Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

The Assassination of an American Teenager

Recs

26

October 23, 2011 – Comments (14)

DavidKretzmann.com: Where do we draw the line? When do we stand up and say enough is enough? When will we see the world through the eyes of those whose lands we forcefully manipulate, invade, and occupy?

On October 14, 2011, Abdulrahman Al-awlaki was killed by U.S. airstrikes in Yemen. Al-awlaki was a 16 year old American citizen who was eating dinner with a group of his teenage friends when U.S. airstrikes took their lives. Al-awlaki, born in Denver, Colorado, was the son of Anwar al-Awlaki. Anwar al-Awlaki, of course, was the U.S. citizen suspected (but never prosecuted) of working with Al Qaeda; Awlaki was assassinated by the U.S. on September 30, 2011.

In the days before a CIA drone strike killed al-Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki last month, his 16-year-old son ran away from the family home in Yemen’s capital of Sanaa to try to find him, relatives say. When he, too, was killed in a U.S. airstrike Friday, the Awlaki family decided to speak out for the first time since the attacks.

“To kill a teenager is just unbelievable, really, and they claim that he is an al-Qaeda militant. It’s nonsense,” said Nasser al-Awlaki, a former Yemeni agriculture minister who was Anwar al-Awlaki’s father and the boy’s grandfather, speaking in a phone interview from Sanaa on Monday. “They want to justify his killing, that’s all.”

Abdulrahman Al-awlaki ran away from home to try to find his dad. That’s it. This is a human tragedy, regardless of whether you think the U.S.’s military efforts in the Middle East are justified or not. A society that disregards human life cannot possibly expect to uphold individual liberty.

Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize is drenched in blood. Has Obama so much as issued an apology for killing an innocent American teenager and his friends? Nope. Nada.

This is an American teenage kid that we’re talking about, just three years younger than me. He had a Facebook profile. He listened to Akon, Eminem, 50 Cent, and Snoop Dogg. His favorite books were Harry Potter and Twilight. He loved Spongebob Squarepants, Prison Break, Lost, The Simpsons, and the BBC “Planet Earth” series. His favorite movies were Harry Potter, Braveheart, Troy, and Gladiator. In other words, he was a human being.

Have our minds been so numbed by war that we casually brush off the deaths of innocent lives, even an American teenager, taken by the U.S.? Will people continue to defend these political psychopaths who ignore the destruction of innocent life the U.S. has caused around the world? I pray not.

14 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On October 24, 2011 at 2:45 PM, GNUBEE (24.82) wrote:

Hey pencils,

Do you wander into a warzone thinking you somehow have a startrek like forcefield around you?

Yes it is saddening, but it should be an assumed possibility if (even in the effort to locate your dad) you are in "enemy territory".

Report this comment
#2) On October 24, 2011 at 6:38 PM, dragonLZ (99.40) wrote:

Have our minds been so numbed by war that we casually brush off the deaths of innocent lives, even an American teenager, taken by the U.S.?

Yes, they have (p.s. See Gnubee's comment).

Report this comment
#3) On October 24, 2011 at 6:58 PM, TMFPencils (99.79) wrote:

GNUBEE,

The U.S. has made Yemen a warzone. Congress didn't declare war, our enemy is incredibly vague, and now we dismiss the deliberate assassination of U.S. citizens (without a hint of court procedure) so long as a President says it's the right thing to do.

To me, this is an incredibly dangerous problem. It's even more dangerous than the very serious GOP discussion of who mowed Mitt Romney's lawn four years ago.

Best,

David 

Report this comment
#4) On October 24, 2011 at 7:22 PM, WikiCPA (51.52) wrote:

Hey Pencils,

 At first reading this article, I was shocked. I am not a fan of Obama and yes, this was a step over the line. What hit me most is that he was born in the US, went to Colorado State, and went to my Alma Mater in San Diego, and i just graduated. To think our president would assassinate one of my own peers is disgusting but not surprising.

With that said, I dug a little deeper. He was in Yemen looking for his terrorist uncle. And that he had received Al-Qaeda training and that he had connections and preached about Al-Qaeda connections during his time here in San Diego. If this were to be true, then I believe it was the right thing to do. I consider myself in the know with alot of the things that the media covers up, but whatever our president knew about this situation, I don't.

Report this comment
#5) On October 24, 2011 at 9:41 PM, whereaminow (24.34) wrote:

If this were to be true, then I believe it was the right thing to do.

Don't they have these things for proving that, what are they called.. what are they called.. what are they called....

Oh yeah.

COURTS

David

Report this comment
#6) On October 25, 2011 at 2:08 AM, stockdatamaster (98.58) wrote:

He was in Yemen looking for his terrorist uncle. And that he had received Al-Qaeda training and that he had connections and preached about Al-Qaeda connections during his time here in San Diego. If this were to be true, then I believe it was the right thing to do.

So basically, an impressionable 16-year-old teenager with a wacko uncle deserves to be KILLED merely because of his associations?

Capital punishment is a controversial subject in and of itself; even more so when it pertains to a minor (I can't fathom how ANYONE can condone terminating a KID, regardless of the reason).  But in this case, the notion of a preemptive death penalty, i.e., killing a person who might--or MIGHT NOT--commit a crime in the future, is taking it to a whole new level of disturbing.

Report this comment
#7) On October 25, 2011 at 12:11 PM, WikiCPA (51.52) wrote:

David,

I'm a firm believer of the court system even though it has its flaws like everything else and i agree with you. I just find it hard to process someone like that, to go out and capture them, and bring them back for prosecuting. If there was a warrant out for his arrest, who knows what the kid could have done. Hide out forever and spread anti-american messages? It is very controversial and I would definitely like to see future minor suspected terrorists to be tried rather than assassinated.

 

Stockdata,

 Associations and receiving Al-Qaeda Training are completely different. You can't say it was preemptive either, you don't have all the data of the US government...or do you?

Report this comment
#8) On October 25, 2011 at 12:34 PM, turdburglar (40.94) wrote:

I'm glad he's dead.  This nonsense about putting him in a court is absurd.  The guy was hiding out Bin Laden style in Yemen.  Good riddance.

Obama peace prize is drenched in bullsh*t.  It was awarded to him before he had time to do anything to promote peace.  Of course let's keep in mind this is the same prize that was once awarded to Yasser Arafat for denouncing terrorism in English while promoting it in Arabic.  Let's face it - the committee that awards that prize is easily fooled.

 

 

Report this comment
#9) On October 25, 2011 at 1:02 PM, leohaas (32.36) wrote:

NEWS FLASH:

I'm with the Libertarians on this one. For those who disagree, please show me the specific section or article in the Constitution that allows our Government to do this. I'll apologize if proven wrong.

END OF NEWS FLASH

To my fellow Liberals: when Cheney did similar things (yes, we all know it was Dick who was in charge, and that Shrub was no more than a puppet), we called for his Impeachment. Shouldn't we do the same now with Obama? Or is Cheney right Obama owes the previous Administration an apology?

On a personal note: Am I happy that people like the al-Awlakis and Osama Bin Laden are no longer among the living? You bet. But is not the task of our Government to kill them until we have a war declared by Congress. If Congress declares war on Yemen, our military can kill people in Yemen, taking the appropriate international conventions and protocols (such as Geneva and The Hague) into consideration. Same for Pakistan.

Finally, a non-Constitutional argument against killing terrorist. Terrorism cannot be fought by killing the terrorist because there typically is collateral damage: innocent bystanders are killed or maimed. It is the friends and family of the innocent bystanders, as well as those of the targets, that are radicalized by our assassinations. They become the new breed of terrorists, and they are even more fanatic because of their personal stake. Read the myth of the hydra: for every terrorist we kill, we create two new ones!

Report this comment
#10) On October 25, 2011 at 2:32 PM, GNUBEE (24.82) wrote:

David,

We appear to agree on "our enemy is incredibly vague"

But to say "and now we dismiss the deliberate assassination of U.S. citizens" seems a bit of a jump. Without knowing the intentions of the missle attack it is unreasonable to say it was an assasination (or other attack specifically targeting Abdulrahman Al-awlaki). The US has made it known that we are on the offensive. So if information is provided that the group presented a danger, I can understand an attack. That is how I and many others see it.

Like Franklin's "Lay down with dogs get up with fleas". To associate or appear to associate may put you in harms way. And that is what I see here.

Stockdata, "So basically, an impressionable 16-year-old teenager with a wacko uncle deserves to be KILLED merely because of his associations?"....Not deserves, but it is a reality. These are Big boy games. If you want in, you play by big boy rules

Leo, I agree that a heavy hand can and does promote terrorism, but to roll over is not a viable option.

Report this comment
#11) On October 25, 2011 at 3:50 PM, leohaas (32.36) wrote:

I am not suggesting we "roll over". I am suggesting we that we disengage from foreign lands. Those countries that want to trade with us, we'll trade with, but no military aid, and definitely no "boots on the ground". Other countries must defend themselves.

If we no longer do business in the countries where they hate our guts, there is no need to keep any military presence there. The result will be that eventually the folks over there will hate us a tad less, so they no longer feel the need to kill as many of us as possible by strapping a bomb to their bodies.

PS CR@P: this is the second time today that I agree with the Libertarians.

Report this comment
#12) On October 25, 2011 at 5:04 PM, GNUBEE (24.82) wrote:

Leo,

Fair enough. I fear that some of the places we feel the need (whatever it is) to trade with would be very hostile w/o military aid or boots on the ground. Example, what if we felt we needed to trade with Somali people? It wouldnt happen because the criminal element there would toast a westerner in heartbeat without protection.

I cant say with any conviction that either the current or a proposed pretectionist set up would be better though. You may well be right.

Report this comment
#13) On October 25, 2011 at 5:57 PM, stockdatamaster (98.58) wrote:

To those who say "I'm glad he's dead", you do realize we're talking about a 16-year-old boy and not a grown man... right?  At that age, a person's core belief system hasn't even been established yet.  There's still plenty of time to rid oneself of those negative outside influences and end up becoming a respectable member of society after all.

When we start justifying killing minors in the name of fighting terrorism, WE become the terrorists in the eyes of everyone else in the world.

Report this comment
#14) On October 28, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Frankydontfailme (28.15) wrote:

I didn't mind the killing of Al-alwaki.

The fact that a teenage United States citizen was murdered as 'collateral damage' is unacceptable. The general in charge should be force to be dishonorably discharged. The commander in chief should be censured. Seriously outrageous. Barely reported by the MSM. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement