We are well past the slippery slope stage and have plummeted off of the cliff. If you are not outraged you are not paying attention.

*laughs at the placement of this thread after the big debut of the " Judge, Jury and Executioner " one * What happened did the other draw too much heat?

So what if people have an underground bunker. There are folks that have storm shelters too yet couldn't those be construed the same way? If one's thought process is to not care about what the US government can do, then what does that say about you? That you are complacent and will believe anything the goverment tries to feed you? If you don't ask more questions, then what has happened to society today? Unless, of course, this is how they are creating ' zombies'.

Next on the list:

The NEW $ 1,500,000,000, 1,500,000 SQFT, NSA CyberSecurity Data Center in Utah:

• http://www.informationweek.com/government/security/nsa-to-build-15-billion-cybersecurity-da/221100260

As part of its mission, NSA monitors communications "signals" for intelligence related to national security and defense. Gaffney gave assurances that the work going on at the data center will protect civil liberties. "We will accomplish this in full compliance with the U.S. Constitution and federal law and while observing strict guidelines that protect the privacy and civil liberties of the American people," Gaffney said.

From same link.

Yeah, right. This "data center" probably has the technology to "take over" ALL Internet access points during a "National Emergency" declared by the President. Goes well with Mr. Obama's CyberSecurity Act of 2009.

Won't the next Republican President inherit this power if the precident is set by Obama? I wonder how the Libs will go for that. My guess is they will demand the repeal of any such power then. It is only a good thing to have when they are in charge. Just like the Military is better when they are in charge. They remember that the tanks, planes, ships and soldiers belong to them. And when they are in control the ends always justify the means.

Obama's march to complete dictatorship continues unabated. I am not sure what is more disturbing: what is happening or the enablers that find it acceptable. Welcome to the repeat of the late 1930's Germany.

Ido! That goes right along with the agreement in place with that Muslim Brotherhood organization to link all the U.S. schools. Yet this particular story that is definately NOT being talked about. *rolls my eyes and laughs*

AND, here are the reasons to be concerned with this "Mining Operation" in Utah:

http://occupycorporatism.com/cia-sponsored-trolls-monitor-internet-interact-with-users-to-discredit-factual-information/

L ots of shallow idiots near sighted war lovers just like you.

the gov. has NO IDEA They are creating more problems

by the use of drones..more enemies are created by the use

of the drones..

Look if you're not appalled by not only the thought process behind such a document then you're not paying enough attention. IF you aren't bothered by the vague word usage which most assume the definition of instead of asking then you're not paying enough attention...

Someone on the other topic said OH BUT ITS ONLY FOR AL-QAEDA NOT FOR CITIZENS. But the document itself states no necessity of proof or otherwise to be associated with or working with. Which alarms me greatly. Not only do we violate our laws with this but we slip down to the terrorists level.

How are we winning the war if we continue to drag ourselves lower and lower because of their actions?

If you sap liberties the terrorists win, it's that simple.

Technology is good, when used properly and wisely. The problem, as we have all found out, in this modern electronic age, is ANY technology can, and will, be abused, or misused. Now this. It seems to this old soldier/sailor/airman that "1984" is now here.

I'm just hoping I'm no longer a resident of this mortal coil, when all hell breaks loose, as it is rapidly heading towards.

That appalls me too John, the death count and proximity of what's going on in Syria can't hold a candle light to the seriousness of this matter.

This is a terrible memo, and the lack of outrage, I suspect, is because conservatives are by nature in favor of killing bad guys and liberals, by seige mentality, are hesitant to criticize Obama.

But just ask yourself - suppose the Russians decided that people running around America threaten them. Would you accord them the right to use drones here? And blow up whomever they pick out, with apologies for "collateral damage"? In that case, I doubt that there is one American who would accept Russian memos for laying out an argument for the legality of those acts.

And the lib sheep pat each other on the back as if this is a good thing. Wake up! This is just the begining. Wonder where that cow Fisty Red Head is?

That argument doesn't follow logically. No we wouldn't accord them the right to use drones here and we would shoot them down if they tried, meanwhile the Yemenis government has welcomed them and boasts about the program. If these countries had forces that could detain these individuals, we would turn to them, if they had the capability but refused, we would appeal it to international organizations and apply pressure, if not eventually considering it an act of war (as is what brought us to Afghanistan, the Taliban's refusal to hand over bin Laden when they were in a position to do so - this is also what would happen in a standoff between the US and Russia as you identify it). They lack control over broad areas of their territory, and in most cases as a result have given us the green light.

“I can find no way around the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the executive branch of our government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws while keeping the reasons for their conclusion a secret.”

Assassinating an American citizen without even bringing legal charges against them - That's fine with Obama.

'Waterboarding' a foreign terrorist that has killed American citizens and who might have information on a planned mass murder of more Americans - Oh, that's too horrible to consider - it would be 'torture', and against our core principles.

Clearly, anybody that doesn't agree with Obama's reasoning must be a 'right wing extremist'.

lol

Irish, you will not see Fisty Read Head here, for two reasons, first she has no clue what her stand on this is because PBO hasn't come out and said how great it is, and second well there is no second!

Killing an enemy on the battlefield who happens to be a US citizen versus torturing an individual in our custody. Yes the latter is unacceptable and the former is acceptable. The only real debate is on defining the battlefield and the enemy. So, are we at war with al Qaeda or are we not, and were these individuals in question AQ or not? If the answer to both is yes, there's not much of an issue here.

Anybody remember this ?

"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in 'rightwing extremist activity,' saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias."

Wouldn't that be enough to get somebody killed?

Only if it wasn't feasible for law enforcement to capture them, which has pretty much always been the law enforcement standard (they can shoot armed suspects evading and resisting arrest...).

Michael don't totally disagree with you, but killing somebody without proof they are what we think they are leaves a person dead.

I truly believe that going though the proper channels (briefing congress and what not) that something like this could be justified.

But giving any one person this power without checks and balances is not going to turn out good in the end.

I will quote skibum609 from below

"Sorry buffoon but this step combined with the proposed new gun laws is paralleling 1930's Germany. There isn't a political party nor a politician on earth I would trust to do this. I wouldn't even trust me."

Mike,

You can skirt around all you want but the writing is on the wall. A massive push to ban citizens from owning firearms for their own protection and the DOJ giving the green light to kill anyone they claim to be a terrorist. Yep, pretty much 1930's Germany written all over it. And for those who say over and over "that will never happen".....well just take a look at what is already happening. And since when have people put so much trust in our government? The same government and leaders that lie at every turn, and we want to allow them to have more power?

King Obama strikes again. You think he really paid attention to his oath of office?

yuppp...the politicians ...and their fear of not making the public live in fear...remember that iraq...was on the verge of destroying the United States with those WMD's...and George Bush saved us all...

Oh this whole freaking Drone thing goes way past just the use of drones and attack on Americans. Obama has continued on with what all the wars and attacks you Libs had screamed at Bush for. Obama has created 1000 fold or more terrorists than he has killed. You folks need to check into his own special army that only answers to him and his cronies. They are called Joint Special Operations Command (JSoc), this model of US warfare that strikes at civilians and insurgents alike – in 70 countries. Interviewed former JSoc assassins, are shell-shocked at how the "kill lists" they are given keep expanding, even as they eliminate more and more people.

Our conventional forces are subject to international laws of war: they are accountable for crimes in courts martial; and they run according to a clear chain of command. As much as the US military may fall short of these standards at times, it is a model of lawfulness compared with JSoc, which has far greater scope to undertake the commission of extra-legal operations – and unimaginable crimes.

JSoc morphs the secretive, unaccountable mercenary model of private military contracting, (like Blackwater was) into a hybrid with the firepower and intelligence backup of our full state resources. JSoc is now also seeking more "flexibility" to expand its operations globally.

JSoc operates outside the traditional chain of command; it reports directly to the president of the United States and is accountable only to him. Since he also denies what they do they really are accountable to nobody except their own conscience and if that kicks in then they are done for

Plain Bobby,

Yeah and Barry is saving us all with his winning smile. Dick head.

Let's see: Apparently, according to the latest liberal doctrine, it's horrible and inhumane to kill a murdering terrorist, but quite ok to slaughter millions of innocent, defenseless unborn babies. The contradiction of the malfunctioning "progressive" mind never ceases to amaze me.

No,No,No,No and did I mention HeIl No...
Lets' say you and all of your friends 6 to 10 maybe are in a field target practicing with your weapons.

Then lets say that a satellite fixxes on your location and zooms in, target marks and gives descriptive intell on your weapons as being assault weapons.

Displays' your location as within reach of a local province without providing the terrain which clearly in your eyes has a solid dirt backdrop between you and that populated area.

This alone could mandate a Drone strike against you.

Have I made myself clear?

If not, read it again idiot...

If only people would read the actual memo. it clearly says the condition would have to be when the person is "clearly unobtainable". that would mean they not only have to be NOT in America, but they would have to be in a place where it would be dangerous or impossible or unwise to send troops or law enforcement. If an american terrorist is hiding under your bed, they will not be using drones. they will send the swat team. What part of this do repubs not understand? or do they understand but want to complain and call names anyway? who knows?

