EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans

Originally posted by jibeho
This just shakes me to the core. Nothing will prevent them from using drones on US soil to kill SUSPECTED terror big wigs who just happen to be US Citizens. Wow! No arrest... No charges, No indictment. Just Pure Suspicion... Just like the case with Anwar Alwalaki.... If they can get away with that under the "law" they can get away with anything...

Assassination by drone is the new norm for Obama and the man who masterminded the program.. Screw due process and intel gathering....

That is what blows me away too..(HOPEFULLY never literally, eh? ) I can almost buy their logic for how they zapped the two traitors who flipped to Al Qaeda in Yemen. ...almost. They claim arrest wasn't possible. They claim it was far too dangerous to attempt a snatch and grab for intelligence and logistical reasons. Okay... I think it's B.S. in the end and a question of simply how badly they wanted to try and commit resources ...but whatever. I'm tired of defending people I'd have shot in the head myself if given the chance. I just can't much stand with how our Government did it by policy.

In the US though?! What the HELL?! There is no possibility of claiming they can't arrest someone unless they've totally lost civil control of large areas of the national territory. If THAT came to pass, a "finding" to justify it would hardly be necessary in the first place. We'd be in a state of open and clear civil war. So this makes NO sense except as an unthinkably brutal tool of oppression and suppression of dissent. THIS is the kind of thing, as I recall, people swore would never ever happen in this nation....even the serious TALK of it would never happen.

Never say never has taken on entirely new and very dark meanings, huh?

reply to post by collietta


Thanks!! I was already bugged by this after seeing a drone fly over the highway very near my home last summer.
You just made it worse...... I am the lady standing in her garden with her friend talking about conspiracy theory.

PEOPLE< PEOPLE......
The Drones are unconstitutional, the Laws being passed to support them are null.....
Same same the Patriot Act.....NDAAsection for killing people.
All these and many more goverment actions and laws are totally against EVERYTHING the country was founded upon, and stands for.
When will you stop arranging the effing deck furniture on the Titanic?
Cant you feel the gaping holes gashed in the hull?
Face the truth....
Goverment has been taken over by the corporate sector....they have become inextricably intertwined in a web of
corruption that surpasses any the world has seen....
Evil triumphs when "good men" DO NOTHING.

reply to post by stirling

The Drones are unconstitutional, the Laws being passed to support them are null.....

how so?
Please explain using existing laws why they are not constitutional.

I would like to make everyone aware of the following.

en.wikipedia.org...

Contrary to popular belief, the Act does not prohibit members of the United States Armed Forces from exercising Law enforcement agency powers within a State, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order"; it requires that any authority to do so must exist within the United States Constitution or Act of Congress (which it currently does not except under the Insurrection Act).

And then this page leads us to this one here the Isurrection Act.

en.wikipedia.org...

The 2007 Defense Authorization Bill, with over $500 billion allocated to the military, and which also contained the changes to the Insurrection Act of 1807, was passed by a bipartisan majority of both houses of Congress: 398-23 in the House and by unanimous consent in the Senate.[4] For military forces to be used under the provisions of the revised Insurrection Act, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--

(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

So should a domestic terrorist attack occur and the local state authorities were unable to respond to a overwhelming threat. A drone attack would be perfectly legal under the constitution.

Amazing what a few minutes of googling can lead you to find.

It's in the constitution....
The government can do whatever they want to "quell insurrections."

It was only a matter of time.


ATSers shouldn't be surprised by any of this coming out. We've seen the slow build up for acts such as this, what's worse is seeing the build up of any of this actually taking place.


Ridiculous how the government looks down on us like we're all fools waiting for the slaughter. There are enough smart people in this country to know better than to believe any of this is for the greater good.

reply to post by Swills


I think the killing gets easier and easier. if you use a drone you remove yourself even further from the devastation you cause.

So, no one should have any confusion about what Obama and those with him are preparing to do.

reply to post by Swills

And if drones strikes are legally going to be allowed to kill Americans for supporting Al Qaeda shouldn't the first strikes be rained down on Washington DC itself? I mean who else is supporting Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria?

This is a very good angle. Defining the determining factors used to label any individual Americans as terrorist and a serious threat to the state.

If they are going to do this, then they need to look at all citizens, including LEO's, Politicians, Corporate Heads and apply the label to every single person who meets the 'qualifications'.

The 'American Terrorists' who are the most financially powerful and politically influential, should be considered the largest threat of all. They should all be the very first 'American Terrorists' targeted for murder by these drone strikes. I am sure there are many citizens who, financially, politically, and socially, fit the profile of the US government's definition of what qualifies someone to be labeled 'American Terrorists'.

