Criminal law, International, Military, Politics, Society

Death Panel: Obama Delegates Hit List To Panel of Unnamed Officials

I recently ran a couple of columns (here and here) and postings criticizing President Obama’s assertion of the right to kill citizens as a presidential prerogative. It now appears that he has delegated the selection of targets for killings to a panel of unnamed officials who determine which people should be killed without a trial or even a charge. When it comes to citizens like Anwar al-Awlaki, the killings raise serious constitutional problems that are being kept from the courts by the Administration.


The identity of the members of the death panel are secret. There is no public record of their decisions or the basis for the kill order. Indeed, neither the target nor the public will necessarily know that it was this panel that ordered the killing.

While civil libertarians are raising voices of concern over such extrajudicial killings of citizens, the Obama Administration has portrayed “the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of President Barack Obama’s toughness toward militants who threaten the United States.” It has worked. Even conservatives are cheering the killings of the two citizens. Apparently, death panels in health care are enough to rally thousands in opposition but an actual death panel produces nary a yawn if the targets are hated. The fear is that this is how the rule of law dies — to the cheers and thunderous applause of citizens.

The results of the panel are simply submitted to the President, who retains the authority to countermand their decisions.

Obama has the distinction of putting the first citizen on the list. As noted in the earlier postings, Bush killed a citizen who was riding with a target, but Obama outdid his predecessor again in ordering the killing of a citizen.

Source: Reuters

149 thoughts on “Death Panel: Obama Delegates Hit List To Panel of Unnamed Officials”

  1. Most of what you say about Obama is true, Henman, but I still don’t want to surrender all three branches of government to the republican tea party. Those judges are in for a very long time, and I can’t forget that the republican platform wages war on women.

  2. HenMan, et al,

    I have to say that the only reason I can see to keep Obama in office is the SCOTUS. We cannot afford to have another young uber-right-wing ideologue appointed to the Court. That would happen if the Republicans got the Presidency and an opening came available.

    As for the other attributes, or lack of them, I agree.

  3. AY,

    “Better be careful or someone might think you are going republican….”

    Not in this life.

    😉

    *****

    Swarthmore mom,

    “Maybe I am wrong but I see Elaine as more of an Elizabeth Warren independent democrat rather than a republican.”

    I’m definitely a supporter of Warren.

  6. AY-

    My friend Swarthmore Mom keeps reminding us of dire consequences if Obama is not re-elected. I recently went back and forth with Sw Mom about the “lesser of two evils” theory. Every day that Obama is President we learn of more wrong doing- more violations of the law, more assaults on common decency, more kowtowing to money. At what point does he become the equal of two evils. I think he has already crossed that line. As far as civil liberties and the rule of law are concerned, what is the difference between Barack Obama and George W. Bush, or Dick Cheney, or Donald Rumsfeld, or John Yoo?

    What is Obama’s re-election slogan going to be? “I will protect you from the terrorists if it kills you”?

    Surely we can find a better Democratic candidate than this. How can anyone justify voting for this sell-out? How much more do we have to see from this man before we reject his actions and stop believing his silver-tongued bullshit?

    Progressive? No.
    Liberal? No.
    Democrat? No.

    Establishment toady? Yes.
    Servant of the Military-Industrial Complex? Absolutely.
    Employee of the Wall Street bankers? Undoubtedly.

    Lesser of two evils? Not anymore. Just one of two evils.

  7. HenMan,

    You are going in the wrong direction…..As another poster and I have discussed…What if they had a selection for none of the above…who would win…..I agree that it is a good ideal to vote…..It is a great idea to make yours count….even if not main stream….I had no problem voting for Nader and would do so again if presented the opportunity……It is just a shame that we are in the mind set of the lesser of two evils….a better opportunity must present itself and soon….what happens is most people reach the point of apathy…especially after all of the political commercials….wouldn’t it be nice if that money could go to a more noble cause….such as food for the hungry…but the ads do generate jobs in the media world…so there is that…As has been said…Keep on keeping on….and Keep Austin Weird…….

  8. The Tea Party was right. Obama does have a Death Panel.

    Sen. Chuck Grassley was right. Obama does want to kill Grandma.

    I was wrong. I voted for Obama.

    That won’t happen again.

    I’m moving farther to the left. Much farther.

    And I’m going to see if I can find my steel pot.

    And wear it all the time.

    Watch the skies!

    And don’t vote for the lesser of two evils.

  12. Now why did you have to rag on Jill…..She has the right to post the way she does and you have the right to ignore reading it…I am sure we have people on here that regularly ignore others posts for various real or imagined reasons….I can say that I enjoy reading the cut to the chase facts that are posted with the links…

  13. 2Jill.
    Regular readers of Greenwald know where to find his writings. Those who are not regular readers might appreciate a link.

    I don’t mind reading a lengthy post if what I am reading is the individual poster’s words of opinion. If what a poster wants to present is someone else’s lengthy opinion then please do as Elaine or anon nurse or Swarthmore mom do and post excerpts and then the link.

    I’ve stopped reading your posts because they are so often just a repeat of someone else’s opinion verbatim. Further, some of us have limited memory space and the longer a thread grows the more difficult it is to load. Some of that problem would be lessened if you simply posted the link.

    For instance — http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439×2068758

    Thank you

  15. Anon nurse, I’m glad you posted that quote, it was going to go into my comment also. A couple of days ago I said in a comment that given time mid-level managers in organizations no one has ever heard of will be putting the names on the lists and that they’d be Americans on American soil. The mechanisms already in place are designed (as the article states) to protect the President from liability. I still predict that soon the President will be entirely shielded as more authority migrates downward to these ad-hoc committees. And you know, there’s a certain kind of person that would consider being called in to one of those meetings the high point of their career. They’re not going to want to give that power up. for their own sick reasons. These aren’t good people trapped on a dark path, they’re where they are because they like it, like the torturers.

    Just how totalitarian does a country have to become before people realize that we are living in a state governed by a mindset and actions that we spent 40 years fighting a cold war against? That it’s not a slippery slope anymore but only the question of, now that we’ve hit the bottom of that slope and started digging, how low will we go. Our government is IMO now in the hands of sick and depraved people.

    Thanks also for the ‘End of America’ video also.

  17. Do you really blame the protesters? Or do you think that its possible with the standing garrisons, militias a/k/a police departments incited the incidents….or even escalated them in any way….

    Who do you think is going to win.

    The song that comes to mind of what will be next is, “Who let the dogs out.”

  19. And then there’s this, from the Reuter’s article:

    “When the name of a foreign, rather than American, militant is added to targeting lists, the decision is made within the intelligence community and normally does not require approval by high-level NSC officials.”

Comments are closed.