October 9, 2011

Sunday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (100911)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 12:57 pm

Rules are here.

Share

5 Comments

  1. Steve Jobs wouldn’t have lived much longer anyway, what with Roseanne Barr ready to cut off his head and all.

    Comment by Lgbpop — October 9, 2011 @ 10:09 pm

  2. Ron Paul: Obama’s criminal act, ‘Who else is on Obama’s Secret Kill-list?’

    http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/ron-paul-who-else-is-on-criminal-obama-s-secret-kill-list

    Video:
    http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-09/ron-paul-who-else-is-on-obamas-secret-kill-list/

    According to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some aspirational statement of values allowing exceptions when convenient, but rather it is the law of the land. It is the basis of our Republic and our principal bulwark against tyranny.

    Last week, the assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration. If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be aborted when there is a really bad American, is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee not subject to Congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights? Didn’t we just bomb Libya into oblivion under the auspices of “protecting” the civilians from being targeted by their government?

    Comment by G — October 10, 2011 @ 8:12 am

  3. As stated frequently, the constitution and Christianity aren’t suicide pacts. Awlaki was an enemy combatant who counseled people who had killed Americans (e.g., Fort Hood) and had moved into helping to plan attacks. The idea that he was still a “citizen” in any meaningful sense is not defensible.

    Comment by TBlumer — October 10, 2011 @ 8:22 am

  4. Tom, You are very Wrong. – Greg

    Was Anwar al-Awlaki still a U.S. citizen?

    http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/30/was_anwar_al_awlaki_still_a_us_citizen

    Short answer, yes.

    I got into this question a bit with an explainer earlier this month about Chris Jeon, the UCLA student who traveled to Libya to fight with the anti-Qaddafi rebels.

    It was once possible to lose one’s U.S. citizenship by fighting in another country’s army against the United States — whether Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula counts as an army is another question — but as the legal blog Opinion Juris explained on Twitter this morning, the Supreme Court has found that unconstitutional under the 14th ammendment. Ironically, the virulently anti-Semitic cleric’s citizenship was protected by a case that involved a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen fighting to keep his U.S. citizenship after voting in an Israeli election.

    In order to lose his citizenship, it must be shown that the U.S. citizen joined the foreign military or swore allegiance to another state “with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality” — a very tough standard. There’s no evidence that Awlaki ever formally renounced his U.S. citizenship.

    A bill was introduced in the House last year by Rep. Charles Dent (R-Penn.) which would have stripped Awlaki of his citizenship on the basis that his calls for attacks against the United States constituted a voluntary relinquishment, but it never made it out of subcommittee. In any event, the Obama adminsitration never denied Awlaki’s citizenship when it targeted him for assassination.

    Comment by G — October 10, 2011 @ 10:14 am

  5. So if Awlaki never renounces his citizenship, he’s a citizen just about no matter what.

    We’re never going to agree on this, because you’re okay with the Constitution and Christianity being suicide pacts. They’re not.

    As Andy McCarthy has said at National Review (April 2010), “The president is unquestionably the one to whom the Constitution entrusts this call.”

    Comment by TBlumer — October 10, 2011 @ 10:24 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.