Ron Paul is wrong about dead Al Qaida terrorist

by Justen Charters

The fact that I strongly disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy- or lack thereof- has probably dubbed me a Neo-con or a Rockefeller Republican by his supporters.  So before you get out the Guy Fawkes mask and declare total war through your keyboards, take off the tin foil hat and hear me out.

On Friday we received word that one of the highest ranking members of Al Qaida, Anwar al-Awlaki, had been killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen.  In a world where we still hold people accountable for their actions, this kind of news should not upset anyone, but rather give them added peace of mind.

CAIR (the Council On American and Islamic Relations), which is known to have ties to terrorist groups like Hamas, had this to say regarding al-Awlaki’s death:

“As we have stated repeatedly in the past, the American Muslim community firmly repudiated Anwar al-Awlaki’s incitement to violence, which occurred after he left the United States. While a voice of hate has been eliminated, we urge our nation’s leaders to address the constitutional issues raised by the assassination of American citizens without due process of law.”

2012 GOP Presidential Candidate Ron Paul responded to the news by making this statement in New Hampshire:

“Awlaki was never tried or charged for any crimes. No one knows if he killed anybody.  He may have been associated with the Underwear Bomber”

Their argument is Anwar should be given a fair trial because he was an American citizen.  And as you can see from CAIR’s quote they say his incitement to violence occurred after he left the United States.

But wait; Awlaki left the United States in 2002.  Is it just coincidental that…

3 out of the 5 of the hijackers that crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon considered al-Awlaki a spiritual advisor and attended his San Diego Mosque.  The Fort Hood gunman Nidal Malik Hassan who killed 13 people and wounded 29 others a month before he would have been deployed to Afghanistan went to al-Awlaki’s mosque in Falls Church.  Hassan also exchanged emails with Awlaki, only God knows what was in those emails but I don’t think they were in a standard pen pal relationship.  Futhermore, the 2005 London Subway Bombers translated lectures of Awlaki’s at the same time as they were plotting the bombings, and his materials were found with apprehended co-conspirators of the suicide bombers.

Awlaki’s supporters described him as a master orator who could easily draw young Arabs to his cause.

Awlaki was to Al Qaida what an SS Colonel was to the Third Reich.  Ron Paul wants to try him as a common criminal instead of an enemy combatant.  Remember he said, “No one knows if he killed anybody.”

So for Ron Paul’s sake, let’s say Awlaki never took a human life,  which I highly doubt. How many orders has he issued to murder innocent people?  How much poison has he injected into those who sat under his tutelage which inspired acts of violence?  How many more terrorists will sit in the interrogation room and admit to having Awlaki influence their motives?  Or, GOD FORBID how many more terror plots will be carried out successfully with the investigation afterward unveiling Awlaki as a main driving force for the Jihadist?

In addition Ron Paul has said, “Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida have been explicit — they have been explicit, and they wrote and said that ‘we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians fair treatment…’”

Ron Paul’s assertion is incorrect.  Al-Qaida recruits are students of Wahhabi Islam.  Wahhabi Islam was founded in the early 18th century by Muhammad ibn Abd-al Wahhab and was a new ideology that preached a brand of purification Islam. Call it the Aryan belief system for Islamists. Anyone who did not acknowledge this new ideology was deemed apart from the branches of Islam – an apostate, deserter or heathen, which permitted their blood to be spilled and their property to be confiscated.  Although Wahhabi Islam is a narrow sect of Islam as a whole, it has influenced a number of terror organizations and infamous Jihadists, such as al-Awlaki.

My opinion: al-Awlaki’s hands are dripping in just as much blood as all those whom he persuaded to murder the innocent.  If you can’t see that, your moral compass needs to be replaced.  And that goes for all those who support Ron Paul’s lukewarm position on terrorism too.

Justen Charters is a 24 year old political activist. In the last six months, despite battling an immunity disorder, he has been a major contributor on social networking sites such as youtube, facebook and twitter. His youtube channel has videos that are frequently featured on Patriot Action Network, one of the largest conservative social networking sites, and he’s one of the most followed bloggers on Red County.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 01:48 | Posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Terrorism | 221 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Anonymous

    Sorry, Mr. Charters, Due Process and ethics do not stop at the border of the United States of America.  It is what we are, or should be, to provide a fair and equitable means to reach a decision about life or death of an American citizen.  When the Oval Office can assassinate an American citizen without a trial, then nothing, repeat, nothing stops them from assassinating you.

    • Triliberty516

      You my friend are one blind old dog! And you make a lot of sense!

    • EdH

      Quite a laundry list of accusations against Anwar al-Awlaki the CIA came up with.
      Not quite as long as the laundry list of Biological, Chemical & Nuclear WMDs they used to justify invading Iraq. Hopefully there is a little more truth this time.

  • J S

    Your argument is that he was a bad man that did bad things and should be killed.  It’s a poor one.   He is a citizen of the U.S., and has rights that our government should respect. 

    How is a serial killer who confessed to a crime of multiple murders any different?  Does he not get due process?  Or maybe a domestic terrorist who is also a U.S. citizen?  Do our rights cease to exist because we live in a different country? 

    • Triliberty516

      Great points. Stupid ideas are just stupid idea’s this kid left himself open for a reality check.

    • Jonathan Nitzan

      Exactly. We tried and executed Timonthy McVeigh… what people don’t get is that if this guy meant to harm the United States, by being assassinated he did more in death than he ever could have done in life, just like the 9/11 terrorists. He has moved us one step closer to a totalitarian dictatorship by inadvertently stripping even more rights from us and giving the ability for a president to now assassinate a citizen at will because he’s a “bad” man.

  • Yes, that is why Al Qaida is clammoring to bomb Uraquay or Brazil or Sweden, or Canada or Mexcio, those non muslim countries are just right at the top of Al Qaida’s list to bomb.  I’m afraid you are wrong.  They attack us because we are an empire and we have bases on their lands.  

    • triliberty516

      You are another kook just like me.

    • Josh Basquez

      George, you’re speaking too much sense and intelligence. you must be one of them ‘terrorists’ types. … grrr… duh… YAH AMERICUH killed one of them terrorists again.. [yells at wife] ..”HONEY, WHERE IN TARNATION IS YEH-MEN?”…[opens beer].. ALRIGHT GLAD I WATCHED FOX NEWS TO KEEP ME UP TO DATE, TIME TO PUT TV BACK ON THE BALL GAME.

  • Anonymous

    You may not be able to enlist, but it would be nice if you would stop advocating the Neocon policies that condemn the rest of your generation to fight endless wars.

    If you want to learn about conservatism, pick up something from Russell Kirk.  Stay away from the NRO, Weekly Standard big government fanatics.

    • Triliberty516

      Russel Kirk how can you possibly ask a fake conservative War Mongering Liberal to read Kirk. Kirk is Conservatism. You are a cruel man! 

  • Po2jones

    Paul isn’t angry that this man is dead, he called it a net gain. What he is concerned about is Americans being terminated at the whims of government; labeling people terrorists with out trial. Don’t forget that the vice president called teabaggers “terrorists”. That term gets thrown around pretty loosely these days. Paul’s position protects people like you, if you choose to write an article that disagrees with the government, and the government chooses to call you a terrorist. Imagin if this county ever went into revolt, would all the protesters be deemed terrorists? You need to look at issues from all angles before putting out such narrow minded articles.

    • Sovereigner516

      Some People have no idea why we have a constitution. They are not taught why we should cherish it. This kid is part of the brain washed. But I am pretty sure you are helping him out! Great Post!

  • Nomo S. Pamming

    The problem with this, sir, is that nobody is upset that this monster is dead. Ron Paul is not defending his innocence. Take off your foil helmet and think about it. What would stop the President from simply sending in SEAL Team X into a KKK rally in Georgia? Or a New Black Panther Party rally in Detroit? Nothing, apparently. Seems the POTUS has given himself the Judge Dredd badge without bothering to ask us what we think about it. It does not sound very constitutional, coming from a constitutional law professor, does it?

    • triliberty516

      Like your thinking. Keep the education going! America needs it!

  • Mat343

    “My opinion: al-Awlaki’s hands are dripping in just as much blood as all those whom he persuaded to murder the innocent.  If you can’t see that, your moral compass needs to be replaced.”
    So, using your logic, any accused murderer should be killed without trial. PERIOD. You have decided that justice is decided by one man, without a jury. If you don’t see the problem with this then you are lost.

    • triliberty516

      This boy is getting a schooling!

    • Deefburger

      If an opinion is all it takes to justify a death, then we live in uncivilized times and in a barbaric country.  Don’t ask me for my opinion of you, you might not get the answer that you want me too….

  • I will dub you what you are. You are a person whom feels the end justifies the means. You are a person who cares not for true justice and prefers vengeance. You are an objectively challenged, narrow minded, blood lusting every day American. Just what happened to this country? I’ve been ashamed of my nations actions and policies for quite some time but it never fails to get worse does it. NO ONE SHOULD ESCAPE LAW! does anyone even care that we could of learned something from this man if taken alive, that we could of learned A LOT from Osama if he had been taken alive? No you all just want any reason to feel like these wars have been worth the human, political, and economic cost. I can understand the psychology there but I also understand that it is simply wishful thinking.

    • triliberty516

      You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I would really say this guy doesn’t know history and why we had the protections in the constitution.

  • Unfortunately, you miss Ron Paul’s whole point. He has clearly stated this has nothing to do with the quality of person al-Awlaki is. In fact, he has admitted himself that many people will feel relieved by his assassination.
    The problem is that he got no due process, which means the evidence against him never had a chance to be scrutinized in a court of law or the public eye. What this means is that, in the future, we will have established a precedent that says the executive branch can do its own analysis of the evidence, not have to share it, give you information only it deems relevant, and assassinate that person if they deem it necessary. I personally find this idea very troubling.
    Added to that, the evidence against al-Awlaki that is known to the public is his sensationalist videos crying for America’s destruction. While this is totally disgusting to most, it is not criminal. Freedom of speech protects the filth of society as well as the good. By giving up on the former, you start to erode the latter.
    Thomas Paine said it eloquently: “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard
    even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he
    establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”

    • FreedomLover

      OMG I love you!

  • Anonymous

    How can you expect to be taken serious when you call for the people you disagree with to “take off the tin foil hat?” This article is just more propaganda.

    • FreedomLover

      So very true. Also very sad!

