Do you believe that the fbi has the right to kill some american citizen

[applegrove]

if he is armed and dangerous and a threat to life of civilians? How is killing Al Aulaqi any different?

[LAGC]

1. Was he really armed and dangerous?

Sounds like he was only "armed" with a video camera and microphone.

[msanthrope]

6. Email between him and his co-conspirator, on the planned BA bombing--

He wasn't just advocating murder, he was actively plotting it....


Awlaki's emails to terror plotter show operational role
By Thomas JoscelynMarch 2, 2011

SNIP--

On Feb. 13, 2010, Awlaki emailed Karim again. This time Awlaki probed Karim's ability to get a bomb or suicide bomber on board a plane headed for the US, and he also encouraged Karim to take a job on a flight crew. Awlaki wrote :

Our highest priority is the US. Anything there, even if on a smaller scale compared to what we may do in the UK, would be our choice. So the question is: with the people you have, is it possible to get a package or a person with a package on board a flight heading to the US? If that is not possible, then what ideas do you have that could be set up for the uk?

...You should definitely take the opportunity, the information you could get would be very useful.

Karim emailed his brother on Feb. 15, 2010: "If it's not a good idea to visit you guys, then I intend to visit BD or USA. If I visit USA, I can check out what their security process is like."

Karim also replied to Awlaki on Feb. 15, saying he was willing to work on a US-focused

Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/03/anwar_al_awlakis_ema.php#ixzz1ZTbJ22f9

[LAGC]

10. So he types some mad shit on his keyboard.

Therefore we should just kill him. Because the government says so.

Gotcha.

[msanthrope]

11. Mad shit? He's conspiring to blow up an airliner. Karim was convicted....

you think that was mad shit?????

[LAGC]

15. Again, because the government says so.

I'd prefer these allegations be aired in open court so that the government must prove its case to the world before I support letting it pass a death sentence on anyone, let alone carrying it out.

[msanthrope]

31. Um, did you not read that these emails were put into open court--and led to a conviction

of his co-conspirator?

[sabrina 1]

24. Lots of morons type up stuff like that online, assuming those are

his emails which would mean he was pretty stupid btw. Should we drone attack all those lunatics now, no trial, no charges, just bomb them all? That is probably pretty expensive to do there are an awful lot of nut cases around. And those humanitarian drones are pretty expensive. I wonder who is making all the money each time they are used?

[AverageJoe90]

28. True, but......

Then again, we don't have any legitimate proof that he DIDN'T type up those e-mails though..........but yeah, I wouldn't want a drone used on every nut case either. It wouldn't work all that well, perhaps barring the rare & exceptional example where someone was investigated and arrested, but had managed to flee to an enemy nation before a trial could commence, and was proven to have been planning, and intending to imminently carry out a terror incident, particularly if it involved nuclear weapons, against the U.S., and especially towards civilians(not going to use Al-Awlaki as an example however, because he was neither investigated nor arrested. Not to mention we still don't know what exactly he was doing on that convoy).

[phantom power]

2. They have that right if they're in a gunfight.

Otherwise, they are obligated to bring a suspect in for a trial.

[msongs]

3. so its ok for foreign governments to send drones to the US to kill people. didnt know that nt

[The Magistrate]

4. That Is How They Got their Start, Ma'am

Mr. Dillenger is hardly the only U.S. citizen F.B.I. agents simply shot down without making the least attempt at arrest.

[JuniperLea]

19. Yes, it's a little late for all this outrage...

I thought people understoond this! It sort of freaks me out a little that there's all this outrage when this has been SOP forEVER!

[EFerrari]

5. Do you believe people should be killed for their speech?

[Denninmi]

7. No, I don't approve of the way this is being done.

The standard, I believe, is that the perpetrator has to be an "imminent threat" to the law enforcement official in pursuit, or to another person. In this case, an unmanned piece of technology was in pursuit, so in no way could these two suspects have been an imminent threat.

Honestly, I believe that they should be captured and tried, not assassinated on the spot with no real due process.

They were discussing this on NPR as I drove home, less than an hour ago. The viewpoint among the legal community involved in this area is mainly that "due process" has a different meaning beyond the borders of the US or other countries under the "rule of law" and that, in this circumstance, hostile territory and this semi-legal "state of war" due process boils down to basically being put on notice that the US can take you out at any time by any means due to your status as an "enemy combatant."

