Obama's AG Won't Rule Out Drone Death Strikes on U.S. Soil
March 6, 2013 12:34 PM
comment(s) - last by
Holder argues Congressional authorization is unnecessary to kill Americans, Executive Branch can do what it wants
President Barack Obama's (D) Attorney General,
, dropped a bombshell this week,
[PDF] that he did consider it acceptable to kill Americans with drone deathstrikes on U.S. soil, but only under "extraordinary" circumstances.
I. A Time to Kill?
He says that such plots had never been performed in the homeland to date. But several Americans have reportedly been killed with drone strikes in the Middle East during the Obama regime was elected into power in 2008.
AG Holder's comments came in response to
Sen. Rand Paul
(R-Tenn.). Sen. Paul had promised to stall the nomination of John Brennan to become director of the
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency
. Mr. Brennan is a controversial figure who helped mastermind the program of drone deathstrikes and "enhanced interrogation" (torture) programs in the Middle East.
AG Eric Holder told Sen. Rand Paul that "hypothetically" drone strikes could be used on U.S. soil to kill Americans. [Image Source: AP]
In his letter to Sen. Paul, seeking to clarify when drone strikes would be allowed, AG Holder writes:
The question you posed is.... entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.
Holder goes on to point to Pearl Harbor and the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001 as examples of the kinds of threats that might require Americans to be ordered killed by the President.
II. Armed and Ready, Flying Over Your Backyard
Since the middle of the last decade,
flying over U.S. states
, ostensibly for use in countering drug trafficking and other forms of crime. Of late, some of these drones
have been reportedly armed
Reaper drones are currently being used over U.S. airspace. [Image Source: The Real Revo]
There are currently no formal laws passed by Congress governing whom and be killed and when – if the President's premise that death strikes on Americans does not violate Constitutional due process holds true. Further, such strikes appear entirely at the discretion of the President, the military, and the national intelligence agencies -- Congress is not in the loop.
That seems rather curious. The Constitution is unequivocal in that Congress alone has the power to authorize the use of deadly military force.
Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution
, the foundation of the U.S. government, clearly grants Congress the power:
[Image Source: EL Civics]
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
However, according to President Obama and his staff's logic, that power has now been transferred to the executive branch, and what's more, it can be used to kill Americans without a trial on U.S. soil.
The Obama administration argues sometimes American citizens may need to be killed without due process, both abroad and at home. [Image Source: Matt Ortega/Flickr]
The Obama adminstration executed a similar privilege overseas at least once -- ordering a drone strike that killed suspected al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, who happened to also be a New Mexico-born U.S. citizen. Other Americans were also killed in other drone strikes, but it is unclear whether those killings were ordered or mere inadvertent attrition.
III. Some Upset About Obama's New Power to Kill Americans
Sen. Paul was not happy with the Obama administration's plan to grant itself the power to kill, and to cut Congress out of the loop. He
, "The U.S. attorney general's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening. It is an affront to the constitutional due process rights of all Americans."
Some in the Senate feel the President shouldn't have the power to order the killings of Americans on U.S. soil. [Image Source: Drone Wars UK]
But some of his colleagues weren't so harsh.
Sen. Susan Collins
Sens. Ron Wyden
(D-Colo.) praised the President's
decision to hand over memos
detailing when drone strikes were allowable.
The Obama administration had previously
asked its press secretaries to lie
about the existence of the memos, claiming they didn't exist. In light of the disclosure, the Senators say in a
, "We are pleased that we now have the access that we have long sought and need to conduct the vigilant oversight with which the committee has been charged. We believe that this sets an important precedent for applying our American system of checks and balances to the challenges of 21st century warfare. We look forward to reviewing and discussing these documents in the days ahead."
The Senate now moves on to debate Mr. Brennan's confirmation, following his confirmation by the
Senate Intelligence Committee
. There will likely be lively debate from Sen. Paul,
, during Mr. Brennan's confirmation hearing before the full Senate.
The debate brings to mind the words of George Orwell in an essay on wartime Britain, who wrote, "As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me."
Sen. Rand Paul [PDF]
Sen. Wyden, et al.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
This... bothers me.
3/7/2013 10:03:21 AM
And some may consider this a little too 'conspiracy theorist', but nonetheless, it is a possible scenario.
Right now, our country is in a position where the general population is rather unhappy with their leaders. Extremely unhappy with those in charge. Feeling a huge disconnect between what they need and want and what their leaders are giving them. Their lot in life is going somewhat down the toilet and while things are a stitch better than they were 5 years ago, they're still not in great shape.
Occupy movement. Home grown militias. Huge run-up in purchases of arms and ammunition. Assault weapons flying off the shelves.
I'm wondering if they (the government) are feeling like they might start having a big red 5-ring on their heads. Face it, this is (supposed to be) a government of the people, by the people, for the people, and if we as a people decided to rise up and tear this government down and replace it, it within our right and our power to do so. Somehow though, I don't think those in charge would be too amenable to that happening, and one thing that those in power like to do - is stay in power.
Add that to the memo about how they would now have the right to drone-strike and assassinate (that's what it is - plain and simple) US born citizens on US soil - who have been deemed a threat to the country - and it's not a big leap to replace 'country' with 'government'. With that they could indeed continue down the slippery slope leading to a mandate to assassinate those who pose a threat to the power structure of our government.
IMHO - this 'drone strike' on US soil is pure, unadulterated crap, and violates the US constitution in so many ways as to be laughable. On foreign soil, in a hostile country, surrounded by supporters, and unable to bring a person in without huge cost of life, I can certainly see usage of drones for assassination. Here on US soil though, with available police units for support, with National Guard units for support, with FBI for support, I cannot see any -legitimate- reason why someone could not be brought in with proper legal means far short of assassination via remote for adjudication under the law and with the rights our Constitution allows for.
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
Former Press Secretary: Obama Admin. Tried to Conceal Drone Strikes on Americans
February 25, 2013, 2:01 PM
Obama Admin. to Release Classified Memo Detailing Drone Death Strikes on Americans
February 7, 2013, 11:10 AM
Can U.S. Citizen Shoot Down Domestic Spy Drones? Question Looms
September 14, 2012, 3:50 PM
EFF: Police May Use Armed Drones to Watch You, Citizen Help Needed
June 12, 2012, 2:36 PM
Dawn of the Drones
June 6, 2008, 6:15 PM
Creationists are Mad About Google Doodle Depicting Evolution
November 24, 2015, 8:48 PM
DHS and TSA: Whoops, We Missed That 73 Airport Employees May be Terrorists
November 19, 2015, 2:16 PM
Star Wars Spinoff Film "Rogue One", Theme Park Attractions Announced
August 17, 2015, 12:20 PM
SpaceX Falcon 9's Seventh Supply Mission to ISS Ends w/ Fiery Stage 1 Explosion
June 28, 2015, 1:10 PM
Cool Science Video: Glowing Millipede Prowls the Nevada Desert
May 18, 2015, 12:00 PM
Newly Discovered Costa Rican Glass Frog is Kermit's Doppelgänger
April 22, 2015, 11:26 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information