  • Everyone who is applauding this action, please watch one or both of these Frontline programs: “Top Secret America” and “Kill Capture.” Both can be seen online.

    • triliberty516

      I’m not applauding this nor are many others who understand what had occurred!

  • I agree with the rest of the comments….100% disagreeing with you. LOL Ron Paul is defending the Constitution and the RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED TO A FAIR TRIAL. THAT is America.

    • triliberty516

      Nailed it!

  • Anonymous

    “”My opinion: al-Awlaki’s hands are dripping in just as much blood as all those whom he persuaded to murder the innocent.  If you can’t see that, your moral compass needs to be replaced.”So, using your logic, any accused murderer should be killed without trial. PERIOD. You have decided that justice is decided by one man, without a jury. If you don’t see the problem with this then you are lost.” I AGREE.

  • Urban II 1095

    Everybody loves a good tin foil hat now and again. Calling people names always makes me feel good. Lets just hope are neocon ideas do not fall out of favor with the msm and the military industrial complex cause obviously we do not need courts just global hawks and predator drones! 

    • triliberty516

      Yahoo! You say that well!

  • You say (In addition Ron Paul has said, “Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida have been explicit — they have been explicit, and they wrote and said that ‘we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi Arabia, you do not give Palestinians fair treatment…’”Ron Paul’s assertion is incorrect.  Al-Qaida recruits are students of Wahhabi Islam.  Wahhabi Islam was founded in the early 18th century by Muhammad ibn Abd-al Wahhab and was a new ideology that preached a brand of purification Islam. Call it the Aryan belief system for Islamists. Anyone who did not acknowledge this new ideology was deemed apart from the branches of Islam – an apostate, deserter or heathen, which permitted their blood to be spilled and their property to be confiscated.  Although Wahhabi Islam is a narrow sect of Islam as a whole, it has influenced a number of terror organizations and infamous Jihadists, such as al-Awlaki.)

     ~ you don’t take into account that extremist groups must play on mainstream hate or fear to gain traction and attract followers. Look at Russia, many of these groups including Al-Qaida we’re formed to repel Russian occupation. Russia no longer occupies middle eastern countries and they no longer attack Russia. Make sense? It should… Ron Paul simply concurs with the 9/11 commission findings but no one calls that panel unpatriotic and ignorant. Its so much easier to attack a single man.

  • For Liberty

    Awlaki dined at the Pentagon just a few months after 9/11/2001.  So I am pretty certain that the pentagon knew about his relationship with several of the 911 terrorists.  I wonder why they would have invited him to the pentagon for a diner.  I suppose we will never know now that he will not have his day in court. 

    • triliberty516

      Don’t tell the truth you may get accused of wearing a tin foil hat

  • Rhetorical questions (“how many terrorists,” “how much poison,” “how many more terror plots,”) and unfounded assertions don’t make an argument.  Maybe he did inspire the killings at Ft. Hood.  The point is that WE DON’T KNOW.  Here’s a thought.  Think back to every abortion clinic that was blown up or abortion provider that was killed.  I’m sure Jerry Falwell probably was an influence at some point.  Or that guy that wrote “The Turner Diaries.”  Heck, we KNOW he inspired Timothy McVeigh.  Let’s drop some bombs on them without a trial.  Sooner or later it will get around to all of us.

  • Agreed. I like Ron Paul but sometimes you have to pick your battles and it’s best to keep quiet.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjRcO1Sm0HU

    • triliberty516

      Yeah and to the contrary of your humble opinions, this is a great battle to step into! Ron Paul is running for President and it’s not to continue the blown out of proportion War on Terror it’s to protect the People of this Country from the tyrants in Washington DC!  

  • jdude

    ha, i love people who think terrorism started on 9/11. Even the CIA has a term called “blowback.” So if they have a term for it, then it must be conceivable that it can happen.

    Only in arrogant America, does the principle, “you reap what you sow” apply to everyone for all of mankind EXCEPT for AMerican Foreign policy. Then it’s just we sow, and never reap….  laughable!!!!   Just ask ancient Rome what becomes of an empie with this type of mentality!   Even Ben Stein resorted to callin RP anti-semetic just becuase he suggested that our own policies might be coming back to haunt us…

    Get out your darth vader helmets, it’s “The Empire (America) Strikes Back” 2.0!

    • triliberty516

      Yahooooooooo. Love it!

  • jdude2000

    is it just irony that the one country occupying all the middle east is the one suffering the most threats? Really?  How come the terrorists arn’t so against Panama, China, russia?????

    • triliberty516

      uuuuum ummmmmm ummmmmm you are a Terrorist Sympathizer………uuuuum uuuuuuummmmmm you are UnAmerican. You are just stupid. ummmmmmm ummmmm. I can’t debate that I will sling names!

      • A striking impersonation of Rick Perry, nice.

        • triliberty516

          It the Bilderberger in him.

          • It’s the retard in him to which i referred. I’ve heard far better debate from uninformed, uninterested high school students just trying to get through the day to smoke some pot at home than i’ve ever heard from that man. It astounds me that such an idiot could be a player on the political scene for so long.

  • jdude2000

    Howcome Obama and Holder hated waterboarding, and even wanted civilian trials for all the terrorists, but are hypocritcal and willing to kill an Amercian citizen without even blinking???????

  • Xk8290

    I can’t believe the ignorance that has totally indulged most of this country. Don’t you realize that we as americans will be targeted for assassinations in the future under this  neo con/new world order regulation that uses terrorism as an excuse to suppress our freedoms and fight endless wars. We can’t even film law enforcement anymore without getting heat. You idiots need to wake up and stop encouraging this ridiculous tough guy attitude good boy american who loves murder and violence.  If this ex-c.i.a operative was so bad then why wasn’t he killed when he visited the pentagon a few years back right around 9/11. Please stop spreading propaganda and telling the real patriotic americans to take of the tin foil hats.  I cant believe that it has come to this because one day all you war mongering writers will realize you were dead wrong on this issue. When will the war on terrorism end? The mainstream corporate media and governemnt officials are already branding a new form of terrorism. It will be used against the “tea Party” and anyone who doesnt agree with their policies and regulations. The system uses in Iraq will be used here in America soon. Please start writing truth and encourage the constitution because you also will be effected by the New World Order that is now openly talked about..

    • jdude2000

      i agree, our assasination of citizens sets a really bad precedant!

    • triliberty516

      Agreed

  • Anonymous

    All you did was make the case he was a bad guy.    I don’t think anyone is really arguing against that.  The problem is the methods and the laws, or more specifically, the complete lack of care in following the law.

    I’m not at all upset the guy is dead.   I am upset because the law was ignored to do it.

    These laws are not there to protect people like Awlaki, assuming he is in fact guilty.    The laws are their to protect the innocent.

    If what he did was so bad that he deserved being killed like this, then the case against him shouldn’t be that hard to present.   In which case, he would be sentenced and dealt with accordingly.

    However, if someone is innocent, then the trial is what saves them.    The trial is to determine guilty or innocence. 

    So, this basically means anyone, citizen or not, who makes the “list” is going to be dealt with.    Well that may seem all fine and dandy when you think the people on it are guilty.   But it’s when the innocent person gets put on it that matters.

    And when it’s the same basic instruments deciding these things as that which said there were WMD in Iraq, compiles the no fly list, brought out the yellow cake stuff, thought we would be treated as liberators, and all these other things which have proven to be false, well that’s even more reason to not be in favor of the actions.

    And it’s not like there aren’t ways of dealing with such things legally.   They just ignored it.   Why?  Because the legal ways of doing things doesn’t give them carte blanche powers, they would have to make the case for him, or congress would have to vote on it – which means the representatives could be held accountable and so on.

    Ron Paul just proved that no matter what your race, your beliefs, your culture, or even if you hate everything about him, he will stick up for your civil rights.   In a time where we have steadily lost our rights, and continue to lose our rights, he just solidified that he is the only candidate who is worthy of being our next president. 

    He is the change people were looking for in 2008.

    • triliberty516

      I like You! You like Ron!

  • Brooksmunro

    Why was he a guest at the pentagon in 2001.  file://localhost/Users/brooksmunro/Desktop/www.youtube.com:watch%3Fv=CZbIf0NTGdw.webloc

  • Anonymous

    You can always lobby your congressman if you don’t like the law. However, you can’t circumvent the constitution if you truly believe in it.

  • The fact was he was never charged with any crimes.  He was executed on the order from Obama.  Also, the other guy with him was executed as well.  He may have authored an inflammatory magazine, but oh well.  It was as if Texas accidentally had two prisoners on gurneys next to each other and accidentally stuck a needle in each of them.

    How much bloodshed will suffice in this “War on Terror”.  My guess is that we have not seen the last.

    • Unless something changes we’ve only just seen the beginning. If you look back into history a 20, 30, even 50 year war wasn’t uncommon. Especially in regards to long standing, expansionist empires. Rome anyone? We’ll be pretty damn lucky to last as long as they did at this rate.

    • triliberty516

      More manufactured terrorism. If the man was truly guilty and they had the evidence why didn’t they just bring him to justice? He probably is just another CIA asset like Bin Laden. 

    • True. Whoever ordered the strike should be up for murder.

  • Dilltp04

    you’re an idiot… he’s not saying the guy is completely innocent you ignorant fuck, he’s saying he has a constitutional right to a fair trial, where he would probably be convicted and sentenced accordingly… a lot of people in our country have done some very bad things but you don’t see the gov’t sending drones out to assassinate them… i think the timothy mcveigh comparison was a good one (which you conveniently left out of your article) mcveigh killed a lot of people, so should he have been assassinated by the government without due process??  you’re an idiot

  • Stuff

    Men such as Adolf Eichman, and Hermann Goring were gave a trial.

    • Atlanticvirtual

      Pre-meditaded murder

    • triliberty516

      Yeah but not Terror suspects? Wonder why? Manufactured Terrorism would be my take on it.

  • Brooksmunro

    Was he part of the same al-qaida that the U.S. is supporting in Libya to over through kadafi, or is it the same al-qaida the U.S. armed in Afghanistan to fight the russians, or is it the al-qaida the U.S. supported in bosnia ? wake up sheeple, get out of your fear cage.

  • triliberty516

    No one needs to jump down your throat but you make it pretty easy for an invite. Go read the Constitution and some real History. No one really cares about your opinions! The Law of the Land is the Law of The Land! The Constitution is written so simply even you can understand it! Due Process is the Law of the Land! Not Nazi Communist Law. 

