A Dangerous Precedent
Listen to Rep. Ron Paul deliver this address.
According to the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some aspirational statement of values, allowing exceptions when convenient; rather, it is the law of the land. It is the basis of our Republic and our principal bulwark against tyranny.
Last week’s assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the president and his administration. If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a “really bad American,” is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights? Didn’t we just bomb Libya into oblivion under the auspices of protecting the civilians from being targeted by their government? Timothy McVeigh was certainly a threat, as were Nidal Hasan and Jared Lee Loughner. They killed people in front of many witnesses. They took up arms against their government in a literal way yet were still afforded trials. These constitutional protections are in place because our Founders realized it is a very serious matter to deprive any individual of life or liberty. Our outrage against even the obviously guilty is not worth the sacrifice of the rule of law. Awlaki has been outspoken against the United States, and we are told he encouraged violence against Americans. We do not know that he actually committed any acts of violence. Ironically, he was once invited to the Pentagon as part of an outreach to moderate Muslims after 9/11. As the U.S. attacks against Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia expanded, it is said that he became more fervent and radical in his opposition to U.S. foreign policy.
Many cheer this killing because they believe that in a time of war, due process is not necessary — not even for citizens, and especially not for those overseas. However, there has been no formal declaration of war and certainly not one against Yemen. The post-9/11 authorization for force would not have covered these two Americans because no one is claiming they had any connection to that attack. Awlaki was on a kill list compiled by a secret panel within President Obama’s National Security Council and Justice Department. How many more Americans citizens are on that list? They won’t tell us. What are the criteria? They won’t tell us. Where is the evidence? They won’t tell us.
Awlaki’s father tried desperately to get the administration to at least allow his son to have legal representation to challenge the “kill” order. He was denied. Rather than give him his day in court, the administration, behind closed doors, served as prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner. The most worrisome aspect of this is that any new powers this administration accrues will serve as precedents for future administrations. Even those who completely trust this administration must understand that if this usurpation of power and denial of due process is allowed to stand, these powers will remain to be expanded on by the next administration and then the next. Will you trust them? History shows that once a population gives up its rights, they are not easily won back. Beware.
Read more by Rep. Ron Paul
- What No One Wants to Hear About Benghazi – May 13th, 2013
- Liberty Was Also Attacked in Boston – April 28th, 2013
- Congress Exploits Our Fears to Take Our Liberty – April 21st, 2013
- Why Can’t We All Travel To Cuba? – April 15th, 2013
- Neo-Con War Addiction Threatens Our Future – March 24th, 2013
JoaoAlfaiate
October 11th, 2011 at 3:05 am
Apparently nothing, not ever the Constitution, will restrain the USG.
ghouri
October 11th, 2011 at 3:06 am
Now the laws in america are made for poor people to punish them and the previleged are immun against laws.
alfred t. mahan
October 11th, 2011 at 4:15 am
How many years until we have drone surveillance over Kansas City toto. Wall Marts being blown up by predator robots. Well I guess if someone says it is legal it's ok right? Ohh, but do I hear an echo or did someone say something like that in Nuremberg a few years back. I was just following a logical flow of thought from legal orders and precedents!!!
alfred t. mahan
October 11th, 2011 at 4:34 am
http://www.larouchepub.com/impeach_ridge/ridge_5….
"These defendants were men of a station and rank which does not soil its own hands with blood. They were men who knew how to use lesser folk as tools. We want to reach the planners and designers, the inciters and leaders…."
–Justice Robert Jackson at Nuremberg
stevieb
October 11th, 2011 at 5:11 am
Thank you Mr.Paul for stressing that this was a "criminal act'; that's exactly what it was. President Obama should be sitting in a cell right now awaiting trial….
