QuoteAnwar al-Aulaqi, U.S.-born cleric linked to al-Qaeda, killed, Yemen says
SANAA, Yemen — Anwar al-Aulaqi, the radical Yemeni-American cleric and one of the most influential al-Qaeda operatives wanted by the United States, has been killed in northern Yemen, Yemen's Defense Ministry said Friday morning.
The ministry, in a text message sent to journalists, said "the terrorist Anwar al-Aulaqi has been killed along with some of his companions," but did not provide further details. The report could not be independently verified; Aulaqi has been falsely reported killed before.
In a separate e-mailed statement, the Yemeni government said that Aulaqi was "targeted and killed" five miles from the town of Kashef in Yemen's northern Jawf province, 87 miles east of the capital Sanaa. The attack, the statement said, was launched at 9.55 am, local time.
While the Defense Ministry said Aulaqi was killed in Marib province, other government sources said he was killed in neighboring Jawf province.
A Yemeni security source, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media, said Aulaqi was killed in an air strike, possibly by an unmanned American drone. The Obama administration in recent months have escalated the use of drones to target al-Qaeda-linked militants in Yemen and Somalia. U.S. officials could not be reached for comment.
If true, Aulaqi's death would be considered a significant victory in the U.S. war against global terrorism. Believed to be 39 or 40 years old, the New Mexico-born cleric has been implicated in several attacks on U.S. soil, including the 2009 shootings at Fort Hood, Texas; an attempt later that year to bomb a Detroit-bound airliner; and an attempt in 2010 to send parcel bombs on cargo plans bound for the United States.
In April 2010, the Obama administration authorized his targeted killing. U.S. officials alleged that he is a top leader in al-Qaeda's Yemen wing, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
Aulaqi, who lived in Virginia and was the imam of a mosque in Falls Church, left the United States in 2002. He was detained in Yemen in 2006 at the request of the United States but was released later that year. His lectures in English on Islamic scripture have drawn in countless followers online.
Earlier this year, Michael Leiter, the U.S. official in charge of analyzing terrorism threats, told a congressional committee that Aulaqi and AQAP probably posed "the most significant risk to the U.S. homeland."
If true......USA! USA! USA!
Great, wish they could kill his wives and children too.
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yemen will soon replace Pakistan as the US most trustworthy ally :)
Quote from: viper37 on September 30, 2011, 10:05:09 AM
Yemen will soon replace Pakistan as the US most trustworthy ally :)
:lol:
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on September 30, 2011, 08:13:06 AM
Great, wish they could kill his wives and children too.
Don't worry, they will be welfare queens in Detroit soon enough.
Quote from: Viking on September 30, 2011, 09:52:06 AM
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yep. Though the White House still won't admit that, due, no doubt to their abiding shame at that order.
On the other hand it's good that, so far as I can see, the ideology that al-Qaeda represents is now entirely devoid of charismatic leaders. It should also mean, God willing, that the US has no excuse to support Saleh in any way.
Guy deserved to be whacked, he was a Colordao State University alum.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 01, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
On the other hand it's good that, so far as I can see, the ideology that al-Qaeda represents is now entirely devoid of charismatic leaders.
I know. Obama's charisma, as a muslim leader, has proven to be a complete flash in a pan.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 01, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: Viking on September 30, 2011, 09:52:06 AM
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yep. Though the White House still won't admit that, due, no doubt to their abiding shame at that order.
On the other hand it's good that, so far as I can see, the ideology that al-Qaeda represents is now entirely devoid of charismatic leaders. It should also mean, God willing, that the US has no excuse to support Saleh in any way.
Was there a warrant out for his arrest? Could he have just turned himself in and explained the whole misunderstanding?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 01, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: Viking on September 30, 2011, 09:52:06 AM
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yep. Though the White House still won't admit that, due, no doubt to their abiding shame at that order.
Interesting concept. Got any sources for the claim that they feel "shame" (let alone "abiding shame")?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 01, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: Viking on September 30, 2011, 09:52:06 AM
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yep. Though the White House still won't admit that, due, no doubt to their abiding shame at that order.
He did know he was there. That was just a bonus. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 01, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: Viking on September 30, 2011, 09:52:06 AM
This is the guy the US Citizen that Obama ordered whacked.
Yep. Though the White House still won't admit that, due, no doubt to their abiding shame at that order.
