American Anwar al-Awlaki Killed in Act of State Terrorism

“Patriotism means a love for your country and not hate for others.”

Charles Schenck  World War I pamplet

The United States of America continues to demonstrate its capacity to kill individuals in targeted-assassination campaigns. Now they are killing Americans such as Anwar al-Awlaki. The New York Times in their reporting of the assassination in Yemen on September 30, 2011 recite a litany of administration-talking points: He said bad things about the US. He was “linked” to investigations of planned attacks. He was Al Qaeda’s, “greatest English-language propagandist.” He had a “suspected role” in the Ft Hood deaths that were perpetrated by Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a physician. He was killed for his views, his words, his provocative statements. He was killed for speaking!

Linda Spillers for The New York Times

He was assassinated in northern Yemen, a nation that has experienced a brutal crackdown by its autocratic President Ali Abdullah Saleh who has ruled for over thirty-years. The US has taken no action in replacing Saleh-who returned after healing in Saudi Arabia from an assassination attempt. In claiming that Anwar al-Awlaki was an Al Qaeda leader, I ponder which is worse and a greater threat to international peace and security? the US or Al Qaeda.

We deploy pilotless drones that launch “Hellfire” missiles. We avoid capture of our own pilots in this cowardly new approach to war. We avoid even an attempt at fact-finding prosecution. We avoid a presumption of innocence and in fact impose the death penalty without even an indictment. We avoid applying the First Amendment to an American who has the right to advocate violence against the US. and to utter vitriolic attacks as long as they are not accompanied by imminent action.

I do not know if Anwar al-Awlaki was more than a good speaker: a Tokyo Rose if you will. I do know that the drone-like law of the jungle attacks in third countries are illegal: killing Americans abroad is bestial. Targeting Muslims who oppose American imperialism is state terrorism. The place to demonstrate that an individual is guilty of a crime is not from an aircraft but from a civilised judicial proceeding.

The US terrorist organisation–known as the C.I.A. or more broadly the Pentagon–is convinced that these targeted assassinations will eliminate Al Qaeda and scare into submission its dwindling leadership corps. What will eliminate Al Qaeda or frankly, since there is no real Al Qaeda, the spirit of resistance to American pro-Zionist, anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim campaign is a change in policy. It is our policy of unwavering support for Israel in its ruthless colonisation of Palestine, the pursuit of oil in the region through various military campaigns, the Nazi-like war on Iraq predicated on the monstrous lie of WMD and the tactics of brutal warfare marked by high-tech robotic planes that will never extinguish resistance against the US.

The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Barack Hussein Obama in 2009 and he accepted it in Oslo, Norway on December 10. His acceptance speech included a warning that the US would continue to wage “morally justified” wars.  His actions have been immoral and indiscriminate particularly in reference to non-combatant deaths in Afghanistan and Pakistan that lay outside the purview of international humanitarian law.

The Nobel Peace Prize should be based upon prior action, not hoped for promised behaviour. President Obama had planted in the minds of the Nobel committee a belief that major reconciliation between the Judeo-Christian and Muslim worlds was possible. His Cairo speech in June 2009 was testament to that belief: his actions however have been a third war in Libya, the barbaric assassination of Usama bin Laden and now the killing of an American-born Muslim leader in Yemen.

Where are the jobs? Where is our credit rating? Where is national health insurance? Where is the end of the death penalty? Instead we seek global hegemony amidst a declining moral civilisation whose acts of state terrorism are so gleefully parroted by the New York Times.

This entry was posted in External Affairs. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply