The Right to a Trial and the Extra-Judicial Killing of al-Awlaki
I have a hard time with this particular issue.
On the one hand, I agree that trials should be held and the state should have to prove a person is guilty before punishment is meted out. On the other hand, we have an American citizen, who for all intents and purposes was living beyond the reach of justice and who was providing moral and material support to terrorists, terrorists that on a daily basis kill and attempt to kill Americans and our allies.
In this instance, as with Bin-Laden, I am perfectly happy we took the shot. It has to be understood that we are fighting a war, and different rules apply in a war. There is no trial required to attack and kill enemy combatants, nor should there be.
This is just an example of the dangerous tightrope walk freedom is. I feel confident that had this person not been killed, we would certainly not have captured him.
Leave a Reply
I consider this to be “trial by ordeal” for the modern day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_by_ordeal
There is no trial speedier than a missile through a window.
They could re-name the procedure for firing a missile ‘due process’ in order to comply with certain legalities.
“We can assure the public the military carried out due process before dispatching the terrorist”