Hacker News Reader

Comment by jhkdwbkjlf | Hacker News Reader

Most ppl didn't care/do anything when the previous Nobel Prize winning guy droned an American and his son (and other crimes). Why should ppl care now about this if the guys doing it are quite honest in their contempt for the rule of law? Say what you will about DJT, but he's quite honest (mostly 'cause he can't control the diarrhea from his mouth).

If one is unwilling to raise one's voice for political expediency reasons when the "good guys" are doing "bad" things then all this hoopla about this admin pulling back const. protections is a bit of a laugh, aint it?

View on HN

Except of course that people that the ACLU and others absolutely did raise their voices about the targeting of Anwar al-Awlaki. Indeed there was quite a lot of legal back and forth about its legality.

Personally, I see pragmatic difference. It is easily within the within the U.S' capabilities to give this person a lawyer. It's not clear how the U.S would have bought Anwar al-Awlaki to justice for the crimes that he was proud of committing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

Yes, a "lot of legal back and forth" by Government lawyers writing secretive memos that are nothing but a sham. Throw them in the same cell.

They also of course killed his U.S. citizen son ("I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father") and 8 year old daughter (not a U.S. citizen, so clearly worthless).

It must be comforting to live in a world that is so black and white. That legal back and forth isn’t worthless. It’s what systems based on the rule of law do when faced with knotty problems. You’ve decided that they are a sham and that the lawyers should be thrown in jail without due process.

Find me anyone other than the people in your head who believe the daughter was worthless.

There is no legal back and forth! There was no legal process! You seem to have a hard time understanding this.

Writing secretive memos on how to extra-judicially kill U.S. citizens is little different from Freisler giving his expert opinion to the Wannsee conference.

I've always thought Anwar al-Awlaki was a somewhat odd example.

Suppose an American man is found guilty of war crimes in, say, France, and is ordered captured dead or alive. While conducting military exercises in France, the US, an ally of France, gets the opportunity to capture him, dead. They do so. Are you outraged?

Replace France with Yemen and you pretty much have the situation with this individual.

I should say, I agree with you on the point that drone strikes in general are not good policy. I'm more concerned about civilian casualties than the actual targets, though. I've yet to come across a case to change my mind.

> found guilty

I think the point is, "found guilty" _by whom_?

The Yemeni court system?

> Say what you will about DJT, but he's quite honest

Yeah, uh, no.

It case it wasn't clear, the "Nobel Prize winning guy" was Obama

Reply on news.ycombinator.com