Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki killed in Yemen

[witness23]

Wow......another one bites the dust.

Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki killed in Yemen
30 September 2011 Last updated at 12:17 ET

Link: BBC News - Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki killed in Yemen

US-born radical Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a key al-Qaeda leader, has been killed in Yemen, the country's defence ministry said.

US President Barack Obama said his death was a major blow to al-Qaeda.

Awlaki, of Yemeni descent, has been on the run in Yemen since December 2007.

The US said that as a key figure in al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), he had played a "significant role" in plots to blow up US airliners and had sought use poison to kill US citizens.

Mr Obama is said to have personally ordered his killing last year.

Yemen's defence ministry statement said only that Awlaki had died in Khashef in Jawf province, about 140km (87 miles) east of the capital, Sanaa, "along with some of his companions".

US and Yemeni officials later named one of those as Samir Khan, also a US citizen but of Pakistani origin, who produced an online magazine promoting al-Qaeda's ideology.

Local tribal leaders told the AFP news agency that Awlaki had been moving around within Yemen in recent weeks to evade capture. Local people told AP he had been travelling between Jawf and Marib provinces when he died.

US officials said Awlaki's convoy was hit by a US drone and jet strike.

Mr Obama said that as the leader of external operations for AQAP, Awlaki had taken "a lead in planning and directing efforts to murder innocent Americans" and was also "directly responsible for the death of many Yemeni citizens".

He said the death marked another "milestone in the broader efforts to defeat al-Qaeda and its affiliates", and paid tribute to US intelligence and the Yemeni security forces for their co-operation.

"This is further proof that al-Qaeda and its affiliates will find no safe haven anywhere in the world, " he said.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Awlaki had "demonstrated his intent and ability to cause mass terror".

One US official told the American network ABC that US intelligence had had "a very intense focus" on Awlaki for some time, waiting for a chance to strike.

The unnamed official said there had been "a good opportunity to hit him" on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks this year, but that "it never materialised".

'Poison plot'

BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera says the killing is significant because Awlaki's use of modern media meant he was able to reach out and inspire people susceptible to radicalisation.

He is believed to have played a significant role in the Christmas 2009 Detroit airline bomb attempt and in the plot which sent two bombs in printer cartridges on US-bound cargo planes in 2010. They were intercepted in the UK and Dubai.

He has also been implicated in the 2009 US army base killings in Fort Hood, Texas, and a failed bombing in New York's Times Square in 2010.

Washington said he had sought to use poisons including cyanide and ricin in attacks.

When he was imam of a San Diego mosque in the 1990s, his sermons were attended by two future 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.

He also lived in the UK from 2002-04, where he spent several months giving lectures to Muslim youth.

In a video posted in November last year he called for the killing of Americans, saying they were from the "party of devils".

Weeks later, he survived an air strike in Shabwa province in which at least 30 militants were killed.

He has been reported dead in the past following US air strikes on southern Yemen in December 2009 and November 2010.

He was the target of a US drone attack that killed two al-Qaeda operatives in southern Yemen on 5 May.

The death comes amid concerns in Washington about the impact of Yemen's political crisis on its ability to tackle al-Qaeda militants.

President Ali Abdullah Saleh is facing a widespread protest movement, along with an armed insurrection by renegade army units and tribal fighters.

Mr Saleh, who was injured three months ago when his residence was shelled, returned last week after treatment in Saudi Arabia.

In an interview published on Thursday, he said he would not stand down, as promised in a deal brokered by Gulf States, if his opponents are allowed to stand in elections to succeed him.

 

[Turtle]

Well, crap. Those goes another one of my Middle East pen pals.

 

[witness23]

It seems that we have been losing quite a few middle eastern pen pals of late.

 

[layoutshooter]

Strange idea, kill the enemy and traitors. Break things and kill people, NICE JOB GUYS!!

 

[RLENT]

..... simply ..... ground-breaking .....

I'll bet most folks probably don't even realize the unique significance of this event.