Personally, I think it stinks. But, given the state of perpetual war, etc., why should we bother with a few legal niceties? Hmmmm?

We have always, to my knowledge, been at war with Eastasia, never with Eurasia (until next week, that is, when it changes).

[NightWatcher]

8. Tim McVeigh got his Due Process. The Nazis even got trials at Nuremberg

We don't just knock off citizens without due process.

If they knew where he was, they should've picked him up and brought him to trial.

[AngkorWot]

13. "The Nazis even got trials at Nuremberg"

I seem to remember at least a few Nazis getting bombed and shot without getting due process.

God. Roosevelt. What a dick.

[AverageJoe90]

22. Yeah, but.......

The one major problem was that he was on U.S. soil and hadn't been putting up a fight, nor was he in the process of aiding & abetting another attack when the Feds caught up to him. Now, if he had been in say, Saudi Arabia or Iran, and doing what Al-Awlaki was doing(some white supremacist groups and most of the Islamists have had a surprisingly close working relationship over the years, sharing their contempt for the Jewish people and Western Democracy. Hell, this even goes back to WWII, when Hitler & the Grand Mufti were collaborating THEIR efforts!), then I'm pretty sure we would have done the exact same thing, even if some elements of the U.S. rightwing went up in arms about it.

[Enrique]

9. so if they gunned down Angela Davis in her sleep, it would have been justified?

what about Bill Ayers?

Do you think Nixon was too soft?

[AverageJoe90]

23. Here's the thing..............

Angie Davis was no terrorist, and as far as I know, Bill Ayers never intended to harm anyone, especially not civilians.

[Enrique]

26. Nixon thought she was a terrorist, and he's the one that counts

he's the one that gets to put people on lists of people to off. He'd put Ayers on the list too.

[elleng]

12. Yes to your first.

This differs as its an entire national security issue, not 'just' a common criminal. Technically, FBI may not have authority over such; CIA might, and surely DOD/military does.

Fact of 'American citizen' not important, imo.

[applegrove]

14. I agree. I'm canadian and I don't think people should be making it an issue that he was an

Ameican citizen. He was a monster. He was trying to kill civilians.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. Does that same standard apply to CIA types who plan to kill civilians?

Or, bomber pilots who bomb villages? How about artillerymen who bombard villages? Are they, too, liable for assassination?

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you." Friedrich Nietzche

[JuniperLea]

21. When people conspire to do harm to America...

Or Americans, they should automatically be thought of as having lost all rights to use the term and all that goes with it.

The FBI's first gigs were to kill killers... it has always been so.

But I agree... American citizen or not, a killer is a killer.

I don't believe in killing at all... I wish these asshats would just get locked away. I consider the video they release as their confessions. I don't see the big deal about no trial in this situation.

[AverageJoe90]

29. Didn't feel sorry for this, well, douchebag Al-Awlaki either.

I still ask why he hadn't been detained. In fact, I just found this warrant from June of 2002, albeit due to passport fraud:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29510870/Al-Awlaki-Arrest-Warrant

Why in the FUCK did they not act on this? If this is really the case, then the Denver Attorney's Office REALLY fucked up, BADLY, on this one. This shit could have been nipped in the BUD and yet they chose to cancel the warrant and let him go free.

[GreenWorld4Me]

16. If it was possible

If it was possible to take him in without putting other lives in harms way they should have brought him in. if it was not possible then they should have killed him on the spot.

[lamp_shade]

18. Yes I do.

[AverageJoe90]

20. Yes. And Al-Awlaki was no different. nt

[AverageJoe90]

30. Actually......I'm sorry.

The truth is, even with the most hardcore terrorists, I'd like to see them apprehended rather than killed on the spot. BUT, however, if that someone decides to try to take out the agents trying to arrest him, then, I say, by all means, they should fire back!

[Cherchez la Femme]

25. Ever hear of "Rules of Engagement"?

Those went by the wayside too,
just like Rule of Law...

[provis99]

27. Luis Posada is a terrorist who has murdered Americans, and is an ongoing threat.

Yet he lives in luxury in Florida, because he is a right-wing Cuban exile terrorist, rather than a Muslim American. Would you be in favor of Obama assassinating Posada?