| Author | Message | ||
     Ft_bstrd |
Hoot, I understand and accept your position. Half of me agrees with you. Half of me agrees with Sifo. I'm torn. | ||
| Sifo |
Hell, I only half agree with Sifo! | ||
| Garryb |
Two-Year Manhunt Led to Killing of Awlaki in Yemen Site Intelligence Group/A.F.P. — Getty Images; WBTV, via Associated Press Anwar al-Awlaki, left, in a 2010 video, and Samir Khan, shown in North Carolina in 2008. By MARK MAZZETTI, ERIC SCHMITT and ROBERT F. WORTH Published: September 30, 2011 WASHINGTON — Anwar al-Awlaki did not leave much of a trail, frustrating the American and Yemeni intelligence officials pursuing him over the last two years. Killing of Awlaki Is Latest in Campaign Against Qaeda Leaders 2nd American in Strike Waged Qaeda Media War (October 1, 2011) Yemenis Say They Have Bigger Problems Than Al Qaeda (October 1, 2011) Linda Spillers for The New York Times Anwar al-Awlaki at Dar al-Hijrah mosque, where he served as imam, in Falls Church, Va., in 2001. They believed they finally had found him in a village in southern Yemen last year. Yemeni commandos, equipped with tanks and heavy weapons, surrounded the hamlet, but he slipped away, according to a Yemeni official. In May, his pursuers targeted him in a drone attack, but narrowly missed him and other members of his entourage as they drove across a desert. The search for Mr. Awlaki, the American-born cleric whose fiery sermons made him a larger-than-life figure in the shadowy world of jihad, finally ended on Friday. After several days of surveillance of Mr. Awlaki, armed drones operated by the Central Intelligence Agency took off from a new, secret American base in the Arabian Peninsula, crossed into northern Yemen and unleashed a barrage of Hellfire missiles at a car carrying him and other top operatives from Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, including another American militant who had run the group’s English-language Internet magazine. The strike was the culmination of a desperate manhunt marked not only by near misses and dead ends, but also by a wrenching legal debate in Washington about the legality — and morality — of putting an American citizen on a list of top militants marked for death. It also represented the latest killing of a senior terrorist figure in an escalated campaign by the Obama administration. “The death of Awlaki is a major blow to Al Qaeda’s most active operational affiliate,” President Obama said in remarks at a swearing-in ceremony for the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, outside Washington. Mr. Obama said the cleric had taken “the lead role in planning and directing the efforts to murder innocent Americans.” Mr. Obama also called Mr. Awlaki “the leader of external operations for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula” — the first time the United States has publicly used that description of him. American officials say he inspired militants around the world and helped plan a number of terrorist plots, including the December 2009 attempt to blow up a jetliner bound for Detroit. The drone strike was the first C.I.A. strike in Yemen since 2002 — there have been others since then by the military’s Special Operations forces — and was part of an effort by the spy agency to duplicate in Yemen the covert war the it has been running in Pakistan. Friday’s operation was the first time the agency had carried out a deadly strike from a new base in the region. The agency began constructing the base this year, officials said, when it became apparent to intelligence and counterterrorism officials that the threat from Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen had eclipsed that coming from its core group of operatives hiding in Pakistan. American officials said that the missile strike also killed Samir Khan, an American citizen of Pakistani origin who was an editor of Inspire, Al Qaeda’s English-language online magazine. Mr. Khan, who grew up in Queens and North Carolina, proclaimed in the magazine last year that he was “proud to be a traitor to America,” and edited articles with titles like “Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom.” United States officials said that Friday’s strike may also have killed Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri, a Saudi bomb maker responsible for the weapon carried by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called underwear bomber in the jetliner plot. He is also thought to have built the printer-cartridge bombs that, 10 months later, were intended to be put on cargo planes headed to the United States. Neither of those plots were successful. A high-ranking Yemeni security official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Mr. Awlaki was killed while traveling between Marib and Jawf