These attacks by drone, crusie missle and JSoc special forces account easily for thousands of women and childs deaths each year.

You folks should check out the works and reporting from Jeremy Scahill and also check out the film Dirty Wars by Scahill and Rowley

Also check out this page(cut and past to browser)

guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/03/jsoc-obama-secret-assassins?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Another point I do not see addressed in this article, is, Who gave them the right to make up a de facto law, Laws are supposed to be done by way of the Legislative Branch! Executive Orders as defined by the Supreme Court are the Presidents right to tell his Cabinet, how to run their department. The President also takes an Oath to uphold our Constitution! This action appears to be too vauge and has us violating US citzens of their due process and the ability to face their accuser! I have no issues with the actual killing a US citizen that has taken up arms against us and then killed in actual combat against us! These drone attacks are happening in countries that we are not at war with, and we are violating their sovriegnty by these attacks, and creating unneeded hatred towards the US!

Does anybody not see that these US citizens were killed in Yemen, a country that we have diplomatic relations with! How can we say that we were not able to arrest, capture etc., as per the drone memos 2nd standard states! How can we not see the unrest and unease we cause in countries that we are not at WAR with! These are the three standards: (1) where an informed, high level official of the U.S. government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States; (2) where a capture operation would be infeasible – and where those conducting the operation continue to monitor whether capture becomes feasible; and (3) where such an operation would be conducted consistent with applicable law of war principles. In these circumstances, the ‘realities’ of the conflict and the weight of the government’s interest in protecting its citizens from an imminent attack are such that the Constitution would not require the government to provide further process to such a U.S. citizen before using lethal force.” I can only assume by the vagueness of these standards and the fact we have an individual making the decisions of life and death which I now read Panetta saying is the President himself but the standard vaguely states that the US has given someone the ability to be judge and jury without due process! The 16 year old boy was "assasinated" while eating, was he the Target? Read article: ibtimes.com/us-doj-memo-outlines-legal-basis-drone-strikes-against-american-citizens-1062386

" 2010, Al-Awlaki’s father attempted to sue the United States government after his son was placed on the CIA’s targeted kill list. However, the case was dismissed from courts after the White House invoked the state secrets privilege." The son would of been possibly 14 if that happened before his birthday on August 25th. This amazes me that our country was in fear that there was an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States by him! The son was at a restaurant when killed, so he obviously was under observation, since it did not happen at his home or at a training camp,etc, it sounds as though he could easily been abducted and brought to trial! I do not oppose killing a US citizen that is killed in the actual act of fighting with us, but I do oppose the fact that we are killing our citizens on the basis that we "Think" they might attack us, because they do not agree with our government! We are all in trouble if that is to be the standard used against all who are opposed to our governments actions! Is this what we have in store for us if we allow this to happen now in our name, as it will become easier to for our government to take the next step if this one is already in place!

More insight into the drone attack against the boy: dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/10/15/denver-teens-death-by-drone-remains-shrouded-in-secrecy/

The US federal government is the biggest terr@rist threat the world has ever seen! Does anyone wonder why our country is the most hated in the world. My guess has to do with our horrible policies around the world. These policies include but are not limited to drone strikes.

This is a partial post from a post @TrustVerify on a similar thread: Enclosed is a partial list of the children that have been murdered in our name.

The List of Names was compiled by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

CIA Drone Strikes in Pakistan 2004–2013

Total US strikes: 362
Obama strikes: 310
Total reported killed: 2,629-3,461
Civilians reported killed: 475-891
Children reported killed: 176
Total reported injured: 1,267-1,431

US Covert Action in Yemen 2002–2013

Total confirmed US operations (all): 54-64
Total confirmed US drone strikes: 42-52
Possible extra US operations: 135-157
Possible extra US drone strikes: 77-93
Total reported killed (all): 374-1,112
Total civilians killed (all): 72-177
Children killed (all): 27-37

US Covert Action in Somalia 2007–2013

Total US strikes: 10-23
Total US drone strikes: 3-9
Total reported killed: 58-170
Civilians reported killed: 11-57
Children reported killed: 1-3

Drone Infographics

Interactive map

by Drones Team

This map details the locations of CIA drone strikes in the remote Pakistani tribal areas.

Partial List of Children Killed

PAKISTAN

Name | Age | Gender

Noor Aziz | 8 | male
Abdul Wasit | 17 | male
Noor Syed | 8 | male
Wajid Noor | 9 | male
Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male
Ayeesha | 3 | female
Qari Alamzeb | 14| male
Shoaib | 8 | male
Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male
Tariq Aziz | 16 | male
Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male
Maezol Khan | 8 | female
Nasir Khan | male
Naeem Khan | male
Naeemullah | male
Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male
Azizul Wahab | 15 | male
Fazal Wahab | 16 | male
Ziauddin | 16 | male
Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male
Fazal Hakim | 19 | male
Ilyas | 13 | male
Sohail | 7 | male
Asadullah | 9 | male
khalilullah | 9 | male
Noor Mohammad | 8 | male
Khalid | 12 | male
Saifullah | 9 | male
Mashooq Jan | 15 | male
Nawab | 17 | male
Sultanat Khan | 16 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male
Noor Mohammad | 15 | male
Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male
Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male
Abdullah | 18 | male
Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male
Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male
Shahbuddin | 15 | male
Yahya Khan | 16 |male
Rahatullah |17 | male
Mohammad Salim | 11 | male
Shahjehan | 15 | male
Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male
Bakht Muneer | 14 | male
Numair | 14 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Taseel Khan | 18 | male
Zaheeruddin | 16 | male
Qari Ishaq | 19 | male
Jamshed Khan | 14 | male
Alam Nabi | 11 | male
Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male
Rahmatullah | 14 | male
Abdus Samad | 17 | male
Siraj | 16 | male
Saeedullah | 17 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Salman | 12 | male
Fazal Wahab | 18 | male
Baacha Rahman | 13 | male
Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male
Iftikhar | 17 | male
Inayatullah | 15 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Adnan | 16 | male
Najibullah | 13 | male
Naeemullah | 17 | male
Hizbullah | 10 | male
Kitab Gul | 12 | male
Wilayat Khan | 11 | male
Zabihullah | 16 | male
Shehzad Gul | 11 | male
Shabir | 15 | male
Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male
Shafiullah | 16 | male
Nimatullah | 14 | male
Shakirullah | 16 | male
Talha | 8 | male

YEMEN

Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female
Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female
Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female
Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female
Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male
Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male
Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female
Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female
Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female
Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female
Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male
Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female
Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female
Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female
Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female
Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male
Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female
Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female
Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male
Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male
Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female
AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male
Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male
Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male
Nasser Salim | 19 *****These deaths have occurred in our names***** The comment I have also seen is that we are at war and also have no treaties with these countries ! I haven't noticed that we have declared war on any of these countries and you might look again at the fact that we do have some treaties with at least 2 of these countries, which tells us that we have diplomatic relations with them! How good will those relations be if we are attacking countries we are not in a war with? I also point out the escalation of these drone attacks since President Obama has taken over! 362 total strikes in that time and during Obama's time 310.

• 9

• !

#1.94 - Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:12 PM EST

Partial List of Children Killed

PAKISTAN

Name | Age | Gender

Noor Aziz | 8 | male
Abdul Wasit | 17 | male
Noor Syed | 8 | male
Wajid Noor | 9 | male
Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male
Ayeesha | 3 | female
Qari Alamzeb | 14| male
Shoaib | 8 | male
Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male
Tariq Aziz | 16 | male
Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male
Maezol Khan | 8 | female
Nasir Khan | male
Naeem Khan | male
Naeemullah | male
Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male
Azizul Wahab | 15 | male
Fazal Wahab | 16 | male
Ziauddin | 16 | male
Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male
Fazal Hakim | 19 | male
Ilyas | 13 | male
Sohail | 7 | male
Asadullah | 9 | male
khalilullah | 9 | male
Noor Mohammad | 8 | male
Khalid | 12 | male
Saifullah | 9 | male
Mashooq Jan | 15 | male
Nawab | 17 | male
Sultanat Khan | 16 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male
Noor Mohammad | 15 | male
Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male
Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male
Abdullah | 18 | male
Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male
Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male
Shahbuddin | 15 | male
Yahya Khan | 16 |male
Rahatullah |17 | male
Mohammad Salim | 11 | male
Shahjehan | 15 | male
Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male
Bakht Muneer | 14 | male
Numair | 14 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Taseel Khan | 18 | male
Zaheeruddin | 16 | male
Qari Ishaq | 19 | male
Jamshed Khan | 14 | male
Alam Nabi | 11 | male
Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male
Rahmatullah | 14 | male
Abdus Samad | 17 | male
Siraj | 16 | male
Saeedullah | 17 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Salman | 12 | male
Fazal Wahab | 18 | male
Baacha Rahman | 13 | male
Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male
Iftikhar | 17 | male
Inayatullah | 15 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Adnan | 16 | male
Najibullah | 13 | male
Naeemullah | 17 | male
Hizbullah | 10 | male
Kitab Gul | 12 | male
Wilayat Khan | 11 | male
Zabihullah | 16 | male
Shehzad Gul | 11 | male
Shabir | 15 | male
Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male
Shafiullah | 16 | male
Nimatullah | 14 | male
Shakirullah | 16 | male
Talha | 8 | male

YEMEN

Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female
Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female
Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female
Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female
Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male
Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male
Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female
Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female
Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female
Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female
Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male
Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female
Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female
Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female
Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female
Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male
Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female
Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female
Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male
Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male
Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female
AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male
Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male
Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male
Nasser Salim | 19 *****These deaths have occurred in our names***** The comment I have also seen is that we are at war and also have no treaties with these countries ! I haven't noticed that we have declared war on any of these countries and you might look again at the fact that we do have some treaties with at least 2 of these countries, which tells us that we have diplomatic relations with them! How good will those relations be if we are attacking countries we are not in a war with? I also point out the escalation of these drone attacks since President Obama has taken over! 362 total strikes in that time and during Obama service, was responsible for 310 of those!

Sorry for the double post I don't know how it happened!

I would also like to point out that I and many others feel that Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, a decorated veteran of four combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan who is accused of the mass killings is total Bullshlt.

Many feel that these killings were the work of JSocs- Joint Special Operations Command which in the past have shown that they have killed like this before then tried to cover it up. Take a look into JSOC-Obama's secret assassins.

Here is a start for you

guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/03/jsoc-obama-secret-assassins?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

youtube.com/watch?v=Asa0mT180UY

Sort of reeks of Spielberg's Minority Report. I understand the government wanting to prevent terror attacks but this DOJ paper is extremely broad and let's face it, our government is not the most trustworthy entity on the planet.

People (conspiracy theorists) have been telling you about this since its inception back in '11, and all you have to do is read the damn NDAA for yourself and you get every answer to every one of these "questions"

It Does apply to all Americans on or off American soil.-NDAA Act of 2012

There does not need to be real justification, all that is "needed" is the Presidents secret assumpton that your "tied in" with some terror cell. -NDAA Act of 2012

There's no other way to say it: This is tyranny. A President who has the power to kill anyone he wishes, completely outside of law and the Constitution, is a dictatorial tyrant. He is a "king." This is precisely the kind of thing our Founding Fathers fought against in breaking away from the King of England. Our ancestors were fed up with secret trials, secret executions, secret court proceedings and suffering under the whims of one man whose power was completely unchecked.

If you believe the president has the power to order U.S. citizens executed far from any battlefield with no charges or trial, then it’s truly hard to conceive of any asserted power you would find objectionable

This isn't even an Obama issue, by the way: it's an issue of the next President who comes to power, and the one after that. With this Justice Department memo, the office of the President is being granted permanent power to order the killing of any person added to a list. This power is wildly unconstitutional and illegal, yet if it remains unopposed, it is a power that will be retained by the office of the President and used by future Presidents.

I'm not sure where in the Constitution it says, "...unless a legal memo says otherwise." The U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights lay out immutable rules, limits and guidelines for government. But when an oppressive government regime decides to utterly ignore the Constitution and the limits of power described therein, it becomes a dictatorial tyranny. We are there now in America. Dont believe me?,well just look at the article this post is on...

Love my country...Fear my government......now more than ever.

I would also like to know if in fact the President is the individual who signed off on these deaths! Who is the culpable person, in ordering these deaths, bring it out in the open! I can only say that they are giving all citizens a new way of killing others here in the United States! They can say that they killed someone because in town because they shot the finger at them and they "THOUGHT" they were in imminent danger of attack later at their house, even though there is no proof that it was actually going to happen! What are we saying by allowing this to happen? Have we fallen into the abyss so that we can kill someone that believes differently? I dread the ramifications of allowing this to continue in our name!!!!

I just wonder why an American citizen (wherever they are) is not afforded the right of due process but a non-American terrorist being held in Gitmo is? I don't think anyone could tell me anything that would make me believe that's right.

Here is a quote from monticello.org, attributed to Thomas Jefferson:

@Jo Great point!

If......If.....If...........these 'drones' or whatever can be used so successfully why haven't they been used to eleminate hunted persons in foreign countries?????? Why have we spent so many years and the lives of 'lower class' unable to find jobs, Americans looking for these foreign threats (that were never found). We currently have another 'threat' so why not just take him out and stop wasting our resources.

If a guidance system is needed for the drones the draft would be reenacted with draftees from the upper-crust drafted first. W's daughters would be the first drone pilots.

Not always on the backs of "poah folks"

garbageman you are a liar. You have the quote and the site, but you failed to mention that the site said this:

Status: We have not found any evidence that Thomas Jefferson said or wrote, "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny," or any of its listed variations.

http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/when-governments-fear-people-there-libertyquotation

Stop lying!!!!!! This did not come from Thomas Jefferson.

We execute traitors and turncoats by fair means or foul, by drones or by strangulation. And we dish out the same punishments to enemies whose activities are deemed not conducive to our safety and well being. Children killed; a drop in the ocean compared to children killed in Dresden and Hiroshima. Try listing those garbageman-2736857 .

I said attributed to him, how is that a lie? Do you have proof that he didn't say it! These are others the quote has been attributed to at monticello.org.!

Other attributions: Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine

No issues with this policy?

Right, right.

We can send a Seal Team into a nuclear country like Pakistan, without permission, in an attempt to detain a senior operational leader of Al-Quida like Osama Bin Laden but...

We can't take the time to legally indict a citizen of the United States of America a traitor (punishable by death) prior to executing him with a drone?

Sounds legit.

comment above was for @TOM!

Once upon a time, I thought I lived in the land of the free and the brave...

@tomilvento More from monticello .org and why the comment is attributed to him!!! This quotation is vaguely similar to Jefferson's comment in an 1825 letter to William Short: "Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent."^[5] To date however, the most likely source of this quotation appears to be a series of debates on socialism published in 1914, in which John Basil Barnhill said, "Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty." @ABDELKADER these were countries we were at war with

John Doe 111184

I don't get it? Mexico has been poisoning Americans for over 40 years with their chemical (illegal drugs) warfare on US citizens. No one has said a thing about that.

John, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Objections to our sacrosanct government sponsored social "wars" is not allowed.

Our wars on crime, poverty, illiteracy and drugs have been abject failures. We are not allowed to criticize the massive failures these enterprises have been, especially here on PMSNBC.

What's even more terrifying is they are now in the process of waging a new "war on guns" against us. To that our criminal government is threatening this abomination of drone attacks against American citizens.

But of course, the unwashed masses want even more incompetent government to create more useless social wars that consume tens of trillions of dollars with no significant results.

Sounds like OBAMA just watched the JUDGE DREDD movie.

Now he wants to play judge, jury, and executioner.

Obama is a lightweight in everything he does.... for a constitutional scholar he lacks basic understanding of our rights.....WE DO NOT NEED OR WANT A KING.

Go back to Kenya if you want to be KING.

@ JimSpence Another of those secrets that I have also long wondered about is, why we are unable to rid ourselves of our own domestic terrorists! I am talking about the Gangs that terrorize and kill innocent people, we have been plagued by them for decades! I hope I do not give the President any ideas to use drones against them! As I would have to question his Constitutional right to do that, even if I think we have waited long enough for a solution to this problem! They are attacking innocent civilians daily in our country, and have caused numerous deaths! These aren't "imagined"imminent attacks against our citizens but actual real attacks! As much as I would like to see their ilk removed from the face of our planet, I would have to fight for their right to due process and to face their accuser!

I have also long wondered why we are unable to rid ourselves of our own domestic terrorists! I am talking about the Gangs that terrorize and kill innocent people, we have been plagued by them for decades! I hope I do not give the President any ideas to use drones against them! As I would have to question his Constitutional right to do that, even if I think we have waited long enough for a solution to this problem!

Garbageman His Constitutional right to do that? What about his Constitutional right to attack people in countries that we are not at war with? This goes way past just drone attacks on Americans as other humans have rights also. Granted many may have it coming but what gives Obama the right to cluster bomb whole villages in Yeman? He has no right and I feel he is going against the Constitution by not having Congressional approval. Obama has his own private secret assassins and many times they hit the wrong house or village then try to cover it up. Tell the man that had to watch these hitman dig bullets out of his wife so they could try and blame the Taliban. Then after they are caught in they lie they/Admiral McRaven offer a sheep for payment.

we also have along with dozens of other bogus attacks one in Yemen, where a missile strike had killed a group that the US had called "al-Qaida". "What was discovered, were the remnants of Tomahawk cruise missiles and cluster bombs … some of them bearing the label 'Made in the USA', and the photos were distributed to international media outlets."

Fourteen women and 21 children were killed. "Whether anyone actually active in al-Qaida was killed remains hotly contested

This is part of an article at: rt.com/usa/news/obama-ndaa-detention-president-288/ and is shared with you to show you what some have said about the NDAA! "The NDAA, an otherwise mundane annual bill that lays out the use of funds for the Department of Defense, has come under attack during the Obama administration for the introduction of a provision last year that allows the military to detain United States citizens indefinitely without charge or trial for mere suspicions of ties to terrorism. Under the 2012 NDAA’s Sec. 1021, Pres. Obama agreed to give the military the power to arrest and hold Americans without the writ of habeas corpus, although he promised with that year’s signing statement that his administration would not abuse that privilege.

In response to the controversial indefinite detention provision from last year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) introduced an amendment in December 2012 that would have forbid the government from using military force to indefinitely detain Americans without trial under the 2013 NDAA. Although that provision, dubbed the “Feinstein Amendment,” passed the Senate unanimously, a select panel of lawmakers led by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Michigan) stripped it from the final version of the NDAA two week later before it could clear Congress. In exchange, Congress added a provision, Sec. 1029, that claims to ensure that “any person inside the United States” is allowed their constitutional rights, including habeas corpus, but supporters of the Feinstein Amendment say that the swapped wording does nothing to erase the indefinite detention provision from the previous year.

“Saying that new language somehow ensures the right to habeas corpus – the right to be presented before a judge – is both questionable and not enough. Citizens must not only be formally charged but also receive jury trials and the other protections our Constitution guarantees. Habeas corpus is simply the beginning of due process. It is by no means the whole,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) said after the Feinstein Amendment was removed."

@fishman you haven't read my other posts! You would see that I am talking about "them" claiming that he has the Constitutional right to carry out those attacks!

Once Obama destroys the second amendment to the Constitution

We are all toast!

SallyAnn-4595694,

Please be careful of who you talk to and where you hang out. It may get you killed. How many people are expectable as collateral damage in the United States or abroad? This idea of giving our government the power to kill anyone they suspect is a threat could cover a large range of the American people. There is a reason we have liberty and freedoms in this country and letting the government stomp on them for any reason is wrong. I remember a while back the President telling the Russian President I will be able to do more after the election or something to that affect. Is this what he was talking about?

This just confirms what many of us have been saying ever since the 2012 NDAA came out.

How many people/terrorists has the Patriot Act caught and WTF are we giving up our civil liberties for? How much money does it cost to invade our privacy ALL FOR NOTHING? Why can we not cut that chit out of the budget?

If a government is THAT corrupt maybe it should get overthrown.

How is this for a T.J. quote "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty . . . And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Next the Government wants to disarm the civilian population by destroying the second amendment to the

Constitution of the United Sates than it will be either conform our else

ALL HAIL BIG BROTHER!

garbageman-2736857

@ JimSpence Another of those secrets that I have also long wondered about is, why we are unable to rid ourselves of our own domestic terrorists! I am talking about the Gangs that terrorize and kill innocent people, we have been plagued by them for decades!

Gman, I have been attacking our dysfunctional social wars for years.

There can only be two reasons why our wars on crime, drugs, illiteracy and poverty are such failures.

1. They can’t be fixed by our incompetent government.

2. The government doesn’t want to fix them to continue the never-ending crises they so embrace.

My money is on number 2. This way they can continuously bombard us with chaos and crisis to give the impression we need more and more government to protect us from the evils they self-perpetuate.

The solution to all of our problems is education.

Crime, drugs, poverty, violence are all a result of illiteracy. Most Americans read at an 8^th grade level, most high-school graduates don’t know how to use—there, their or they’re—correctly in a sentence. Most American’s can’t calculate 30% of 460 in their head.

Many will argue it’s the parents fault, which to a degree it is. The problem is we are functionally into our second generation of graduates of our criminal education system, we have illiterate parents trying to teach illiterate children. This is a volatile situation.

When we spend more than any nation, other than Switzerland, on education and our students rate in the bottom 1/3 in math, science and reading compared to other OECD countries, something is seriously wrong.

Of course the Liberals/Progressives continue to be indoctrinated in the belief that more government is the answer. This is their shame.

@ JimSpence I also vote for #2, as they are ways to promote" JOBS" and our false economy!

@garbageman, Got that rant off your chest. WOW!!! You must feel better!

Get down to your comunnity centre and run for office if that is what you think is true ,is absolute!

Feels good leting of steam in front of your computer! Get out there and show people how it should be.

I Dare you! Ps. you could just post an e-mail address instead of paste and post HUGE comments that no one in thier right mind would even contemplate to read!!

For sure. What justifies association or terrorist activity if proof isn't required in the case? What stops them if the oversight is completely ignored and courts have no purpose in this matter.

Why is this an issue? Didnt everyone hear that Obama is friends with Jay-Z? Now that is real news.

You can blame all the brainless idiots that voted for this thug.

Come on say the work that you want to use? If he was a white
guy or republican you would be all for this.

bush had the attorney general make documents that said it was ok to send Americans to secret prisons. didn't hear these guys complain then lol

here is a little hint. the reason republicans lost the last two elections, and will lose the next two or more can be seen in the posts above.

first, nobody believes them anymore.

second, people are just tired of your name calling and dooms day messages. your insults etc.

third, they are tired of your hate.

you think you can win points for your insults, but all you get is lost.

I don't know what has happened to this country??? I do not own a gun but am thinking of getting onel Take away the guns control the banking system this has Germany written all over it!!! I am scared to death about this, health care. it all maybe they will push it too far and we will have a revolution?

George PaulJohn,

I am a conservative. I lost confidence in both parties. Both parties bring about the same draconian laws to restrict our freedoms. Both political parties have endangered our way of life by running up a massive debt that can never be repaid. I think that is the real reason our politicians are attacking the second amendment right now. They know there will be hell to pay when everyone becomes instantly broke due to the coming economic collapse.

I see this as the government making a legal preparation for when and if The People, who have been slowly having their rights taken away, to be able to attack and kill us when we decide to revolt against our government whether peacefully or armed. They are protecting themselves as they make themselves into dictators. By the way, "they" are the wealthy who have priced the presidency and other top offices out of 90% of Americans price range. "They" are the wealthy who have been voted in again and again and have created family dynasties in our government as father passes office down to son, wife or whatever to ensure they control the laws. Their laws mostly benefit the wealthy and every once in a while they toss the rest of us a bone or two as we wait for something to trickle down to us. They dazzle us with their theatrics as they carve more and more of the pie out for themselves leaving us the stale crust. They are the ones who hide their money in offshore accounts to avoid taxes but also just in case they fail and must flee the country or be brought to justice by The People if their plans fail. They are the ones who sent jobs overseas so they can profit from cheap labor while they crush any businesses that attempt to remain American in hopes of turning our country into a Third World trash dump to someday exploit us when we become desperate for work.

George, you have to be a troll. Anybody who is not outraged or at least very very nervous about our President and "informed high level officials" having blanket authorization to kill anyone, anywhere, anytime, without having to tell anybody anything about their reasoning is either a fool or complicit in this very obvious, blatant violation of the 14th amendment. Mark my words that if any Republican had ever done this the entire country, INCLUDING AND ESPECIALLY CONSERVATIVES, would be screaming and calling for not only impeachment but also imprisonment. The only reason some liberals are not screaming is because they don't want to admit that they weren't just wrong but HORRIBLY WRONG. Obama also now has his "brown shirts"...213 of our 18-24 year old youths who have been trained to obey Obama absolutely and without question and are under the umbrella of FEMA(which is the agency that will be in charge of coordinating and enforcing martial law). History has shown us what comes next and it won't be pretty just ask the Jews what they think of Hitler. Obama has declared that his goal is to obliterate the Republican party so I fully expect that the first order of business will be rounding up any conservative in any office of authority to be shipped off "for their own protection" and never seen again. When they show up at my door they will get a good dose of the second amendment.

Interesting observations George, but what you just laid out completely describes liberals, especially the hate part. Liberals are also the biggest hypocrites.

"They claim the right to kill any American for, basically, any reason. This should terrify anyone who is conscious!"

No and no! Read the report. Your comments are silly.

When a citizen joins the enemy in a major way and is fighting against us in another country, I say they are fair game. It is not an assignation. It is warfare.

Having said that, of course we should ask questions about this policy (it is not a law, it is a policy). And that is what we are doing right now in a free society - discussing and asking questions.

timothy clark: You are an absolute moron if you think this issue has anything to do with race or political affiliation... an absolute close minded, room-temperature IQ, moron.

When a citizen joins the enemy in a major way and is fighting against us in another country, I say they are fair game. It is not an assignation. It is warfare.

So why is there no judicial review before or after the kill?

Because THEY SAY you are a terrorist doesn't mean it's true. Pardon us for wanting some check and balance, due process, and at the very least verification of their claims.

And according to Bush era Law and the NDAA, the entire USA is apart of the war zone. We are all potential enemy combatants even here. It won't be 10 years an they'll be lobbing missles on us here, or snipering us, or kidnapping us in the middle of night and shipping us to GITMO.

Sheep trust their govt. Patriots question them at every turn. It doesn't matter if a RepubliBLood or DemoCrip has this power...there has to be accountability and a process of verification of claims. They are already killing Americans with no proof presented to anyone. They say it, then they kill you...no questions asked.

That's tyranny.

In my view, the Bush administration attempts to implement heightened security for the country against threats of further attacks in light of 9/11 (NDAA, Patriot Act, TSA), present to me an entirely different MOTIVATION than what I consider to be Obama's calculated attempts to force the nation to accept his drive to achieve unchecked authority. The underlying motivation to protect the country, whether or not you agree with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, versus underlying motivation to disassemble the country from within for highly suspect reasons, is an ominous distinction.

