Obama authorizes killing of cleric

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
montypython
Jedi Master
Posts: 1128
Joined: 2004-11-30 03:08am

Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by montypython »

If in case this wasn't posted earlier, From MSNBC:
By Scott Shane
updated 9:07 a.m. ET, Wed., April 7, 2010

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration has taken the extraordinary step of authorizing the targeted killing of an American citizen, the radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is believed to have shifted from encouraging attacks on the United States to directly participating in them, intelligence and counterterrorism officials said Tuesday.

Mr. Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and spent years in the United States as an imam, is in hiding in Yemen. He has been the focus of intense scrutiny since he was linked to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood, Tex., in November, and then to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25.

American counterterrorism officials say Mr. Awlaki is an operative of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the affiliate of the terror network in Yemen and Saudi Arabia. They say they believe that he has become a recruiter for the terrorist network, feeding prospects into plots aimed at the United States and at Americans abroad, the officials said.

It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said. A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president.

'Direct actions'
But the director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, told a House hearing in February that such a step was possible. “We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community,” he said. “If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.” He did not name Mr. Awlaki as a target.

The step taken against Mr. Awlaki, which occurred earlier this year, is a vivid illustration of his rise to prominence in the constellation of terrorist leaders. But his popularity as a cleric, whose lectures on Islamic scripture have a large following among English-speaking Muslims, means any action against him could rebound against the United States in the larger ideological campaign against Al Qaeda.

The possibility that Mr. Awlaki might be added to the target list was reported by The Los Angeles Times in January, and Reuters reported on Tuesday that he was approved for capture or killing.

“The danger Awlaki poses to this country is no longer confined to words,” said an American official, who like other current and former officials interviewed for this article spoke of the classified counterterrorism measures on the condition of anonymity. “He’s gotten involved in plots.”

The official added: “The United States works, exactly as the American people expect, to overcome threats to their security, and this individual — through his own actions — has become one. Awlaki knows what he’s done, and he knows he won’t be met with handshakes and flowers. None of this should surprise anyone.”

As a general principle, international law permits the use of lethal force against individuals and groups that pose an imminent threat to a country, and officials said that was the standard used in adding names to the list of targets. In addition, Congress approved the use of military force against Al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. People on the target list are considered to be military enemies of the United States and therefore not subject to the ban on political assassination first approved by President Gerald R. Ford.

Both the C.I.A. and the military maintain lists of terrorists linked to Al Qaeda and its affiliates who are approved for capture or killing, former officials said. But because Mr. Awlaki is an American, his inclusion on those lists had to be approved by the National Security Council, the officials said.

At a panel discussion in Washington on Tuesday, Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California and chairwoman of a House subcommittee on homeland security, called Mr. Awlaki “probably the person, the terrorist, who would be terrorist No. 1 in terms of threat against us.”
Here's the NY Times link for the article

If this was something done by Bush it would make perfect sense, but for Obama to do it just seems like political expediency...
User avatar
Dominus Atheos
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3901
Joined: 2005-09-15 09:41pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Dominus Atheos »

You're an idiot. No one cares that the military killed a Muslim cleric, the only reason this story is notable is because he was an American citizen dumbass. Even the title of the MSNBC article you quoted is "U.S. approves killing of American cleric" (bolding mine, obviously). Why the fuck would you remove that word from the title?
User avatar
montypython
Jedi Master
Posts: 1128
Joined: 2004-11-30 03:08am

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by montypython »

Dominus Atheos wrote:You're an idiot. No one cares that the military killed a Muslim cleric, the only reason this story is notable is because he was an American citizen dumbass. Even the title of the MSNBC article you quoted is "U.S. approves killing of American cleric" (bolding mine, obviously). Why the fuck would you remove that word from the title?
That was an accidental misquote, could a mod please edit the title for clarification?
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10646
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Elfdart »

Looks like the Teabaggers were somewhat right after all -Obama really does have a death panel.
Image
User avatar
Zixinus
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 6663
Joined: 2007-06-19 12:48pm
Location: In Seth the Blitzspear
Contact:

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Zixinus »

Elfdart wrote:Looks like the Teabaggers were somewhat right after all -Obama really does have a death panel.
And if I read the story correctly: its for actual terrorists.
Credo!
Chat with me on Skype if you want to talk about writing, ideas or if you want a test-reader! PM for address.
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Knife »

