Well it looks like our government has the precedent to establish an Orwellian dystopia.
A few weeks ago the Obama administration ordered the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki a US citizen without any trial. They claim they have “sufficient evidence” to show that he was affiliated with terrorist plots. What scares me is that the administration themselves get to determine what constitutes “sufficient evidence.”
My God… This…this is unforgivable. I could have forgiven all of Obama’s earlier crimes, but this? I’ll never forgive him for this.
I honestly can’t think of much to say. I’m in shock. This is just…tyrannical. So much to be expected by the state, I suppose. They ratchet their abuses up little by little, inch by inch. This is only another step in the Road to Serfdom.
I’m pretty sure bloomj is saying that he’s fairly confident that Obama isn’t evil/tyrannical enough to actually assassinate anyone who is innocent. That said, this entire ordeal is still bullshit. Just calling it how I see it.
I mean I agree this is unconstitutional, the power to judge is supposed to be reserved to the judicial and everyone is supposed to have the right to defend the charges against them, a trial etc. But we’re also not looking at the intelligence that Obama has through the CIA which might be quite compelling. Needless to say, one or two guys here and there won’t upset too many people, especially if they’ve got Arab names but if he does this a bunch of times, or to someone with a more American sounding name, there might be a serious reaction.
But in addition to this being unconstitutional, wouldn’t you say that this is a power that no government, let alone no single branch of government, should have? I mean once government officials can start assassinating citizens what freedom do citizens have left??
Wonder why the order didn’t just give the authority to use legal force if he resisted arrest. I mean, it would have meant the same thing in the end anyway, is it to much to ask the government to at least pretend anymore?
I think this would be the proper time to use the word illegitimate. The government doesn’t legitimately have this power, according to our Constitution. I don’t mean in a moral or logical sense either, I mean in a legal sense.
But there’s not much anyone can do about this except protest it.
I know that you’re saying that it’s illegal according to the constititution, but wouldn’t you also say that it’s immoral, unethical, and simply a grotesque use of power?
@OP: It’s just a matter of degree… the government judges in all its own disputes, anyway, this is no different than the government granting itself the authority to assassinate on the basis of its own “assessment” of someone’s guilt or innocence. If you appear before a government court presided over by a government-paid judge, charged by a government lawyer with the crime of violating one of the government’s “laws” by which you are sentenced to death by government executioners, how is this any different from the President deciding to assassinate someone?
That said, I do think assassination could occur in a natural order society (free market law and security). Such overt acts would essentially be a declaration of war between the respective parties. Since the parties have, in such a situation, chosen to handle matters outside the law, there are no legal repercussions.
But there’s not much anyone can do about this except protest it.
This is the bitch. This is one of many things that show what Obama can get away with vs what Bush can get away with in terms of public moral indignation and public outcry for a crime.