Tyranny is what you get when you are so afraid of the world that any line of defense becomes plausible.

9/11 generated such hysteria in the American populace that the Patriot Act with its blatant removal of of civil rights and rendition for torture became the norm. The same people posting here about the tyrannical nature of their government under Obama are exactly the same people who signed off on torture (euphemised as "enhanced interrogation") as a plausible method for dealing with terrorism. This killing at a distance at the whim of your representatives is simply the logical extension of that sort of thinking. What did you expect?

All can say is welcome to the world your fear and cowardice created.

I assume you are reading something that is not available to me as a Citizen.

The Federal Government has the obligation and duty to protect me as a Citizen. What is the big deal about using Dones to watch someone who is contmplating harming me an American Citizen?

If they see something that makes the suspect a threat to other Citizens then the apprioate action should be taken. It is done every day with Police Offices using actual eysballs instead of TV Camera's.

The Government is not going to kill anyone who is not a threat to our security unless it is an accident. In combat they call it fracticide but it means killing by mistake.

All this talk about invasion of privacy is good unless the Government prevents a mass killing etc. Then it will be good for the Country. You can't have it both ways.

Blaming the President for a department of Justice position paper is a very large stretch of the facts. The Government draft these proposed position papers all the time because they have to PLAN for a situation. If something happens in the world someone looks on the shelf or computer to find the PLAN. That is the way it works.

Carl, you need to get out more. The drone program and kill list are all approved directly by Obama. People like you will cause us all to become slaves to our gov't.

Tomilvento, You need to get your news from more than one source. Legal experts including Judges all over America are up in arms over this. One Judge has already stated that while this report specifically states that these operations are going on in other countries there is nothing to prevent them from doing the same thing inside our borders. In another judges words ... if this President does not disturb you with this policy of killing Americans without due process in clear violation of the Constitution then nothing our gov't does will ever disturb you.

Seriously you guys. You need to get news from at least 6 different sources in order to be able to piece together all of the information you need to understand what is happening. I recommend checking at least 2 conservative sources, 2 liberal sources, and if you can find them, 2 independent sources. I watched The Daily Show last night and I have to say that when John Stewart tells you that you need to be afraid of something that Obama does you ignore the warning at your own peril. Go look up the video of his show from last night and I think that you will sing a different tune.

Uh...did you even read the article?

No one is silent. It is being printed and on the news. There is an active discussion about the Obama administration.

Texas... this story sat dormant for months - while the election campaign was in full swing - it is only now they are even beginning to bring the stories out and only because of the nomination - not because of the history of it.

If anyone isn't getting a little worried they aren't paying attention. Your civil liberties are being tossed out the window in huge chunks.

There are 36 comments here and 1100+ on the boo hoo gays in BSA story. Sorry but Obama is getting a free pass for doing something the Progressives would be marching on Washington if Bush did. This story came out yesterday and a small blurb appears on this Progressive swinbe site 30 hours later. They care more about Ashley Judd.

Bush did do it, and we supported him then too (Obama was chastised in 2008 actually for arguing that Bush should be doing more of it....).

@ michael YOUR STUPID!!!

Michael, wrong, US citizens were not targeted and killed by drone attacks under George Bush.

I'm pretty sure there's a media story right at the top of the page here. Isn't there?

@Tim, did you mean "you're stupid"?

@Gary - November 3, 2002; US drone kills 6 including an AMCIT, in Yemen. Go ahead and google it.

See post 1.14. It is a legitimate concern that we are not more outraged about this. Simply because Obama is a nice guy who supports healthcare for all, a path to citizenship for hard-working abused peasants, and international peace, we ought not to allow him to expand the power of government assassines in this illegal, unconstitutional manner.

Actually Bush what the ACLU union was pissed at Bush for, was no warrant wiring taping Americans that were having conversations with people overseas.

Gary-302710

Michael, wrong, US citizens were not targeted and killed by drone attacks under George Bush.

I'll re-post with more details since people still seem to be liking Gary's post apparently just flat-out ignoring the post three posts later that demonstrates this is flatly wrong. The first use of an attack drone outside Afghanistan was on 3 November 2002. Among those targeted in this strike, authorized by President Bush and publicly defended on 10 November 2002 by Condoleeza Rice as Constitutional given "the realities of the new war we are facing..." was Ahmed Hijazi, an American citizen believed to be connected to the Cole Bombings.

If the FBI can take a person prisoner they will do it .if
they cannot they they will used a drone strike. It as simple as that but it has
to be overseas. We are talking about terrorists not some country bunking
holding a kid hostage so he can get some air time.

Just because you have an American passport does not make you
a good American.

Timothy Clark,

I think Timothy Clark is a terrorist. I heard he is conspiring to meet with some shady people the next he travels out of the country. Good luck the next time you travel Timothy.

Bush didn't order the killing of U.S. citizens. Obama just gave this country a first down that path sorry to say. Terrorist or not by violating our own values of Habeus Corpus etc regardless of geographic setting or their treason we aren't any better then a 3rd world country. So let's not just shake our heads the first time and then say its ok from then on.

Yes Trent, Bush did. 3 November 2002.

Timothy Clark......Just because you have an American passport does not make you
a good American.

That's a true statement, but....and it's a big but......you are still an American AND still have all the rights and privileges as such. These rights and privileges cannot be taken away on the suspicions of any person...not even the President!

Michael -

He happened to be in the same car with about 5 known Arab alQaida operatives. He was not the primary target, but was collateral damage. Too bad this doesn't fit in with your worship of Obama and hatred of Bush.

>

From THE WASHINGTON POST -- washington

Hijazi held U.S. citizenship and was also a citizen of an unidentified Middle Eastern country, a senior administration official confirmed. He was not born in the United States, but resided here for an unknown period of time, the official said.

>

So, dual citizenship at best. And naturalized.

Perhaps you should check your propaganda sources better so you won't be caught in the lies quite so easily.

The Founders knew that greed and hunger for power would eventually bring us to the point where we now find ourselves.

The most troubling part of the article was the Judge acknowledging that it was very clear that this is something that was incompatible with the Constitution but was unable to to do anything about it.

This tells me that there is a unconstitutional precedent somewhere that needs to be addressed. Someplace, sometime, someone allowed activities that weren't in the spirit of protecting the Constitution to be practiced, either by design or by ignorance. This single instance has laid the groundwork for the place we are in right now. We keep hearing about all these Constitutional Scholars giving opinions on all sort of issues. I cannot understand why an expert on the subject shouldn't be able to uncover this error rather quickly and provide guidance to straighten it out.

Well.....I guess I probably can understand why after all. The Founders knew that greed and hunger for power would eventually bring us to the point where we now find ourselves.

@Michael1753821, is correct it did happen under G.W. Bush, Kamal Darwish was the name of the US citizen killed by a drone in 2002, probably Obama's thought for a precedent to allow him to do it! This does not make it legal in my mind to kill a US citizen without due process and the chance to meet their accuser unless they are killed in an actual attack of the US, not one that has been "imagined" and not really imminent!!! The site for some info on this and other info is: thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/03/29/yemen-reported-us-covert-actions-since-2001/ I would also have to repeat a comment written earlier and that is we allow Gitmo foriegn born prisoners the rights to trial, but refuse them for our own citizens!!!

@Tammy All you need to do is read my posts to see that I am not a fan of Obama, but I would like to know your source that he wasn't targeted as the site I mention in post 3.21 claim that he was part of a group: November 3 2002
♦ 6 reported killed
In the first known US targeted assassination using a drone, a CIA Predator launched from Djibouti struck a car killing six al Qaeda suspects. A seventh individual may have escaped. The dead included Al Qaeda leader Qa’id Salim Sinan al-Harithi, also known as Abu Mi (one of the alleged masterminds behind the USS Cole attack) and Abu Ahmad al-Hijazi, a naturalised US citizen also known as Kemal or Kamal Darwish. Darwish, a US-born Yemeni, was suspected of being the recruiter of a terror support cell that had been rounded up in Buffalo, New York state. The other four killed reportedly belonged to the Aden-Abyan Islamic Army, and were identified as Salih Hussain Ali al-Nunu or Zono (aka Abu Humam); Awsan Ahmad al-Tarihi (aka Abu al-Jarrah); Munir Ahmad Abdallah al-Sauda (Abu Ubaidah); and Adil Nasir al-Sauda’ (Abu Usamah, initially identified as al-Qia’gaa). All six names were released by the Yemen government three weeks after the attack. I would like your info as this one appears flawed since they say he is a naturalized citizen and a US born Yemeni!

Skibum,

Bush stated he would sign an "assault weapon" ban if it ever hit his desk. Do you really miss him?

Me too he had class and dignity not "do what I say and do not argue w/ the great one ever!!!"

Jay - Please provide proof of that. I am calling you out as a liar.

Both Bush and Obama are tyrants. The more you fools play this DemoCrip vs RepubliBlood game the more the tyrants win and the more we lose our liberties to thunderous applause of the fickle, stupid, and violent masses.

