Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sentence first, verdict afterwards.
 
#12
If you want to speak of crimes, then the evidence available to us, the public, suggests -- I will not say proves, for obvious reasons -- that the most serious charges that can be brought against al-Awlaki are:

* Conspiracy to Commit Treason
* Supporting Terrorist Organizations
* Incitement to Riot

None of those is a capital crime.

The Geneva Conventions - treaties which the United States and Yemen are both signatory to - contain the following text... (Article 3)

Quote:Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following
provisions:

(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Has Al-Awliki "taken an active part in the hostilities"? Well, the most he's been accused of, publicly, is preaching sermons that attacks on the US are good. That's... well, moral support for the enemy, at most. Has he taken up arms against the United States, participated directly in the recruitment and/or training of combatants for such actions, or otherwise directly involved himself in the conflict?

As far as we know... no.

From the WaPo article Greenwald links to:
Quote:After the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush gave the CIA, and later the military, authority to kill U.S. citizens abroad if strong evidence existed that an American was involved in organizing or carrying out terrorist actions against the United States or U.S. interests, military and intelligence officials said. The evidence has to meet a certain, defined threshold. The person, for instance, has to pose "a continuing and imminent threat to U.S. persons and interests," said one former intelligence official.

Actions actually fitting these criteria would be entirely legal under the Geneva Convention cited above.

Quote:The Obama administration has adopted the same stance. If a U.S. citizen joins al-Qaeda, "it doesn't really change anything from the standpoint of whether we can target them," a senior administration official said. "They are then part of the enemy."

Outright joining al-Qaeda? Yes. You've enlisted in the army of the opposing power, even if you're not directly participating in military actions. That makes you a combatant.
Has Al-Awlaki done so? Has he participated in their activities, in training combatants or planning attacks? Is there evidence that he has done so?

We, the public, have seen none.

We, the public, have not been assured by the Obama administration that such evidence exists, even in classified intelligence data.

We, the public, have not been assured by the administration that a competent military court, subject to the rules for handling such classified intelligence data, has reviewed such evidence, as is provided for by the Geneva Convention.

(Note, by the way, for those who like to spout off about the US' treatment of other detainees: The Geneva Conventions do specify a military court to rule on such matters, NOT a civilian court, and that "being an enemy combatant" and thus subject to internment as a prisoner of war is NOT a crime for which a person can be charged in the civilian court system.)
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Sentence first, verdict afterwards. - by Ayiekie - 09-16-2010, 03:37 AM
[No subject] - by Wiregeek - 09-16-2010, 04:00 AM
[No subject] - by Epsilon - 09-16-2010, 07:16 AM
[No subject] - by Foxboy - 09-16-2010, 07:38 AM
[No subject] - by sweno - 09-16-2010, 10:05 AM
[No subject] - by Ayiekie - 09-16-2010, 10:58 AM
[No subject] - by robkelk - 09-17-2010, 12:39 AM
[No subject] - by Ayiekie - 09-17-2010, 02:55 AM
[No subject] - by rmthorn - 09-17-2010, 03:29 AM
[No subject] - by robkelk - 09-17-2010, 03:14 PM
[No subject] - by Bob Schroeck - 09-17-2010, 04:01 PM
[No subject] - by ECSNorway - 09-18-2010, 05:13 PM
[No subject] - by Ayiekie - 09-19-2010, 02:19 AM
[No subject] - by ECSNorway - 09-19-2010, 07:40 AM
[No subject] - by Epsilon - 09-19-2010, 09:02 AM
[No subject] - by Bob Schroeck - 09-19-2010, 05:11 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)