Provinces in northern Yemen — areas known for having a Qaeda presence and where there is very little central government control. A tribal sheik from Jawf Province, Abdullah al-Jumaili, said he had seen the place where Mr. Awlaki was killed. Reached by phone in Jawf, Mr. Jumaili said that the car Mr. Awlaki and two or three companions had been traveling in was nearly destroyed, and that it might be difficult to recognize bodies. But he said he had also spoken to other tribesmen in the area and was “100 percent sure” that Mr. Awlaki had been killed. There had been an intense debate among lawyers in the months before the Obama administration decided to put Mr. Awlaki on a target list in early 2010, and officials said that Mr. Khan was never on the list. The decision to make Mr. Awlaki a priority to be sought and killed was controversial, given his American citizenship. The American Civil Liberties Union, which fought unsuccessfully in the American court system to challenge the decision to target Mr. Awlaki, condemned the killing. Mr. Awlaki’s death comes in the midst of a deepening political crisis in Yemen, the Arab world’s poorest country, where President Ali Abdullah Saleh has been resisting repeated calls to relinquish power. Mr. Saleh has argued that he is essential to the American efforts to battle Al Qaeda in Yemen, but American officials said there was no connection between Mr. Saleh’s abrupt return this week from Saudi Arabia, where he had been recovering from injuries sustained in an assassination attempt, and the timing of Friday’s airstrikes. Born in New Mexico to Yemeni parents, Mr. Awlaki, 40, began preaching in mosques while a college student in the United States. During that time, as a preacher in San Diego, he met two of the Sept. 11, 2001, attackers. He returned to Yemen in 2004 and his English-language sermons became ever more stridently anti-American. American counterterrorism officials said his Internet lectures and sermons inspired would-be militants and led to more than a dozen terrorist investigations in the United States, Britain and Canada. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who is accused of killing 13 people in a shooting rampage at Fort Hood in Texas in 2009, had exchanged e-mails with Mr. Awlaki before the shootings. Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani-American who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square in May 2010, cited Mr. Awlaki as an inspiration. Many ordinary Yemenis — schooled in the cynicism of Yemeni politics — believe that their government could have killed or even captured Mr. Awlaki at any time, and chose to do so only now for political reasons. But in fact, the Yemeni security services, many trained by American Special Forces soldiers, appear to have pursued Mr. Awlaki for almost two years in a hunt that was often hindered by the shifting allegiances of Yemen’s tribes and the deep unpopularity of Mr. Saleh’s government. In 2009 and 2010, Mr. Awlaki seems to have been mostly in the southern heartland of his own powerful tribe, the Awaliq, where killing him would have been politically costly for the government, and capturing him nearly impossible. The area where Mr. Awlaki was finally killed, in the remote north, did not afford him the same tribal protection. There are also many tribal leaders in the far north who receive stipends from Saudi Arabia — the terrorist group’s chief target — and who would therefore have had more motive to assist in killing him. The hunt for Mr. Awlaki has involved some close calls, including the failed American drone strike in May, and the previously unreported operation in the Yemeni village. Yemen’s elite counterterrorism commandos, backed by weapons from Yemen’s regular armed forces, formed a ring around the town as commanders began negotiating with local leaders to hand Mr. Awlaki over, said one member of the unit. “We stayed a whole week, but the villagers were supporting him,” said the counterterrorism officer, who is not authorized to speak on the record. “The local people began firing on us, and we fired back, and while it was happening, they helped him to escape.” Yemen’s political crisis has seriously hampered counterterrorism efforts, and may have slowed down the hunt for Mr. Awlaki. In May and June, armed jihadists overran two towns in southern Yemen, beating back the army brigades in the area and penning one of them behind the walls of its base for two months. The elite counterterrorism unit was not deployed until August, because of fears of civil war in the capital. Eventually, the unit regained control of the city of Zinjibar, but the counterterrorism officer, who took part in the fight, said the militant forces appeared to have expanded during Yemen’s crisis, with recruits from