  • The Constitution was only written and the law that says all everyone must be given a trial before being sentenced. If he did all the crimes he did, and was planning, then he could get tried for Treason and face death and or life imprisonment. But the constitution was only written for nice white Americans right……It a shame so many people forgot what our country was founded on……

  • Justen, it’s time to wake up, dude. You’re only 24. I was half-cooked at that age, myself, but your country needs you.

    America has never been more vulnerable than it is now. We are broke. And, the way our “foreign policy” works: without money, you are without friends. Just look at what is going on with Pakistan. Billions of dollars in aid later, and Lindsay Graham is talking about how we should invade. Our forces are stretched precariously thin, and we owe an obscene amount of money to a hostile frenemy: China. Do you see this ending well?

  • Dilltp04

    and also if you really feel soooooo much safer now that this guy is dead then you are lying to yourself… you will probably forget all about it tomorrow when you write another article denouncing ron paul for opening up the consitution…. you think killing this one dude is going to make us safe from the terrorists, then tell me what has changed? you still have a house and a bed and food and a job you fool stop lying to people acting like we’re all safe now

  • Anonymous

    Justen,

    While you write nice and can run through a train of thought.  I’m sad to report to you that you have very little understanding of your basic freedoms.  You should probably look up an online course on human rights, US Constitutional freedoms, inalienable rights, etc.

    Your position is seriously flawed and follows the logic of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.

  • Anonymous

    “In addition Ron Paul has said, “Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida have
    been explicit — they have been explicit, and they wrote and said that
    ‘we attacked America because you had bases on our holy land in Saudi
    Arabia, you do not give Palestinians fair treatment…’””

    “Ron Paul’s assertion is incorrect.”

    ——-

    Mr. Charters, you fail to recognize that this is not an “assertion” by Ron Paul. It is fact. Had you taken the time to do some research and actually read what Osama bin Laden wrote after 9/11 then perhaps you would be able to make the distinction between “assertion” and “fact”.

    You have a right to your opinion and I appreciate that. Just get your facts straight and I’d be more willing to listen to what you have to say.

    • The premiss of what he said is correct and that is the point. We did instigate 9/11. To think otherwise is foolish and lacking basic common sense. How would you react to me bombing your neighborhood?

  • Brooksmunro

    We can’t assassinate citizens, but we can under law assassinate rouge C.I.A. operatives. so all’s good. 

  • Brooksmunro

    We can’t assassinate citizens, but we can assassinate rogue C.I.A operatives, so all’s good

  • Happyboy

    I think this guy lost all his rights when he became a terrorist.

    • You prove it in court while possibly gleaning important information. The right to due process is Constitutionally GUARANTEED. Therefore the people who violated it are in fact traitors. We tried Nazis and they weren’t American citizens, this guy was. No one is saying he shouldn’t have ended up paying for what he might’ve done but there’s reason why it needs to be proven in court unless there’s a threat of imminent danger, which there wasn’t.

    • And how would you define becoming a terrorist? It’s a label, not an action. If I went out on the street and told 10 people I was a terrorist, does that make me one? Would I have just lost all my rights?

      Seems to me that slapping this label on someone and killing them (rule of the jungle) is much more convenient than actually proving their actions (rule of law).

  • Thomasjefferson

    “Awlaki was to Al Qaida what an SS Colonel was to the Third Reich”
    Very well said!

  • Anonymous

    Dear How Old Are YOU author?

    How do you respond to the murder by the US of the other American citizen in the car that Al-Aliki was in?  When does the murdering stop?  How does execution without due process make us a safer nation?  How does aligning with the Yemeni government give the Yemeni people the impression that they can have free debate among unpopular leaders without involvement in their sovereign political debates?  Finally, be assured that the Chinese have already stolen drone tech and are in the process of selling these drones to Muslim hate groups.  How will you feel when they blow up one of our leaders in YOUR neighborhood? 

    And finally, I want you to for a minute consider writing an exit strategy from ten years of war?  Ron Paul’s: mutual assured respect and fair commerce.  Treat other people the way you want to be treated while maintaining the threat of a solid defense.   Provide trade options so that people can get back to work and end these undeclared wars that don’t build anything. What’s your plan?

    It is so easy to be a critic.  A lot harder to be a real leader.  I think you have some growing up to do.

    Sincerely,
    Ron Paul 2012 Voter!

  • In a free land a pig has the same rights as the president unless PROVEN guilty in a court of law.

  • ‘As
    President, I would have arrested Awlaki, brought him to the U.S., tried
    him and pushed for the stiffest punishment allowed by law. Treason has
    historically been judged to be the worst of crimes, deserving of the
    harshest sentencing. But what I would not do as President is what Obama
    has done and continues to do in spectacular fashion: circumvent the rule
    of law.’ – Ron Paul
    Is that soft on terror or strong on rule of law? Almost everyone agrees, including Paul, that Awlaki was awful and deserved to pay for his incitement against the US. But as a US citizen, he had the right to due process. How long until assassination-without-trial logic is used against us “terroristic” Tea Partiers?

  • Nick Riley

    Ron Paul is right once again.   This was a case of using a sledge hammer to pound in a nail.  Obama liked the boost he got from the Bin Ladin raid and you can be sure politics had a hand in the way things went down CIA or Military  it all works on perceptions.

    This article was illogical and naive.   Anyone who trusts the government as much as this author does should be more careful maybe examine more motives before saying, “Dr Paul is wrong!”    Rule #1 should be to say, “Thanks Dr Paul for bringing the constitutionality of our executive branch back into the discussion…now I’ll go study this out some more.” 

    Quoting from this dumb article: So for Ron Paul’s sake, let’s say Awlaki never took a human life,  which I highly doubt.

    Nobody gives a crap what you highly doubt.  That is what courts are for.

  • Elliot Riley1

    Nobody has said this terrorist was not a horrible excuse or a human being or that he didn’t deserve to die. The point that was made by not only Ron Paul, but many others, is that the executive branch of the government does not have the authority to decide which of its citizens to kill. 

    If the law doesn’t support the current environment, change it. Let the American people know about the change and take any grievances to the government. The problem is not that this guy died, it’s the bigger picture. Step back and think about how scary it is that the president can kill citizens. What is the next step now? What if others have been killed and it didn’t make the news? What if the intelligence is flawed in some cases, as was the intelligence that told us Iraq had WMD hidden? 

    It’s not the face that this person was killed that is the problem, it’s the policy that it has created. 

  • I did not spend 22 years on active duty so that the USA could morph into the USSR. I have no problem hunting bands of terrorists down and killing them. But, you cannot single out one person and kill them. It violates the laws of war. An active duty Marine would be court martialed for it. If we can hold an 18 year old Marine accountable to his oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foriegn and domestic” we can dang sure hold his commander in chief accountable.

    Ever heard of leadership by example? Ron Paul has and Obama hasn’t.

  • Josh Hanselman

    I’m sorry, but you failed on EVERY single occasion to actually support your disagreement with Dr. Paul.  You mention multiple comments from him (from the debates, mostly), and I kind of got excited because I thought you were going to make a case worth a good discussion/argument, but there’s nothing in here that actually touches on the quotes you bring up.

    “Hassan also exchanged emails with Awlaki, only God knows what was in
    those emails but I don’t think they were in a standard pen pal
    relationship.”

    Honestly, this reminds me of Sean Hannity’s style of spectator judgment.  It’s too easy.  Do you have access to the emails enough to make claims on anything?  The problem is that the people who are high up on the CIA and our Executive branch are making knee-jerk assumptions like this without examining thorough evidence.  Which is the point: whether he left the country or not, it doesn’t absolve our society of the requirement to follow the law and give him a trial.  If everything checks out and he’s guilty, then what are you so afraid of?  You also sort of just…blatantly ignored the part where THE YEMEN BOMBINGS DID NOT GET CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.  I have to assume at this point you’re aware of the December 2009 drone bombs that killed 55 people, 41 of which were civilians (and 21 of those were children).  If you are NOT aware of this, I can reasonably hypothesize that you are deliberately ignoring history to suit your disagreement with Ron Paul, which is deplorable.  If you’re simply OK with the idea that a full 74.5% of the deaths in a United States-lead attack were innocent civilians, than I highly suggest you forget about writing these articles and simply keep voting for establishment Republicans.  Mitt Romney will do just fine.

    “Ron Paul’s assertion is incorrect.  Al-Qaida recruits are students of Wahhabi Islam.”

    These two assertions are not connected.  Whether or not Al-Qaida recruits are students of Wahhabi Islam or Sunni Islam makes little difference to me.  What matters is that we as a country have failed to follow our constitution in matters of foreign affairs for the better half of the last century.  Have you actually read Bin Laden’s letter to the United States?  Read it, all the way through please, and then tell me with a straight face that Ron Paul was wrong with his comments to Santorum in that debate.

    I think the part you’re not getting is that yes, Islamic terrorists hate us regardless of what our foreign policy is.  But, as others have pointed out already, it’s the difference between being annoyed at an obnoxious drunk in a bar…and hitting back when he decides to throw a punch at you.  If you want to ignore the casualty statistics of the Gulf War, or the effects of our economic sanctions on Iraqi children, or our history of propping up dictatorships in the middle east, or our rampant addiction to militarism around the globe, be my guest.  But please skip the nonsense about Ron Paul being wrong and go pick up a copy of the constitution.  Or read a high school level history book on the Middle East.  Either will do.

    • Xk8290

      Great points, unfortunately many ignorant and naive americans like Justen Charters doesnt know tyranny existed like Nazi Germany or China and many  other countries throughout the ages. Since the Roman Empire there have been extreme dictatorship and deception. Also the mass killing of citizens. But of course since America is America to some people tyranny and corruption never could happen here and Ron Paul is a loony who has no idea what he is talking about. Ladies and Gentleman we are officially living in the twilight zone. 

  • Brian Fake

    So for arguments sake lets say the United States government never took an innocent human life,  which
    I highly doubt. How many orders has the President (both past and present) given to, albeit unintentionally, murder innocent
    people (civilian casualties, collateral damage)?  How much has the foreign policy of the United States government injected poison into those who sat and watched as their father, mother, brother, sister etc. were innocent victims of covert operations or war? To put it in simpler terms: You and your family are overseas (let’s say in Pakistan) visiting a family friend. A bomb from a drone drops across the street just as you and your family were getting into the car. Your wife and daughter are killed. Your son badly injured and can’t feel his legs. You somehow survived. You find through news reports that it was the United States going after a high profile “enemy combatant”. Do you just brush off the death of your family members? As a reminder of the event, you will be pushing your son around in a wheelchair for the remainder of his life. I do believe most people would want to strike back. Hence the term blowback, which our own CIA has recognized.

