I remember being attacked for standing up against the war with Iraq, against the creation of the Homeland Security Department, and against the authorization of war powers to spy, torture, detain indefinitely, and kill people (including American citizens) without providing evidence of why those people were being targeted, tortured, or murdered.
Over the past few days, I have been attacked in the same way, because I demand evidence to justify the government's killings of American citizens by drone without trail.
The wisdom of not going to war with Iraq, or spying on American citizens, detaining people indefinitely without trial or proof of their guilt, along with torturing people has come almost full circle, and gratefully so.
Yet, one pesky caveat to the destructive environment the Cheney regime created with their loose interpretations of governmental power, is when it comes to the murdering of American citizens abroad, without justification, especially if they are vile human beings.
The justification so far for killing Awlaki consists of some loose associations. One can show me the emails Awlaki had with Hasan
(The Fort Hood coward), and I'll tell you, along with the FBI, that those emails were mostly benign, Hasan was already radicalized well before his emails to Awlaki.
One can say Awlaki trained Sharif Mobley
(an alleged American terrorist in Yemen), except Mobley and his lawyer claimed otherwise.
One can say Awlaki radicalized and trained the Underwear bomber, and perhaps so, let us have a trial to find out ' oh wait, we already killed Awlaki, an American citizen, without a trail, and we attempted to do it even before the Obama regime created the ridiculous memos to justify it with, which means they were already acting without legal justification.
There is no doubt Awlaki's rhetoric called for the harming of Americans. Rhetoric alone is not justification for death by drone, unless it is, without the government presenting their justification, we'll never know, and we'll never be able to debate the issue in public.
I'm sure you'll chime in that Awlaki wasn't a citizen, but he actually was, and so was his son, who was also murdered two weeks later, supposedly accidentally, even though that is highly debatable.
One way to clear the debate would be to release the video footage of the bombing, to truly see if one could not tell children were in the area. Of course, we'll never get that video, just like the memos to justify these actions were never supposed to be seen due to 'national security' reasons.
But, now that we have seen the memo, albeit heavily redacted, there is no national security risk presented with their forced release. Unfortunately, the memo
also does not contain the justification for what proof the government had that Awlaki was a terrorist who posed an imminent threat to our nation, or what even constitutes an imminent threat or an environment of war. Without such justifications, how can we, the electorate, seek proper representation moving forward?
I don't want to vote for a politician who thinks it's okay to form secret kill lists of American citizens, without providing proof of their crimes or giving them a trial before murdering them.
If I cannot ask my potential candidate if he supports the Obama regime's interpretation of the law, how can I properly vote for that candidate' I cannot, and my right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness unfettered by government imposed constraints, is no longer a reality, and isn't' that what the terrorists wanted in the first place'