass popular upheavals that have shaken the country.."
Anwar al - Awlaki's Extrajudicial Murder - by Michael Ratner
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29275.htm
"The law on the use of lethal force by executive order is specific. This assassination broke it - that creates a terrifying precedent.."
President, Constitutional Law Professor and Nobel Peace laureate strikes again...
I would suppose that Obama has permission of the Yemeni government to use its airspace to do this. Not that this makes it okay, it just makes it not an act of war against Yemen.
My guess is that Doug is right, based on the comment by NDPP in post #16.
Some of the press is speculating that the timing is not coincidental. The dictator returns from Saudi Arabia and the drone strike occurs immediately. Lets not forget that unlike in Libya the totalitarian government is supported by NATO despite tens of thousands of peaceful protestors in the streets.
Yeah but drones were being used by the USA in Yemen long before this strike. The strike in its self is nothing new; the status of the target is what makes this strike stand out.
Would that be why the title of this thread includes the murder of two US citizens. The US has abandoned the rule of law in its foreign relations so yeah a drone strike in another country is just business as usual.
Dead Men Tell No Tales: The CIA, 9/11 and the Awlaki Assassination
Awlaki did have ties to several 9/11 hijackers. But the FBI and the Pentagon dictatorship knew about him for a decade and could have picked him up
at any time. Instead he was given the green light to come and go from the U.S. unlike many ordinary American Muslims who were scooped up immediately and detained during the post-9/11 hysteria.
They've known all about "al-Qa'eda" for a long time before 9/11. Our lapdog newz media used to refer to them as "the mujahideen" and even freedom fighters. These freedom fighters were given direct entry visas to the U.S.A. in places like Riyadh, Saudi Arabia for years according to Sibel Edmonds and at least one other whistleblower who worked for the U.S. Government in Riyadh and whose job it was to issue U.S. travel visas.
Fair trial in adhering to U.S. Constitutuional law? Hell no. They could never let someone like Awlaki spill the beans to the press.
Death squad justice and assassinations is par for the course for Gladio ringleaders. It's desperation time for the Gladio mafia, and it's getting ugly.