Quote:
Originally Posted by iron81
Because very few people would use the word "execution" to describe a drone strike.
The funny thing here is that its pretty clear that there is a specific reason why he chose to use "execution" in his headline when, in the past, he has always said "due-process-free assassination"
but that reason is basically the opposite of what you appear to be accusing him of.
Assassination, the word he has been using, implies that the killing was extralegal. Definitions of assassination:
Quote:
1. to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously
2: to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons
But the word execution implies something that was done as part of the legal process. The definition of execution:
Quote:
a putting to death especially as a legal penalty
Normally when he talks about al-Awlaki's killing, when he says "due-process-free assassination," he is saying the US government, operating outside of the legal system, murdered one of it's own citizens.
Then yesterday Holder said "well, actually there was due process even if the dronee wasn't charged and the judicial department wasn't involved."
So today Greenwald's headline implies "Holder claims that a legal execution was carried out (as opposed to an illegal assassination) with due process, despite the fact that the executed was never even changed."
Now, if we can move past the headline, I'd suggest reading the actual post. It was really good.
Last edited by SL__72; 03-06-2012 at 07:58 PM.