Today in a congressional hearing, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair acknowledged that the U.S. may, with executive approval, deliberately target and kill U.S. citizens who are suspected of being involved in terrorism. I discussed this story in the segment on MSNBC Countdown below.
In the hearing, Blair stated “[w]e take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.”
The story raises serious legal questions. It is one thing to kill an American in the course of a terrorist act or to prevent an imminent attack. It is quite another thing to kill someone suspected of terrorism without a trial. That would amount to the assassination of a citizen.
Once again, the Obama Administration appears to be following Bush policies. In late 2002, Kamal Derwish (aka Ahmed Hijazi), a U.S. citizen, was killed in an attack by a Hellfire missile fired by a Predator in Yemen. The U.S. knew it was killing a U.S. citizen because it was monitoring his phone at the time. We were targeting Al Qaeda figures. One of the men was Abu Ali al-Harithi, suspected of masterminding the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen. After the attack, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions wrote a letter to the United States stating the attack “constitute[s] a clear case of extrajudicial killing.”
Notably, Derwish was a key possible witness for the defense in the controversial Lackawanna case. He was reportedly the individual who recruited the Lackawanna defendants to travel to Afghanistan and knew facts concerning their travels, timing, motivation, and the material support to al Qaeda.
Such use of unilateral authority put the United States on shaky legal ground. The Annex to Hague Convention Number IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, has a provision that reads: “In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden … to kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army … .” The provision is admittedly a bit vague when put into specific situations on a battlefield. However, the U.S. Army has interpreted this provision “as prohibiting assassination, proscription, or outlawry of an enemy, or putting a price upon an enemy’s head, as well as offering a reward for an enemy “dead or alive.'” While the military believes it can target individual soldiers, the line between an assassination and legitimate killing has become more blurred with new technology like predators. What is not blurred are the rights of U.S. citizens.
As reaffirmed in cases like Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), American citizens have the same protections regardless of whether they are without or outside of the country. In that case, two American women who murdered their husbands on American military bases abroad were given the same protections under the Fifth Amendment regardless of the fact that they were located and committed the crimes abroad.
If a president can kill U.S. citizens abroad, why not within the United States? What is the limiting principle beyond the practicalities?
AY,
What iz ya jivin’ about. Who’s going ta run bdaman’s ass down? Are ya threatening him? JK 🙂 sho ’nuff!
I just found an en English to Ebonics translator. It may help improve communication.
http://www.joel.net/EBONICS/translator.asp
AY said “However, I don’t see how you can justify killing American citizens on foreign soil just because they are talking with a native.”
I don’t either, and that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about people who have left the U.S. and have joined forces with Al Queda. I may be wrong, but I don’t think Al Queda has many “U.S. Friendly” visitors. :>)
“But then again the Sct has stated that the 4th Amendment has no applicability outside if he US.”
I was not aware of that. It would support my position. Can you provide a link?
“But don’t you think that they should at least get a military hearing to say the least.”
I’m not talking about if captured, they should be executed on site. I’m talking about recognition that they are/were a U.S. Citizen, but are considered an acceptable member of a targeted strike.
bdaman,
So who dey sey is gonna run you ass down? is that how you say it?
Duh,
Thats like asking your mistress if she minds if you have another girlfriend. Some do and some don’t.
Well the first couple just showed up for our S B Party.
I leave you with this
Who dat say they can assassinate a U.S. citizen, Who dat, who dat
Obama say he can assassinate dat who.
What is Fixated? Are you implying I am switch hitting. Impossible for now. The reason that my ELF did not show up is the mouse trail dropped a letter in the email name and I did not realize it. SO there.
Byron said “Personally if Chumley is in the car and he is not the one being targeted too bad for Chumley. Wrong place. wrong time for him.”
Byron, that is what I understand Blair to be addressing. But instead of the Military saying too bad for Chumley, they are asking the Commander-in-Chief for final authority to say too bad for Chumley.
Oh no, I was out shopping. Trying to figure out is I should fry the wings and then bake em of just bake em.
I have a great hot sauce for them. The Scoville unit ought to be somewhere between 150,000 to 200,000. Jalapenos just don’t do it for me any more. The habaneros chili is a good start and then it is mixed in a blue cheese dip. It is not for the amateurs.
