ANWAR AL-AWLAKI'S DEATH.

If "once a citizen, always a citizen" is the case, then the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki raises the question whether the U.S. Government has any authority to kill the said "major figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula", because he is still an American and under the protection of the nation's Constitution.

However, al-Awlaki abandoned the United States many years ago, and became the leader of a terror organization, whose aim was to destroy America; he chose to hate the nation in which he was born; and to become its enemy.

Many American lives have been threatened on his advice, to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man accused of the Christmas Day bomb attack, which fortunately failed; and to Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, who killed twelve U.S. soldiers a civilian.

He was still training al Qaeda operatives in Yemen to initiate more terror attacks on his country of birth; and sought to use WOMADs (Weapons of mass destruction) to attack Westerners on foreign soil, most definitely being Americans visiting his newly acquired country of citizenship, Yemen; and across the Arabian Peninsula, according to senior U.S.officials.

He was an enemy combatant to the U.S. in every respect, and he has to be dealt with to stop him from doing more damage; but how?

He could not be found and be placed under arrest for him to have a fair trial, in view of his status as an American citizen, and therefore protected by U.S law(Constitution); and his situation was a bastard case for the U.S. Government.

So, just yesterday, it was reported that a CIA drone had hit a target of al Queda members, who were sworn enemies to the U.S., and al Awlaki was one of the dead.

Now, some people are saying that the killing of an American citizen is illegal, because he must be tried in a court of law and be found guilty before any type of sentence can be passed on him; and again, but how?

If U.S. authorities can lay hands on him, then that will be justifiable for his arrest and eventual trial; but his status has changed from being a free man to that of a fugitive. He is a danger to more Americans passing his way; and therefore, he cannot be allowed to run amok and continue in that mode.

So, his life has to be brought to an abrupt end to save lives. He was a criminal, whose intention was to be part of a terrorist organization, which would not spare a single moment to destroy the United States.

Should he have been permitted to carry on? Not many people would think so.

The liberals, who were admonishing the U.S. for taking al-Awlaki out were wrong for one sole reason, that he had abandoned his native land, and therefore, he had voluntarily relinquished his citizenship as an American.

In view of that, he met his death his own way or of his own choice; and that was to be an enemy fighting in a terror war against the U.S.; and so it (U.S.) had the right, under the law, to defend itself.

Anwar al Awlaki's death was his own making. His ending was, therefore, legal; in every sense of the word.