Check the lost and found for Anwar's rights

Anwar al-Awlaki is a United States citizen currently hiding out in Yemen. Scott Shane of the NY Times writes: "the notion that the government can, in effect, execute one of it's own citizens far from combat zone, with no judicial process and based on secret intelligence, makes some legal authorities uneasy."http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/world/14awlaki.html?ref=politics
???? Can someone help me out? Are we really sentencing this man to death because of information obtained through illegal wiretapping and are not trying him in court as granted through our rights? He is, after all a United States citizen. I do understand he is a suspect to terrorism, or that's what the eavesdropping the US is telling us, but why not give him his day in court. Oh right, no legal evidence. So then should wiretapping be legal? If this man really is a threat, then legalizing wiretapping could help save millions of Americans if he is planning another 9-11. But what about those of us that aren't terrorists? Griswold v Connecticut grants us the right to privacy, so would wiretapping phone calls then not violate those rights?
But why stop there. What does it matter if we have a right to privacy if they are going to violate our right as a citizen to a trial? I really feel this issue is bigger than the economy, bigger than health care, bigger than immigration. Everything that is happening to Anwar is a violation of our rights, regardless of the fact that he poses a threat. Serial murderers and rapists also pose a heavy threat, but measures this extreme are not being taken with them. Though I don't support any acts of terrorism he might be planning, I do think the authorities should be more than just "uneasy".