Anwar al-Awlaki & Samir Khan

[TheMercenary]

That post changes NOTHING.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

This post changes NOTHING.

FTFY.

[Lamplighter]

I'm pleased to report the NY Times Editorial Board has been
following this thread on the Cellar, and agrees with me on this issue.

Editorial
Justifying the Killing of an American
Published: October 11, 2011

The Obama administration apparently spent months considering
the legal implications of targeting Anwar al-Awlaki,
the American citizen who was killed in Yemen last month
after being accused of being a terrorist organizer.

It prepared a detailed and cautious memorandum to justify the decision—
a refreshing change from the reckless legal thinking of the Bush administration,
which rationalized torture, claimed unlimited presidential powers and
drove the country’s fight against terrorists off the rails.

But the memo, as reported by Charlie Savage in The Times,
is an insufficient foundation for a momentous decision
by the government to kill one of its own citizens,
no matter how dangerous a threat he was believed to be.
For one thing, the administration has refused to make it public
or even acknowledge its existence.
It was described to Mr. Savage by anonymous officials,
and the administration will not openly discuss even its most basic guidelines
for choosing assassination targets.

The decision to kill Mr. Awlaki was made entirely within the executive branch.
The memo was not shared with Congress, nor did any independent judge or panel of judges pass judgment.
The administration set aside Mr. Awlaki’s rights to due process.
<snip>

.
Sec. Panetta needs to pay attention too.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Anwar al-Awlaki was not a citizen. He had publicly stated his intention to relinquish his citizenship, and entered "foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States".
His movements leave no doubt in my mind he knew full well we would take him out at the first opportunity. Probably because he lived in the real world, unsullied with high faulting delusions.

Section 349(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(3)] which provides for loss of U.S. nationality if an American voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship enters or serves in foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States or serves in the armed forces of any foreign country as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Anwar al-Awlaki was not a citizen. He had publicly stated his intention to relinquish his citizenship, and entered "foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States".
His movements leave no doubt in my mind he knew full well we would take him out at the first opportunity. Probably because he lived in the real world, unsullied with high faulting delusions.

Perhaps the issue is that it's not really a foreign country... ?

[xoxoxoBruce]

It says foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States, or armed forces of any foreign country...

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Anwar al-Awlaki was not a citizen. He had publicly stated his intention to relinquish his citizenship,
and entered "foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States".
His movements leave no doubt in my mind he knew full well we would take him out
at the first opportunity.
Probably because he lived in the real world, unsullied with high faulting delusions.

Maybe he did realize he was at risk, but nevertheless I've not seen anything
to show that he met the requirements of renouncing US citizenship.

Sullied or not, stating an "intention to relinquish" is like pledging in a fund-raiser,
it only matters when the check is cashed.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Maybe he did realize he was at risk...

Oh Good GOD! you have always seemed to me to be more intelligent than this statement makes you sound.