Zixinus wrote:
Elfdart wrote:Looks like the Teabaggers were somewhat right after all -Obama really does have a death panel.
And if I read the story correctly: its for actual terrorists.
Still not encouraging. As an American Terrorist, he still has rights. Now, if there is a huge firefight and he doesn't survive the battle that would have captured him, that's one thing. Saying that the government can claim someone is a terrorist and kill them without a trial is, well not good.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

I don't think this as a big deal. This guy is a known terrorist sympathizer and now they have information he is directly participating in attacks. If that information is verified then I'm all for it because locating and arresting known terrorists is a dangerous job, especially when that said terrorist is of high value. Why should ground troops be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
ShadowDragon8685
Village Idiot
Posts: 1183
Joined: 2010-02-17 12:44pm

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by ShadowDragon8685 »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:I don't think this as a big deal. This guy is a known terrorist sympathizergang-banger family member and now they have information he is directly participating in attacks liqour store hold-ups. If that information is verified then I'm all for it because locating and arresting known terroristsgangsters is a dangerous job, especially when that said terroristgangster is of high value. Why should ground troopspeace officers be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
Honestly, I'm kind of :shock: at you.

Of course, he might be dangerous, let's just execute him here and now without a trial! Why, think of the tax money that will save! Due process? :finger: it.

That said, if they catch him a firefight actively participating, just shoot the motherhumper. But you can't just assassinate someone.
CaptainChewbacca wrote:Dude...

Way to overwork a metaphor Shadow. I feel really creeped out now.
I am an artist, metaphorical mind-fucks are my medium.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Captain Seafort »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:Why should ground troops be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
The same reason any other criminal is arrested and tried - due process.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
Kamakazie Sith wrote:I don't think this as a big deal. This guy is a known terrorist sympathizergang-banger family member and now they have information he is directly participating in attacks liqour store hold-ups. If that information is verified then I'm all for it because locating and arresting known terroristsgangsters is a dangerous job, especially when that said terroristgangster is of high value. Why should ground troopspeace officers be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
Honestly, I'm kind of :shock: at you.

Of course, he might be dangerous, let's just execute him here and now without a trial! Why, think of the tax money that will save! Due process? :finger: it.

That said, if they catch him a firefight actively participating, just shoot the motherhumper. But you can't just assassinate someone.
You know that is why I said "Verified" information. If it is verified that he is participating in attacks against our soldiers then why should he get more of a free pass than your typical terrorist?

I think some of you might be confusing a combat zone with a typical police action.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Kamakazie Sith wrote:Why should ground troops be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
The same reason any other criminal is arrested and tried - due process.
He isn't just a criminal though. He is an enemy combatant in a foreign country. This isn't like a SWAT raid in downtown LA.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
ShadowDragon8685
Village Idiot
Posts: 1183
Joined: 2010-02-17 12:44pm

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by ShadowDragon8685 »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:You know that is why I said "Verified" information. If it is verified that he is participating in attacks against our soldiers then why should he get more of a free pass than your typical terrorist?
A couple of good reasons.
1: It sets a bad precedent. Unpopular U.S. Citizen? Don't travel abroad, or you can be whacked!
2: If they catch him without a gun in his hand, summarily shooting him is a thousand kinds of illegal. Honestly this is a large gray area where you have Predator strikes, which makes them quite ambigious.
3: I said that if they do catch him with a gun in his hand, by all means shoot the fucker.
I think some of you might be confusing a combat zone with a typical police action.
Most countries are sane enough to deal with terrorism as what it is; a job for police, not military. Heavily-armed and well-trained police, perhaps, but police, not soldiers. We're the assholes who kill flies with incindiary grenades, though.

[edit]
Kamakazie Sith wrote:He isn't just a criminal though. He is an enemy combatant in a foreign country. This isn't like a SWAT raid in downtown LA.
Why not? SWAT teams often go into situations with heavily-armed criminals, often armed just as well as the average kalashnikov-toting terrorist motherfucker, and frequently facing the potential for booby-traps and shit.

If you wanted to catch him alive, gunfight or not, SWAT teams might be precisely the types to use. But they'll probably just nail him with a Predator missile.
CaptainChewbacca wrote:Dude...

Way to overwork a metaphor Shadow. I feel really creeped out now.
I am an artist, metaphorical mind-fucks are my medium.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Captain Seafort »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:He isn't just a criminal though.
Why not? Conspiracy to commit murder (or whatever planning to blow up an airliner counts as) is a crime, therefore he's a criminal.
He is an enemy combatant in a foreign country.
What country is he fighting for? Why, and since when, is this country at was with the US?
This isn't like a SWAT raid in downtown LA.
Of course not, it's far more dangerous. The fact that this particular criminal is exceptionally dangerous doesn't change his status.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Let me put this in a law enforcement perspective.

If I were chasing a person that I had probable cause was a serial killer (and I mean identified not chasing a shadow) and he ran and I reasonable believed that his running would defeat my attempt to arrest him then I could shoot him in the back...even if he was unarmed.

If I was responding on a robbery in progress and the subject walked out the front door just as I was arriving and then when he/she sees me goes to run back inside...I could use deadly force to prevent him from taking hostages.

In the OPs case. He's now an active terrorist in a foreign country which apprehension is very difficult. If the opportunity arises then they should take him out.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Knife »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:I don't think this as a big deal. This guy is a known terrorist sympathizer and now they have information he is directly participating in attacks. If that information is verified then I'm all for it because locating and arresting known terrorists is a dangerous job, especially when that said terrorist is of high value. Why should ground troops be put at risk just so a person who is willing to use deadly force can stand trial.
Like I said, if they kill him because they're resisting and he dies in a firefight, that's one thing. This is the head of the government saying he's dead, no matter what; to a citizen. That's not right.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Knife »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:Let me put this in a law enforcement perspective.

If I were chasing a person that I had probable cause was a serial killer (and I mean identified not chasing a shadow) and he ran and I reasonable believed that his running would defeat my attempt to arrest him then I could shoot him in the back...even if he was unarmed.

If I was responding on a robbery in progress and the subject walked out the front door just as I was arriving and then when he/she sees me goes to run back inside...I could use deadly force to prevent him from taking hostages.

In the OPs case. He's now an active terrorist in a foreign country which apprehension is very difficult. If the opportunity arises then they should take him out.
Well, to use yours, you Captain just told you there is a serial killer loose. You should shoot him on sight, no questions asked, he doesn't expect you to bring him back in handcuffs at all. That's what Obama just did and it isn't right.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Captain Seafort »

Knife wrote:This is the head of the government saying he's dead, no matter what; to a citizen. That's not right.
It also changes the status of this crook - it's treating him as though he's a soldier or senior political figure fighting a war.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
A couple of good reasons.
1: It sets a bad precedent. Unpopular U.S. Citizen? Don't travel abroad, or you can be whacked!
LMAO. He isn't "unpopular". He is actively participating in actions that kill people.
2: If they catch him without a gun in his hand, summarily shooting him is a thousand kinds of illegal. Honestly this is a large gray area where you have Predator strikes, which makes them quite ambigious.
Not really. If they catch him with a gun in hand and there isn't a reasonable method of capturing him available...then killing him is perfectly acceptable.
Most countries are sane enough to deal with terrorism as what it is; a job for police, not military. Heavily-armed and well-trained police, perhaps, but police, not soldiers. We're the assholes who kill flies with incindiary grenades, though.
I don't see why that matters. Police/military = People with guns
Why not? SWAT teams often go into situations with heavily-armed criminals, often armed just as well as the average kalashnikov-toting terrorist motherfucker, and frequently facing the potential for booby-traps and shit.
Because the area is significantly more dangerous.
If you wanted to catch him alive, gunfight or not, SWAT teams might be precisely the types to use. But they'll probably just nail him with a Predator missile.
Yup, and none of our soldiers will pay with their lives for it. If he wants a fair trial...he can always turn himself in.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Knife wrote: Well, to use yours, you Captain just told you there is a serial killer loose. You should shoot him on sight, no questions asked, he doesn't expect you to bring him back in handcuffs at all. That's what Obama just did and it isn't right.
Is that really what is going on here? Doesn't seem like it to me. If he turned himself in do you think he would be shot on sight? It's more likely that he'll be killed because he'll be spotted somewhere and resources won't be available to capture him. Just like any other terrorist VIP that is located.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Captain Seafort »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:Not really. If they catch him with a gun in hand and there isn't a reasonable method of capturing him available...then killing him is perfectly acceptable.
What's that got to do with the scenario posited, where he didn't have a weapon?
Most countries are sane enough to deal with terrorism as what it is; a job for police, not military. Heavily-armed and well-trained police, perhaps, but police, not soldiers. We're the assholes who kill flies with incindiary grenades, though.
I don't see why that matters. Police/military = People with guns
The difference is that the job of the military is to protect society by killing people who pose a threat. Police protect society by arresting people who pose a threat. In the case of common criminals, rather than state threats, the former should always have primacy, with backup from the military if necessary.
Yup, and none of our soldiers will pay with their lives for it. If he wants a fair trial...he can always turn himself in.
You could use exactly the same logic for any other criminal, and start lobbing 1000lb bombs around LA.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Captain Seafort wrote:
What's that got to do with the scenario posited, where he didn't have a weapon?
Sorry. I meant unarmed as well. Did you miss my post involving a law enforcement example of an unarmed subject who poses a danger to the community if he/she escapes?

