Here is what the unindicted co-conspirators at CAIR have to say about the killing of Anwar Awlaki courtesy of Fox News.
A voice of hate? This man was an American-born traitor, who very likely, had a hand in 9-11. He was likely involved in the Ft Hood massacre as a conspirator/mentor to the actual killer, as well the underwear bomber in Detroit. Maybe we should do some research into what connections, if any CAIR had to Awlaki himself.
Last August, Steve Emerson's Investigative Project on Terrorism reported that CAIR intervened when a woman was questioned by the feds about Awlaki. (That's what CAIR loves to do.)
http://www.investigativeproject.org/2103/actions-would-speak-louder-than-words-in-cairs
Here is what Frontpage Magazine published last year about Awlaki ties to CAIR figures in LA and San Diego. Note that the writer is Joe Kaufman, whom CAIR tried to sue a couple of years back over another issue.
http://frontpagemag.com/2010/01/22/cair%E2%80%99s-fort-hood-idol/
Here is what ABC News San Diego had to say in December 2009 about CAIR representative Edgar Hopida's reaction to the terrorist allegations against Awlaki:
http://www.10news.com/news/21566748/detail.html
In June 2011, Creeping Sharia, via Fox News, published this on possible connections between Awlaki and CAIR CEO Nihad Awad:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/hamas-linked-cair-invited-to-pentagons-al-awlaki-lunch-months-after-911/
So, as you can see, it is perfectly understandable why CAIR would issue such a cautiously-worded statement as they did.
Most of this recap is twice as boring as a scratch in a record -- and I'm old enough to remember what that sounded like.
ReplyDeleteBut on the issue of due process... speaking as a libertarian socialist who reminds Miggie of his favorite stereotype of a leftie, if an American citizen is in foreign territory directly participating in a military or paramilitary organization that is launching attacks on American territory intended to cause fatalities, killing such a person is a legitimate military operation, regardless of their citizenship.
It's like, if an American citizen in Werhmacht uniform had been fighting at the Battle of the Bulge, would anyone have had to get a ruling from a federal court before taking him out? I don't think so.
I took a different view of the Jose Padilla case. He was likely guilty as charged, and there is every reason to lock him up, but if an American citizen is arrested on American soil, the government does have to prove its case in court. No government is entitled to declare them an enemy combatant without a trial to prove that they are. Think how that would play out with innocent citizens, who could be "declared" enemy combatants at whim.
Awlaki, on the other hand, was in combat, not arrested, just killed in action.