Somalia and several Arab countries. Fresh information about Mr. Awlaki’s location surfaced about three weeks ago, allowing the C.I.A. to track him in earnest, waiting for an opportunity to strike with minimal risks to civilians, American officials said. A senior American military official who monitors Yemen closely said Mr. Awlaki’s death would send an important message to the surviving leaders and foot soldiers in the Qaeda affiliate. “It’s critically important,” the senior official said. “It sets a sense of doom for the rest of them. Getting Awlaki, given his tight operational security, increases the sense of fear. It’s hard for them to attack when they’re trying to protect their own back side.” But some Islamist figures said Mr. Awlaki’s status could be elevated to that of a martyr. Anjem Choudhry, an Islamic scholar in London, said, “The death of Sheik Anwar al-Awlaki will merely motivate the Muslim youth to struggle harder against the enemies of Islam and Muslims.” He added, “I would say his death has made him more popular.” Reporting was contributed by Laura Kasinof from Sana, Yemen; Alan Cowell from London; and Souad Mekhennet and Rick Gladstone from New York. This article has been revised to reflect the following correction: Correction: September 30, 2011 An earlier version of this article said that Yemeni forces had carried out the attack. (Message edited by garryb on October 11, 2011) | ||
| Whistler |
Let's see if I have it so far. Some say dude is an enemy in wartime, we are correct in taking him out. Some say we are not sure dude was an enemy and if not an enemy then as a citizen should have had due process. Some others are comfortable with a righteous kill but are uncomfortable with the way the process unfolded. I agree with all out war, if I am at war. I am OK with the killing of this particular man because I feel he was our enemy in war. I do not have a problem with someone making a decision about how and when we do kill an enemy (strategy) but I hesitate to give life/death powers to someone I don't trust. I don't think we've had a "formal" declaration of war since WW2. In my mind those "formal" declarations made things more clear and in many cases much more focused and defined. For me, a clear objective is paramount in war and I want strong leadership throughout that war. Is Obama a badass? In this case, I guess. It's the trust factor, and not just with him, that messes me up though. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Well as far as declaring war the President can mobilize and use military forces with out Congress for 60 days without asking then another 30 after regardless of Congress so technically Obama has been within his rights so far. | ||
| Whistler |
I'm sorry, I should have been more clear. This is an example of what I mean by "formal" declaration of war. http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/77-1-148/77-1-148.html My point concerning "formal" declarations of war is that a "formal" war in some circumstances perhaps has the better possibility to become more clearly defined with shared objectives resulting in a more predictable winning outcome rather than the use of say the War Powers Resolution and NATO. A "formally" declared war takes away a lot of uncertainties in many minds when faced with a killing such as this. Nevertheless and in either method, it still boils down to a trust factor for me. | ||
| Moxnix |
I very often agree with Ron Paul, though he gets a bit kooky and high minded on occasion. This is OB's fault for not running a secret war like a real president. Excerpt from Paul's website: Al-Awlaki was on a kill list compiled by a secret panel within President Obama’s National Security Council and Justice Department. How many more Americans citizens are on that list? They won’t tell us. What are the criteria? They won’t tell us. Where is the evidence? They won’t tell us. Al-Awlaki’s father tried desperately to get the administration to at least allow his son to have legal representation to challenge the “kill” order. He was denied. Rather than give him his day in court, the administration, behind closed doors, served as prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.The most worrisome aspect of this is that any new powers this administration accrues will serve as precedents for future administrations. Even those who completely trust this administration must understand that if this usurpation of power and denial of due process is allowed to stand, these powers will remain to be expanded on by the next administration and then the next. Will you trust them? History shows that once a population gives up its rights, they are not easily won back. Beware. | ||
| Sifo |
From Garryb's article above, here is what al-Awlaki is accused of actually doing...