Your nostalgia for a tyrant who gave us the USA PATRIOT ACT, legalized torture, invasion of a country (Iraq) that posed no credible threat to us, the de facto abolition of our 4th Amendment rights, and bailouts of idiot failure banks makes me sick. He was the precursor to everything Obama is doing.

They are both sociopaths. They are both tyrants. They are both habitual liars. When will you get this nationalist cult of state worship out of your heads? It's a false paradigm you are living your life through! Everything is not either black or white in the real world!

Damn sheep.

Pro-Individual - I never considered Bush a tyrant. Hear tell it, he was too (insert all the nasty remarks here), but he made tough calls during tough times and I don't doubt for a minute he was on his knees alot asking for help to make the right ones. Did he fail at some and succeed at others? Yes. Was he perfect? Far from it. We can all relate. But did I ever worry he was actively working to undermine my freedoms and the freedom of my country? No. If he indeed stated he would sign an assault weapon ban if it hit his desk, as posed in another comment, I doubt it would be received with the same outrage as it is today - because I don't think huge numbers of Americans would be running to their local gun dealer to buy guns because they felt Bush had an agenda to disarm Americans, toss out the 2nd amendment, all in the name of gaining power over them. I agree the federal government is oppressive and needs to be radically scaled back. You can dam the whole lot of them, however at some point you must agree, you probably would be ill-suited to do the job yourself, although I have no doubt you would do your best to try and make wrong things right.

alim-2810059,

What you are missing is that Bush was essentially Cheney's and the other neo-con's useful idiot.

And now both Obama and Biden are USELESS idiots. But they have the media covering every gaffe they ever make and NOT running important stories like this months later.

ANYONE BUT BIDEN in 2016!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

You mean like the NRA is twisting the 2nd Amendment?

Chemack

Since you want the gun issue brought into this, I ask you one question, What stopped Japan from invading the US? I heard they were afraid that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass. China is making mock up vidios of them blowing up what appeared to be NYC. We can always scare them if we make them feel there will be a slingshot behind every blade of grass, right?

The NRA's position was upheld in 2011 when the Supreme Court dope Slapped Washington DC and threw out the most restrictive gun law in the Country. You really don't get out much I see.

whywait,

Um, it was dopey North Korea that made the video. Not China. But I'm with you on the rest. I just don't see any value in blaming China for something they didn't do. Now they do do (lol) a lot of other bad stuff.

Touchdownplay

Sorry about the mistake, I guess I was a little anxious to respond. I agree, china already does enough.

Twisting? You mean like the rights given to us by our creator (Whomever you believe that to be) can't be taken away from us by our Government.

@Tom, God gave you the right to a gun? Interesting. Did God give you the right to a trial by a jury of your peers, or was that (like the 2nd Amendment) a social compact right rather than a God-given one?

No. That is some old farts wishful thinking. Japan could not
take over the US the same as Australia too much land and not enough troops to
hold the land. The Japanese thought that we were too lazy, soft and week to
waged a great war with both lots of dead and treasure.

Their army was doing mostly holding actions with the Chinese
who have very few weapons. They did don’t have both the weapons and personal to
do anything better.

China owns the U.S. They are the first one to say it!! they also say we have lost our way and values what this country was founded on.

Don't forget thy have the biggest Military in the World it is in the Millions! Who knows maybe our next president might be Chinese? We all know you don't have to be born in here to be President.

whywait, what stopped Japan from invading the US was the US Navy. Their Pearl Harbor raid failed to neutralize the US Pacific Fleet. Six months later the carriers that they had failed to sink turned the tables on them at Midway, the Japanese retired with heavy losses, and after that they were on the defensive for the rest of the war. There was never a time when they were able to send a massive invasion force across the Pacific unopposed.

Yes that is true Ben, but this president just does it anyway under executive order! He has already done it several times

Sorry buffoon but this step combined with the proposed new gun laws is paralleling 1930's Germany. There isn't a political party nor a politician on earth I would trust to do this. I wouldn't even trust me.

So we should we give King Obama full charge. Congress may be useless some times, but the checks and balances keep us free!!!!

@Chemack... so your solution is to ignore the checks and balances that were put in place by the founders of this country, and let a few unknown people have the power to start selecting who gets killed and who lives - based on this loosely written document... yeah - that about sums it up I think.

I seldom agree with your posts, skibum - but you're dead on this time.

"I wouldn't even trust me" <=== brilliant.

Chemack56-2587500

How many other Rights do we need to hand over to Lord Hussein? We have gone along for the past 225 years without giving all of our rights up to ONE MAN. Now so many are putting their trust in one Mortal human being. It will come back to haunt many of you. King Obama will not be in power but another 4 years & the next President may not be as trustworthy. The way things are going, one of our next President may have been born in Mexico, Egypt or somewhere. Don't say it can't happen. 30 years ago would you have thought we would have a President named Barrack Hussein Obama?

Chemack, liberals howled in anger over the water boarding of 3 known, confirmed terrorist, under George Bush. They made a point in that that was not what the US is about. We do not torture. Well, we do not torture but we kill US citizens without benift of due process of law.

Police can shoot an armed suspect, but once in custody they can't even slap him around a bit. Custody and control of the environment changes everything.

When was there another 9/11? Before or after Chemack?

Even if you trust Obama, which I don't, you are going to trust this kind of power in the hands of some unknown future president? You cannot tell me that in today's age of technology that an American citizen cannot be contacted anywhere in the world and warned that he/she needs to return to the United States immediately to defend allegations against him/her or face deadly consequences. The wording of it is exceedingly upsetting to me. "High level official?" An "imminent threat?" With "no intelligence they have actively engaged in a plot?" Picture this: A member of a political organization makes the following statement. "Washington is full of liars and cheats. We need to go in and clean house." Under the new rules, a "high level official" can make the case that this person is talking about treason and poses 'an imminent threat' even though there is 'no intelligence he is actively engaged in a plot' and order his execution? Really? You want one person to be given that much power over life and death?

So what is the difference between a common criminal and a terrorist? How many people he kills? People are terrified of rapists and murderers, right? Why don't we just drop the word "Criminal" and just use terrorist. There doesn't seem to be any difference in your thinking between the two.

We should also just throw our rights away as soon as we can. The Constitution, after all, was written to apply only during the happy fun times, not in dark, dangerous times when your liberty and freedom are under attack.

I was going to type a long message with predictions for our future, but I am becoming afraid to voice my opinion on a public forum such as this.

it could be anyone who opposes Obama and makes to much negative noise!

Batini...I used to think the same way, this quote may help you. I found it while trying to educate myself to the Founders mindset about what they intended this Great Country be.

“The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men.”
― Samuel Adams

Here's another.....

“[I]t is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or of any number of men, at the entering into society to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights, when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are life, liberty, and property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up an essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right of freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.”
― Samuel Adams

Obama's grip is slipping. The gun control issue and the executive orders, Benghazi, the threat to American lives by their own government - just the thought of it. People are awakening. It's beginning to roll over the country - like rediscovering what freedom used to be...

alim-2810059,

You anti-Obama stance is blinding you to simple truths. Obama is as much victim to the security state apparatus the fearful populace has allowed to be constructed. He is only as cognizant of what dangers exist by way of the intelligence he receives. If he is told and convinced that there is imminent danger to the US and its people he will use the most efficient and practical tools available to him to eliminate that danger...what president would not?

The problem is public fear and the way it distorts reality. What this memo indicates is no different except in scale from the hysteria that drives extreme 2nd Amendment advocates to disproportionately arm themselves against perceived dangers their neighbors and government. It is a form of hysteria and until we get that in check not much is going to stop this whole momentum toward a police state.

Obama is no victim.... he surrounded himself with these people... knowing that the blame can easily be their fault if all goes wrong.

So who informed him that guns were a problem?????? Eric Holder after fast and furious failed to subvert the 2nd amendment..... FOR our own good?

OBAMA should be focusing on jobs- AS HE STATED- but I see this idiot pointing out everything else but jobs.

This guy is a major LOSER!!!!!!!!! NOT A LEADER.

DaveM-877764

You need to grow up some.

Culheath:

You should expect more from the president. The guy is not a leader.

I know your expectations in life are low, but not mine. I expect a President to do his damn job and unite this country.

He is the most divisive President ever- and the most innefective.

Sounds like you need to remove your head from your ass.

I agree. As written it allows the president to simply "appoint" someone as a terrorist and have him killed. That could include any political rival or anyone who criticizes him or his cronies. Or anybody could simply make a phone call and say "I think this guy is a terrorist" and have somebody killed.

I agree, their should be a higher standard of review. Its just like getting approval for the secrete wire taps, you can still do it, just let therebe some oversight. Look at it this way though, an American citizen who takes up arms with an enemy we are currently at war with, who has killed Americans, and who has vowed to continue to do so well, if he was a Japanese American 70 years ago, he would have been shot on the spot. Then again, I don't want their to be any protection for one of these @!$%#s who has found a path to citizenship only to use it to protect themselves when they are caught or to use it to make their plans easier.

