A Targeted Assassination
To be blunt, right off the bat, I want to assure you all that I don’t have a problem killing Anway al Awlaki. I’m glad this man is dead and that he can no longer manipulate the minds of those who would do evil in the world and against the United States. However, I have questions and concerns. Because, unlike Osama bin Laden, this man was an American who was targeted for assassination. He wasn’t killed in the line of fire. He wasn’t killed in a shoot-out or any type of gun battle, he was directly targeted by a drone missile.
I know questions were raised by some in this country over the killing of bin Laden and whether justice truly prevailed. But those voices were quickly drowned out by the sheer rejoicing of his death and the message that justice was served. The majority of Americans felt that bin Laden was fair game in the war on terror and a trial wasn’t necessary to prove his guilt given that he publicly bragged about his accomplishment in the 9/11 bombing.
But does the same hold true for Awlaki? Is he simply a casualty of war? Or, does such a targeted death concern you?
Now I understand that Awlaki was tried over and over again in the minds of the American people and fully convicted of the crime of terrorism. But as we all know, America is the land of justice and freedom. Every citizen is accorded due process. That Awlaki was not given such consideration may simply depend on how one chooses to view his actions. This is truly an conundrum as we all agree that Awlaki was a bad man and our cause for peace is helped considerably by his death. He was not convicted of a crime although his name was on the terrorist list.
Is that enough to order his death?
That is the big question we now face. We need to be very careful in answering that question. What criteria places one on the terror list? Who makes these determinations? While most of will whole-heartedly agree that Awlaki belonged on the list, we may not agree with the decision to place others on that list. Then what happens?
Are all the names of this terror list approved for killing? Without due process? Who gets to decide this?
We’ve heard many a mouthpiece call the Tea Party members terrorists. Does that mean they are on the list? Who determines what names belong on the list? Why isn’t this list made public? And what defense or course of action do you have once your name is placed on the list? We all heard Congress members label Christians and gun owners as terrorists? Really? Are their names on that list?
The Patriot Act gave our president broad sweeping powers to combat terrorism both abroad and here at home. While I hate to see this turned into a party issue, under Bush, the use of this power caused the Democrats to demonize both Bush and Cheney and accused them of abuse of power. Yet under this current administration, the president utilizes the same power and indeed, has expanded the those same powers seizing even more control to act on his own authority without Congressional approval yet no opposition is found among the same Democrats who were outraged just a few short years ago.
No matter what you personally feel about the Patriot Act or who is currently wielding the power, the fact remains that there are questions about how these enacted policies affect we, the people. Granted, when your morals, values and standards of conduct are similar to the person making the rules, perhaps the questions are diminished. But when your personal beliefs stand in stark contrast to the president, what then? We should be able to have trust in the law without having to trust in the lawyer, the court, the list makers or the president.
Without a solid structure in place that defines what a domestic terrorist is, we must rely on someone else’s interpretation. That could get ugly. As ugly as 1943 Germany, when speaking out in opposition to the law of the land got you killed. That isn’t what any of us want, nor do I believe it is the intent of the law in America. However, not enough limits are not placed on those with the power and authority to effect the list of terrorists.
Is opposing the president an act of terror? No, of course not. But what if you make a lot of noise and attract a great deal of attention and maybe even have a following? What if your voice carried across the country? Are you a terrorist then? Does lying about the president make you a terrorist? Did it under the last administration? Does it put your name on the list?
When no one can legally stop a president or an administration, from placing names on a terror list, then is anyone who speaks out against them truly safe? Is the only thing we have to guard against such an action is a trust in the character of the president and our leaders? Maybe this isn’t what is happening now but without any firm limitations in place, this could very likely be the next step.
When the power of the presidency, here in America, can arbitrarily place the name of one who opposes him for any reason, on a terrorist hit list, then Houston, we have a problem.
While those speaking out against the killing of Awlaki may not personally care that he is dead, they sincerely care about the process that allowed him to be killed.