Basically he gave sermons on the internet that were very anti-American. True those sermons may have inspired a couple of people to take action against US interests, but the actions are still not those of al-Awlaki. If I post a racist rant on the internet and some lunatic reads it and decides to go out and lynch some folks from the hood, who has broken the law. Sure I would be a racist POS in that scenario, but I wouldn't be guilty of the lynching. It's they guy that actually commits the crime that is the criminal. There hasn't been any new information or opinion posted in days. We're just saying the same thing over and over and not understanding why the other side doesn't understand. Fruitless. I agree. We are at a point where one side says he's guilty of terrorism and I point out that he only seems to be guilty of unpopular speech. The facts that have been brought up only support one side. Sometimes it sucks to follow the evidence. | ||
| Sifo |
How about just some humor... I was going through a few magazines the other day down at the local Mosque. I was really enjoying myself. Then the bloody rifle jammed. | ||
| Davegess |
The dude could have gotten all the due process he wanted; all he had to do was turn himself in. Instead he went and hid out in the wilderness and launch attacks. Kinda like the wild west, the dude was "Wanted. dead or alive". Actually far worse than that, he was a traitor working for the enemy in a time of war. He is not due ANY constitutional protections as long as he keeps himself out of the reach of law enforcement and continues to attack the USA. There is no slippery slope. | ||
| Aesquire |
Now, ( snicker ) Sifo, ( chuckle ) you know that's close ( heehee ) to hate speech. I have to warn you that can get you on the list. If that joke inspires....... you get the TOW. ( Hellfires are unlikely, since the FAA hates Drones. ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80 %A6 Regular guys in Germany never had the thought that Gypsies would be slaughtered. It did happen. Despite the seeming paranoia, I really don't think we will have death camps here. They will be reeducation centers, as called for by Obama's mentors. ( I have the youtube link here somewhere... of course the unrepentant capitalists will be killed ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ I'm Not even saying Obama will bomb Detroit, just observing that he now claims he can if he wants to. No trial, no court. Since right wing extreeemists are already officially more of a threat to the US than AQ, per this administration......... It wasn't that long ago that airplanes with bombs were used on Striking union members. Here. It wasn't that long ago that forced sterilizations on certain ethnic groups were done. Here. By people that share an ideology with the people in power. Here. Now. | ||
| Aesquire |
I agree a combination of law enforcement investigation and military action may be the way to fight this war few admit to us being in. Dave, I'm pretty sure he was scum, and the planet is better off without him. But today the President of the US claims he has the full legal right to kill who he wants. While a big fan of spy novels, and Clancy, it's still chilling that this prez claims to have a secret paper that he claims lets him do what he wants without congress, courts, or publicity. I expect that there are secret actions taken by Spec-ops fellows in the dark of the night that I will never hear of. I expect that if a avowed bad guy US citizen hiding in bullcrapistan, and gets killed, I may never hear about it. Assassination as campaign tactic, however, not so expected. Again, I ask, do we want Michelle Bachman to have this power in january of 2013? Or Newt? Or Hillary? | ||
| Davegess |
The can have the "power" as there is none. It is a clear case of a combatant in a war attacking us. He forfeits his rights when he joins the enemies army. He want rights he surrenders to law enforcement. This guy had the chance to to do that. He didn't. If He was in the USA or anywhere else that was possible he would have been arrested. He headed outside the scope of law enforcement into the scope of war. There is no slipper slope or abuse of constitutional rights. Period. | ||
| Moxnix |
The issue is always whose ox is being gored. | ||
| Ulyranger |
I wonder if this target elimination would be so troubling if the situation wasn't being used as campaign fodder by a desperate Prez with rapidly sinking approval ratings?? The world is a better, safer place without this individual sucking O2. There is a time and place for black ops and we don't need to know everything real time........ ....more amateur hour in the White House. | ||
| Moxnix |
Remotely related: http://eugene.kaspersky.com/2011/10/11/infected-dr ones-is-die-hard-4-becoming-a-reality/ | ||
| Chauly |
