Kevin Jon Heller (opinio juris) has a valuable blogpost on The Folly of Comparing Al-Awlaki to Admiral Yamamoto.
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is condemning the Obama administration for killing an American born al-Qaida operative without a trial. How did it come to this? CNN's William Martel wrote march 6 2010:
"In January 2009, President Obama announced that the United States would close the Guantanamo Bay military prison. Ten months later, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that alleged Sept. 11 co-conspirators, including Mohammed, would be tried in criminal courts. Initially, the trial was to be conducted in New York, but U.S. politicians, notably New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, objected. The political climate was already beginning to shift when 13 U.S. soldiers were shot and killed, allegedly by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist, at Ft. Hood, Texas, a week before Holder's announcement. But what became the "game changer" was the attempted Christmas Day bombing. When the 23-year old Nigerian Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab allegedly tried to blow up Northwest Airlines flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit, he altered the politics of terror trials -- and arguably our political center of gravity."
Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who enjoyes Obama's immunity for assassinating the Presidents of Burundi and Rwanda believes strongly in a policy of assassination of political opponents. In March 2010, just two months after the Northwest Airlines incident, Paul Kagame gave a speech at West Point, where his son, Ivan Cyomoro, studies in which he said:
"contrasting the response to the 9/11 attacks in New York and the genocide in Rwanda, President Kagame pointed to the need to enhance international response, solidarity and cooperation, so that international threats "carry the same weight and meaning to all countries irrespective of which interests are at stake" and not only when the interests of powerful nations are threatened."In may 2011, the regime's mouthpiece The New Times published an article in which opponents of the regime were warned their fate would be similar to Osama bin Laden. No doubt the Anwar al-Awlaki case will have impact both on US diplomacy abroad and the Presidential elections.
Homeland security watch has collected many links to articles on the Anwar al-Awlaki's assassination. Chris Lundry at the COMOPS blog has written a series of blogposts:
"exploring Islamist reactions to anti-Islam and anti-Muslim events in the US, including the debate over the Park51 Islamic Center and an American pastor’s proposal to burn a Qur’an on 9/11, among others. One of the points we made in our final post was that these events fuel the extremist narrative that the US and its allies are at war with Islam"What is interesting about Anwar al-Awlaki is the fact that he is an American citizen. What are the legal options for his family? Can they appeal his "assassination" conviction? Are his constitutional rights transferrable to another person after his death?
Summer Patriot - Winter Soldier writes about the curious case of nadal milak hasan and compares it to Anwar al-awlaki:
Anwar al-awlaki was a natural born united states citizen: his father sued in an american court to try and prevent his eventual killing by american intelligence and military operatives. he was never conviction of any act of homicide or terror in a united states court.Summer Patriot - Winter Soldier then makes this point:
but, he was identified as an al queda operative. and, he was executed as an al queda operative.
"US army major nadal milak hasan was and is an islamic jihadist terrorist, by his own admission and testimonial of his islamic faith at war with the united states, deserves to have that determination made and announced by him, and very richly deserves summary field execution after summary court martial as an enemy combatant who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers, and tried to kill 32 more of them.The contradictory approach by the US of an American who happened to live in Yemen and an American living in the US seems obvious.
why does an enemy who has the blood of 13 soldiers on his hands deserve the due process considerations of american jurisprudence any more than anwar al-awlaki did (not.) why does an enemy combatant who killed 13 soldiers not deserve the same summary field execution any less than anwar al-awlaki?"
Carl Spurchise writes:
"The American people will never know the truth about Al-Awalaki's alleged crimes. Even Nazis captured from WWII who were charged with crimes against humanity had trials in Nuremberg, Germany. Not Al-Awakaki. He got Oxbowed to death."Ron Paul is obviously correct when he states:
“This is very, very dangerous, you know. Who knows what the future will bring. Maybe just dissenters would be potential terrorists. Already, it doesn’t take a lot to be a potential terrorist.”The patriot act has been used mostly in drugs related cases. As John Whitehead,who served as research assistent to Francis Schaeffer on the influential book "A Christian Manifesto", said in may concerning the extensions of the patriot act:
"we are more like China then China is like us"Ron Paul: Al-Awlaki Should Have Gotten the Eichmann Treatment.