Obama memo justifies drone-war killing of Americans

[lewisipso]

Well, here you go.

Does President Barack Obama have the right to order the assassination of an American anywhere in the world—without any oversight from Congress or the courts, and even if that U.S. citizen is not actively plotting a specific terrorist attack? His administration, in a stunning Justice Department memo laying out a broad legal rationale for the country's ever-expanding drone war, says yes.
The 16-page document, obtained by NBC News, emerged days before John Brennan, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser and the foremost architect of America’s hugely controversial unmanned aerial vehicle war, goes before the Senate Intelligence Committee in a Thursday hearing on his confirmation as CIA director.
Obama campaigned in 2008 as a fierce critic of George W. Bush’s national security policies, but he has apparently learned to stop worrying and love nearly unfettered executive power—the literal power of life and death over fellow U.S. citizens overseas thought to be consorting with extremists groups that may be targeting America. So, under what circumstances does he have the right to act?
The memo says “an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government” (we see how well this worked in Benghazi) must decide that the target is a "senior operational leader" of al-Qaida or "associated forces," “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States,” and that an attempt to capture that individual is “infeasible.”
“Targeting a member of an enemy force who poses an imminent threat of violent attack to the United States is not unlawful. It is a lawful act of self-defense,” the document asserts.
"Imminent threat"? That seems reasonable and is a traditional standard for military action. Except that, as NBC investigative reporter Michael Isikoff notes, the memo adds that “the condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”
Instead, that previously mentioned "high-level official" can determine that the potential target was “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of an attack and that “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.”
Isikoff notes the memo does not define "activities" or "recently," leaving that up to the administration to determine on a case-by-case basis.

Obama memo justifies drone-war killing of Americans | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/se...hite_Paper.pdf

[bayern]

Can;'t say what I want.

[cajunguy]

Can;'t say what I want.

I WOULD say what I'm thinking, but black helicopters make me nervous - - - a little.

Come on 2016. IF this country survives that long.

.

[Odd]

Drone me first. I'm a bigger threat than a terrorist; I like this country.
Hell, I invited North Korea to target me, why should I fear a Democrat? That's my problem, I don't live in fear so I'm not politically useful to anyone.

[bayern]

Drone me first. I'm a bigger threat than a terrorist; I like this country.
Hell, I invited North Korea to target me, why should I fear a Democrat? That's my problem, I don't live in fear so I'm not politically useful to anyone.

Yeah, but when the ABC agencies start knocking on you door at 0-dark 30; TSA sets up a check point at your driveway and Drones circle your house, you may become suspicious, even paranoid.

[lewisipso]

Here's the bottom line. I'll say whatever I damn well please whenever I damn well please. I do however, possess a minute bit of diplomacy and can withhold comment to some extent. If anything I EVER say (outside of a direct threat) causes agencies to knock on doors at dark 30, or any other such activity, it would benefit the executing agency to be perfectly successful the first time. Better come prepared. Mistakes will not be tolerated and I won't allow a do over. I will also add that such activity will cause more than just a disagreement or just moving some furniture. Any and every body can stick that in the fn pipe and smoke it.

[Xiphos]

I don't mind Gitmo but domestic assassination doesn't sit well with me. What if you have the wrong guy? Hard to undo a Hellfire. I'd also not like being "collateral damage"...

[HudsonHawk]

I don't mind Gitmo but domestic assassination doesn't sit well with me. What if you have the wrong guy? Hard to undo a Hellfire. I'd also not like being "collateral damage"...

What's a little shrapnel between komrades?