DaveGess: I still want to see the evidence that he attacked us, especially now that he's gone. Of course, I'm still waiting for a Declaration that says that a state of war exists between us and...? | ||
| Union_man |
I will be forwarding this thread to Homeland Security so you terrorist sympathizers can be added to the no fly list.  Never mind, they probably already know.......thank's Patriot Act!!!!  | ||
| Sifo |
Of course, I'm still waiting for a Declaration that says that a state of war exists between us and...? That's easy enough... http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/warpower/sj2 3.pdf Of course I think it's an easy argument that we've stretched this declaration well beyond it's specifics. I will be forwarding this thread to Homeland Security so you terrorist sympathizers can be added to the no fly list. Just click here... http://www.attackwatch.com/ I'm actually kind of disturbed about the things that some people take as fact about our bomb catcher. We have claims that he went to Yemen either to evade prosecution or to join AQ. I suppose it's beyond belief that he could have gone there to join his family who lives there. He obviously didn't go there to evade prosecution seeing as he wasn't wanted when he went there, so that's easy to refute. He went there in 2004, years before he was wanted by the CIA. All aspects of his guilt as a terrorist lies solely on what our government claims in vague accusations. None of these accusations will ever be cross examined now that he's been given his 72 vegans. I guess we can feel easy knowing that politics could never play into what our government accuses people of as it seeks to increase it's own power. This is how our founders felt about government too, isn't it? No doubt he was one to spew anti-American sentiments... "Not God bless America... God damn America!"... Wait that was someone else, well you get the idea. Without a doubt anyone associated with such anti-American sentiments should be locked up or blown to smithereens, right? So he was an "operational terrorist" linked with the underwear bomber and the inkjet bomber. What exactly was his involvement in these attempts? I have no idea at all. He's accused of helping to train people for these acts. Where did this happen? Did we bomb these training camps in Yemen? I haven't heard of this. Why not? What expertise does he have to help with the planning and training for these kinds of attacks? None that I've heard of. As far as I can tell he's nothing more than a loudmouth with a pulpit trying to get people to see the world as he views it. Is that anit-American? In this case, I think there's little doubt that it was. Does that make him an operational terrorist though? We're starting to really stretch the facts at this point just because it's convenient. When does this new power of our government to assassinate out citizens end? I guess to know that we need to know what legislation authorizes this. Oops!!! That's a secret. Will it remain a secret for the president in 2013? 2017? 2053? I'm guessing it will remain in place until our government decides it no longer wants that power. Any guesses when that will be? Honestly I'm not clear at all how far you can go at this point in speaking out against the actions of our government. While I'm often not pleased with those who do so, it has always remained clear that you could do so, and on occasion it has had real effect for the better. When the ability to speak out against our government is stifled, what have we done? How far are we from just having people get "disappeared" for what they say? It happens all the time in some countries where protections aren't in place. What protections are in place here in the US? Oops! That's secret. Really!!!??? Sure I think the world is a better place without al-Awlaki. Does any want see the rest of my list? Should we act on my list? Should we act on the President's list? Can we see the President's list? We often do things because they seem right at the time, but can't see the future unintended consequences. We do these things because they are convenient at the time. We tend to ignore the reasons why doing these things was intentionally made to be inconvenient by our laws. Our government has told us that the legal reasoning for this only applies to al-Awlaki. Does anyone really believe that? What other legal reasoning have we ever had that only applies to a single individual. Sorry, but I just can't buy into this one. We are being fed a line of BS with a nice sugar coating. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
have you seen the call to a new corporation of information and communication under the jobs bill ?..... reading it now, I don't like the smell of it. sticks of internet kill switch. | ||
| Blake |
Sifo, >>> From Garryb's article above, here is what al-Awlaki is accused of actually doing... That is some, not all, and not the most serious.