  • Mr. Ron Paul is not wrong. al-Awlaki deserved to die. All Obama had to do was renounce the citizenship and there would be NOOOOO issue.

    You cannot assassinate American Citizens without due process!!!!!

  • Tessy

    Lets line up all the rappers who incite violence against the police and women and assassinate them for encouraging violence against Americans. Then when we are done there, lets line up those who create video games like Grand Theft Auto where you can beat a prostitute with a bat and assassinate them for their violent speach and visuals. Then while we are at it lets do away with all the religious leaders who stand against what we believe because we all know religion is a dangerous thing…where will it end? There is a price to pay for freedom loving people. Never underestimate the power of due process of the law. It is there for the protection of freedom loving people everywhere. Point well Taken Mr. Paul no one man should have that kind of power!

    • Better include all police and political officials who encourage and even commit violence against citizens which would include those who are pro needlessly raping a U.S. citizen of the right to due process, which is the point.

  • i stopped reading after he said tin foil hat. seriously dude?

  • onesquarelight

    Great closing argument only there is not trial buddy. He’s already dead. You really could have sealed the deal though.

    Please think about what is at the heart of what your are saying. Watch this and open your mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLUoWhWsOWk&feature=player_embedded

  • Crewe

    You make a compelling case against Awlaki. It is very possible a jury would have agreed with you if they had been given a chance..

  • Tessy

    Oh yea I forgot about those petty little Tea Party people Maxine Waters says should all go to hell Lets assassinate them while we are at it. COME ON AMERICA ITS TIME FOR A REALITY CHECK

  • JAMESCLAYBORNBURENTT

    First of all: Terrorists are CRIMINALS. We have to treat them as CRIMINALS. We need to go after them and arrest them and throw them in prison. We are not at WAR. If so according to your logic, we (the United States) can KILL any person if we say they are a terrorist because we are at WAR. Plus, this War will NEVER END because there will always be some person somewhere that believes in killing other human beings. Look at Timothy McVeigh. We didn’t decide to go to war with every VETERAN because one VETERAN decided to blow up a federal building. Terrorism is a criminal act not an act of warfare. 

    Secondly, Wahhabism is not the reason why Islamic terrorists are trying to kill us. I advise any person to look into the history of the middle east and the actions of the United States Government, the British Government, and the French Government for the last three hundred years. The reason that they are trying to kill us is because of our foreign policy. We overthrow governments( Iran in 1953 by the United States Central Intelligence Agency), we support Isreal (1947-today), and we consistently meddle in other countries to influence them to accept United States dominance in the region and our cultural values (Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc).

    Thirdly, just because he was a United States citizen doesn’t make it wrong. Its wrong because assassination is murder. Everyone should be standing up and shouting about how the United States has become EVIL. We bomb terrorists and kill civilians and nobody cares. We kill civilians and we call it collateral damage and nobody cares. We assassinate people through the CIA and nobody cares. When will you care America?  To all you right wing christians, I ask you where Jesus said it was ok for governments to kill other people or their own citizens. Wake up America. Murder is injustice and is morally wrong.

    A king was scared he was going to lose his kingdom so he called in all the leading families of the kingdom and served them dinner. After dinner, he ordered his guards to slit all their throughts to protect himself from disaster. The son of one of these dead men, eventually rose to prominence and led a rebellion against the king, winning and executing the king.

    The moral of the story is that Tyrants such as the United States always bring about their own doom because they are so scared of losing power they create their own enemies.

    We are doing that know. WAKE UP AMERICA. DEMAND THE END TO SENSELESS WARS.

  • Ihatewar

    I will still default to calling you a Neo-con war monger using war propaganda.  How about this, enlist and fight them yourself since this seems so morally right to you

  • Jhynn

    Sorry kid, killing the ‘terrorist(s)’ does not keep us safe. Opposite actually. Get a brain before writing another article.

  • Ksengage15

    Is trililiberty516 the guy who wrote this? Justen? Just curious seeing how he’s responding to every single comment on this page.. the whole “tin foil hat” comment is a pretty dumb thing to say. Sorry I support ron paul and don’t agree with what the mainstream “corporate” news say about him..just cause I don’t live and think the way they tell you to doesn’t mean I’m crazy.

  • Well, I’m glad that you assigned yourself the title of “judge and jury”. Too bad that Awlaki is — sorry, “was” — not only a US citizen, but he was a human — and both of those titles gave him the right to a fair and balanced trial.

    He deserved having the evidence against him reviewed by people who wanted to see him declared innocent — even Charles Manson got that.

    Also, under numerous international agreements, assassination is a war crime (not that we’re in a war. Please to be showing me the Declaration of War?)

    SO… no… I think my tinfoil hat is working pretty well. It’s telling me that you don’t care that a single person can decide the fate of a human, let alone a US citizen. My tinfoil hat is also telling me that you actually believe that, by murdering this man, we’ll decrease the hatred against us in the future.

    Nah, I like my tinfoil hat. It keeps all the bullsh** out.

  • Andy K

    I think it’s funny how various journalists and bloggers keep posting articles about how Ron Paul is wrong about his foreign policy ideas, and how those who believe the same as he does are crazy and are incredibly far off the mark. The reality is that YOU, sir are far off the mark. 

    Did you ever read any book on Blowback? Have you ever thought, (though disturbing) to read Osama Bin Laden’s “Letter to America”? Try that before posting something like this again. The fact of the matter is that we don’t need to be policing the world, and killing American citizens in drone operations without due process.

    Ready for 10 more years of wars and depression in America? That’s what you’ll get if you don’t wise up and realize Ron’s right. I hope that for your sake, you do.

  • Okay, the first paragraph you insult Ron Paul supporters, while asking us to hear you out. I think the point of what most of Paul says is to have Americans think forward, rather than here and now. If we execute someone who is an American citizen without due process, even if they are living in another country and is a part of a terrorist group, it will lead to other occurrences. We’ve already been through so many scares, (Communism, Japanese, Islam, etc…) but it could lead to something like McCarthyism times 10. Even if you think it’s wrong, you shouldn’t mind the fact that he’s making you think… it’s good for you, even if for 1/10 of a second, to question the actions of your government.

  • Go to ronpaul2012.com then click on the first article at the bottom left of the home page titled al-Awalaki and Richard Jewell.

  • Timothy McVeigh got due process and a fair trial, and he blew up a day care center. Granted, he was executed in the end, but he got what he had a right to as an American citizen, despite committing what was unarguably an ideologically motivated terrorist attack aimed at the United States. The only difference that I can see between McVeigh and Awlaki is that one was a white Christian. The other was Arabic, born from immigrants, and Muslim. Coincidence? You decide. 

  • So you wrote this whole article, telling us Ron Paul is wrong about Al-Awlaki, yet you failed to mention how exactly Ron Paul is wrong?

    What you wrote is a bunch of opinion – totally irrelevant to the topic at hand. Ron Paul isn’t discussing opinions or speculations in his condemnation of the way Al-Awlaki was assassinated, he is talking about and defending the *rule of law.*

    Charge the man with a crime, as the Bush administration did HUNDREDS of times to terrorists, present him with the charges being made against him, and then let the courts deal with him. Speculating about what you’ve heard Awlaki was involved in is for the birds. Evidence is for the courts. All American citizens MUST be given their day in court. Not so much to take it easy on criminals / terrorists, but to ensure that should I end up in court one day for any reason, that I still have my 5th Amendment protections.

    Also, when you claim Paul is wrong in his ‘assertion’ that Usama Bin Laden was very explicit in his writings and statements, I’m not sure whether you’re just confused, or haven’t listed to or read experts who have written about Usama Bin Laden. Bases on the Arabian Peninsula, which was seen as a desecration of Muslim holy land (bases which were subsequently removed by the U.S. following 9/11, might I add), is in fact one of Bin Laden’s grievances against the U.S. Foreign occupation is the number one factor contributing to the growing number of Al Qaeda, and other terrorists in general, against U.S. interests. The experts – the CIA, internal Pentagon reports – have been very clear that it is our presence in Central Asia that incites suicide terrorism against us.

    You should read ‘Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism’ by Professor Robert Pape of Chicago. He also has a new book out with updated statistics. He has the first and only database of every recorded suicide terror attack dating back to the late 1970’s, and has done the most prominent analysis of this data than any other individual. What Pape has found, and what he proves in his book with the data/evidence, is that in over 96% of cases, the main motivation for individuals to commit suicide terrorism is foreign occupation of land the ‘terrorists’ consider their homeland by a modern democracy, and has little, if anything, to do with religion.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul never said he was a good guy.  Ron Paul didn’t say we should do nothing.  He stated we must follow our constitution and rule of law.  That is what we are supposedly fighting for right? to preserve America’s freedoms?  What you are saying is the end justifies the means.  This is the path to dictatorship.  What is more disturbing than what the president did, is that there are so many such as yourself who are supporting this and just don’t seem to get the significance of what has just happened.  Judge Napolitano covered this very well recently.  Watch his latest episode and learn something

  • JayTee

    Are neoconservatives mentally handicapped?

  • Ron Paul Supporter

    When Ron Paul went on Neil Cavuto, he said that Awlaki’s death was probably a net positive; HOWEVER, despite the fact that he was an enemy does not trump the requirement of due process. Some would argue that there are risks of attempting to capture him which would put our troops in harms way. I understand this, but the act of capturing him may have prompted an exchange of gunfire which would have ultimately killed him anyway. Resisting arrest would justify an exchange in gunfire. You have to try and capture the American cictizens due to their rights to due process. If they choose to go down swinging, then that is there mistake and they will be shot. After all, despite how certain we may be regarding Awlaki’s guilt, even Casey Anthony got her day in court, and we all know that she was guilty.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul cares a hoot for Awlaki’s death. He knows he is evil. What Ron Paul cares about is the orders for assassination that a president 20 or 30 years from now may give for the ever more encompassing crime of “terrorism.” Awlaki was undoubtedly a terrorist. Many in the future may not be. Wise up sonny and look at history. Do not be guilty of the arrogance of assuming, “That could never happen in America.” And by the way. No tin foil hat here sonny. Just quite a few more years and a lot more experience on this earth than you.

  • Anonymous

    It’s time to stop this game. Last I heard, you’re more likely to be struck by lightning than be killed by a terrorist. Brown University study says we’ve killed 250,000 in the war on terror. Not 250,000 terrorists. 250,000 people, including some terrorists. The media hypes up terrorism so everyone remains fearful. The military industrial complex and their cronys keep making money. Our money. Our govt uses us as puppets because they feel we are like children. It’s time to grow up. Ron Paul 2012.

  • Ron Paul Supporter

    You either agree with the rule of Law or you don’t. Despite the fact that we all emotionally agree with Awlaki’s death, we can not pick and choose when to follow the constitution, and when not too. Ron is consistent, and he believes in the constitution even when the rest of us want vengiance instead of justice. Ron Paul is the only choice in 2012.

  • Denis S

    Mr. Charters has adopted Sen. Santorum’s position, from the sound of it.  What is difficult to understand about liberties and Constitutional rights?  We catch some despicable people here in the US – serial killers, rapists, burglars, etc – but do we kill them just because they are evil?  No, we give them due process and then punish them accordingly.  That’s how our Justice system works.  Why should it work any differently for al-Awliki?  Just because he was an evil man?  The moment you give the government the right to decide without due process who lives and who dies, you have a problem on your hands, my friend.

  • K. and a lot of people knew in our government about the attack that was going to happen (do not try to give me conspiracy, it’s called Pearl Harbor, the fed gov knew of the attack and said nothing). Should they be executed by a drone attack at their house?  What about the CIA who knew of all these people and had previous connections through financial transactions and previous acquaintances?  Kill them too?  Sorry buddy, but your rule of law does not coincide with the Rule of Law.  For anyone to be assassinated for whatever reason without due process they must be considered a terrorist or threat to america (whatever that means).  Therefore judgement is made on that person, who judges the person?  Why do you think the founders set up the government the way they did?  For exactly this reason, but our fascist collusion of Big Corps. and Central Banks and Big Gov. is ruining this once beautiful haven for liberty, law, and reason.  So when your ideas are a threat to government do you feel it is reasonable to be killed?  Ding Ding Ding… that is your alarm clock. Time to WAKE UP! Open your eyes to the sunshine, and breath deep for the first time.  Always remember Follow the Money.  RON PAUL or not at all.  Thank you and goodnight.

  • Mike

    “So for Ron Paul’s sake, let’s say Awlaki never took a human life,  which I highly doubt.” You highly doubt but you do not know. Even Nazi war criminals got their day in court.

  • Justen Charters has NO IDEA ABOUT THE US CONSTITUTION!!!

  • In your opinion, however most evidence you are using is most likely tainted. Your opinion does not constitute a court of law, testimony and lawfully admitted evidence. Your opinion is just an echo of much neocon propaganda, but with a liberal corporatist dictator calling the shots. The Constitution is the law of the land. It is what distinguishes us from tyranny, at least it used to. If presidents can assassinate US citizens without even charging them with a crime, the slippery slope will prove to be an avalanche.

  • “We must protect even our enemy from oppression, for failure to do so
    will assure that such oppression reaches even unto ourselves.”- Thomas Paine

  • “We must protect even our enemy from oppression, for failure to do so
    will assure that such oppression reaches even unto ourselves.”- Thomas Paine

  • peaceout

    Only tyrants shoot people without a fair trial.  America used to represent the notion of “innocent until proven guilty.” Mr. Charters, the author of this article, seems to promote the notion of “guilty, you get no chance to prove your innocence, and we will kill you on sight because we say your guilty” If the US Government is so certain that Al-Awlaki killed so many people and was part of a conspiracy to kill Americans, why are they so afraid to offer this evidence in a court of law? What are they trying to hide? If we allow any government to kill people without a fair trial, there is no telling who else could be put on the hit list. This is the purpose of our Bill of Rights: to prevent tyrants from going around accusing people of crimes without any proof other than “because we said so.”   This is very dangerous and all true Americans who believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should be very concerned.

  • You could have saved yourself a lot of time. 

    Ron Paul said its GREAT this guy is dead, but his whole stance is that if we weren’t over there based on a bunch of fear propoganda in the first place, we might not have as many enemies.

    Why do people waste so much time trying to disprove Ron Paul on a theory?  Its possible that he’s wrong on non-interventionist foreign policy, but I doubt it.  If you think we are safer now since 9/11 and that the cost of that freedom was worth it…then you are a clueless moron.

  • TheSecond

    You’re either too young, not well versed in foreign policy, or both to write garbage like this.  Hit the books dude, and find a clue.  

  • wow, what a load of propaganda  B.S. Where do you get your info from?
    I’m afraid immunity disorder has taken a toll on your brain.

  • Donn3336

    Kid, where did you grow up? Why do we have laws? Hell, I’ve got an idea, from now on we will just ask you who is guilty and who is not then we don’t need courts, judges or jury’s. You sound like you have all the answers, thank God you weren’t among the founders. I am an American, remember I have a right to a trial. Even the infamous Timothy McVay had his time in court. 

  • Thanks for all the feedback.  If you disagree with me, you disagree.  The fact that a good number of you are most likely 9/11 truthers or avid Alex Jones fans gives me more reason not to consider replying to all these comments.  A few of you I appreciate your approach even if you disagreed.  And I’ve read several articles from Ron Paul supporters who out of the gate say Neo-Con, Rockefeller Republican your not a real conservative if you don’t support Ron Paul.  Fact of the matter is he won’t get the GOP nomination and he won’t ever be the President.  He should stick to monetary policy or maybe if he wants to work so hard like the President’s job would be, he could go back to delivering babies.  Al-Awlaki got what he deserved.  And your ridiculous argument that because he was killed it doesn’t prevent the government from labeling me a terrorist and killing me.  Is so far fetched.  It sounds like something Alex Jones would say.  Do yourself a favor don’t try and waste your time indoctrinating me.  A few years ago I studied the secret societies and watched Alex Jones.  And that is propaganda.  For example you would probably tell me anyone who belongs to a secret society is evil.  Ronald Reagan was a member of the Bohemian Club and so was every other President since the early 1920s.  Ronald Reagan was evil right?  Because he helped tear down the Berlin Wall and usher in some actual hope to the Soviet Union.  Who I am kidding most people I’ve come across who support Paul’s non interventionist style foreign policy would have not interfered with Hitler taking over the whole of Europe.  Like I said moral compass needs to be replaced.  And don’t go into this whole the Founders were non interventionists based on a few quotes from some farewell addresses.  Just throw one out there.  Barbary Wars.  I read the Constitution once a week.  Anyone want to sit down and have a one on one with me let me know.   

    • “far fetched”? look at the world around you and see how fast things are changing not long before you’ll be saying this
      First they came for the communists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.Then they came for the trade unionists,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.Then they came for the Jews,
      and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.Then they came for meand there was no one left to speak out for me.

    • It’s not that all these people disagree with you, it’s that Constitutional Law disagrees with you and your poor defense of a totalitarian judicial system.  And now you are talking about secret societies? You are off your rocker. If you think it’s OK for the executive branch to kill an American without due process, and you subscribe to that overwhelming power of government, then you liken yourself to Adolf Hitler. No, you’re not a conservative, sir, you are a communist.

    • metor

      Is it really ridiculous that you could be wrongly labeled a Terrorist.Just look at the several cases where these Drone Planes have accidently killed the wrong people in Pakistan because of faulty intelligence. Have you ever heard of Richard Jewel ? He’s the Olympic Security Guard who was wrongly accused of planting a bomb in Atlanta that killed 111 people. His picture was plastered on the front page of every paper in the country because he fit the FBI profile. He was a loner,a cop buff. The theory was he did it so he the security guard could rescue survivors and be a hero.He definitely  would have made Obama’s hit list. HE WAS FOUND TO BE THE VICTIM OF A BLUNDER WHICH WAS RESULT OF THE HUGE PRESSURE THE FBI WAS UNDER TO FIND THE SUSPECT.

    • Dferreira1975

      “I read the Constitution once a week.”
      Ummmm….. Did you actually understand it?

    • 3H

      How about Brandon Mayfield?  Probably a good thing he wasn’t overseas instead of at home when the FBI came a knockin’.  Well, when they were done snoopin’.

      On a different note, please show me where the President has been granted the power of both judge and jury.  I know it’s inconvenient, but democracy is frequently more about process than it is about results.   

       

  • Congratulations, you’ve pretty much made Dr. Paul’s case for him.  Believe it or not, we don’t try American citizens based on your, or anyone else’s “opinion”.  Rather, we offer all of the citizens of this great country a fair and impartial trial in front of a judge and jury. Nobody is suggesting that Awlaki is a good guy and should have been left alone.  The point is we don’t try our citizens based on the opinion of anyone, including the president.  Doing otherwise destroys one the freedoms upon which this country was founded. 

    As for “enemy combatant” status – the problem with that is there is no proof that he was engaging in direct combat with us.  And you really can’t be seriously suggesting that it’s ok for the United States of America to fire drone attacks on anybody around the world who says bad things about us, which might insight others to carry out violent acts against us?  Where does that slippery slope end?  

    We all dislike Awlaki as much as you, but I love my country and the principles upon which it was built enough to recognize that we can’t devolve to vigilante justice.  

  • Anonymous

    This is such a serious offense against the Constitution that I believe Obama and his entire gang of cronies should be arrested and tried for murder to prevent this kind of thing from becoming common place in America.

    Obama is president, not King.  He doesn’t get to decide who lives and dies.

    The president’s job is not to keep us safe… his job is to keep our freedom safe. 

  • StupidVoter

    The rule of law is the rule of law. If we fail to do that then the terrorists have already won. 

  • There is some thing call the law and even a suspected terrorist deserves a TRIAL not to be murdered. Sorry, if this attitude is allowed, then innocent people who commit no crimes can be executed unjustly. The author of this article is a hypocrite and hates America. 

  • Will

    He is probably guilty Justen, and the world is probably a better place without him.  But America is a better place when we follow the constitution and do not deny any citizen their rights.  Executive has invoked the secrecy clause, so you and I would just be speculating as to how many crimes awlaki committed.  It is important that we follow due process and hold that each individual is ‘innocent until proven guilty’.  There are lots of Americans that many people would feel deserve killing and aren’t ‘worth’ a trial…but that’s a slippery slope.  Be careful.  Be thoughtful.  Good article! 

