Can the Government now Kill U.S. Citizens? Attorney General says, Yes…

T

TheodoreWaters

Longterm Registered User
Another article that makes me want to bug out.

March 9, 2012
In a speech on Tuesday the Attorney General of the United States tried to lay out the governments case for killing American Citizens overseas.
YEP, KILLING AMERICAN CITIZENS!

The Obama Administrations policy of extra-judicial killings of American citizens abroad, is being trumpet by the Attorney General this week as he lays out the legal case for murdering American citizens without a trail.

The Attorney General, Eric Holder, suggested in a speech earlier this week that the President of the United States has the power to kill anyone outside the United States he feels might be dangerous. When you combine this type of thinking with the recent passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, which allowed for the indefinite detention of American Citizens without a trail, it has some wondering…..

What about killing American Citizens in America, is that now allowed?

FBI Director Robert Mueller was asked yesterday on Capitol Hill that exact question. The House wanted to know if the Obama Administration’s policy of extra-judicial killings of American citizens abroad could also apply inside the United States as well.

At first the F.B.I. Director tried to evade the question, but when pressed he finally stated that he was not certain if the government had the right to kill our own people.

Not Certain?

You better be damn certain! How the hell does the Director of the F.B.I. not know that the government doesn’t have the right to kill Americans that they deem to be “dangerous� The fact that this is being talked about at any level of the Federal Government is absolutely appalling. But for the Attorney General of The United States to put forth a legal case for doing so, is beyond belief.
 
Excellent thread. I was thinking to pos it myself. The constitution of America says that we will protect and defend the constitution against ALL enemies foreign and domestic. This all started with Al Awlaki. He was dronned in Yemen as he claimed to be some big Al Qaeda operations mastermind. So in the end he got his due.

Does this law affect US citizens? Of course it does. Why wouldn't it? Do you think that they would come out and say ok and by the way we have drones flying over every major city and we can dispose of you at any moment. With the patriot act and many more to follow after that. The Attorney General Holder. Don't even get me started on that clown I would be on my soap box for hours.

Excuse my being cynical. Ex cop in me tells me these people do it all the time in the US. Wouldn't surprise me at all.


Tapmaster
 
The law of the land in many countries means very little when considering the powers of government wishes. Assassinations are rife and merely appear as accidents. Scientists falling onto train tracks, brake failure on cars, government employees being found in bags in whole or in parts and many incidents of 'missing'. Laws are merely stated for the benefit of citizens to abide by and entertain - government 'forces' work on a completely higher level...



Rich H
 
I dare say that had John Walker Lindh wouild have been killed had events gone differently. (the American Taliban captured in nQala-i-Jangi fort in Afghanistan, the one where during the riot CIA officer Johnny Spann was killed)

I suppose it is the difference between a planned killing with a drone, and an immediate action duing a armed confrontation.

But I fail to see the difference (when abroad) what the passport carried makes? That said, i am not a US lawyer.

I suppose inside the US, then rules of armed force and self-defence mean a planned op to kill is conspiracy to murder and so the FBI wouldn't really be in that game. That said, if someone decides to try their luck and gets slotted by federal officers that's a justifiable homicide.

Bit different, all those Iranians dying in mysterous shootings and explosions. Those are not your own countrymen.

That said there's an interesting question as to how much of an extension of the weapon system do you have to be to be in order to be a legitimate target? Bit like killing unarmed spotters for indirect fire-they are unarmed, but part of the weapon system. Scientists assist a strategic weapon system? Anwar Al-Awlaki was an ideologue and Samir Khan a web-designer (both held US citizenship), both got taken out in a drone strike-along with AQAP's top bomb maker.

Fine line between kill/capture, and war/criminal.

I mean Ramzi Youseff, the first bloke to try and blow up the World Trade centre in the mid 1990s was found and arrested. Now it does seem more kill than capture.
 
Its sad to say that in this day and age, if you are not aware that an asset of the government can take anything from you including the oxygen you breathe, than its self imposed ignorance. The CIA, NSA, and DIA have made it quite clear that they have the capabilities for such action. And thats not even touching the government funded "acquisition" companies and what they do.

What I thought most interesting is that the FBI director "tried to evade the question." All I can say to that is, "Really? Plausible deniability? Im shocked!" Im not sure what genious thought he was going to get a straight answer out of him.

We all know the drill here, "I am not aware of any such action, I was not part of any such mission, and if I was I am not at liberty to speak of it." Is it possible? YES! The real question is, is it plausible? YES! All you have to do is look up the unclassified actions of the CIA during WWII, Vietnam, Or the cold war.

Thats my piece.
 
The government should have that option available at any time to use against one of it's own citizens. Especially! when the citizen threatens the lives of American's or anyone else for that matter. From an executive level the outcome of that can easily be resolved. As stated earlier even if the person does not have a US passport that option should always remain on the table.

American's of all people know the sketch. "Protect and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic". Or pledge states I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under GOD indivisible with liberty and justice for all. So when someone takes it upon himself to go against these principles then he gets what he gets.

Tapmaster
 
Extra-judical killing is a term that the press love to use.

In reality every drone strike is scrupulously attended by a targeting panel who seek legal advice and weigh up the various courses of action available. Auditable and accountable documents exist to ensure that this option is used with due diligence.
 
This has been around now for a while. Fact is that American Law does not mean anything outside of America. This does not authorise them to work at will in any country they wish and hold a press conference following after stating they dropped yet another one of their own. This simply heads a congressional before the 72 hour response.
 
It would appear that the government can authorise killing American terrorists any where in the world. In my opinion rightfully so! American Law does exist outside America. For example all ex pats who live outside the mainland US are required to file taxes. If you make above a certain amount they can force you to pay taxes and there is nothing you can do about it. Read the fine print inside the US passport. There are a lot of escape clauses for the US to act.

For example they say that you can be a dual national. However, in the passport it states that you could lose your citizenship if you swear allegiance to a foreign power. Again, everyday people get dual nationality and nothing is said. But, rest assured if need be that exclusion can be used against you.

The US is paying a lot of countries for aid and military assistance. So in return they are allowed to rid the world of terrorists. There is no need to take it before congress in 72 hours as the story would certainly get out and risk the possibility of losing another terrorist.

Tapmaster
 
they see no problem with killing anyone else, where ever they are; without a 'by you leave' so why not their own citizens.
 
The 72 hours I was referring to was for the families who think they have a right to file a congressional on behalf of their Terry child. This old law just shoots that dead in the water and a congress official is not obligated to waste their time looking into it. The law is only very nice loop hole in many acts already established to prevent any inquiries.

As fore the tax law; if you live in any of the approved 189 countries and hold a visa for the country you reside in and are paying tax, yes you must file taxes but they can not make you pay taxes. You must submit an additional form with your return and provide evidence from the tax office in the country you are living & paying taxes in. You can just down load the paper from the IRS website and if you have not got a clue as to how to obtain the document required from your hosting counrty then call the IRS office at you local embassy.
 
Back
Top