Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Surveillance Drone in the US!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BlastTyrant" data-source="post: 64948" data-attributes="member: 3051"><p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-memo-justifies-drone-war-killing-americans-164123578--politics.html" target="_blank">Obama memo justifies drone-war killing of Americans | The Ticket - Yahoo! News</a></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">Does President Barack Obama have the right to order the assassination of an American anywhere in the world—without any oversight from Congress or the courts, and even if that U.S. citizen is not actively plotting a specific terrorist attack? His administration, in a stunning Justice Department memo laying out a broad legal rationale for the country's ever-expanding drone war, says yes.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">The <a href="http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="color: #00ccff">16-page document</span></a>, <a href="http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite" target="_blank"><span style="color: #00ccff">obtained by NBC News</span></a>, emerged days before John Brennan, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser and the foremost architect of America’s hugely controversial unmanned aerial vehicle war, goes before the Senate Intelligence Committee in a Thursday hearing on his confirmation as CIA director.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">Obama campaigned in 2008 as a fierce critic of George W. Bush’s national security policies, but he has apparently learned to stop worrying and love nearly unfettered executive power—the literal power of life and death over fellow U.S. citizens overseas thought to be consorting with extremists groups that may be targeting America. So, under what circumstances does he have the right to act?</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">The memo says “an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government” must decide that the target is a "senior operational leader" of al-Qaida or "associated forces," “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States,” and that an attempt to capture that individual is “infeasible.”</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">“Targeting a member of an enemy force who poses an imminent threat of violent attack to the United States is not unlawful. It is a lawful act of self-defense,” the document asserts.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">"Imminent threat"? That seems reasonable and is a traditional standard for military action. Except that, as NBC investigative reporter Michael Isikoff notes, the memo adds that “the condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">Instead, that previously mentioned "high-level official" can determine that the potential target was “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of an attack and that “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.”</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">Isikoff notes the memo does not define "activities" or "recently," leaving that up to the administration to determine on a case-by-case basis.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">The memo notes that the president can order a strike against al-Qaida far beyond the battlefield of Afghanistan, and it makes clear that he will not be constrained by national sovereignty. Either a country will give the green light to drone strikes on its territory, or America will strike if that country is "unable or willing" to do so.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">This is no surprise. Obama famously said in the 2008 campaign that he would order an attack inside Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden, whether or not Islamabad signed off. He made made good on that promise, ordering the raid on bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 1, 2011, which killed the terrorist leader.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">The memo is sure to trigger another round of questions from Congress about the drone war, which has been shrouded in secrecy. And it comes at a time when that campaign is powerfully unpopular overseas, according to <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #00ccff">a June 2012 Pew Research poll</span></a>. While 62 percent of Americans approve of the approach, 44 percent of respondents in staunch ally Britain do. And the numbers plummet in countries with large Muslim populations: 6 percent in Egypt, for instance, and 9 percent in NATO ally Turkey.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">That's in part the reflection of anger over civilian casualties from such attacks. Obama has grappled with that problem ever since the <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/02/04/john-brennan-obama-s-cia-chief-nominee-could-restrain-the-agency.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #00ccff">very first drone strike</span></a> on his watch, a Jan. 23, 2009, attack that reportedly claimed the life of "an innocent tribal elder" in Pakistan. A May 2012 New York Times report said that the administration minimizes civilian casualties by counting "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0" target="_blank"><span style="color: #00ccff">all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants</span></a>."</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">The memo drew a withering response from the American Civil Liberties Union.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff"><span style="font-size: 14px"><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'">“This is a profoundly disturbing document, and it’s hard to believe that it was produced in a democracy built on a system of checks and balances,” said Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. “It summarizes in cold legal terms a stunning overreach of executive authority—the claimed power to declare Americans a threat and kill them far from a recognized battlefield and without any judicial involvement before or after the fact.”