Reply With Quote
So there's some concern about murdering US citizens, but no concern about murdering non-US citizens.
Just label everybody "enemy combatant" and start blasting way.
This Is War!
sameEarlier this week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta went on 60 Minutes and described the process by which U.S. citizens are targeted for assassination: “the President of the United States has to sign off and he should.” Obama officials have repeatedly gone to the media anonymously to make claims about Awlaki’s guilt and to justify their assassination program. Here is one “senior administration lawyer” — cowardly hiding behind anonymity — responding to my criticisms and justifying the assassination program to Benjamin Wittes (who naturally protected him from being identified). When I spoke at an NYU Law School event in 2010 and criticized what was then the Awlaki assassination attempt while sitting next to FBI Counter-Terrorism official Niall Brennan, NPR’s national security reporter, Dina Temple-Raston, stood up and revealed that Obama officials had secretly shown her snippets of evidence to demonstrate that Awlaki was involved in actual Terrorist plots.
So Obama can go on TV shows and trigger applause for himself by boasting of the Awlaki killing. He can publicly accuse Awlaki of all sorts of crimes for which there has been no evidence presented. He can dispatch his aides to anonymously brag in newspapers about all the secret evidence showing Awlaki’s guilt and showing how resolute and tough the President is for ordering him executed. Justice Department and Pentagon officials scamper around in the dark flashing snippets of evidence about Awlaki to reporters like Temple-Raston so that they dutifully march forward to defend the government’s assassination program. Obama officials will anonymous insist in public that they have legal authority to target citizens for killing without trial.
So there's some concern about murdering US citizens, but no concern about murdering non-US citizens.
Just label everybody "enemy combatant" and start blasting way.
This Is War!
Not so much, going by what's posted here.
whichever way you decide, it all ends up taxpayer funded anyway
it's not evidence, yet, but the USG gives color to the allegation Awlaki was operationally involved with the underwear bomber and Nidal Hasan in this memo.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...c5d9fc7699c.41US-born Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaqi, killed in a US drone attack in Yemen last year, had been in US custody at least twice in prior years but was released, a human rights group said.Judicial Watch, an accountability watchdog group, said it had learned this through Freedom of Information lawsuits it filed with the US government.
It said do ents from the US embassy in Yemen, for instance, indicate Awlaqi was held for at least eight months between late 2006 and mid 2007. But the do ents do not say how long he was held or why he was he was freed.
Back in October 2002, Awlaqi was detained at New York City's John F. Kennedy International Airport on a warrant for passport fraud, a felony that can be punished with up to 10 years in jail.
But the FBI ordered his release, Judicial Watch said. Awlaqi flew to Washington, DC and eventually returned to Yemen.
In yet another incident, months before Awlaqi was killed in September 2011, the embassy in Yemen was instructed to send Awlaqi a letter urging him to come to the embassy to pick up an important do ent but not tell him what it was.
In fact, it was simply a revocation of his passport, Judicial Watch said.
Don't see why they couldn't have made that info public before the killing and discuss the reasons for doing so with the American public. You know, besides realpolitik.
"USG gives color to the allegation Awlaki was operationally involved with the underwear bomber and Nidal Hasan"
I believe everything the govt tells us.
Any reason given for murdering his 16 year old American citizen son in a completely separate targeted attack two weeks later?
Obama ordered to release legal memo:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/ny...al-awlaki.htmlA federal appeals panel in Manhattan ordered the release on Monday of key portions of a classified Justice Department memorandum that provided the legal justification for the targeted killing of a United States citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who intelligence officials contend had joined Al Qaeda and died in a 2011 drone strike in Yemen.
The unanimous three-judge panel, reversing a lower court decision, said the government had waived its right to keep the analysis secret in light of numerous public statements by administration officials and the Justice Department’s release of a “white paper” offering a detailed analysis of why targeted killings were legal.
“Whatever protection the legal analysis might once have had,” Judge Jon O. Newman wrote for the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, “has been lost by virtue of public statements of public officials at the highest levels and official disclosure of the D.O.J. White Paper.”
The ruling stemmed from lawsuits filed under the Freedom of Information Act by The New York Times and two of its reporters, Charlie Savage and Scott Shane, and by the American Civil Liberties Union.
same“What makes it particularly significant is that it applies not just to a single do ent but to a habitual practice of government officials,” he said, “which is to say, ‘I’m going to talk about something that’s classified, but I’m not going to give you the underlying records.’ ”
Lawyers for the plaintiffs praised the ruling.
David E. McCraw, a lawyer for The Times, said: “The court declined to accept at face value the government’s claims about national security and instead did a searching and independent review of the record.”
Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, added: “This is a resounding rejection of the government’s effort to use secrecy, and selective disclosure, as a means of manipulating public opinion about the targeted killing program. The government can’t pretend that everything about its targeted killing program is a classified secret while senior officials selectively disclose information meant to paint the program in the most favorable light.”
I'm much more concerned about the "untargeted" killings. (collateral drone deaths of innocents)
Obama ain't. He's more worried about some racist old Jew talking about blacks than the deaths of innocent civilians.
...and now we've got generals saying this is ok to do in the USA
based on secret lists, like Obama did
https://theintercept.com/2025/12/12/...-boat-strikes/
(My receipts for Obama doing this are in this thread and elsewhere in this forum)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