This is the first U.S. citizen publicly approved for extra-judicial assassination, and then subsequently deprived of life - without the benefit of a trial, without being given the right to confront his accusers - all outside of the rule of law ...... in direct violation of the United States Constitution .....

Outstanding !

Everyone should be sure to keep that in mind in the future - for when your own number comes up.

Strange idea, kill the enemy and traitors. Break things and kill people, NICE JOB GUYS!!

.... thus saith the "National Security State" Fan Club .....

So much for that Constitution thingie I guess .....

 

[xiggi]

..... simply ..... ground-breaking .....

I'll bet most folks probably don't even realize the unique significance of this event.

This is the first U.S. citizen publicly approved for extra-judicial assassination, and then subsequently deprived of life - without the benefit of a trial, without being given the right to confront his accusers - all outside of the rule of law ...... in direct violation of the United States Constitution .....

Outstanding !

Everyone should be sure to keep that in mind in the future - for when your own number comes up.


.... thus saith the "National Security State" Fan Club .....

So much for that Constitution thingie I guess .....

"your own number" compared to someone who has declared war on the US and is responsible for numerous deaths here and abroad and many more attempts on lifes here is in itself a bit out there imho.

Reading Ron Paul's opinion on the subject is just one more reason he is not fit to be president of this country. Not sure how he could swear to protect the citizens of he US and have the view he does on this subject. I guess that is what happens when you walk that fine line between genius and crazy.

 

[greg334]

I'm glad he is dead but on the other hand there is a problem that maybe a few of us see.

We should have captured him, put him on trial and executed him under our laws. But instead we showed the world we are a nation of men (and women) and not a nation of laws. Pretty d*mn sad when you think about it and again it goes back to my point - the terrorist win, we lost.

BUT it brings into a serious question of gaps within our intel world and the need to close these gaps because it took too long to track him down, the same issue with Bin Laden. In this case, we should be asking ourselves what did we outright kill him when we could have captured him as the same chance of capturing Bin Laden?

 

[tbubster]

He helped plan attacks on america you know the USA.Does not matter where he was born when he started helping terrorist attack and kill americans or anyone else who does not follow Islam he gave up his citizenship and all rights that comes with being an american citizen.Same goes for Samir Kahn the other american born citizen that was killed in the same attack.

I guess the videos of Al-Awlaki calling on muslims to attack and kill all non belivers is not enough proof for the Good DR.NO.

You see what some of the people that are against this terrorist being killed fail to see is that it does in fact send a message.That the USA is playing by a different set of rules.A set of rules more like their own.That when it comes to its leaders and its planers it really is take no prisoners.

 

[Moot]

We should have captured him, put him on trial and executed him under our laws.

That's exactly how it played out, well except for the capture and trial part. In your scenario the end result is execution. You make mention of a trial but nothing about finding the poor slob guilty or not. So what is the difference other than saving a few bucks and some time? Like everything else in this country, it's cheaper to have it done overseas. Also less legal hassles and no E.P.A. to deal with.

 

[xiggi]

I'm glad he is dead but on the other hand there is a problem that maybe a few of us see.

We should have captured him, put him on trial and executed him under our laws. But instead we showed the world we are a nation of men (and women) and not a nation of laws. Pretty d*mn sad when you think about it and again it goes back to my point - the terrorist win, we lost.

BUT it brings into a serious question of gaps within our intel world and the need to close these gaps because it took too long to track him down, the same issue with Bin Laden. In this case, we should be asking ourselves what did we outright kill him when we could have captured him as the same chance of capturing Bin Laden?

The problem with that line of thought is they simply look at us as fools for putting people in jail for years, taking care of them and then giving them a trial. They do not think like we do and hunting them down and killing them on the spot will make them both fear and respect us more than any capture and trial ever will. The way it was handled we do win and they lose once again. To them capture and trial simply shows us as cowards.

