Targeted Killing Revisited

I gave my two cents regarding the targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in a blog last year (read it here).  Obviously I disagreed with the killing based on U.S. Constitutional rights and the fact that al-Awlaki was a citizen of the U.S. at the time of his killing.  Now, five months after the fact, the U.S. government (meaning the Obama Administration) is going to outline for us how U.S. law empowers the U.S. government (meaning any administration) to kill U.S. citizens overseas who engage in terrorism.

So, let me see if I get this straight.  If the terrorist act is committed by a citizen residing in the U.S. the law says that this individual should be arrested if possible and brought to trial.  But, if the terrorist act is committed by a U.S. citizen living outside the U.S. then U.S. law does not apply the same.  And, obviously, the law and sovereignty of the country where the U.S. citizen is residing also do not apply.  Also slightly humorous to me in the conversation is the contention that targeted killing is not assassination.  But, it is assassination if the agents of other government do the targeted killing.  Interesting double standard illustrated through the Obama administration's decision making; when the Israeli's engage in targeted killing (which by the way is not illegal by their constitution or by any administrative or legal finding in Israel) the U.S. government and governments around the world wail and gnash their teeth at the impertinence of Israel, but if the U.S. government determines the killing is good to go, then hey why is anyone complaining that the U.S. Constitution just got thrown out the window.  Go ahead President Obama, continue to prove that you are one of the most illiberal presidents in U.S. history.