| ||
| Sifo |
Blake, Mr. Obama also called Mr. Awlaki “the leader of external operations for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula” — the first time the United States has publicly used that description of him. The simple fact that he was given this title by our government AFTER we killed him should make you question what is going on. I didn't list any of that because it is very non-specific in nature and most of it is guilt by association. I would love to hear what he is accused of doing. | ||
| Blake |
Seems very reasonable to maintain confidentiality of our specific knowledge of al qaeda organization. but that still wasn't all that he was accused of. "...(Awlaki) helped plan a number of terrorist plots, including the December 2009 attempt to blow up a jetliner bound for Detroit." It seems one would have to accuse the CIA of lying in order to makes any case against taking the guy out. Again, at some point our leaders deserve our deference. I see no evidence whatsoever that leads me to question the targeting of Awlaki and friends. Apparently the ACLU even tried to have him removed from our terrorists we'd like to kill list. The courts apparently rejected their case. | ||
| Pwnzor |
Love him or hate him, Obama has information that NONE of us has. I don't like it at all... but I have to give deference to the man who is actually holding the REAL information, and Obama is that man for the moment. I can only imagine that the President of the United States has a stress level that would crush most people under its weight. Take it for what it's worth. I don't like American citizens being targeted, but like I said, I don't have all the information. The guy who does made the decision, and we all get to live with it | ||
| Sifo |
Seems very reasonable to maintain confidentiality of our specific knowledge of al qaeda organization. but that still wasn't all that he was accused of. That is a choice that has to be made. How much do you show your hand to proceed against a suspect. That is a big part of the argument for wanting to try people like KSM in military tribunals instead of the civilian court system. It doesn't give the government the right to ignore it's own laws however. "...(Awlaki) helped plan a number of terrorist plots, including the December 2009 attempt to blow up a jetliner bound for Detroit." It seems one would have to accuse the CIA of lying in order to makes any case against taking the guy out. How so. It's up to the government to make it's case against the guy, not the other way around, at least if you care to follow our laws. So what was his involvement in the Christmas day bombing? From what I've been able to find from the most detailed accounts I've read is that he "prepared" him for what he was planning to do. That sounds to me like spiritual counseling. Granted, not good spiritual counseling, but I don't know that you can convict someone for that. How about we take a look at what al-Awlaki said himself, not in any attempt to deny involvement, but to brag about what was done. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/world/middleeast /01yemen.html
The entire piece is worth reading if you want to get a better feel for what's being said. It's clear that al-Awlaki is more than willing to brag about what has been done against the US. It's clear that he supports what has been done. It seems clear that he is proud of his part in what's been done too. It's also clear, despite what has been claimed many times in this thread that he DIDN'T claim to be a member of AQ. It's also clear that despite the insinuations from our government that he didn't have any part in planning the Christmas day bombing. It seems odd to believe that someone who so openly admits that he supports this act would then deny having an actual part in it if he did indeed have a part in it. There's a big difference between promoting an ideology, even a violent ideology, and actually taking part in the violence or the planning of violence. So what are your thought as to why this guy who is bragging about what has been done against the US seems to differ from what our government is saying about what was done. Honestly after reading this piece I'm starting to think that our government is acting like the incompetent sheriff who locks up an innocent person just so that he can close the books on a crime that he can't solve. | ||
| Sifo |
I mentioned this earlier about the apology to the parents of Khan (the editor of Inspire magazine). It seems to be a true story not just fiction picked up by blogs. http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/07/267316 3/us-state-dept-contacts-khan-family.html I've been trying not to make this about BO, but at this point I just can't understand the complete inconsistency in dealing with these things. We blow up two supposed terrorists. The one who has claimed to not be part of a terrorist group is the good kill. The one who states "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that I [am] Al Qaeda to the core." gets an apology. This administration is completely schizophrenic! WTF??? | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fi ghting_words/2011/10/anwar_al_awlaki_assassination _the_one_legal_protection_the_unite.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fi ghting_words/2011/10/anwar_al_awlaki_when_is_it_ac ceptable_to_kill_a_u_s_citizen_susp.html I don't think we should forget that there is a secret list of people to be killed. I might even want some of those people to be killed. Doesn't make it right. | ||
| Sifo |
I think BO is liking his new found powers of life and death. President warns other Middle Eastern dictators, particularly Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, that they could be next | ||
| Blake |
We had a secret list for every war we've been in, no? | ||
| Sifo |
For US civilians??? For assassination??? |
