« It is not clear how one gets on the American Proscription List | Main | Your guess is as good as mine »
October 1, 2011
Mead's Sensible View of the Awlaki Hit
It does not take much special knowledge to understand that Mr. Awlaki had placed himself well beyond the protections of criminal law.Had he been captured, and dragged as it were unwillingly back under the umbrella of American law, it might have been different, and he could have been tried for treason or other crimes. But Mr. Obama was under no obligation to risk the lives of American soldiers to save Mr. Awlaki from himself and restore to him the protection of the laws he despised, nor was he under any obligation to forbear and allow Mr. Awlaki to continue his activities until such time as Interpol or some other recognized law enforcement agency could serve him a warrant and take him into custody. -- Obama: Warrior Or Assassin? | Via Meadia
Posted by Vanderleun at October 1, 2011 5:46 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.
Your Say
Somebody makes sense, and it is not the ACLU.
Posted by: Fat Man at October 1, 2011 9:07 PM
I've been conflicted about the whole thing - glad he's gone, disturbed about the "assassination" aspect of it.
This piece got me thinking that, given his actions, he has, in effect, renounced his American citizenship by encouraging attacks against us. I read a quote of his exhorting Islam to join in "...the war".
That pretty much resolves my conflict.
Posted by: leelu at October 2, 2011 10:49 AM
E.J. Dionnne today in the WAPO pulls Obama's schlong out of his mouth for a moment and asks what liberals would have done if GWB had done this? He then fatuously allows "This is a hard question. And we should acknowledge it."
You know what else I bet was hard, E.J.? I'll bet it was hard for GWB to defend us while being accused of being a Nazi by hundreds of little crapweasels like you any time he tried to spy on terrorists, much less kill them.
Posted by: sherlock at October 2, 2011 1:12 PM