No, because it would have been feasible to detain him (and once detained, for the political process to turn en masse against him for clearly acting against the Constitution). And once detained, due process plays a much bigger role. Just like a cop on the street can use lethal force under various circumstances pursuing a criminal but once they are detained, new rules kick in preventing cops from even slapping them around.

Bill Horn- At least with waterboarding, you must have your hands on the person, you don't kill a potential treasure trove of information and don't cause collateral waterboard damage and kill an innocent 16 year old boy. Besides, we waterboard our own troops as a part of training. My fear is that the lawless President Obamadinajhad will feel no resistance when he drops a Hellfire missile on our people on our soil.

Michael-1753821,

Here Michael let me see if I can prove a point even though I used this post once before. I heard that Michael is conspiring to meet with terrorists the next time he travels. Don't worry that comment will be flagged by the NSA as well as a few other agencies. I am sure you'll be fine.

I think that is exactly the point. The President and even his Attorney General believe they should have the power to toggle the switch and pick and choose who they can kill. The President just needs someone to justify his choices, and then he can hide behide some memorandum that the AG approved and say well we thought it was perfectly fine based on our definition of legal...

warren, was the meaning of "is" ever defined, even to this day?

Is the guy a terrorist threat? Is he one today, don't know. He may have been 30 years ago, take him out!

Is the guy a potential terrorist threat? We cannot say no, so take him out too!

The DOJ who brought us fast and furious. No Thanks.

As much as I hate big government, this is an instance that screams for a panel. One requiring at least one military expert to determine if apprehension is feasible, at least one constitutional lawyer, at least one defense attorney to try to make a defense case against the evidence, and some combination of judicial and legislative representation. I think it should also be mandatory that some effort be made to inform the targeted individual that a hearing is taking place and if he wishes to attend, he should immediately contact his defense attorney and return to the United States. Only, IF the panel determines that a case is made 'and' IF the individual does not contact his attorney or return, can such a presidential order be allowed. NO WAY should one person, not this president or any other, be allowed to make a decision like this alone.

Yes if we get a panel together then I say lets get 100,000 of these fu*@kers blazing around the skies looking for things that seem out of place and the panel can say oyu are the weakest link goodbye.

I also disliked the Patriot Act and it has all started rolling downhill quickly.

I think the part the President is missing as well as the AG is the moral implications and precedent he is setting. Our enemies will now know that even Americans think it is ok to kill Americans... just ask our own President. Legal is a standard, moral is a standing.

Pretty sure the three Americans killed by this policy were Muslims....

"Michael-1753821

Pretty sure the three Americans killed by this policy were Muslims....'

Pretty sure the three Americans killed were Americans...

So were the thousands of Confederates killed in the Civil War. No one complaints about violating their due process rights, I wonder why?

You couldn't have said it any better George..

"Michael-1753821

So were the thousands of Confederates killed in the Civil War. No one complaints about violating their due process rights, I wonder why?"

Apples and Oranges Mike but let me give you a brief tutorial;

The Confederacy declared absolution from the Union, initiated hostilities with uniformed troops in the field then waged open warfare against said Union until defeated. Most historians I've spoken to and literature I've read do not support your opinion that people declaring themselves "Confederates" were citizens of the US. They seceded from the US. Declared themselves null and void with the US.

You get it now? They weren`t citizens of the US by their own decision, the Union killed them in order to preserve their citizenship with the US...kinda different from the current state of affairs, but not even a proper comparison.

Abraham Lincoln did not recognize secession. He fought the war stating the entire time that those states were part of the US, and that the people of the South were still U.S. citizens. He made this most clear in the first inaugual, after the Confederate states had seceded but before hostilities bagan: "In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war." Your own post acknowledgs this by stating the Union was fighting to PRESERVE their citizenship, indicating they had not lost it in the eyes of the Union. In terms of the Unions action, how Confederates may have viewed themselves is irrelevant.

It can be just as easily argued that Anwar al-Awlaki did the same thing by joining AQAP, relocating to Yemen, and openly advocating for violent jihad against the United States. The only real distinction seems to be that Confederates wore uniforms while AQ does not. The hague Convention makes clear that is irrelevant as well.

All points well taken but in fact this is not what the memo states right? This isn`t about a declared war recognized by Congress against a national government, either recognized or not, is it?

The memo doesn`t differentiate place, affiliation or current activities either for or against the government of the US, does it? It declares everyone, anyone, everywhere, potential "Confederates" no longer allowed due process, doesn`t it?

Everyone, everywhere is now at least by the intent of this memo circulated by the very operators of hi-tech lethal force inside the US government to be added to the kill chain without due process of US Constitutional law, doesn`t it?

So? You`re good with that or not?

The Civil War was not a declared war recognized by Congress against a national government either. The U.S. Has only fought 5 declared wars: 1812, Mexican-American, Spanish-American, WWI, and WWII. All other conflicts the US has been involved in came via what we would call today AUMFs (starting with the Barbary War in 1801). the CSS Alabama was sunk off the coast of France, anyone anywhere who raised the banner of the Confederacy was treated as a combatant and, if seen as a threat, vulnerable to attack.

The Memo declares the US to be involved in a Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC) as authorized by the AUMF of 2001, authorizing the President to use whatever force necessary to pursue members of al Qa'ida. And no, not everyone, everywhere is at risk of being attacked, only those who it is not feasible to capture - which means only those living either in nations that will refuse to capture them for us and won't allow us to go in ourselves, or in nations with limited sovereignty where there is no means to go in and capture (as exists in the FATA, Yemen, and probably Somalia too, the areas where it has become an issue. If you're worried about being seen as a target, I'd avoid areas like that.

Stop deflecting and answer this;

So again I ask you, you have no problem with the current thought process as displayed by the Justice department with this memo?

Yes or no, what`s your answer?

Spoken like a real jerk; the guy he ordered killed was an American Muslim who instructed another to kill 13 US Soldiers at Ft Hood....This president already has authority to order a Nuclear attack and now you want him to give an American citizen a pass if he is helping the enemy blow up this country? I see your absence of logic, and your prejudice.

Brian -

I don't think you're going to get an answer from Michael as I don't think he is capable of deciding that he needs to go to the bathroom without Obama's permission.

patrik -

Where did Brian say he wanted to give a terrorist a pass just because he's an American? The problem you fail to see is that the individual is an American citizen and is therefore protected under the Constitution of the United States. Due process is all that is being asked because in this country an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. At that point, he could be taken in front of a firing squad.

What I don't understand is why you and other liberals have no problem with fighting against the death penalty for known and proven murderers, but you won't afford another citizen the same rights just because someone claims he is a terrorist?

"patrik-952691

Spoken like a real jerk; the guy he ordered killed was an American Muslim who instructed another to kill 13 US Soldiers at Ft Hood....This president already has authority to order a Nuclear attack and now you want him to give an American citizen a pass if he is helping the enemy blow up this country? I see your absence of logic, and your prejudice."

I said nothing of the sort Patrik, you are another individual who obviously hasn`t read the memo and now resorts to ad hominem attacks to support a rebuttal that is quite frankly, uninformed and illogical to any American citizen interested in preserving their very lives against a government explaining it`s willingness to murder it`s own citizens without due process.

Read the memo, not the article, then respond please. Notice I didn`t call you any names either. That always helps in rational discourse. Thanks.

Michael's comments are food for thought.
Problem with the drone policy is that governments don't always HAVE the "facts", don't always use them truthfully--this is the reason behind the notion of courts and due process in order to determine tha facts (which process itself is at best imperfect). This has nothing to do with being conservative vs liberal, and plenty of liberals do NOT like this drone business.

This isn't a law. It's someone's interpretation of what their abilties to act are, under the Constitution.

If your in Europe they the president could have you arrested
or killed by a hit team from the NSA or CIA. Of have the locals do it. Now if
your are hiding in cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan of Yemen or some other
country he would have to take you out by drone strike.

The reason to use drones is it is more cost
effective that other means, you do know we are in a budget crises, Right. But go
on believing that you are a great threat to the US if you feel better.

Timothy....do you even think about what you're posting? This is the USA.

Proud of our President, but most importantly I'm proud of my fellow citizens who had the courage to elect him. I plan on standing by them.

Yes Allen Lee you are a simpleton. Why don't you go suck one. Bet your a fagg.

Tim, while we both disagree with Allen's politics, comments such as yours are exactly why the left slams us with being uneducated, dirt throwing neanderthals. Please feel free to rise above such juvenile mud slinging.

Texas Lady......

You're 100% correct, I think an honest discussion without inflammatory comments would go a great ways towards solving a great many of our problems. There's many comments posted here that are really great comments and I'd check them up in a heartbeat.....right to the point , usually the last paragraph, where it becomes libtard this, brainless con that, muslim President, Terorist Muslim President. They take a great argument and just trash it.

Agree with Texas Lady...have read all the posts, most are great and then comes the end where the writer lets loose with his/her fingers on the keyboard and it's all lost.

Take some time to read posts from Garbageman....many great points.

Got the message Texas, Johnny, and Daisy. Good job!

The bunker insurgent? You're a moron.

Coming from someone who calls themselves a"bum" I guess being called moron would be a compliment!

"

Cops: Twisted revenge plot behind killings

“The violence of action will be high.... I will bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to those in LAPD uniform whether on or off duty,” Dorner wrote

foxsportswest.com

Drone strike, Easy choice for me, Bummy.

Let me understand u's complaints; president can send in Seal Team 6 into another country and blow the hell out of everybody, but he cannot send a Drone overhead to blow the hell out of everybody, especially if one of those people like al AWLAKI ordered 13 US Soldiers dead in Ft Hood, TX....Is that what the complaints are?

pat -

Seal Team 6 was a military operation against a military target as binLaden was not and never has been an American citizen.

Do you not understand the concept of citizenship?

>

>

Evidently not. After all, the liberals have been in charge of education long enough to make sure that students of the past 30-40 years don't really know their history or civics.

The U.S. can't go into any country and arrest anyone based on our laws, even if they are an American citizen. That's why we establish extradition treaties.

Truer words could not be spoken. I also find these statistics very easy to believe given the circumstances.

63% of the people do not trust the President

63% of the people do not trust the Supreme Court

87% of the people do not trust the Congress

79% of the people trust the big businesses and banks that are really running the country

Since they changed the definition of imminent, they can always redefine feasible as well.

Feasible is always a cost-benefit analysis, and this is a policy memo summation and not the formal legal document, so parsing it to that level borders on absurd. To say it would be infeasible to detain someone on US soil and to argue that a missile strike was the only way feasible to neutralize the threat wouldn't pass ANYONE's sniff test without first acknowledging they were in an area of the U.S. beyond sovereign control. Even in the mountains of Idaho, ATF can surround their compound.

And level it like they did in Waco...

Michael -

Are you really that clueless?

>

Or are you just that far up Obama's sphincter?

What is difference of POTUS sending Drones to kill the enemy in another country in secrecy, or his sending in Special Forces to kill the enemy into another country in secrecy? When does an American's citizen's actions disqualifying to be accorded due process?
Did al Awklai actions related to deaths of US Soldiers in Ft Hood, TX disqualify his rights of due process?
Would an American citizen's known assistance in formulating an attack on World Trade Center, or with Chinese on delivery of a Nuclear Weapon against USA? qualify for his assasination?
The president has within close proximity to his person nuclear codes for launching Nuclear War; would he have to get permission to before ordering a launch knowing Russia / China are poised strike us?

pat -

There are several things wrong with your assumptions. Among them:

-Special Forces are military and will go after a military target. They will not knowingly kill an American citizen unless given no other choice, as in if the individual is actually firing on them. They will opt to apprehend him if at all possible. They are very aware of the Constitution and what it allows as they are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution, as are all military members.

-Drones have no native intelligence and aren't bothered by Constitutional niceties.

-Nothing in the memo limits targets to being in a foreign country - they are being used for surveillance in this country at the present time.

Now, if and when you can come up with a logical argument as to why Obama should have authority to use drones against American citizens without due process, I'll listen. Otherwise, I'll just put you on ignore like I do the other idiots who think Obama can do no wrong.

Amunaka, your words may be construed as an eminent threat upon a Republican-American making you a potential target of some future Republican controlled drone.

To..1Rodney"""

Hey but just look who the terrorist sympathizers are now ....

"Amunaka

To..1Rodney"""

Hey but just look who the terrorist sympathizers are now ...."

You mean the Constitutionalists, don`t you?

Amunaka,

Your thinking is a symptom of the current disease in this country. I have mine and the rest of you should just die. Sound about right to you? Your self interest and self preservation have no place in a community that embraces diversity. If you thinking is liberal it is not very liberating.

To Above"""

Right...

Still ...I wonder what the body the body count would of been if they had drones during WWII... and all well and good but we are up against people who strap bombs to themselves ....

and boots on the ground would be better to take out a terrorist than a drone attack ....why if only bush had used drones earlier....

Officials: White House Slow to OK Drones to Kill Bin Laden

Published June 25, 2003

Associated Press

When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones (search) had recently spotted Usama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the Al Qaeda (search) leader. But the administration failed to get drones back into the Afghan skies until after the Sept. 11 attacks later that year, current and former U.S. officials say.

Top administration officials discussed the mission to kill bin Laden as late as one week before the suicide attacks on New York and Washington, but they had not yet resolved a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the armed Predators and whether the missiles would be sufficiently lethal, officials told The Associated Press.

In the month before that meeting, the Pentagon and CIA successfully tested an armed Predator on at least three occasions -- including once when it destroyed a mock-up home resembling an Afghan structure bin Laden supposedly used, the officials said.

The disappearance in 2001 of U.S. Predators from the skies over Afghanistan is discussed in classified sections of Congress' report into pre-Sept. 11 intelligence failures and is expected to be examined by an independent commission appointed by the president and Congress, officials said.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA put the armed drones into the sky within days -- and they soon played an important role in one of the early successes of the war on terror.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,90318,00.html

"Amunaka'

Thanks for the history lesson, but what does that have to do with the current train of thought from this administration with approving the killing of American citizens both here and abroad without due process using weapons of mass destruction?

To..Brian"""

Everything....

"

"Amunaka

To..Brian"""

Everything...."

Care to elaborate?

I`m all ears reading how you attempt to justify deadly force used against an individual from one`s own government without due process...

To..Brian """

Reread my post ..it's all there

"Amunaka

To..Brian """

Reread my post ..it's all there"

I did and it isn't. Read the memo then comment, everything else is superfluous...

Amunaka has a point on the first post...... Got me thinking about the push to grab guns.

What if "in the near future" Obama decides to executive order that all guns are illegal?

Anyone possesing them (not in law enforcement/military) is considered a terrorist...

That will be alot of drones overhead bombing our own people who the government considers "terrorists"

Scary thought- but knowing Obama- Plausible scenario.......

CapitolOne,

You have distilled the very chilling aspect of this article and the country's direction. Lack of real leadership at all levels of Congress and the Administration allow this to happen.

You folks have a short memory about the 13 US Soldiers killed in Ft Hood by Maj Hasan direction of al Awkali, the American, President Obama ordered killed in Yemen. When does an American lose his rights at due process; when he has assisted in destruction of WTC, helped Chinese to launch nuclear threat? When? There are scores of US citizens leaving this country to learn to kill you and me and you folks are saying no, let's wait to arrest them> Give me a break, your problem is that Obama has the nuclear codes to launch a nuclear strike, but you cannot accept he has the authority to take out an enemy of the State. Go figure!

When does an American lose his rights at due process; when he has assisted in destruction of WTC, helped Chinese to launch nuclear threat?

He never loses his right to due process. There is no action so heinous that it suspends due process. The only time due process does not apply is when he is actively engaged in combat.

When? There are scores of US citizens leaving this country to learn to kill you and me and you folks are saying no, let's wait to arrest them

"Due process" means a trial, it does not mean an arrest. If the person waives his right to be present at his trial that is his business. Try him, convict him, then kill him with a drone and there's no problem. The problem comes when the President decides that he can unilaterally skip the trial and conviction parts and go straight to the execution.

Give me a break, your problem is that Obama has the nuclear codes to launch a nuclear strike,

Actually he doesn't. A military officer in close proximity to him does. It is unlikely that that officer will give him the codes absent incoming missiles or a declaration of war. However you are addressing war against a foreign nation vs murder of a US citizen, they are separate issues.

but you cannot accept he has the authority to take out an enemy of the State

When that "enemy of the State" is a US citizen and the decision is made by somebody in the Executive branch, no, I cannot accept it.

If he can decide unilaterally that Al-Maliki is an "enemy of the State" then he can decide that you are an "enemy of the State". Of course you're convinced that that could never happen to a good person like you. Six million Jews believed something similar once.

You know you have not read the story and you have taken the discussion totally out of context. This is not about protecting school children but about protecting the nation. Are you really arguing that an American citizen can go abroad( that means overseas as in and to another country) and threaten to harm American citizens on the ground in America and you are saying that the government can't drone them?????????? Nuts!

would those students ..today ...be considered internal threats to us because of their anti gov stand

If they had taken up arms and attack people in a building
then yes. If the torch a building they would be labeled terrorist and the FBI
would try and arrest them. If they are just yell and being a pain in the butt then
they would be a local problem. If they ran to another country and that county
would or could not capture them they could be killed. But only if there was
some proof of them trying to plan or support an attack.

I tried to explain this to some college students, they were adamant that under Obama this could never happen.

If a person is or group is protesting in a civil way then
they are not going to get attacked but if they turn violent that changes
everything. Look how long it took to remove the Protest Wall Street people. They
were not violent and took months to remover them. If they had started to throw
rocks or destroy buildings then it would have required more force.

It is all about how dangerous a person or group is or how
much danger the public is in changes the response.

Timothy, how old are you? Are you old enough to remember the 1968 Democratic National Convention?

The main reason the "Occupy" movement hasn't been removed is that the government has learned that such confrontations are bad press for the government and rallying points for the protesters--far more effective to just ignore them until everybody gets bored and goes home.