Mike Spindell said “I wouldn’t put that much trust in any man/woman.”
I believe you Mike. Fortunately the Framers of our Constitution saw fit to make one person the Commander-in-Chief. One person, elected by a majority of the electors, is charged with the duty of protecting the citizens of this country.
“President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.” -Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
That provision vests full control of the military forces of the United States in the President. The power of the President is at its zenith under the Constitution when the President is directing military operations of the armed forces, because the power of Commander in Chief is assigned solely to the President. If you think he is acting unconstitutionally, call your Congressman and ask that he be impeached.
And you know I busted you yesterday switching
AY sure is funny you haven’t posted in this thread ALL DAY. I make a reference about a new nom de plume (I Like That) and bam here’s AY
Last post of Fixated 3:32 first post AY 3:41
I see Duh is here. Bdaman can’t be that far away. Where is Amon re, I have not seen him post yet.
Looks like duh has gotten into an actual good fight. Good job.
However, I don’t see how you can justify killing American citizens on foreign soil just because they are talking with a native. But then again the Sct has stated that the 4th Amendment has no applicability outside if he US. But don’t you think that they should at least get a military hearing to say the least. Reminds me of a story I read about the civil war here in the US where Quantrill Raiders. He made those decisions with the pull of a gun. Killed 200 in retaliation for one of his men getting shot.
Duh:
Personally if Chumley is in the car and he is not the one being targeted too bad for Chumley. Wrong place. wrong time for him.
If this is a military mission, personally I dont think you need the executive’s permission to proceed. Johnson did that kind of shit in Viet Nam and it worked out “real well” for our troops. Although we should have never been there to begin with. But that is another argument.
“Section 401(d) not only makes acceptance of “any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state” the basis of expatriation; it also makes “performing the duties” of any such office, post, or employment a ground for expatriation.”
U.S. Supreme Court, Kawakita v. United States, 343 U.S. 717 (1952)
While Al Queda is an entity at war with the U.S., but is not itself a foreign state, the intent of the laws making that automatically lose their citizenship are clear.
Am I missing something here. Fixated Neurotic jumps in the thread and with his first post says answer my question first?
Who is using a new nom de plume?
Fixated Neurotic
1, February 7, 2010 at 2:46 pm
answer my question first not the other way around.
Fixed,
I am not familiar with the details of Pat Tillman’s death o discuss it. If he was purposely killed because he was going to speak out against the war, I would have a big problem with that.
As to the Blackwater guy. He is not a member of the U.S. Military. He would not be the one performing the strike.
Stay on topic. Please.
How do you Spell God, I do not know, d-u-h? You are playing duh when you first make that decision to kill an American national on foreign soil.
Duh,
You are being foolish. You cannot expatriate an American citizen. They do that to themselves just because they work there. The difference being an expatriate usually works and makes lots of money and if a person moved over seas to do a job of manual labor they would be considered immigrants.
You are just shooting American citizens on foreign soil. Admit it.
Byron said “you don’t need an executive order to blow some American’s ass away if he is hanging with Al Qaeda.”
Yes you do. That’s exactly what this article is about. Watch the video. Listen to Blair’s words.
Byron said “What I am saying is not incompatible with protecting our troops. If Chumley Patterson jumps up and says God is great and he is holding an AK-47 or a detonator, blow his ass away. If Chumley’s name is on an executive order that says he is to be assassinated that is wrong.”
What about somewhere in between. What if Chumley has left the U.S. and joined up with Al Queda? What if the military surveillance supports that Chumley is giving aid to the enemy?
If the military is going to strike an Al Queda target, and Chumley is among them, should they;
1) Abort the attack because on of those in the vehicle is an American that joined forces with Al Queda?
2) Inform the POTUS that Chumley is one of those in the vehicle and get permission to go ahead with the strike?
It’s your call Byron.
“Every traitor you protect is one more that will kill members of our armed forces, and innocent civilians if given the chance.”
How much fera and loathing can one absorb without agreeing to a Dictatorship. So many people have been given the death sentence for crimes they didn’t commit and yet the prosecutors were adamant as to their guilt. Lt. Calley blew away a town of
Vietnamese rebels only to discover they weren’t and then as FN
said there was Pat Tillman. I wouldn’t put that much trust in any man/woman.