  • Just curious: How many of you are participating in the pitiful Occupy Portland protest?  

    • The Bill Post Radio Show

      Great piece Justen…..sorry for the Ronulans and their photon torpedoes.  You are welcome to bring this up up on my show anytime.  Thanks for writing this story.

      • Dferreira1975

        What show is that Bill..  I’d love to bring up why you’re wrong and see how you defend your position.  I’m sure you wouldn’t want that though.. You’d simply go all Glenn Beck on me and start yelling and forcing me off the phone rather than listening objectively.  

        I find it ironic that Justen asks Ron Paul suporters to “remove the tin hat” and give his article a fair chance while talking about the government removing a fair chance at life from another person and then disregarding everything that’s posted as “fringe”.  Then you chime in with the Star Trek theme, as if to say we’re just wrong because we’re nuts or trekkies I suppose.  The fact of the matter still remains..  This man was murdered by our government..

    • Shark Hunter

      What does that have to do with your pitiful article?

  • Rashidul

    Fucker Justen Charters you are giving some wrong information in this report

  • metor

    Do you folks see the irony here?  Mr Charters is reviewing the facts of the case to see if Obama made the correct decision. Well guess what Mr Charter the directive that Gave Mr Obama the power to make the decision clearly states that neither you or anyone else can subject the anointed one to any such review, you lost that right when Mr Awlaki lost his due process.

  • Rashidul

    He was not one of the highest ranking members of Al Qaida.He condemned 911 and killing of innocent civilian in Iraq in youtube in English.That is his crime

  • Rosco1776

    I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 so according to their list, I’m a possible terrorist. Should I be eliminated? I hope not but where does it stop once that door is open. I have t shirts older than you and I hope you see the light soon. We can’t just keep going around invading countries at our whim and killing anyone we please, many with innocents killed as well, that makes us no better than the terrorists themselves. If another country invaded the US, I would become a terrorist to drive them off our land.
    Wake up out of the neo con slumber your in!!

    Ron Paul 2012 or BU$T !!

  • Marshy

    A human being is a human being. If we kill even 1 innocent human being in an attempt to kill another, then the blood is on your hands my friend. Two wrongs don’t make a right. In fact, BEFORE 9/11, we killed more innocent civilians in other countries than did the 9/11 attack. Yet we still think that our lives are more valuable than theirs?? And you call yourselves religious?!?!?!?? A life is a life. If you chose to have paranoid personality disorder and think everyone is out to get you, then they will be. Unfortunately people like you are running our country and are nothing more than an insecure people with authority. But I’ll tell you what, people like me who understand the world will realize we don’t need any laws except the natural law. Which puts paranoid people like you sh*t out of luck unless you decide to join reality.

  • Shark Hunter

    You’re the one living in a fantasy world.  Wake up, head out of ass.

  • Shark Hunter

    You’re the one living in a fantasy world.  Wake up, head out of ass.

  • Anonymous

    September
    30, 2011 was the day America was assassinatedLearn something.http://lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts328.html

  • Your opinion is not what matters in a court of law unless you are a subject matter expert. I only know of this Al-Awlaki what I’ve read in recent days and wouldn’t presume to make judgments on the man based on rumors.
    If there were evidence why wasn’t it presented to a grand jury?
    Why couldn’t a White House spokesman answer questions about whether any evidence existed?
    Mr. Charters you ask a series of questions but provide no answers, which means, you don’t know either.
    I am highly disappointed with the flagrant disregard for the constitution you and your brethren show.
    Me and and many others have sacrificed dearly fighting to uphold and protect that document so you can have the right to express your opinion which the constitution is supposed to protect. The constitution is meant to protect us from tyrannical acts that have been and are being perpetrated.

    Hopefully, you will never have an opinion contrary to that of your beloved president or you too may be considered an enemy of the state and be targeted for assassination.
     

  • Jonathan Nitzan

    “Awlaki was to Al Qaida what an SS Colonel was to the Third Reich.”
    Here’s one for you, Mr. 24-year-old-“political-“activist”… if Awlaki was the SS Colonel, what makes Obama who assassinated him in the dark of night with no trial, jury, or evidence? (It begins with “H” and rhymes with “Pitler”)

  • Erik Teer

    If i had been a political activist in my early 20’s i would no doubt be spitting the same nonsense as you.  It wasn’t until i saw first hand the consequences of our foreign policy that i realized just how wrong i was.  I spent 18 months in Iraq (Sgt. USMC) i lost multiple friends, saw many innocent people killed, and more importantly opened my eyes to the world as it truly exists.  

    Having said that, I simply cannot comprehend how any logical person could support such an act like this.  This type of news chills me to the bone.  1984 Here we come.

    We need to put you on the front line Justin, once you are forced to take another humans life your entire world will be changed.  Talking about killing your fellow man, or ordering others to kill is easy enough, but cowards and chicken hawks do this, and  society should never be led by men like these.      

  • Etieseler

    Here, I’ll take off the tin hat if you stop drinking the Kool-Aid. How about, using the precedence set here of assassinating a suspected ‘terrorist’ based off of some ‘secret information’. Lets say some president after President Pauls terms are up, decides that he didn’t like the freedom and liberty movement, and considers it a threat to the Military Industrial Complex. So they re-define a ‘terrorist’ and now reporters / journalists are on their hit list. And maybe one day in the future when you have created a name for yourself and are known nation wide, and are doing quite well financially because President Paul let the free market work and you started doing honest journalism, and you say something they disagree with. They decided to pull up some ‘secret evidence’ on you and have you assassinated one day on your vacation to South America because they determined you are a ‘terrorist’. Yes, outlandish story. I doubt the big government types will be in power so quick again after Paul. But just think about if he doesn’t win, and you don’t have 8 years of relief, and there really is some president that decides to re-define what a ‘terrorist’ is, and you or someone you know is on that list, or me or someone I know is on that list, because I disagree with the Government doing willy nilly what it wants and not following the rules set for it. This really isn’t very far away. We are just one good crisis away from a police state, and what police state in the history of the world has done a good job at keeping people alive? Now a president can assassinate people on demand. Remember 3 years ago when it was brought up that President Obama either signed an executive order, or re-instated it from Bush (I don’t remember exactly which one it was, it was 3 years ago), and this executive order declared that the President can authorize the assassination of a US citizen suspected of terrorism, and everyone said ‘Oh, don’t be crazy, they’ll never use it. They won’t use it on Americans. He won’t do something like that’. Well, here we are. There is an ‘I told you so’ due. Except it terrifies me that I can say that.

  • josh

    Batman would never kill the Joker because he knew if he sunk to the same low he would be no different. You could learn something from Batman.

  • davidg

    So, you say the government gets to kill anyone it thinks is a terrorist, no due process required.

    A few weeks ago Vice-President Biden accused Tea Party activists of being terrorists.

    Do you really want to have a government that can unilaterally suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?

  • American

    Another unfortunate example of the rush to judgement without a complete understanding of the real issue which was not even addressed in this wasted article space. The real question is ” does the U.S. Pres. have the right to assasinate U.S. citizens without due process??? And no, if you support the war on terror you are a warmonger and a fool. In the article, replace Al Qaida with CIA and you will be closer.

  • josh

    Also I was watching faux news and they were interviewing a former FBI big wig who said “I wouldn’t be surprised if as home grown terrorism becomes larger a drone fires ob a vehicle holding a suspected terrorist driving down I95.”

    I mean that is king of scary. Especially coming from a former FBI agent.

  • Anonymous

    Wow man.  There are a lot of people here who like Ron Paul, but there are a lot of people who just plain disagree with you.  Guess it might have something to do with the “constitution.”  Maybe you should check that out.  You know, the old “know your enemy better than you know your friends” routine.  Might help to read up on this “constitution” thing so that you could better combat those who you are against.

  • josh

    What most people don’t understand about Ron Paul supporters is it has nothing to do with him. I support Liberty. He just happens to fit it. So ill keep my tin foil hat.

  • Thanks Mr. Post.  To the others: Right I’m a 24 year old know nothing.  It will be interesting to see your opinion when I write on how morally reprehensible it is to legalize drugs and prostitution.

    • Dferreira1975

      One more myth.  It’s not morally reprehensible to legalize drugs and/or prostitution.  It’s morally reprehensible to use drugs, or prostitution..  Some people have no morals, so let them live the life they want..
      What you should consider, instead, is how morally reprehensible it is for you to decide how I live my life. 
      Imagine if they outlawed religion instead…  After all, religion is the scape goat that much violence is pinned on.

    • 3H

      We can cross that bridge when we get to it. In the meantime, care to share where in the Constitution the President is granted the power to order the assassination of an American citizen?   Is that only applicable when they are not on US soil, or can the President order a hit no matter where the accused terrorist is? 

      It’s not that you don’t know anything, I think it’s that you’re trying too hard to be clever and it backfired on you.

  • Why does no one ever mention that Al Awlaki was invited the the Pentagon shortly after 9/11?

    The whole thing stinks.

  • Scidsecret

    I dont think the writer (I would hope is NOT a journalist) realizes that this isn’t just the view of Ron Paul, but also the ACLU and the actual Constitution. From what I’ve read in the constitution, you have a right to… what is it called… oh! Due process and a fair trial. I guess the writer… and the Obama administration… forgot that part. A right to all American citizens, no matter the crime. Assassinate the president? You get a trial. Murder 15 people? You get a trial. If you think people believe you’re a “neo-con,” then you’re sadly mistaken because it sounds like you’re just a bumbling idiot.

    • e t

      Our president must be missing his constitutional law professors hat.

  • Don White

    If these actions were justified why did we not send a drone after Timothy McVeigh or Theodore Kaczynski? If Yemen or Pakistan find they have ‘very bad people’ hiding out in Idaho should they send in hit squads? This is a VERY slippery slope we are on. Who gets to decide who deserves due process and who doesn’t? Public opinion? Christ save us has it really come to this? What’s next? Maybe we should put criminals in a Coliseum and the roar of the crowd can decide if its life or death………   

  • Ellisprimetimetraining

    I want to know what the Oregon Catalysts is? they should fire your ass for how much bs is in your little statement

  • Dferreira1975

    I’m sorry, but your article still misses the point.  HE never received his fair trial, which means he was murdered.  Regardless of his guilt or innocence, we have laws in place that were not followed.  An American Citizen was murdered.  This is just one more example of how dumb Americans are.  Your civil liberties can be removed one at a time and it’s ok because they’re killing terrorists in the process. 
    These actions may feel justified, but without a trial they’re illegal…  
    Let’s hope the government never decides you’re a terrorist..

