BALTIMORE (WJZ)– A U.S. airstrike kills an American-born cleric and dangerous al-Qaeda leader.

The government says his death is the biggest victory in the war on terror since Navy Seals killed Osama bin Laden.

Vic Carter has more.

U.S. drone strikes killed wanted al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki Friday morning in southern Yemen.

“The death of al-Awlaki is a major blow to al-Qaeda’s most active operational affiliate,” President Barack Obama said.

Al-Awlaki was a top figure in the terror group’s most dangerous branch– al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Born in New Mexico, he spoke fluent English and served as an imam in a Virginia mosque. In Yemen, Awlaki used his influence and the Internet to help plan attacks on the U.S.

He had direct involvement in the so-called underwear bomber’s failed plot to blow up a Detroit-bound airplane on Christmas Day in 2009 and inspired the deadly shooting rampage at Fort Hood that same year.

Baltimore County Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger is the ranking Democrat on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee.

“I think the message clearly needs to go out to the terrorists in this world who would want to attack us, if you attack Americans or you attempt to kill or kill Americans, we will find you and we will bring you to justice,” he said.

The CIA and U.S. military tracked al-Awlaki for three weeks before the strike on his convoy. It also killed another American– Samir Khan. Khan produced an online English language magazine for al-Qaeda.

Al-Awlaki’s death is considered the most significant since bin Laden’s, but the intelligence officials recognize a weakened al-Qaeda still remains a threat to national security.

In New York City, police are boosting security, worried that al-Awlaki has followers in the city who might want to avenge his death.

Comments (6)
  1. Ruppersberger is wrong. That all works well with most terrorists but this man was an American citizen. As such he is entitled to the protection under the fifth amendment which clearly states

    Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,
    unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising
    in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time
    of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to
    be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal
    case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
    property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for
    public use, without just compensation.

    The constitution doesn’t make exceptions for terrorists or anything else

    The case is clear. This man was murdered by his own government without the opportunity to defend himself, call witnesses in his own defence or any other of his many rights. MURDER, CONTRACT MURDER no less
    As an American, this shames me. It scares me and it should scare you to0.
    In 1933 ther germans approved Hitlers actions and his taking their rightsn away and I think we all know how that turned out.

  2. Steve King says:

    He’d denounced his U.S. citizenship. Therefore he gave up all the privileges of being a U.S. citizen.

  3. sheriff says:

    When you conspire against the U.nited States, you relinquish any & all rights you may have as an American citizen. I’m glad he’s dead & I’d bomb the prick ten times over & others like him. We should bring our troops home & increase smart bomb drone operations I those s…..t hole war zones.

  4. Smiling says:

    angrymanspeaks, please listen to the happymen who have spoken

  5. The right thing was done says:

    I too love and respect my countries Constitution, but when you plot and carryout violent acts against innocent people, or you’re in the process of doing so,you give up your rights. What if a person takes innocent people hostage and has killed a few of his hotages and is about to kill another. Are you tryning to be so intellectual and smarty pants to tell us that a SWAT team sniper who has the hostage taker in his gunsite cannot take the shot and kill the hostage taker because of the 5th Amendment? You really think this? The innocent hostage has to now die because a discussion over the US Constitution? I think of it this way: Al-Awlaki held all Americans hostage and out brave President Obana had the courage to take the shot. FYI, I heard he and his team had a long discussion over the US Constitution with the Justice Dept. over whether or not it was legal to kill Al-Awlaki and the overwhelming conclusion was that it was perfectly legal because innocent lives were at stake and this trumped all other concerns. It is pseudo-intellectuals like you who’s mentality allowed 9/11 to happen as well as past crimes against inncent homeowners within their own homes over whether you can leaglly shoot an intruder. Believe me bro, I shoot and I ask all other questions last. I found your comparison to 1930’s Germany very insulting to Freedom loving Americans. There is no comparison!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE