Sunday, September 26th, 2010 | Author:

How date we question Obama’s right to assassinate American citizens?

How dare we suggest that evidence of wrong-doing and a trial might be required?

How dare the courts try to intervene?

The Obama Administration is fighting tooth and nail to kill a lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of New Mexico cleric Anwar Awlaki, arguing that even though Awlaki isn’t charged with any crimes it “strains credulity” to argue that the US government needs to present evidence before assassinating the US citizen.

In fact the papers filed by the Justice Department attempting to quash the case argue that the court system should have absolutely no oversight over the administration’s sudden, bizarre claim that it can assassinate any American citizen it wants on the basis of nation security, arguing that such issues are “for the executive branch of the government to decide rather than the courts.”

Read the rest here, if you can stomach it.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
2 Responses
  1. Jim Wetzel says:

    Aw, come on, now. It’s Sunday! We live in the greatest and free-est country of anywhere, ever! Furthermore, football’s on! With the government having given us all these gifts, isn’t it just churlish to question the government for wanting to kill someone with neither evidence nor trial? What are we here, ungrateful or something?

    Besides’ the guy’s got a funny name. He’s up to no good, you can count on it. If he hadna done nothin’ wrong, the government wouldn’t be wantin’ to kill him.

    Errrr, excuse me, I meant “take him out.”

  2. akagaga says:

    Churlish? Yeah, churlish. Maybe it’s because my Redsox are breathing their last for this year, but this story really ticked me off. It felt a bit like falling down a rabbit hole, where wrong is right and people think that’s normal.