 

[RLENT]

Think about it:

Bin Laden Is Dead – Let’s Come Home!
by Ron Paul, 05/09/2011

Last week marked an important milestone in the war on terrorism for our country. Osama bin Laden applauded the 9/11 attacks. Such deliberate killing of innocent lives deserved retaliation. It is good that bin Laden is dead and justice is served. The way in which he was finally captured and killed shows that targeted retribution is far superior to wars of aggression and nation-building. In 2001 I supported giving the president the authority to pursue those responsible for the vicious 9/11 attacks. However, misusing that authority to pursue nation-building and remaking the Middle East was cynical and dangerous, as the past ten years have proven.

It is tragic that it took ten years, trillions of dollars, tens of thousands of American casualties and many thousands of innocent lives to achieve our mission of killing one evil person. A narrow, targeted mission under these circumstances was far superior to initiating wars against countries not involved in the 9/11 attacks, and that is all we should have done. This was the reason I emphasized at the time the principle of Marque and Reprisal, permitted to us by the US Constitution for difficult missions such as we faced. I am convinced that this approach would have achieved our goal much sooner and much cheaper.

The elimination of Osama bin Laden should now prompt us to declare victory and bring our troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq. Al Qaeda was never in Iraq and we were supposedly in Afghanistan to get Osama bin Laden. With bin Laden gone, there is no reason for our presence in the region – unless indeed it was all about oil, nation-building, and remaking the Middle East and Central Asia.

Hopefully bin Laden does not get the last laugh. He claimed the 9/11 attacks were designed to get the US to spread its military dangerously and excessively throughout the Middle East, bankrupting us through excessive military spending as he did the Soviets, and to cause political dissention within the United States. Some 70 percent of Americans now believe we should leave Afghanistan yet both parties seem determined to stay. The best thing we could do right now is prove bin Laden a false prophet by coming home and ending this madness on a high note.

Tragically, one result may be the acceptance of torture as a legitimate tool for pursuing our foreign policy. A free society, calling itself a republic, grounded in the rule of law, should never succumb to such evil.

At the very least we should all be able to agree that foreign aid to Pakistan needs to end immediately. The idea that bin Laden was safely protected for ten years in Pakistan, either willfully or through incompetence, should make us question the wisdom of robbing American citizens to support any government around the world with foreign aid. All foreign aid and intervention needs to end.

Our failed foreign policy is reflected in our bizarre relationship with Pakistan. We bomb them with drones, causing hundreds of civilian casualties, we give them billions of dollars in foreign aid for the privilege to do so, all while they protect America’s enemy number one for a decade.

It is time to consider a sensible non-interventionist foreign policy as advised by our Founders and authorized by our Constitution. We would all be better off for it.

 

[RLENT]

"your own number" compared to someone who has declared war on the US and is responsible for numerous deaths here and abroad and many more attempts on lifes here is in itself a bit out there imho.

Sorry .... but that's a mighty short-sighted and rather myopic view you have there my friend.

Consider the various precedents that have now been set:

It is no longer necessary apparently for the government to build a case, prosecute it successfully by presenting evidence and/or testimony, and obtain a conviction by a jury of ones peers .... they simply declare one guilty .... and then mete out the punishment

This country has been on that slippery slope in a variety ways for quite some time ..... and it aint getting any better ....

Further:

Apparently now, anyone - citizen or not - who the state declares to be an "enemy" (aka "terrorist"), is now potentially subject to being targeted and assassinated, thereby being deprived of their very lives ..... on the decision of a single individual - all outside of the rule of law, and in direct violation of the 5th Amendment of the Constitution, to wit:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

It can be truly said:

A crime by the State against even one citizen is a crime against ALL CITIZENS

This crime of the state just stabbed the very soul of this country straight thru the heart .... welcome to the Police State.

Perhaps you really are a true believer ..... that the government only consists of truly nice folks who are only here to help and protect us poor citizens ....

And that it's ok for them kill to US citizens without indictment, or presentation of evidence, or a trial, or a conviction - based on the decisions rendered by a single individual - substituting the rule of a man, for the rule of law.

I'm afraid I'm slightly more skeptical.

BTW, I never had imagined you to be such a devout fan of Obama - I mean afterall, it was he who authorized it.

..... who of us knew ?

Reading Ron Paul's opinion on the subject is just one more reason he is not fit to be president of this country.