    One more thing..
    If a man is under suspicion of murder with a lot of strong evidence against him, can the cops just go in and shoot him rather than arrest him and detain him until his trial?  

  • Eyesofhorus66

    The fact is we live by the constitution and the laws of the United States of America. I dont care what you think because I have substance to back my argument. Assassinations are not legal, our military is bound by law to only kill if there is a hostile force, and only then can they use necessary and equal force to neutralize the hostile force. From what i’ve been reading this man wasnt even armed. He should have been captured and tried in America as an American citizen. Your opinion means nothing, the law and ethics of the US means everything. 

  • Snarfy

    Maybe Ron Paul doesn’t think that a lot of money should have been spent drone bombing a guy that hangs out at the pentagon–why not just pick him up there? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs2r4Jj-ZUU Or maybe he doesn’t like to pay to have someone killed who’s already been killed before. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0rkjUhWbiA&feature=player_embedded#!

  • TJF

    Justen,  I’m a bit shocked to read that you take comfort in the fact that our Commander in Chief is now the Executioner in Chief.  How that news should not make me feel upset is beyond me.  Without the rule of law we are no better than what we claim to be fighting against.  I do not take comfort knowing that at anytime anyone of us may be considered a threat and in another move of “self defense” the President may just blow me and my family up with a drone attack.  I have no doubts that al-Awaki was a bad guy, but I expect, no demand, that my government acts in accordance with the Constitution.  Years from now the young men and women flying those drones and launching the airstrikes in countries we are not legally at war with may be on a witness stand.  Will their pleas of “I was just following orders” ring any differently than they did for some other folks almost 60 years ago?

  • 1st point, the CIA/GOV changed the ranking of Awlaki on the very day that they killed him. The point that a smart conservative will have to see, in a case like this, is that it isn’t the action, itself–it’s the institutionalizing of the action as a policy that is repugnant to a true conservative…Because you ain’t conservin’ nothin’ if you constantly advocate the expansion of executive power (to include King-like powers). 

    • metor

      Good point.These people are wasting time arguing the merits Awlaki’s guilt.The next case may not be as clear cut and we may all agree that that case was wrong. But guess what- its irrelevant because this new directive PROTECTS OBAMA FROM THE CONSEQUENCES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.

  • RuAnIdiot

    First of all, the reason you see “suspected” terrorist in many reports is because he MAY have been connected to AQ. Past that little fact, even if he was a terrorist, he was still a United States citizen and deserved due process. What if the U.S considered you a terrorist?

    If the terrorists were here, Ron Paul would be the first to deal with them. He wants to bring out military home and use them to guard our borders and our country. He isn’t “weak” on terrorism he just understands (which you obviously don’t) what blowback means. Think of it like this, if China came here and built a crap load of bases, we wouldn’t be very happy either. We have major military operations happening in 5 countries and we are broke. Afghanistan will never be a win because of the geography, and we are just trying to “nation build” in Iraq.

    Why should we continue to let our troops die? I guess it’s easy for you to say given you probable haven’t served in the military. Well since I don’t care what you say, I’ll let you know that Ron Paul has gotten more contributions from active-duty soldiers then any other GOP political candidate and Obamma.

    Do you know how to think for yourself or do you just let the MSM control your mind?

  • John

    Hey Justin why did you leave out the fact that Awlaki had dinner at the pentagon with the secretary of the Army? Do your homework before you attack one of the few patriots left in our government. According to the FBI there is NO HARD EVIDENCE that Bin Laden had anything to do with 911 and the same rings true with Awlaki. It is sad that you have been brain washed to believe that the government has the right to assassinate American citizens. What will stop them from assassinating a member of your family?

  • Patkwillms

    Awlaki’s dead.  Now who gets it next?  You can bet that the gov’t has top people working on this and citizens can rest assure that they’ll get it right and wouldn’t ever target anyone who didn’t deserve it.

    C’mon, the gov’t has the best people.  They never make mistakes.  This is a good thing… really. 

    We’re all safer for this.  Why won’t anyone believe me.  Top people!!!

  • Sorry, I’ve been busy lately and missed the headline.  When did Congress Declare War on Yemen?  If we didn’t, what the h#$% are we doing sending drones there?  And, while we’re at it,  isn’t that country in the middle of an uprising?  Did we suddenly become President Ali Abdullah Saleh’s Air Force?  I’m sure that this is winning us a lot of friends – especially when the news of his overthrow is announced any week now.

    No, I really don’t care for the creep that we took out – nor do I particularly care for the other creep, Ali Abdullah Saleh, the corrupt dictator we have been supporting for 30 years.  But I do care deeply about our U.S. Constitution.OK, foreign countries aside, now let’s assume this terrorist had been spotted heading west on I-80 in Iowa.  Do we now use drones to “take out” bad people?Where does it stop?   Does our U.S. Constitution have meaning?

    • metor

      Answer to your last question: No, as of last Friday it no longer does.

  • e t

    Great justification you wrote for there for the unlawful assassination of an American citizen. I am sure there are plenty of people who could just as happily call in a drone strike on where you are at this particular moment, regardless of who might be within the blast radius as they are only collateral damage, and write similar justification as to why such a deed was “necessary”. After all, you are you are working very hard at advocating for the decay of what has made us great – justice and rule of law. Nothing is worse than that, so, forget those inconvenient things like warrants, arrests, trials, LAWS, habeas corpus, courts, pleas, rights, trial by a jury of peers, etc etc etc. Its for the common good so lets just set those minor details aside and go right for the drone strike. There are more than enough convenient morons out there who will be happy to believe and even propagate whatever justification we give after the fact anyway.

  • Okay, we heard you out. Now, hear us out.

    There is a reason why we have courts of law based on presumption of innocence and due process. The reason is tyranny. If you don’t know about tyranny, you weren’t paying attention in history class. There is not a single tyrant in human history who did not have what he or she considered to be a good reason for undermining the legal system and using war powers instead of justice to kill off his enemies. Due process in a system where the rights of the accused are protected is the basis for liberty. Skipping the courts in favor of direct attacks on individuals by the government is the basis of tyranny.

    As for your claim that his “hands are dripping in just as much blood…”, if we use that standard for skipping judicial steps, then the U.S. government is one of the greatest serial murderers in history that must never be held accountable for its actions. Since 2001 alone, our government has killed more innocent people than all of the terrorist bombers combined. And, of course, that is the real motivation behind your outlandish claims. You don’t want to believe that America’s government should be held accountable for its actions. The evidence of this is your stance on what you call foreign policy, but what the rest of us call interventionist tyranny.

    Your ideas regarding guilt-by-association also imply that by your own logic you are guilty of murders committed by the U.S. government, because even though you had nothing to do with those murders personally, you approve of them because you refuse to oppose them. Tell me now how you like being judged the way you judge al-Awlaki. I’ll bet you don’t like it much at all, and that would be the first good realization you would have in this matter.

    He was not initially a radical Islamist. It’s only after the blowback from all the American atrocities conducted in the name of “justice” and “freedom” over the years that he became a radical. That’s the lesson that few in America have been willing to learn, yourself included apparently. Blowback is not some crazy Paulian theory. It’s a CIA fact.

    His Wikipedia article provides a very interesting quote from him. He said, “The important lesson to learn here is never, ever trust a kuffar [non-Muslim]. Do not trust them! [They] are plotting to kill this religion. They’re plotting night and day.” In light of the attitude that the most hawkish of Americans have toward Islam, and in light of all the military and diplomatic stances taken against Muslims over the years, his conclusion is quite reasonable. So it requires no great stretch of the imagination to conclude that the U.S. government drove al-Awlaki to do what he did.

    I’m not saying that al-Awlaki never did anything he wrong. He probably did, but that’s why we have courts of law…to handle lawlessness in a lawful manner. The rejection of lawfulness is the rejection of liberty, justice, and human decency in favor of tyranny and so-called “security”.

  • Ron Glynn

    Dear Justin:

    You are a 24 year old political activist. I am a 60 year old Conservative Republican Political activist and a veteran. Your mistake made was in the very first paragraph. You laid out an attack on any Ron Paul supporter by the “tin foil” comment. You might have just said that Ron Paul supporters are stupid and crazy.

    You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that Ron Paul is the best bet to lead this country out of the pit where we find ourselves now.

  • Bobbaker

    Tin Foil hat? What a smear article, take a less douchy picture of yourself. I do agree though, lets kill all the baddies cause USA USA!

  • Josh Basquez

    Is it just coincidence? I suppose not. Lets KILL HIM. right? Hell, lets just kill everyone the government suspects of terrorism. Damn the Bill of Rights, FULL SPEED AHEAD! 

    Is their ideology dysfunctional? of course, but why are they able to recruit, and why did bin laden declare war? It’s called binladen’s FATWAH and you obviously haven’t read them. A little time behind a keyboard (tin foil hat optional) would do you a lot of good, Mr. Charters. I suggest you begin with the book Blowback by Chalmers Johnson.

  • Ron Paul cares a lot about the constitution, but apparently his arguments seem “radical” to some. So let me put it in plain non-legalistic terms. Would you like other nations launching drones into US territory to kill people they consider their enemies? E.g. China certainly soon will have the capability (or already does) to launch similar strikes. Would you consider it anything other than an act of war if China were to do so?

    Do you strike out against your neighbor whenever you feel wronged? If you care about your family’s security you’ll do better abiding by  the justice system. And you’ll strengthen the justice system in the process.

    That’s why we have constitutions. The king/president isn’t supposed to be above the law. That’s not radical – that goes back to the Magna Carta, at least.

  • Mcfrustrated

    Sorry, doesn’t matter what you think, there is still a law to uphold.  It doesn’t matter how vile a person is, they are still given rights for a reason.  The system works for everyone, even those deemed horrible human beings.  He was a citizen, and it’s not that I think he deserved due process, it is the duty of Americans to do so.  We can’t be selective about who we afford rights to, if we are to set an example.  Giving the government authority to kill citizens without due process, no matter who or for what reason, is not just a step in the wrong direction but a giant leap.