If this were included in the profiling of American Citizens, I know we would see a major retreat in the aggression of labeling average citizens as 'American Terrorist'. Demanding the equal treatment for all citizens may just be a catalyst to wake up Americans and slow the government's rapid charge to create a modern day 'Police State'

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000


In the US though?! What the HELL?!

You should read the memo Rabbit...first, I got the impression from the OP that it was a legal doc...it's not, just a memo aimed at outlining a legal defense should the extra-judicial killings be legally challenged in US courts.

Second...It starts ...very first sentence...specifically specifying "Foriegn Countries"...it's not an opinion that is applicable within US borders.

Full memo here...
msnbcmedia.msn.com...

Originally posted by grey580

So should a domestic terrorist attack occur and the local state authorities were unable to respond to a overwhelming threat. A drone attack would be perfectly legal under the constitution.

Amazing what a few minutes of googling can lead you to find.

If a terrorist event occurs that takes out the Police, FBI and National Guard and full-fledged insurrection is occuring, the last of my worries will be the constitutionality of Drones within US borders...we can revisit that issue after we repel the invasion.

Originally posted by esteay812
reply to post by Swills

 

And if drones strikes are legally going to be allowed to kill Americans for supporting Al Qaeda shouldn't the first strikes be rained down on Washington DC itself? I mean who else is supporting Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria?

This is a very good angle. Defining the determining factors used to label any individual Americans as terrorist and a serious threat to the state.

"Senior Operational Leader" of Al-Qaida and on Foriegn Soil...where arrest would put lives at undue risk...

Really folks...I am not championing this...far from it...but we should start with the actual evidence. The Memo cited.

If drones were programed to target threats to America, Washington would be rubble by now.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
"associated force" eh? What the hell constitutes a leader?! The majority of Al Qaeda street fighters have a grade school education at best. That's not meant to insult but a statement of fact. Al Qaeda recruits to the lowest on most of their people so independent thought isn't a concern they have to deal with from afar, during an operation. I imagine they find it works for them since they seem to have more success hitting our people overseas than we have in hitting theirs most of the time.

Ummm.... Anyway...So how far does one need to go? Get suckered into a series of chats? Read Inspire a few times? Write ..ahem... "disloyal" messages on a wild internet website? Since WHEN did assassination of citizens inside the nation even get TALKED about?!

This stuff ..if accurate..is so far past reasonable control now it's just unbelievable. I swear I may some day do what I never could have imagined...I may really look at other nations to live. It's not there yet. Not by a good distance .....but this isn't getting better around here either.

Let's be honest ... this is worldwide war on dissent ..... this is clear after the Arab Astroturf Spring and the US allies backing Al Qaeda ...... without this the US empire would have a hard time justifying their global reach and war budget .....

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Tardacus

 

Those WMD's ended up in Syria who most recently threatened to use them on the rebels... Marked on the warheads "if found please return to Saddam"... They knew we were coming and bugged them out...

I remember this interesting story from 2010 which seems to corroborate the testimony given by Saddam's #2 general in 2006
pjmedia.com...

Doubt we will ever know for sure unless we can physically get our hands on what Syria has threatened to use..

While so many complained about WMDs not being found they never reminded the American people that the US supplied WMD, training for troops and even real time intel so poison gas could be used ..... yet I have never seen any outrage or criminal charges against US officials who supplied Saddam with WMD .... Gotta love those neocons and their selective memory......

one simple question : does the US consitution apply to people in a foreign soverign state ?

PS - if you claim it does , please cite the reason why

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
one simple question : does the US consitution apply to people in a foreign soverign state ?

PS - if you claim it does , please cite the reason why

The US Constitution is the "Law of the Land"....that land being US Soil...not to say we don't go to bat for folks arrested abroad, but US law doesn't extend to foriegn soil.

Now...International Law and Foriegn Laws apply...But Pakistan, Sudan etc. might complain, but they aren't about to charge the US for taking out terrorist insurgents in thier back yards....and the countries that WOULD charge us, we don't recognize...Ditto UN...they aren't going to go after the USA for sniping Al Qaida leaders.

Ladies and gentlemen, your 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner.



*sigh*

Some of you are wondering who constitutes as a terrorist.

Well, just take a look at who the government considers a domestic terrorist these days. If you are a vet, if you value the constitution, if you are a prepper and if you value smaller government and personal responsibility. They are going after people who haven't bought into the "recovery", who don't accept the two party system. People who are getting pissed off that the bankers and their puppet politicians are making us all slaves.

Troubled times are coming and they are getting ready for it.


--------------------


Oh by the way, in before the Bush excuses. There is no excuse, Obama is just as bad.