Sunday, November 6, 2011
Monday Matters- Marking Period 2, Week 5 Synthesis
Before, I did research on the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, I wasn't really sure about my opinion, and though the process of reading different viewpoints, I found that I could sympathize with both sides. I think that anti-terrorism measures are necessary, but I'm not sure to what extent they justify acts that may break with America's founding ideals. Anwar al-Awlaki's death as an American citizen is unfortunate, and I think that it would have been better if he got his right of due process, but I don't think that we can retrospectively judge events that are ambiguous in details, nor should we too harshly criticize the Obama administration for measures of national security. However, action needs to be taken, to more precisely define the exact powers that the executive branch has in these kinds of situations, so that something like this doesn't happen again. I do believe that there are circumstances that justify killing an American citizen, however in Anwar al-Awlaki's case I'm not sure whether that it was justified or not. Carefulness, thought, and time must however be put into these delicate decisions. However, in the case of Anwar al-Awlaki's son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, I am more sure that his death was wrong (despite his proximity to more justifiable targets). Nothing justifies the drone-strike killing of a 16 year-old, much less a 16 year-old American citizen, and I am dismayed that there has been much less press concerning Abdulrahman al-Awlaki's death, and the lack of an official response from the Obama administration concerning this tragedy.
Monday Matters-Marking Period 2 Week 5, Visual(s)
http://photos.denverpost.com/mediacenter/2011/09/photos-anwar-al-awlaki-killed-in-yeman/#name%20here
These images of Anwar al-Awlaki are as contradictory as accounts of his history. In one he is smiling;in the other his mouth is open in commanding speech. In one he is posed next to a white, non-Muslim women; in the other he is alone. In one his arms are relaxed and crossed; in the other his hand is strikingly pointed in a deliberate act of nonverbal communication. In the second picture al-Awlaki is a banner for Muslim/non-Muslim friendly relations; in the first he is a rallying call for jihad. The first picture is absent of a recognizable background, rather his fence-like surrounding seems manufactured for the cause of not distracting from his video, while in the second Muslim children can been seem behind al-Awlaki and Patricia Morris, symbols of innocence and purity that contrast the violence he is calling for in the first. In both pictures, al-Awlaki's clothing contrasts with the background, however the colors of black and white are flipped, symbolizing the change that has occurred in him from the time of the second picture to the first one.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Monday Matter-Marking Period 2 Week Four
Anwar Awlaki: Targeted for death
Because there was no due process for Anwar Awlaki, even though his death may have been justified for his acts furthering terrorism, we cannot be sure that he really did commit those acts as he had no opportunity to respond to any allegations. Killing an American without due process violates the 5th Amendment and is also morally wrong, in that Anwar Awlaki was not an immediate threat. It is true that today it is much harder to decide how to act in a war against terrorism, without clear-cut battlefields or uniforms, and it is understandable the U.S. government's worry about the threat of Anwar Awlaki. However, for the U.S. government to sponsor assassination, there must at least be judicial review. And although it is true that Awlaki's father Nasser al-Aulaqi's case against the U.S. government to take Awlaki off the targeted killing list was lost, and so legally the Obama administration was in the right, terrorism is not an excuse to ignore America's founding principles.
Because there was no due process for Anwar Awlaki, even though his death may have been justified for his acts furthering terrorism, we cannot be sure that he really did commit those acts as he had no opportunity to respond to any allegations. Killing an American without due process violates the 5th Amendment and is also morally wrong, in that Anwar Awlaki was not an immediate threat. It is true that today it is much harder to decide how to act in a war against terrorism, without clear-cut battlefields or uniforms, and it is understandable the U.S. government's worry about the threat of Anwar Awlaki. However, for the U.S. government to sponsor assassination, there must at least be judicial review. And although it is true that Awlaki's father Nasser al-Aulaqi's case against the U.S. government to take Awlaki off the targeted killing list was lost, and so legally the Obama administration was in the right, terrorism is not an excuse to ignore America's founding principles.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Monday Matters-Marking Period 2 Week Three
When Leaders Die, Terror Still Thrives
Although Anwar al-Awlaki's death may temporarily hurt Al Qaeda's efforts, in the long run it's not going to make a big difference. Killing leader's of terrorist organizations instead may become rallying points for sympathy for the organization and more motivation for violence. This is especially true in the case of religious organizations, and organizations that have more than 500 members. Because Al Qaeda is more than 20 years old, decentralized, and based on religious dogma rather than leadership, it can withstand the deaths of those such as al-Awlaki and Bin Laden. Rather than focusing on killing key leaders, America should try to undermine the social support that Al Qaeda recieves through removing troops from Afghanistan (and at the same time a cause for recruitment) and providing social services to communities where Al Qaeda gets support from.
