It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US commits extrajudicial killings

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
PressTV is reporting that The U.S. is finally admitting the use of drones to strike within Pakistan borders !

Apparently Obama said this on that chat with web users on Google+ Monday Jan 30, 2012.

Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:48PM GMT -- PressTV

the US president said, “a lot of these strikes have been in the FATA” -- Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

"For the most part, they've been very precise precision strikes against al-Qaeda and their affiliates, and we're very careful in terms of how it's been applied," Obama said.
""For the most part..."" Obama does not elaborate on "anything else" ... Hmmm.
What else could be included ?




Liaghat Ali Khan, professor of Washington University had some comments as well:

I think this is a great event in international law that the head of the state of the United States openly admits that the United States engages in extrajudicial killing of persons in a foreign country.

Extrajudicial killings are prohibited under international law because the person who is killing is the judge, is the jury and is the executioner.

So this is a great event in this matter that now legal circles can validly ask the United States that what is its bases and what is its legal medium to which it decides to use drone attacks to kill people.



Story and Video
US President Barack Obama has confirmed that the United States has used non-UN-sanctioned CIA assassination drones to strike targets in the northwestern tribal belt of Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan.


Is There an International Legal Issue Here ?





edit on Jan-31-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I think the politically correct term is called assasination or could also be called executions. If you think youre seeing something now just wait until the drones start slamming into american citizens' homes. Europe already signed their version of internet censorship into law, i got a feeling SOPA and PIPA will be pushed through as well.

It won't be long until anyone who posses as a threat to the system, becomes systematically executed. Can you feel the totalitarian grip squeezing around your throat yet?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
The situation in america is about where the poor germans were in 1938.....almost worked up enough to take the world on.....Soon theyll have the people so frothing that anythinfg said against the war will get a guy lynched.
The un has enough of a confession here for a warrant for war crimes against Obama.....
Whats the holdup?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
This video has Obama saying things about drones and strikes in FATA at around the 29:00 area,

Uploaded by whitehouse on Jan 30, 2012
You asked the questions, and President Obama answered in the first-ever completely virtual interview from the White House, presented by YouTube and Google+.



edit on Jan-31-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Hey man, it is called 'justice with extra effects' if you are the system...
This is just the beginning of those extra effects.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
The big question here is:

Did the POTUS "slip-up" again and divulge secrets not for general publication ?

Or, was this another clever plan to "release" info of this magnitude in an "easy going" nonchalant way ?
And for what reasons ?

The video has someone asking about drones and about aid and about Pakistan.

I did not catch any direct question about drone strikes in the FATA region.

Did I miss that part ?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Regardless of why, violating another country's airspace is violating another country's airspace.

If China or somebody like that came over here doing that without our permission, the U.S. would try to level half their cotton picking country.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Here's a link to an article that may not be the final word, but it looks like an essential place to start. It's an interview with David Scheffer, the Mayer Brown/Robert A. Helman Professor of Law Director, Center for International Human Rights, at Northwestern University School of Law.

Scheffer, the U.S. Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues from 1997 to 2001, is author of the forthcoming book, "All the Missing Souls: A Personal History of the War Crimes Tribunals." (Princeton University Press.) He teaches international human rights law, international criminal law, and corporate compliance and the social mandate.

He discusses the attack on Osama Bin Laden, but I suppose the analysis could apply to any other "terrorist."

inthearena.blogs.cnn.com... rimes-issues-weighs-in/


Whether the United States violated international law in the killing of Osama bin Laden depends not only on how one defines what has been going on since September 11, 2001, but also how this particular operation was carried out on Pakistani territory.

The popular and patriotic narrative is that the United States is at war with Al Qaeda; Osama bin Laden commands Al Qaeda; thus under the law of war bin Laden is a legitimate target for a lethal assault regardless of his personal situation (armed or unarmed, awake or sleeping) at any particular time.

The more complicated view is that bin Laden is under federal indictment for terrorist attacks against U.S. civilians and government personnel on U.S. territory and at diplomatic and military targets in various parts of the world—attacks that violate federal antiterrorism law—and as a matter of law enforcement should be captured and brought to trial, preferably before a federal criminal court in the United States.

Despite the certainty with which proponents of either view argue their respective policies, the fact is that the United States has been pursuing both agendas for almost a decade: waging war and enforcing antiterrorism law. The Afghan and Iraq wars and various military strikes in Pakistan and Yemen testify to the logic of a war.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I hope this is brought up in the debates. Wishful thinking. Would turn the election upside down if nobody had to run against Obama.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Holy piss, I didn't even know that was a secret. This is just a huge middle finger to Americans and Pakistanis most of all, but also the rest of the world. Fantastic stuff.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I think Obama gaffed a slip-up.

I see we got a real "clear" response from somebody !

A senior administration official is denying to CNN that President Obama made a mistake in publicly revealing what had been classified information about U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan.

Asked whether it was a mistake or part of some larger strategy, the official said the president’s on the record admission on drones during a Google + video chat Monday, was “neither a slip up or a secret message to the Pakistanis”


Opps !

why would "some larger strategy" be a "secret message to the Pakistanis” ??

Boing Boing !



Administration official denies president made mistake revealing U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan



The official downplayed the significance of what happened, pointing out that what the president said was widely known. The president, the official said was making the point that the drone missions are “precise” and “targeted to avoid casualties.”

Then WHY even mention FATA ?

I think the POTUS got confused by the "aid" question





new topics




 
3

log in

join