[xnull]

> But I honestly can't help but feel we've reached pretty close to the bottom of that slope. In the sense that I feel like our government just kind of makes stuff up as it goes along and only occasionally responds well to the strongest forms of shame.

In 2010 the Obama administration added an American citizen (Anwar al-Awlaki) to the CIA kill list, circumventing all due process. In a year they were able to strike and kill him with with a drone. They also hunted and killed his son, a 16-year-old US citizen, a couple of weeks later.

The Obama Administration, when challenged, claimed that it has the right to kill in 'dire situations requiring an immediate action to save lives'. However, they were not able to provide, for al-Awlaki or his son, evidence that there was such an immediate threat. First it's an absurdity because they hunted him, and had him on a kill list, for a year. Furthermore, the US had tried a drone strike on al-Awlaki before but missed. In this case there is no question that there was no immediate threat.

Finally al-Awlaki is not known to have participated in any violent action. Rather he was a radicalizer. As an imam, he preached about Islam and about the West. He was popular online (some called him the 'Osama Bin Laden of the internet') where he would exercise free speech (however extremist) but US government partnership with online companies such as Youtube were able to mostly silence him.

al-Awlaki's father even tried - before his son was killed - to get him removed from the kill list. But he was blocked in court.

You mention MLK. There are some parallels - his carrying a radical message and evangalizing others, and his status as a religious and spiritual leader. I do not mean to draw equivalence - only analogy.

Because I wonder what would happen to the next MLK. If al-Awlaki is any precedent then I worry that our guarantees of a fair and speedy trial - jury of peers and all of that - won't be respected when it isn't convenient.

As an addendum I'd like to note that we're seeing more of this. Snowden is allowed to come home and face trial - on the condition (imposed by the US government) that it is not a trial by a jury of peers.