The difference is that the job of the military is to protect society by killing people who pose a threat. Police protect society by arresting people who pose a threat. In the case of common criminals, rather than state threats, the former should always have primacy, with backup from the military if necessary.
Like I said in my first post. If the information is verified that he does pose a threat. I think we agree now.
You could use exactly the same logic for any other criminal, and start lobbing 1000lb bombs around LA.
No, you couldn't. Not any other criminal. Also, the risk posed by 1000lb bombs to the general public isn't acceptable. I also don't think it is acceptable in this case either, just to clarify.

How would you purpose capturing him? Should you let him escape if he is located, but the means to capture him aren't available and the risk of collateral damage isn't present? If so, why? Why is giving a killer a trial more important to you then the lives you put at risk by allowing him to escape? Also, if capture is possible but at high risk why is it important to you to risk the lives of your soldiers to capture a killer in a warzone?
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Knife wrote:This is the head of the government saying he's dead, no matter what; to a citizen. That's not right.
It also changes the status of this crook - it's treating him as though he's a soldier or senior political figure fighting a war.
Isn't that what he is? A soldier fighting a war?
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by General Zod »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:
Captain Seafort wrote:
Knife wrote:This is the head of the government saying he's dead, no matter what; to a citizen. That's not right.
It also changes the status of this crook - it's treating him as though he's a soldier or senior political figure fighting a war.
Isn't that what he is? A soldier fighting a war?
I'd imagine that's generally what you call most people who recruit soldiers for a country's enemy.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
jcow79
Padawan Learner
Posts: 442
Joined: 2004-07-21 02:39am
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by jcow79 »

Captain Seafort wrote:You could use exactly the same logic for any other criminal, and start lobbing 1000lb bombs around LA.

You don't see the difference between arresting someone in L.A. vs. trying to apprehend someone hiding out in a foreign hostile territory? Do you approach all logistical problems with the same simplistic idiocy?
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Obama authorizes killing of cleric

Post by Captain Seafort »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:No, you couldn't. Not any other criminal.
Why not? Take, for example, your hypothetical serial killer.
Also, the risk posed by 1000lb bombs to the general public isn't acceptable. I also don't think it is acceptable in this case either, just to clarify.
Then substitute whatever weapon system you desire to minimise or remove the risk to bystanders.
How would you purpose capturing him?
Special forces would be the best bet, preferably acting in support of Yemeni police.
Should you let him escape if he is located, but the means to capture him aren't available and the risk of collateral damage isn't present? If so, why? Why is giving a killer a trial more important to you then the lives you put at risk by allowing him to escape?
Difficult question, but I'd say yes. Trying suspected criminals through the courts, instead of deciding there's enough evidence to prove them guilty an executing them without trial, is a vital part of western society.
Also, if capture is possible but at high risk why is it important to you to risk the lives of your soldiers to capture a killer in a warzone?
Let me reverse this. If you knew where a serial killer was, say in a farmhouse in the countryside, you knew you could reach it before he left, but there's a good chance that he was armed a could kill one or more police if you went to arrest him. Would you have that farmhouse bombed? What if the farmhouse was occupied by a major supplier of hard drugs? Someone producing kiddie porn? Where do you draw the line, and why?
Post Reply