F.A. Hayek Fan
October 11th, 2011 at 5:38 am
Dr. Paul states, "Many cheer this killing because they believe that in a time of war, due process is not necessary — not even for citizens, and especially not for those overseas. "
Dr. Paul is out of touch with the Republican Party grass roots. These people cheer not because they believe that due process is unnecessary in a time of war but because the U.S. government has killed a Muslim. While the leadership of the Republican Party makes the claim that our war of terror against Muslim countries is not directed against Muslim's, the fact is that the Republican base DOES believe it is a war against Muslim's. This can be proven by reading ANY Republican political forum. I've read again and again on Republican forums that a good Muslim is a dead Muslim. It doesn't matter what the circumstances or how innocent the victim's. The rape, maiming, and/or murder of old men, women or children is cheered and looked upon as a good thing by the Republican grass roots. The grassroots has become so bloodthirsty against Muslims that they consider anyone who disagrees with this outlook a liberal. In today's Republican Party conservatism means nothing more than lowering taxes and killing Muslims.
This is why a huge portion of the Republican grass roots has a visceral hate for Dr. Paul. These people are not Republican Party of Ronald Reagan. They don't give a care about a smaller, less intrusive government or the Federal Reserve. They care about killing Muslims. There is a reason why the rest of the Republican presidential candidates focus so much on Iran and Israel. It feeds the Republican base; a base that has devolved into a death cult.
alfred t. mahan
October 11th, 2011 at 6:13 am
Whatever proportions these crimes finally assumed, it became evident to all who investigated them that they had started from small beginnings. The beginnings at first were merely a subtle shift in emphasis in basic attitude, basic in the euthanasia movement, that there is such a thing as life not worthy to be lived.
The Nuremberg Precedent
VietnamWarVet1966
October 11th, 2011 at 6:53 am
The Zionist Neocons, Israel, and the Christian crazies (NOT real Christians) have complete control of the Republican Party – and – the murder of tens of thousands of Muslims with the destruction of their countries is cheered by the American people who claim to be 'Christians'.
Ron Paul may be the LAST hope for America – and since he will not receive the nomination and will not be elected President – there is NO hope for America.
Bush, Cheney, and ALL of the Zionist Neocons in the Bush Administration and now Obama should ALL be on trial at the Hague for war crimes.
JLS
October 11th, 2011 at 7:32 am
The US government already targets journalists. They are trying to get their hands on Julian Assange to give him the Bradley Manning treatment. How is that any more humane than exucting Al Awlaki? I'd much rather be murdered by drone than live in torment they way that Manning is.
Frank
October 11th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
The "time of war" excuse is being used by democrats more than republicans.
Bob D
October 11th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Disgusting, but not the same. They aren't assasinating Julian. And it would be interesting to see if they catch him they give him the Manning treatment. He is not a member of the armed forces who gave up some of their freedoms willingly to join the military. and I don't think Julian is a citizen of the US.
Don't misunderstand me, these two people are heros in my estimation. And it is hard to imagine the US government really wanting to bring Julian to trial. Do they really think they could control it?
rodney
October 11th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
this is what americans and brtiish have ben doing toother countries and people for last 100 years.
rodney
October 11th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
“In the aftermath of President Abraham Lincoln's defeat of the London-backed slave-holders' Confederate insurrection, the London-linked New York faction of U.S. finance unleashed a predatory looting of the physical assets of the territory formerly ruled by the defeated Confederacy. That operation, which was described then as "carpet bagging," is a term that pointed to the style of the personal baggage, in which the travelling, locust-like predators carried their personal effects.”
A very famous news mogul-Mr.Rudolph Hearst (Jewish proprietor of he the Hearst newspaper chain ))- had been stopped from running for American presidency in 1916 because he was suspected by the English that
might not have been inclined to rescue england in the 1st world war. Anyway, the southern constituency was pressing hard for america to come to rescue england who was staring defeat and thus loosing the prospect of enslaved nations who would have been feed from defeat of england. America did come to aid of england and it was called end of isolationalism. But this end of isolationalism would be tolerated only when it suits english interest against others and not in case of others like freedom for Irish people in northern Ireland (an occupied part of Ireland).and that British agent Wilson intervened on side of Britain in name of spreading democracy at point of gun! Woodrow Wilson was re-elected in 1916 on a promise to stay out of the Great War.
Think of that-Britain was looting two third of the world at the time and killing starving millions of people-and this Wilson comes to Britain rescue in name of protecting democracy! And that is exactly what these bastards mean when they utter democracy-that is a code word for them to attack other countries for furtherance of british interest. Then if two millions Iraqi are killed -starved -it is price worth paying. Somebody can legitimately ask than what to do with 60 millions English people and then it would be worth the price to save the world from English rapacity.
“The First World War was by far the bloodiest conflict in human history up to that time. Schwartz and Skinner noted, “Woodrow Wilson proclaimed a war for democracy against ‘Prussian dictatorship,’ but that was propaganda. Germany had civil rights, an elected parliament, competing parties, universal male suffrage, and an unparalleled system of social democracy.” Germany was far more democratic than either the British or French empire.”
rodney
October 11th, 2011 at 2:20 pm
ron paul will never be nominated because nbritish have visceral hate agasint any one in usa who says that usa doensot need to go to war on bhalf of anybody ellse. and england uses usa to wage the wars world over.
American elections and british interference in that– When Clinton was elected in 1992 BC was saying that it was worrisome for the british foreing office because Clinton might want peaceful settlement in Ireland. No worry. Within 3 weeks of Clinton eelction the british bastards brought him into their grip.. But the same B and british were very happy when in 1994 and 1996 this Clinton lost congress to conservative majority-proof that british friendship was only to neautralize Clinton from straying from so called neutral attitude to uk.
In fact in the 1988 American election B.B.C. had invited the chief drug dealer of BAT-i.e. british american tobacco-(who of course is an englishman) and there was another American there. During discussion of Ducassis' candidature the B.B.C. anchor man suggested to the American that the opponent of bush was hardly an American as he looked to dark and was Greek, the country of geek being too much near Africa. It really happened. This shows a few things. According to B.B.C. not only Blacks were not American but also all those who the english agents have labelled ethnic Americans. In fact B.B.C. openly said (in that program-usually B.B.C. does not reveal its evil intention so easily) that the American means actually anglo-saxons. The whole propaganda and racial slur was provided by BBC.
the way George H.W. Bush finished off Michael Dukakis in 1988. Lee Atwater, Bush’s smear manager, picked up Al Gore’s use of Horton – the black rapist furloughed for a weekend, under a law passed by Gov. Dukakis – and retooled it, throwing in slurs about Dukakis as being some foreign outsider
Don't confuse that white includes Germans either. The same English agents (in America) who created a monstrous film like “birth of nation“ are the same people who crated prohibition only because many German immigrants were drinking bear and they did not like it. It is the same england sympathiser crowd who went on killing blacks, Irish,
etc -
now how come about that every President who wanted to take stand indendent of Britain in America on Domestic or Foreign has eithr been made impotent or killed(Abraham Lincoln, Kennedy,Robert Kennedy)To understand that one has to remember British propaganda machinary(all sorts of media,BBB.,Papars, govt,etc) and britihs agents in America.Britain has always acted like a heyena(or dog) who let two or Three Lions(OF Europe like France, GermansSpanishItalians-all aristrocatic races campared to pirate turned shopkeepers of England)fight amongst and then the kill(loot) would be enjoyed by the heyana. When Nepolean the great defeated the Bitish ,the later agreed to relinquish their deceitfull presence everywhere.But they never have any intention of honouring their pact anyway.They therefore bid for the time to laet some great power get involved against France.
rodney
October 11th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
england si the main evil enemy of usa a nd of the world english would enver allow anyone to becoem president of usa indepdent of cluthces of the english aprasite nation
F.A. Hayek Fan
October 11th, 2011 at 5:22 pm
Of course. They are in control. Just like the Republicans before them, the values Democrats supposedly cared so deeply about disappeared into the wind once they took control. That does not take away from anything I wrote concerning the Republican grass roots and their desire to rid the world of the "Muslim menace" or Dr. Paul's apparent ignorance of this fact.