  • So any citizen who speaks out against the US government and their policies can be executed without due process?  I guess Ron Paul and Ralph Nader should be concerned…. what if they are on this arbitrary list created by the CIA?  The CIA was wrong about weapons of mass destruction…. why do you trust their judgement on killing people?  Obama and the CIA are centralizing too much power in the executive branch…. time for the people to take it back.  Wake up and smell the coffee… you are losing your freedom and liberty.  You have a greater chance of being killed by a bolt of lighting, roller skating , dressed up in a bear costume then you do being killed by terrorists.  Stop being so quick to give up your freedoms.  

  • Joshua

    “O no Government please save me from the big bad Muslim man. He hates me because I like Rock music and vagina. I know that Michael Schuer of The CIAs Bin laden unit says ithas more to do with what Bin Laden views as our meddling in the Middle east then it does freedom. I’m sorry Government for not going up to the blackboard and writing they hate us because we are free a million times. The fact that Iraq didn’t have anything to do with 9/11 or possesed WMDS doesn’t matter you say? I should trust you anyway? Ok Government take my liberty. Give me that good ol patriot act. Have the police pull me out of my car when I tell them they need a warrant to search it and have them tell me the constitution doesn’t matter. (This acually happened BTW.) I submit. O God please Government save me! I’m too stupid. I believe the media I promise!”

    Also when the police searched my vehicle without warrant I had End The Fed. The constitution. The federalist papers. The road to serfdom and Barry goldwaters consience of a conservative in the truck. They literally debated whether I should be an extremist. Fun times.

  • Whether or not this guy deserved what he got (he did) is completely irrelevant. All Americans lost the guarantee of a vitally important right. And for that and all the other rights we have given up, Al-Qaeda is laughing at us. We cannot give up what makes us American for a terrorist. Every time you are put under scrutiny or patted down at the airport… that’s a victory for terrorism. That’s giving into terror.

  • Mr. Charters,

    As a member of the press, who lives on their right to freedom of speech, I find it very irresponsible of you to jump to your conclusions.  You could have posted any number of stories which some loon could interpret as directives.  If they go out, and commit an act of terrorism, will you be OK with the US gov. targeting you for assassination?  I hope you are ready to die for speaking freely.  Aparently, with people like you in charge, that is all one must do in order to deserve death.  This is precisely why the founders set forth the rules in regards to prosecuting criminals.  Who are you to question their wisdom, and who are you to condemn someone to die without so much as a bit of evidence?

  • guest

    R. Paul is no saint and his sanity seriously in doubt.  He merits a Neville Chamberlain laurel strung around his neck and keel hauled out where Osama bin Laden sleeps. 

  • chickasha

    The little old man earned my vote !
     President Paul 2012 !

  • Metatronx1

    Young man you are RIGHT. These people, Al Awlaki and his acolytes, technically speaking, are citizens of the Maghrib – they have no country, claim no citizenship, and are the sworn enemies of all who do not hold their beliefs in Allah… They are terrorists by definition. They are pirates. Pirates have no rights – in ANY civilized country pirates are just that: pirates. Pirates, or ‘international terrorists’, if you prefer, have no RIGHTS. They gave up their RIGHTS when they declared themselves enemies and took off on a terror binge. Traitors have no rights – they are enemies of the state who once gave them their ‘rights’. Enemy combatants on a battlefield are SHOT ON SITE. These people are AVOWED bomb-makers, bombers of innocents in pursuit of their ‘jihad’ which they declared on US. This case is no different from that of ‘spies’, traitors, pirates and confessed murderers , or even enemy ‘soldiers’, for that matter; with the exception that these people are purposefully and un-identifiably ‘out of uniform’ , and like spies and other traitors are apt to be shot on site. Trials and juries are for innocents and civilians, not declared pirate murderers and enemies of the people. Thanks for being clear on that. Perhaps we need to translate ‘kaffir’ for the public, and who uses such terms and why? WE are ‘kaffir’ to THEM?  Not on my watch. Great job . Keep it up, please!met

  • Barger1951

    If Ron Paul had lost a son in the 9/11 attack, I do not think he would have any doubt about killing traitors trying to kill Americans.

    • Are you saying that someone who otherwise lost a son – say, to a brutal murderer – must calm his rage and endure the pain of a slow justice system, but a father who lost a son to an American Muslim fanatic deserves extraordinary retribution? If you and Obama consider yourselves above the law, then you’ll soon find yourselves living in a lawless society.

      Is that really what you want? Is revenge that important to you?

  • Brian Chandler

    Sorry Justen, the war on terror is a fraud. Why dont you google the Faux News article reporting that Awlaki dined secretly at the Pentagon after 9/11. Its amazing how you have this nice little blog without doing any real research. I love your photo too.. You look so cool!

  • Medford1

    Wasn’t Anwar al-Awlaki an American.

  • It is not your place to play judge, jury, and executioner.  America is “One Nation Under Law;” Obama directly undermined this key fact of our nation and hence committed an impeachable act per our Constitution.

    Debate is healthy, but the denial of fact(s) is not.  He should have been captured, tried, and executed if found guilty for treason.

  • Brian Chandler
  • I read this non-hit peace (and I mean that) with a fair and open mind, but you have not convinced me Ron Paul is wrong. It doesn’t matter what the crime or how long a U.S. citizen has left the country. Unless, he or she is no longer a citizen of the United States, the Constitution applies to them as it does to you and I. At least it’s supposed to and that is why Ron Paul is correct.

  • Joshua

    I’m surprised people can’t believe Ron Pauls position on this. In his book Liberty Defined he dedicated an entire chapter to assassination. He even brings up Anwar Awlaki on page 14. Stating that he is a targeted American citizen never charged with a crime only suspected. He speaks about the first attempt to kill him in Yemen. This book was published last year. It’s almost as if Paul knows what’s coming and goes ahead and plainly lays out his thoughts on it. Read it. Learn.

  • srijim1

    After 9/11, Anwar al-Awlaki worked for the US government as a consultant to the Pentagon on Islamic affairs. It was during this time he became disillusioned with the US government’s motivation for a nebulous and perpetual War on Terror, specifically Islam.  To date, the government has provided absolutely no proof that al-Awlaki was a member of Al Qaida nor that he was involved in terrorist activity… none. He became a vocal critic of american foreign policy and it has been suggested that several of his sermons MAY have recruited some to the Al Qaida cause and MAY have inspired terrorist activity. It should be pointed out that the Obama administration has refused to provide any corroborating evidence of such involvement… yes, refused. Ron Paul is correct in saying this extra-judicial assassination is a direct attack on the Constitutional freedom of every American and one more step in the road to tyranny. You have correctly identified yourself as an imperialist neo-con and you are entitled to your opinion. However, you might ask yourself this question… why did the Obama administration make a point of murdering an American citizen? Why didn’t they strip him of his citizenship prior to the killing? Once you understand this distinction you will understand why Ron Paul is right… and you are wrong.

  • This has nothing to do with morals.  It has to do with the LAW!!!Doesn’t matter how hard you try to justify your beliefs, you’re wrong and frankly, you’re dangerous.  I’m glad you are only a ‘journalist’?, and I use that term lightly, and not in any position of power. 

  • Anonymous

    The rule of law is the rule of law.  You are either for it or against it.  There is no middle ground, period.

  • joshSemperFi

    We should all be concerned, and give pause, when our government can pick and choose from the Constitution, and our given broad powers such as these.  Are we not a nation of laws?  Are we not governed by the Constitution?  The President and C.I.A. now have the power to assassinate any American citizen that the President deems a “threat”, without formal charges, proof, or due process.  This sets a terrible precedent….one that is one step closer to this nation becoming the very thing from which we, historically, sought to escape.  This is not about this terrorist.  This is about ignoring the rule of law and about violating the very principles from which this country was founded.

  • I love freedom

    How many dozens of times has the U.S. govenment clained to have killed a “top level” or “number two” hadji in al Qaida? Doesn’t the number three guy just move up?

    Ron Paul is right. This war on terror idiocy is futile!  

  • Richard Haydn

    If there is all this “evidence” just try him in absentia, convict, and sentence to death.  Ron Paul and Constitutionalist supporters are do not advocate being “soft” on terrorists.  We just advocate the rule of law.  I also wonder, for the neoconservatives, when will this war end?  Will will still have drone strikes against the enemy 20 years from now?  I think the “party of war” will not do well the more this drags on.  You of course know the actually fighting men and women in the military gave more to the Ron Paul campaign then all of the other Republican candidates combined.  Not tin foil hat needed young man.  My friends served in Viet Nam, the critical DOMINO we were told.  Seems it wasn’t so critical after all. I hope you are able to overcome the medical condition you are dealing with and wish you well. The auto imune deseases are still such a mystery, as my niece also suffers from Lupus..

  • Micah Breden

    Go ahead and piss all over the Constitution of the United States with this garbage article. The Constitution is explicit about the RIGHT of EVERY American Citizen to a trial by jury. To know who is bringing charges against them, and to be innocent until PROVEN guilty. Maybe this guy was as bad as they say he was – still doesn’t justify blowing him and another US Citizen to pieces with out a trial. Who’s next? Ron Paul? You?

    If you think that ASSASSINATION of American Citizens without due process is the right thing to do. . . . you may want to think for one second about whether your name will be on that list in the future.

    Bravo to Ron Paul! Still out there protecting and defending the Constitution.

  • i love Ron Paul..i love the fact that somebody like him will give me a “due process”..it is what make this country great…President Paul 2012

  • Vermontmr

    It is also known that Anwar al-Awlaki had spent timeat the Pentagon after the 9/11 event, that would mean that he was on the terrorist card deck and spending time in a government facility. I think he was assassinated because he had info that the American government did not want out to the public.

  • Pingback: prediksi bola malam ini()

  • Pingback: Blue Coaster()

  • Pingback: streaming movies()

  • Pingback: streaming movies()

  • Pingback: kangen water()

  • Pingback: How to Access Blocked Sites Without Any Software()

  • Pingback: Click Here()

  • Pingback: mobile porn movies()

  • Pingback: car parking()

  • Pingback: water ionizer()

  • Pingback: electrician career pathways()

  • Pingback: the original source()

  • Pingback: pay day loans()

  • Pingback: house blue()

  • Pingback: auto electrician basics()

  • Pingback: navigate here()

  • Pingback: bottled alkaline water()

  • Pingback: shop car insurance()

  • Pingback: water ionizer payment plan()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)