</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BlastTyrant, post: 64948, member: 3051"] [URL='http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-memo-justifies-drone-war-killing-americans-164123578--politics.html']Obama memo justifies drone-war killing of Americans | The Ticket - Yahoo! News[/URL] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]Does President Barack Obama have the right to order the assassination of an American anywhere in the world—without any oversight from Congress or the courts, and even if that U.S. citizen is not actively plotting a specific terrorist attack? His administration, in a stunning Justice Department memo laying out a broad legal rationale for the country's ever-expanding drone war, says yes.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]The [URL='http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf'][COLOR=#00ccff]16-page document[/COLOR][/URL], [URL='http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite'][COLOR=#00ccff]obtained by NBC News[/COLOR][/URL], emerged days before John Brennan, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser and the foremost architect of America’s hugely controversial unmanned aerial vehicle war, goes before the Senate Intelligence Committee in a Thursday hearing on his confirmation as CIA director.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]Obama campaigned in 2008 as a fierce critic of George W. Bush’s national security policies, but he has apparently learned to stop worrying and love nearly unfettered executive power—the literal power of life and death over fellow U.S. citizens overseas thought to be consorting with extremists groups that may be targeting America. So, under what circumstances does he have the right to act?[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]The memo says “an informed, high-level official of the U.S. government” must decide that the target is a "senior operational leader" of al-Qaida or "associated forces," “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States,” and that an attempt to capture that individual is “infeasible.”[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]“Targeting a member of an enemy force who poses an imminent threat of violent attack to the United States is not unlawful. It is a lawful act of self-defense,” the document asserts.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]"Imminent threat"? That seems reasonable and is a traditional standard for military action. Except that, as NBC investigative reporter Michael Isikoff notes, the memo adds that “the condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]Instead, that previously mentioned "high-level official" can determine that the potential target was “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of an attack and that “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.”[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]Isikoff notes the memo does not define "activities" or "recently," leaving that up to the administration to determine on a case-by-case basis.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]The memo notes that the president can order a strike against al-Qaida far beyond the battlefield of Afghanistan, and it makes clear that he will not be constrained by national sovereignty. Either a country will give the green light to drone strikes on its territory, or America will strike if that country is "unable or willing" to do so.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]This is no surprise. Obama famously said in the 2008 campaign that he would order an attack inside Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden, whether or not Islamabad signed off. He made made good on that promise, ordering the raid on bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 1, 2011, which killed the terrorist leader.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]The memo is sure to trigger another round of questions from Congress about the drone war, which has been shrouded in secrecy. And it comes at a time when that campaign is powerfully unpopular overseas, according to [URL='http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/'][COLOR=#00ccff]a June 2012 Pew Research poll[/COLOR][/URL]. While 62 percent of Americans approve of the approach, 44 percent of respondents in staunch ally Britain do. And the numbers plummet in countries with large Muslim populations: 6 percent in Egypt, for instance, and 9 percent in NATO ally Turkey.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]That's in part the reflection of anger over civilian casualties from such attacks. Obama has grappled with that problem ever since the [URL='http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/02/04/john-brennan-obama-s-cia-chief-nominee-could-restrain-the-agency.html'][COLOR=#00ccff]very first drone strike[/COLOR][/URL] on his watch, a Jan. 23, 2009, attack that reportedly claimed the life of "an innocent tribal elder" in Pakistan. A May 2012 New York Times report said that the administration minimizes civilian casualties by counting "[URL='http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0'][COLOR=#00ccff]all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants[/COLOR][/URL]."[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]The memo drew a withering response from the American Civil Liberties Union.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#00ccff][SIZE=14px][FONT=Georgia]“This is a profoundly disturbing document, and it’s hard to believe that it was produced in a democracy built on a system of checks and balances,” said Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. “It summarizes in cold legal terms a stunning overreach of executive authority—the claimed power to declare Americans a threat and kill them far from a recognized battlefield and without any judicial involvement before or after the fact.”[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Conspiracies & Cover-ups
Surveillance Drone in the US!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top