If the US is going to be in the business of assassinating bad guys, then I don't see why citizenship status should be an automatic free pass.
Quote from: grumbler on October 02, 2011, 02:50:10 PM
Interesting concept. Got any sources for the claim that they feel "shame" (let alone "abiding shame")?
No of course not. But you should always assume the best of people you disagree with.
QuoteIf the US is going to be in the business of assassinating bad guys, then I don't see why citizenship status should be an automatic free pass.
I disagree with assassinations in general. I also disagree with the state killing her citizens. Putting the two together without a judicial process seems fundamentally wrong. And I do wonder where the line is drawn with this.
I can see the attraction in this case and I won't mourn the guy but depending on how involved the US was I think it's problematic.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 03, 2011, 05:58:17 PM
Quote from: grumbler on October 02, 2011, 02:50:10 PM
Interesting concept. Got any sources for the claim that they feel "shame" (let alone "abiding shame")?
No of course not. But you should always assume the best of people you disagree with.
QuoteIf the US is going to be in the business of assassinating bad guys, then I don't see why citizenship status should be an automatic free pass.
I disagree with assassinations in general. I also disagree with the state killing her citizens. Putting the two together without a judicial process seems fundamentally wrong. And I do wonder where the line is drawn with this.
I can see the attraction in this case and I won't mourn the guy but depending on how involved the US was I think it's problematic.
I know you feel shame for making this post. I assume the best of you.
What's the alternative when the state is effectively at war with said citizen who is in a foreign and somewhat hostile country? Knock on the door and serve him a summons?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 03, 2011, 05:58:17 PM
I disagree with assassinations in general. I also disagree with the state killing her citizens.
I don't, on both counts. I am sworn to defend America from ALL her enemies, foreign and domestic.
Quote from: DGuller on October 03, 2011, 06:05:01 PMI know you feel shame for making this post. I assume the best of you.
:lol: Fair. I think they're embarassed which is why to the best of my knowledge they've still not explained the legal principles behind this. I'm with Marc Ambider on that, did they waive his citizenship, or could they? The US hasn't, so far as I know, summarily executed terrorists like the Fort Hood guy. Who decides who should be arrested and who killed? How?
As I've said I don't think the details are clear and it depends how involved the US was but if he died while they were trying to capture him (as I like to think happened with Bin Laden), then fine. But if he died because that was the order then I'm not comfortable with that (though the world's better without him).
Quote from: Maximus on October 03, 2011, 06:17:10 PM
What's the alternative when the state is effectively at war with said citizen who is in a foreign and somewhat hostile country? Knock on the door and serve him a summons?
It's not easy. But the idea that you don't extra-judicially kill citizens isn't one that should only apply when things are easy. The alternative's to try and capture him and to fight his branch of al-Qaeda in Yemen with the assistance of the Yemenis, the drones, the Saudis and everything else. If he's captured it's a bonus, if he dies that's fine too.
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 03, 2011, 06:28:19 PM
Quote from: Maximus on October 03, 2011, 06:17:10 PM
What's the alternative when the state is effectively at war with said citizen who is in a foreign and somewhat hostile country? Knock on the door and serve him a summons?
It's not easy. But the idea that you don't extra-judicially kill citizens isn't one that should only apply when things are easy. The alternative's to try and capture him and to fight his branch of al-Qaeda in Yemen with the assistance of the Yemenis, the drones, the Saudis and everything else. If he's captured it's a bonus, if he dies that's fine too.
How is this diferent from what happened?
Quote from: Sheilbh on October 03, 2011, 06:28:19 PM
It's not easy. But the idea that you don't extra-judicially kill citizens isn't one that should only apply when things are easy. The alternative's to try and capture him and to fight his branch of al-Qaeda in Yemen with the assistance of the Yemenis, the drones, the Saudis and everything else. If he's captured it's a bonus, if he dies that's fine too.
I am not sure what your point is. The US government, like many others, assassinated tens of thousands of German and Japanese soldiers in WW2, and assassinated al-Aulaqi in like manner (draw the parallel to Yamamoto, if you like). Sure, there are preferred outcomes like capturing the guy, but that outcome wasn't in the cards.
The Fort Hood guy suffered attempted assassination from one of the guards on the base, but survived it and was captured. Once captured, there was no need for assassination.