The Ability to kill American Citizens

The ability to condemn a citizen to death without trial is one that will find very little resistance  in the wake of the ever-long battle in the Middle East and the persecution anyone the Government *thinks* is a threat. There does not need to be any proof, there doesn't have to be any trial, it is just this ability to kill and justify it through the rules of engagement or to completely write it off as security measures. This action will not be met with much resistance from the public, as the years of fear programming, hate education and misinformation makes its way to the public eyes through media and a preposterous White House Press Secretary.

The recent release of documents relating to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) openly admits that the government of the United States of America considers itself able to kill its citizens without trial or conviction. These powers they have delegated to themselves stems from the apparent belief that the US Government is above the moral and acceptable practice of allowing a person to defend themselves legally and to submit to the courts a defense of accusations against them.

This request was entered in an attempt to gain information on the drone strikes that killed Anwar Al-Aulaqi; his 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman Al-Aulaqi; and Samir Khan in Yemen September 2011. These strikes were carried out by CIA and other Federal departments along with the military and its drone pilots and crews. The claim that any of these three citizens posed a risk or imminent threat, to the US or any of its interests has never before be substantiated by evidence, just the reports and words of officials within the government and its military. Drone strikes being a preferred method of killing in the Middle East by the American government, many foreign people have lost their lives to these machines, the issue America has at the moment is the way to justify killing an American Citizen in contrast to the United States Constitution that has provisions outlined for the rightful trial by jury and knowledge of charges.

"It is a dangerous notion when your government can make you believe its enemies are yours"

This is not the first time the United States government has killed citizens without trial. Two other cases, The Ruby Ridge Shootout and the Attack on the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco Texas stand as the predecessors, along with many other instances, to justifying murder of citizens. These two incidents are all but forgotten to most and the events leading up to both are the same as the drone strikes that killed these 3 American Citizens.

Each of these cases has the same question. Why is a Government allowed to kill citizens and justify it one way or another. If the Constitution stands as the great tool Conservatives say it is, why then has the Government not answered for its trespass of Amendments securing rights of trial?

The Attack on Branch Davidians, more commonly known as the Waco Siege, took place on April 19, 1993 after 51 days of negotiations. Koresh was accused of practicing polygamy and abusing children, but that wasn’t what the Government was concerned with. The ATF had been tipped off by a UPS driver that had made earlier deliveries that some of the packages contained what looked like hand grenade casings. While owning inert grenade casings is not a crime in of itself, the ATF procured a warrant to search the Church and compound for “illegal” weapons.  When the Davidians refused entranced into their compound the ATF and Local Police used a military type vehicle to punch holes into the sides of building and inserted CS gas. Later in the day, after heavy exchanges of gunfire by both sides a fire erupted killing 75 of the remaining women, men and children.

This attack has been debated heavily over the ensuing years and has never satisfied the questions. Does a government have a right to search an individual’s personal property, whether with a warrant or not? Does a government have the right to initiate an attack on a religious compound? Why does this government have a right to kill citizens without trial? Could this event have been avoided?

Similar to The Waco Siege and not too long before another attack on citizens took place; this time ending the lives of a mother and a son, along with a Federal Law Enforcement Officer.  The Ruby Ridge Raid was again perpetrated on the belief in illegality of weapons and the sale of those weapons. So many events leading up to the siege made this a contentious affair.

All of this leads back to the question. Does Government, any Government have the authority and justification to kill its own citizens without trial or conviction? Since the value of life and the difference in opinion on the legal and philosophical view of this matter varies so drastically it cannot be answered by one person, but rather should be self reflected on. Ask yourself the questions: When did it become permitted that any enemy of a government should have the right to stand trial stripped from them? When did it become permissible to kill a man without his knowledge he is even considered a threat? When did our government stop relying on its own form of inter control and instead subject themselves as a higher moral ruler than the natural rights of man? How long will it be before those that I associate with, or even myself, are considered a threat to the government and are snuffed out without standing to our accused?

With this said and with these questions put out to your own reflection I will offer this last statement . I vehemently oppose any form of government the ability or justification to kill a man, anywhere in the world, from any foreign or domestic place, of any creed or color, of any religion or preference without the ability to defend himself in a court of resolutions. I see this as a violation of natural rights and a gross violation of a moral and civil society.