Jordan, Jenna. "When Leaders Die, Terror Still Thrives." New York Times. 4 Oct. 2011. Web. 23 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/opinion/awlakis-death-wont-destroy-al-qaeda.html>.
Although Anwar al-Awlaki's death may temporarily hurt Al Qaeda's efforts, in the long run it's not going to make a big difference. Killing leader's of terrorist organizations instead may become rallying points for sympathy for the organization and more motivation for violence. This is especially true in the case of religious organizations, and organizations that have more than 500 members. Because Al Qaeda is more than 20 years old, decentralized, and based on religious dogma rather than leadership, it can withstand the deaths of those such as al-Awlaki and Bin Laden. Rather than focusing on killing key leaders, America should try to undermine the social support that Al Qaeda recieves through removing troops from Afghanistan (and at the same time a cause for recruitment) and providing social services to communities where Al Qaeda gets support from.
Jordan, Jenna. "When Leaders Die, Terror Still Thrives." New York Times. 4 Oct. 2011. Web. 23 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/opinion/awlakis-death-wont-destroy-al-qaeda.html>.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Monday Matters-Marking Period 2 Week Two
A Just Act of War
Although there is danger of too much executive power, in decisions for anti-terrorism measures, the Obama administration's decision to kill Anwar al-Allaki was a justified security measure without overstepping executive power. Because he had been directly involved in terrorist plots on American, and was within a country that could not have done anything about him itself, the American decision to kill was necessary. Even though at first glance it may seem that due process has not been taken, in reality a court decision last year, and an extraordinarily cautious process within the executive branch proves that it has been sufficient, within the context. And although drones have been criticized, they are really important tools in the war against terror that must be kept.
Goldsmith, Jack L. "A Just Act of War." New York Times. 30 Sept. 2011. Web. 16 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/opinion/a-just-act-of-war.html>.
Although there is danger of too much executive power, in decisions for anti-terrorism measures, the Obama administration's decision to kill Anwar al-Allaki was a justified security measure without overstepping executive power. Because he had been directly involved in terrorist plots on American, and was within a country that could not have done anything about him itself, the American decision to kill was necessary. Even though at first glance it may seem that due process has not been taken, in reality a court decision last year, and an extraordinarily cautious process within the executive branch proves that it has been sufficient, within the context. And although drones have been criticized, they are really important tools in the war against terror that must be kept.
Goldsmith, Jack L. "A Just Act of War." New York Times. 30 Sept. 2011. Web. 16 Oct. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/opinion/a-just-act-of-war.html>.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Monday Matters-Marking Period 2 Week One
Uphold America's Founding Principles
Firstly, Anwar al-Awlaki was an extremist who did call for killing of Americans, using the internet as a medium. However, the killing of any American without due process is unconstitutional and violates the Fifth Amendment. Violent measures like drone strikes do not decrease terrorism, but instead make it easier for Al-Qaeda to recruit members. We must remember our founding principles even while waging a war on terror.
Awad, Nihad. "Opposing View: Uphold America's Founding Principles." USA Today. 2 Oct. 2011. Web. 16 Oct. 2011. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/story/2011-10-02/CAIR-Awlaki-Constitution-terrorism/50637334/1>.
Firstly, Anwar al-Awlaki was an extremist who did call for killing of Americans, using the internet as a medium. However, the killing of any American without due process is unconstitutional and violates the Fifth Amendment. Violent measures like drone strikes do not decrease terrorism, but instead make it easier for Al-Qaeda to recruit members. We must remember our founding principles even while waging a war on terror.
Awad, Nihad. "Opposing View: Uphold America's Founding Principles." USA Today. 2 Oct. 2011. Web. 16 Oct. 2011. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/story/2011-10-02/CAIR-Awlaki-Constitution-terrorism/50637334/1>.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Monday Matter #3: visual
http://lightbox.time.com/2011/09/23/the-best-pictures-of-the-week-september-16-september-23/#7
Self immolation has been throughout history, a form of political protest; and this picture represents the Greek people's protest against Greece's government and the actions that have led to and failed to stop the Greek debt crisis. If the fire that blazes on the Greeks man's body is his shout of protest, than the policeman (a figure of government authority) running over to extinguish the fire represents the government extinguishing the people's calls. The policeman's face is not shown-he is just a general representation of authority. One of the man's arms is up towards the police officer (as if protecting himself from a blow), while his other arm is still reaching for the dropped can of gasoline that he used to set himself on fire, showing he wants to continue having a political voice. The shadow of the bank he is in front of looms over the man, showing how the economic burden he has endured personally has led him to this, while the authority is coming from the light still not as much affected by the economic problems of Greece as the common person is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)