Well, I'm not sure that I've ever read it .... perhaps you can summarize it for those of us that haven't ?

Common sense tells me that when the State starts assassinating it's own citizens extra-judicially, outside the rule of law and due process, and depriving them of their Constitutional and God-given rights, we might just have a little problem.

Not sure how he could swear to protect the citizens of the US and have the view he does on this subject.

Yeah ?

Well, you might want to contemplate on that long and hard .... for those of us that do get it, the utter irony of your statement above is literally beyond belief ......

Perhaps if you do, the fog you're apparently in, will lift .... and you will see the matter clearly. I'll even give ya a little help:

Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen

I guess that is what happens when you walk that fine line between genius and crazy.

Well, I think I can see pretty clearly what could happen if we adopt your mindset and operating basis of just setting aside the Constitution whenever we find that actually following it is a troublesome inconvenience we don't wish to be bothered with.

I think the Founders did too - probably why they did what they did, in terms of the Constitution and Bill of Rights ....

It's a pity that you, apparently, can't ....

 

[RLENT]

Not sure how he could swear to protect the citizens of the US and have the view he does on this subject. I guess that is what happens when you walk that fine line between genius and crazy.

Well there ya go - your comments above are quite telling indeed. Understandable I guess ..... for someone who wants to be "protected" and "cared for" by their Uncle ....

Just so everyone is clear here - since apparently you have a misunderstanding - the President does not swear to protect the citizens of the US - he swears to protect the Constitution - via his oath of office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

You can find the above delineated in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight of the Constitution.

Clearly, Obama feels no obligation to uphold that oath ... similar to a number of his predecessors that came before him ....

I will feel absolutely no sympathy for you .... or anyone else .... who just glibly accepts this transgression ...... and yea, even excuses or justifies it ... the next time Obama, or those who follow him, does so in whatever manner .... and y'all git to squealin' ....

Just remember:

By your very words you are sanctioning the violation of the Supreme Law of this land ..... you will most certainly deserve anything that results from having set that precedent.

May the Founders forgive you for ****ing all over what they bequeathed you, and what countless many fought so hard to secure ...... and may your children forgive you for selling out their God-given rights .... all out of fear .... in exchange for a little perceived (and likely, false) "security" .... since Lord knows I never will.

..... cowards ..... [spit]

 

[RLENT]

The due-process-free assassination of U.S. citizens is now reality

 

[RLENT]

Breaking the law: Anwar al-Awlaki's extrajudicial murder

 

[greg334]

He helped plan attacks on america you know the USA.Does not matter where he was born when he started helping terrorist attack and kill americans or anyone else who does not follow Islam he gave up his citizenship and all rights that comes with being an american citizen.Same goes for Samir Kahn the other american born citizen that was killed in the same attack.

AND??

People plan attacks every day, we don't go after them do we?

Have we attacked North Korea to oust their leader?

I guess the videos of Al-Awlaki calling on muslims to attack and kill all non belivers is not enough proof for the Good DR.NO.

I have no reason to believe otherwise, the guy got what he deserved and I am glad he is one less we have to worry about BUT you miss the bigger picture here, from Facebook helping him to the issue of the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 14th amendment being trashed.

You see what some of the people that are against this terrorist being killed fail to see is that it does in fact send a message.That the USA is playing by a different set of rules.A set of rules more like their own.That when it comes to its leaders and its planers it really is take no prisoners.

Well here is the thing, the US playing by different rules is why we are in the mess in the first place, it is not a case of 'oh we didn't do a thing to deserve this' crap but because we crapped on so many people for so long, things happened and we are now fighting back as victims.

NOT saying that there are not other ways to dealwith this guy either, you know we used to NOT advertise our covert actions that were broadcasted on the nightly news just after it happened, so capturing him would could have been kept quiet. One alternative would have been to capture him, put his sorry a** on trial and then execute him. Tell you the truth, it looks like our government is handing us things that we can cheer about so they look like they are doing a job and deflecting our attention to the real mess they are making.

The problem with that line of thought is they simply look at us as fools for putting people in jail for years, taking care of them and then giving them a trial.

AND??

I don't see the problem with it, it gives us a chance for revenge. Years? Seriously? I don't think it would have taken years with the level of bloodlust in this country over 9/11.

They do not think like we do and hunting them down and killing them on the spot will make them both fear and respect us more than any capture and trial ever will.

They think differently because they are committed, not like us who are not committed to seeing them end in a realistic manner but they are committed.

They live in a different world, far removed from ours and more realistic than ours. They don't fight a war on terror, or put some nice spin on reality to make us feel good about ourselves after we were attacked, they seem to be spinning the bad things we do in a more graphic manner.

Actually they think less of us, we stepped out of the box we have been portraying and acting like other countries that they are also fighting against without regards to anything other then our end goal. They are happy we are imploding with our security checks at the air port, the no fly lists and the increased scrutiny of US citizens. They love ever bit of that. Now they can go back to their terrorist freinds and say the US has no backbone because they lie about their fundamentals.

They will never respect us, that is not their idea of gaining respect and if you think for a moment they are afraid of us or going to change their way of thinking, think again. They are just on the same level of commitment as were the Japanese, they will die for their cause at all levels and like the Japanese who protected their upper echelon, they will protect their leaders by moving them or securing them out of sight.

The way it was handled we do win and they lose once again. To them capture and trial simply shows us as cowards.

But we have shown the world we are cowards on so many levels, we have been acting like a country of victims and crying about our losses not morning them.

Has the WTC complex been rebuilt to it former self or has it been hijacked to be a monument?

Capturing and putting them on trial is what we do, it is what this country stands for and this is the point many are making saying this was done wrong. If we expect to go into the nation building or border protection business, we have to stand for something and that was we are a nation of laws, not men but now we are a nation of men and not laws.

 

[mjmsprt40]

One part of the picture I haven't missed is this: The guy our drone just "offed" would, if he could, kill every last one of us without any thought about our constitutional rights. Now we wring our hands because he got what he would so willingly dish out to everybody else. Can't say I'm sorry to see him gone, not even a little bit. When he declared himself an enemy of this country, he declared himself an enemy also of our constitution.

 

[layoutshooter]

HE is the one that declared himself our enemy. We KILL the enemy.

As the oath says:

" that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"

Our military was just doing what they have sworn to do. Good job!

 

[greg334]

Yep I figured that.

SO it is, we trash what is there to protect in order to be vengful because people want to kill us because we demand that they play by our rules.

Just finished reading 7 days in May, maybe it is an appropriate book for these times as it when it was written. The warning is clear, we can't usurp the constitution for the whims of those who feel it is necessary to "protect" the country on foreign soil.

As I heard Rove this morning justifying the action, I thought to myself that his words are so twisted and so convoluted that it makes me wonder what is really wrong with those who espouse the conservative mantra - smaller government and a return to using constitutional limitations for government. His point was this was a person that was a combative while in a combat zone - sorry Karl, Yemen is not a combat zone and the guy was not a foreign national. We didn't declare war on Yemen and we didn't kill a foreign nations.

BUT this is the really funny part, for those who scream they support the constitution, then even attempt to justify this action, they need to read the constitution and understand how it applies to the people. It isn't that this guy deserved it or not, it is the point that the US government stepped way out of their right to defend the country and did something that can be considered illegal - trashed our constitution for all.

 

[cheri1122]

Dr Paul is absolutely correct: why waste thousands of military lives [some of our best assets: young people!], brazillions of dollars, and the good will [potential, if not actual] of many other countries by waging all out war, when the Constitution has provided a solution for just such occasions in the form of Letters of Marque & Reprisal?
We have so much money, good will abroad, and [most important] young men & women that we can afford the losses?
I don't think so.
Looks like Bin Laden was a lot smarter than anyone we have had running our country: he knew how the US would respond, and he wasn't disappointed. Then he got to be a martyr, just as he wanted.
How can our fearless leaders think they can run any other country, when they've failed miserably with this one?!