That’s the question at the bottom of the Al-Awlaki assassination. Honestly, I’m not crying over Al-Awlaki. But I don’t think the assassination sets a good precedent. If the executive office can find a workaround to kill Americans abroad without due process (even those who no doubt deserve it)… Well, that’s a slippery slope I just don’t want to go down.
On September 11, Paul Krugman penned a blog accusing neocon politicians of taking advantage of 9/11 to pursue their evil, warmongering policies. I wonder if he and his liberal colleagues feel the same moral disquietude over this assassination? Was it an example of the sort of “deeply shameful” thing government officials did as a consequence of 9/11 anti-terrorism policy? Krugman wrote in a sort of conclusion:
A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits — people who should have understood very well what was happening — took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity?
I’m not a lawyer – I don’t know what the answer is re: the Al-Awlaki assassination. But I sure hope America has a serious conversation about it.