There is a legal rationale for killing a US citizen with one drone.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

But we're not permitted to know what that rationale is. None of us was ok with this sort of thing under the Bush Administration. I'm still not ok with it.
--
Judge: Feds can hide rationale for killing U.S. citizen
Bob Egelko
Published 3:11 pm, Monday, April 14, 2014

(04-14) 15:09 PDT OAKLAND -- A Bay Area federal judge says the Obama administration can keep secret a memo spelling out the legal rationale for a 2011 drone attack in Yemen that killed a U.S. citizen and alleged terrorist mastermind.

The Justice Department was entitled to withhold the memo on the grounds of national security and lawyer-client confidentiality, Chief U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland said Friday.

Although U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and other Obama administration officials have made public statements justifying drone strikes, Wilken said none of them was specific enough for her to rule against the government's claim of secrecy and require officials to disclose the legal rationale for the Yemen attack.
...
On April 4, a judge in Washington, D.C., dismissed a damage suit against U.S. officials by parents of those killed in the drone strikes, saying officials who order such attacks "must be trusted" to act legally and are not subject to judicial oversight.
(more at link)

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-Feds-can-hide-rationale-for-killing-U-S-5401933.php

[dixiegrrrrl]

1. Not at all good.

A Gov't that spies on its citizens, that operates black prisons, that tortures people, and that deprives its citizens of Constitutional protections, cannot "be trusted" with the health and welfare of the people it governs.

Period.

[struggle4progress]

2. You're confusing yourself

There's not a court in the country that will try to force the President to justify a particular military action, conducted with general Congressional authorization using funds appropriated by Congress

There are good reasons not to conduct anti-terrorism campaigns as military operations, rather than as criminal investigations and prosecutions, but our side lost that political fight a few years back: if you want to change that, you've got to engage in the hard political fight to change that

There are good reasons to avoid use of unmanned drone strikes: if you want to change that, you've got to engage in the hard political fight to change that

But the idea, that someone, simply by virtue of American citizenship, enjoys special protections, when apparently serving in a military campaign against the US, is idiotic: as a talking point, intended to sway public opinion, it will not gain any traction, so it will lose politically; and being logically incoherent: it will predictably lose in court also

[Maedhros]

6. The flaw in your reasoning is this:

The persons in question were not "serving in a military campaign against the U.S.", because there is no such thing occurring in Yemen.

The notion that we can ignore the Constitutional rights of al-Awlaki and his son because the execution took place during a war operation is erroneous. We are not in a state of war with Yemen. There is no battlefield, with two armed forces in conflict with one another. The al-Awlakis carried no weapons and commanded no troops. Anwar al-Awlaki did indeed call for jihad against the United States, but this is protected speech (cf. Brandenburger v. Ohio). Even if it were a crime, just because it may have been committed in a foreign country does not make al-Awlaki's rights vanish.

We need to stop accepting the Neo-Con idea of ubiquitous, continual global war as a justification to behave as brutally as they want.

[struggle4progress]

8. There's no constitutional right to wage war against the US

... “I eventually came to the conclusion that jihad against America is binding upon myself, just as it is binding on every other able Muslim” ... In 1998 and 1999, he was a vice president of a small Islamic charity that an F.B.I. agent later testified was “a front organization to funnel money to terrorists.” He had been visited by Ziyad Khaleel, a Qaeda operative who purchased a battery for Osama bin Laden’s satellite phone, as well as by an associate of Omar Abdel Rahman, the so-called Blind Sheik, who was serving a life sentence for plotting to blow up New York landmarks ... One detective, whose name has been redacted, told the commission he believed Mr. Awlaki “was at the center of the 9/11 story.” An F.B.I. agent, also unidentified, said that “if anyone had knowledge of the plot, it would have been” the cleric, since “someone had to be in the U.S. and keep the hijackers spiritually focused” ... During that trip, he visited Ali al-Timimi, a Virginia cleric later convicted for encouraging Muslims to join the fight against American troops in Afghanistan ... During that trip, he visited Ali al-Timimi, a Virginia cleric later convicted for encouraging Muslims to join the fight against American troops in Afghanistan ...
Imam’s Path From Condemning Terror to Preaching Jihad
By SCOTT SHANE and SOUAD MEKHENNET
Published: May 8, 2010

... A prime suspect in the attempted bombings is Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born "spiritual leader" of al-Qaida in the Arabian peninsula, whose sermons were attended by three of the hijackers who carried out the 9/11 attacks ... He returned to Yemen in 2004, where he lectured at Iman University, which is headed by Abdul Majeed al-Zindani, who is closely tied to al-Qaida ...
Prime suspect in cargo plane bomb plot: Anwar al-Awlaki
'Spiritual leader' of al-Qaida in the Arabian peninsula is the only US citizen known to be on CIA list of assassination targets
Chris McGreal
The Guardian, Sunday 31 October 2010 14.05 EDT

... Equally satisfactory for Western security agencies is the probability that AQAP's chief bombmaker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, was also in the two-car convoy that the Reaper drone's Hellfire missiles ripped apart. Al-Asiri was the creative mastermind who persuaded his own brother to stick a bomb up his rectum in an attempt to kill a Saudi interior minister in 2009. He was also behind the Christmas Day “underpants bomber” and the bombs disguised as printer cartridges that came very close to blowing up two America-bound cargo planes last year. If al-Asiri is dead along with al-Awlaki and Khan, then AQAP's so-called “Foreign Operations” unit will have lost its three brightest stars ...
The killing of Anwar al-Awlaki
A crippling blow
Oct 1st 2011, 9:17 by M.J.S.


... The radical Yemeni American cleric who was killed in a CIA drone strike in Yemen in September personally directed the plot to take down a plane over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009, according to a Justice Department memo. The memo, released Friday ahead of the sentencing next week of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called “underwear bomber,” offers the most detailed evidence to date of Anwar al-Awlaki’s operational role in al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate ... One supplement describes how Abdulmutallab, inspired by the online lectures of Awlaki, left Dubai, United Arab Emirates, where he was taking graduate classes, and traveled to Yemen to meet the cleric in August 2009 ... In Yemen, he immediately began to visit mosques to ask people how he could get in touch with Awlaki, who was in hiding. An unnamed individual told Awlaki of the inquiries, and the cleric sent him a text message asking him to call, according to the memo. Awlaki requested a written explanation of why Abdulmutallab wanted to become involved in violent jihad. The cleric, apparently satisfied with the message, told Abdulmutallab he would find a way for him to participate, the memo stated ...
Awlaki directed Christmas ‘underwear bomber’ plot, Justice Department memo says
By Peter Finn
February 10, 2012

... Last Thursday, as the jury in the trial of Nidal Hasan was deliberating, outgoing FBI Director Robert Mueller appeared on CBS News and discussed a string of emails between the Fort Hood shooter and Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Islamic cleric with ties to the 9/11 hijackers. The FBI had intercepted the messages starting almost a year before Hasan's 2009 shooting rampage ... The military judge in the Hasan case also barred the prosecutor from presenting them, saying they would cause "unfair prejudice" and "undue delay" ...
Internal Documents Reveal How the FBI Blew Fort Hood
Nearly a year before the massacre, the bureau intercepted emails between Nidal Hasan and radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki that officials called "fairly benign." They are anything but.
By Mariah Blake
Tue Aug. 27, 2013 6:42 AM PDT

[rhett o rick]

16. I find what you are pushing as very scary. I guess rationalization is the key to your happiness. nm

[struggle4progress]

17. Multiple independent lines of evidence, for over a decade, demonstrated connections

between al-Awlaki and various al-Qaida operatives involved in various terrorist plots. He finally died in Yemen in the company of other known al-Qaida leaders, including one of al-Qaida's top bomb-makers

As long as the problem -- of an loosely-organized worldwide network planning terrorist attacks -- is treated as a matter requiring military response, rather than as a criminal justice issue, this will simply be about as well as we can do: people, who seem to have a long history of connections with multiple terrorist actions, and who travel in the company of known terrorists, cannot expect to travel safely in areas beyond the rule of law. If such a person is brought into custody, of course, a different standard applies

[Maedhros]

18. Yet all the "evidence" to which you link

is sourced to the U.S. Government. These are allegations that Al-Awlaki was not given a chance to refute in a court of law. The U.S. Government refuses to present its evidence other than by statements by anonymous officials or in memos alleging unconfirmed facts.

Even were we to accept the U.S. Governments allegations of criminal activity, the Constitution guarantees due process of law before inflicting punishment. Using George W. Bush's perverted notion that the entire world, everywhere, all-the-time, is a "battlefield" in a "war," is preposterous.

If you have been involved in liberal politics for any reasonable amount of time you would have learned by now that one cannot take the word of the Pentagon or the CIA when they justify their use of violence. The fact that you are so vehemently defending the practice of using drones to eliminate political targets, and using the Pentagon's own arguments, on a supposedly Democratic discussion forum is extremely distressing.

I can't believe that you would be taking this same stance if President McCain was doing it.

[struggle4progress]

23. Standards of military action differ from judicial standards

[laundry_queen]

26. So as long as a citizen is killed as a result of the military

then no accountability is required. Ok. Got it.

[struggle4progress]

27. ?

[msanthrope]

30. Mr. Awlaki did not show up for.his murder trial in Yemen....nor did he show in the UK

when his co conspirator on the BA bomb plot, Rajib Karim, was on trial. Awlaki, who had posted hundreds of videos to YouTube while on the run in Yemen, never secured counsel, and never attempted to refute any charges against him.

Even if you do not believe the American military.... What is your problem with the British courts? Was Karim wrongly convicted?

[GeorgeGist]

7. You don't know what you're talking about ...

when the reason is secret. And the idea that you do is idiotic.

[struggle4progress]

12. ... Earlier this morning, Anwar al-Awlaki -- a leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula --

was killed in Yemen. (Applause.) The death of Awlaki is a major blow to al Qaeda's most active operational affiliate. Awlaki was the leader of external operations for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. In that role, he took the lead in planning and directing efforts to murder innocent Americans. He directed the failed attempt to blow up an airplane on Christmas Day in 2009. He directed the failed attempt to blow up U.S. cargo planes in 2010. And he repeatedly called on individuals in the United States and around the globe to kill innocent men, women and children to advance a murderous agenda ...
Remarks by the President at the "Change of Office" Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Ceremony
Fort Myer, Virginia
September 30, 2011

The general outlines of this story are no mystery: multiple independent lines of evidence, for over a decade, demonstrated connections between al-Awlaki and various al-Qaida operatives involved in various terrorist plots. He finally died in Yemen in the company of other known al-Qaida leaders, including one of al-Qaida's top bomb-makers

[Maedhros]

19. I've no time or inclination to read the propaganda of pro-war (presumably) Democrats.

/ignore list.

[struggle4progress]

24. Hmmm. Your reaction somehow reminds me of this:

[msanthrope]

3. Why would US citizenship matter? And why should the CIC reveal the rationale

behind a military operation to someone not affected by it?

Awlaki's relatives might have a better claim. Wonder why they aren't filing suit.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. We don't typically kill American citizens extrajudicially

When we do, we need to have a clear understanding of why the action was taken. Were you not aware?

[msanthrope]

5. What US citizen was killed "extrajudicially?" nt

[GeorgeGist]

9. It's secret.

[msanthrope]

10. Well, then...no wonder the lawsuit failed. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

13. I made a mistake with the word I chose, but I will not edit; I'll amend here.

There was no judicial oversight, and now we are not permitted to know what rationale they used to decide they could kill him. I don't care what profession you claim to work at, this is morally wrong and goes against everything this nation is supposed to stand for. The most open administration in history isn't.

PS: tell your indented and passive-aggressive pal that he's permitted to address me directly if he'll come on out.

[msanthrope]

28. Of course there was judicial oversight. You are confusing prosecution

in an article 3 court with military strikes. The War Powers Act of 1973 is constitutional... the AUMF of Sept 18th 2001 invoking the War Powers Act has been upheld by every single branch of government.

There seems to be a great deal of confusion on this issue but put plainly..... If you are a non-custodial member of al Qaeda, you are subject to being killed where you are found.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

29. No, I'm reading the words of a federal judge.

On April 4, a judge in Washington, D.C., dismissed a damage suit against U.S. officials by parents of those killed in the drone strikes, saying officials who order such attacks "must be trusted" to act legally and are not subject to judicial oversight.

[msanthrope]

31. You are reading a reporter who quoted three words from an opinion of a federal judge

And that reporter got the ruling incorrectly....

Individual military decisions, that is the operations of War, do not require individual judicial approval because our Constitution has vested that authority within the executive branch. The War Powers Act, invoked here on Sept 18th 2001, has been upheld by SCOTUS..... that plus the extensive line of cases to deal with the Guantanamo detainees is your judicial oversight of that AUMF.

Mr. Awlaki had no right in an article three court because he was fugitive al Qaeda.... and that wasn't dependent upon his citizenship at all.

[struggle4progress]

14. Rules for US judicial process apply when a person is in US custody, or when it is likely a person

can be brought into US custody

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. These are the same goons that use SWAT teams to combat the white collar crime of student loan fraud

I don't trust them.

[neverforget]

15. When President Cruz does this, DU will be in an uproar

and rightfully so. Until then, excuses and GO TEAM!

[LeftyMom]

20. I knew this site had gone downhill, but I just read the replies to this thread and I'm floored.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Well it is ok if the guy giving the orders is a D

wait until the R gets into the WH, and it will happen.



And yes the place went downhill a while ago.

[msanthrope]

32. I've been really happy if Bush droned Osama bin Laden...

Preferably at Tora Bora. How about you???

[Dragonfli]

22. Thank Gawd for the transparency?

I wonder if there is a secret rationale to kill me and my family for a crime they don't have to disclose, whatever the secret rationalization is there must be a secret constitution that backs it up because the one I learned in school would never back up this obvious bullshit.

[MisterP]

25. we put a stop to this in 1641!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_chamber