A piece from the Associated Press via Yahoo News came out last night in which they were raising questions about the United States targeting, tracking, and killing one of its citizens.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama steered the nation’s war machine into uncharted territory Friday when a U.S. drone attacked a convoy in Yemen and killed two American citizens who had become central figures in al-Qaida.

It was believed to be the first instance in which a U.S. citizen was tracked and executed based on secret intelligence and the president’s say-so. And it raised major questions about the limitations of presidential power.

Anwar al-Awlaki, the target of the U.S. drone attack, was one of the best-known al-Qaida figures after Osama bin Laden. American intelligence officials had linked him to two nearly catastrophic attacks on U.S.-bound planes, an airliner on Christmas 2009 and cargo planes last year. The second American killed in the drone attack, Samir Kahn, was the editor of Inspire, a slick online magazine aimed at al-Qaida sympathizers in the West. Read the rest

I don’t believe for a minute this was “the first time.” The Cold War still holds many secrets.

I’m not so sure this is really a problem the way that some are making it to be. First off, Anwar al-Awlaki committed treason against the United States, that makes him a traitor. The penalty for committing an act of treason is death by hanging. So, he got what was due, and what he would have received had he been caught and brought back. All this action did was save time and money on an unnecessary trial or tribunal. Is it in a grayish area? You bet. But sometimes you have to do what needs to be done. Oh yeah, I’ll give credit where credit is due and tip my hat to Obama for making the call. He did the right thing.

Here’s something else to consider. Had we caught him and brought him back, would you really want the ACLU getting involved and mucking things up? You know as well as I, they would be on the side of the traitor.