Instead, in Barack Obama's America, the way guilt is determined for American citizens -- and a death penalty imposed -- is that the President, like the King he thinks he is, secretly decrees someone's guilt as a Terrorist. He then dispatches his aides to run to America's newspapers -- cowardly hiding behind the shield of anonymity which they're granted -- to proclaim that the Guilty One shall be killed on sight because the Leader has decreed him to be a Terrorist. It is simply asserted that Awlaki has converted from a cleric who expresses anti-American views and advocates attacks on American military targets (advocacy which happens to be Constitutionally protected) to Actual Terrorist "involved in plots." These newspapers then print this Executive Verdict with no questioning, no opposition, no investigation, no refutation as to its truth. And the punishment is thus decreed: this American citizen will now be murdered by the CIA because Barack Obama has ordered that it be done. What kind of person could possibly justify this or think that this is a legitimate government power?
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... index.html
No matter how certain you are of someone's crime or how severe, or where their citizenship lies, why deny them the right to defend themselves. Courts and laws aren't perfect, I mean, how many people have we falsely imprisoned over the years, but do we really want to be able to bypass the system simply because of a label that we can throw on practically anyone without any proof? I'm not trying to protect this individual, but I want to see the rights of everyone protected. Hell, the Westboro Baptist Church has done more than Awlaki. No one likes them much, but are they really fair game for assassination by government? Hell no.
