Take a Rare Look at How Obama Decides to Send Drones to Kill Americans

Take a Rare Look at How Obama Decides to Send Drones to Kill Americans

news.yahoo.com

Human rights advocates were floored on Monday night when NBC News published the details of an alarming Justice Department memo detailing the protocol for sending drones after United States citizens. It's not as if they hadn't suspected that the Obama administration's top secret drone attack protocol contained some unsavory details. They just didn't expect them to be so frightfully broad. The scoop by Michael Isikoff is actually startling not for the details but rather for the lack of details. It's very vague about a decision-making process that puts American lives on the line. Put simply,the government believes that a lethal drone attack against an American citizen is justified if the targets are a) "senior operational leaders" of al-Qaeda or b) "an associated force."

(visit the link for the full news article)

I know this has been brought up before in a similar fashion, but it looks like MAYBE the mainstream media is finally cluing in that this really shouldn't be "okay."

I guess it also underscores rather bluntly that if you are not on American soil, then the President assumes you have no Constitutional or Civil rights. So, if the President "okays" the murder of another human being under the auspices of "National Security," shouldn't that give others a blanket right to shoot Americans (soldiers or otherwise) for their own justification (jihad, revolution, etc....take your pick)? I mean, if we are throwing rules out the window......

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

a lethal drone attack against an American citizen is justified if the targets are a) "senior operational leaders" of al-Qaeda or b) "an associated force."

Americans get ready to get called an
*senior operational leaders" of al-Qaeda
*an associated force of al-qaeda .

Originally posted by inj3ct0r

a lethal drone attack against an American citizen is justified if the targets are a) "senior operational leaders" of al-Qaeda or b) "an associated force."

Americans get ready to get called an
*senior operational leaders" of al-Qaeda
*an associated force of al-qaeda .

How can any other country NOT consider this an "act of war"?

The problem with everything in all these regards is the relativity of these "definitions" or "labels" they are using to identify "targets".

Terrorist? Al-CIAda? Not only are these "descriptors extremely vague they are relative and can be used extremely loosely...and without courts, jury, evidence and what not...who gets to decide willy-nilly style who exactly qualifies as a terrorist or a CIAda member?

The way it is presented along with NDAA etc...it is ripe for unabated abuse...

One mans terrorist is another mans patriot...one mans alCIAda is another mans Militia/Freedom fighter...

Its all open for interpretation by the same people who interpret the 2nd amendment to mean they can regulate it as a privilege and not a right...

not...good...news.

If it passes it will soon be changed to include national security threats and terrorists in general which has already been updated to include anti government, well heck folks like you and I right here on ATS.

And what about the civilian casualties seen elsewhere from this is that too ok here?

Welcome to Obamas version of change and hope- No thank you Sir, Never owned a gun but I think I will go buy one this weekend or two, not that that would do anything to an armed drone.

Disgusting

I think that you will find it very easy for the government to add more organizations to the list,

like:
-The NRA
- The FFA
- The Boy Scouts of America
- The Girl Scouts
You know, whoever they feel like putting on a list.

See if you qualify as a potential list victim (terrorist).... take the test

reply to post by byGRACE

Never owned a gun but I think I will go buy one this weekend or two

Bravo to you!

I just hope that you can find one... then ammo to shoot in it. Both are in short supply in many places.

Add to this the reports of Obombers new "limitus test," in which US military leaders are expected to fire on US citizens if ordered... or be replaced/removed... And yet another step in the fascist shift is taken

Originally posted by Aqualung2012
Add to this the reports of Obombers new "limitus test," in which US military leaders are expected to fire on US citizens if ordered... or be replaced/removed... And yet another step in the fascist shift is taken

Yes...I was just about to add that to this thread....good catch!

I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new “litmus test” in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. “The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.” Those who will not are being removed.

Obama wants military leaders who will fire on US Citizens

reply to post by CIAGypsy


Let us not forget this:


U.S. Drone Policy: Standing Near Terrorists Makes You A Terrorist

"It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent," the Times reports. "Counterterrorism officials insist this approach is one of simple logic: people in an area of known terrorist activity, or found with a top Qaeda operative, are probably up to no good."

I saw this statement and thought I should share:

The liberals should take a look back and recall Kent State when the military was called upon to take up arms against them then look up the definition of hypocrite.

OH.....this gets even better...

More evidence surfaced today indicating that the Obama administration is breaking the law and defying official government policy by ordering the destruction of expended brass at military installations. The brass is often used by civilian gun owners to make their own ammunition.

Gun rights enthusiasts often make their own ammunition in a process known as "reloading," the practice of taking the brass from once-fired used bullets to make homemade ammo.

National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea reports on his blog that not only is the government destroying such used brass at Fort Drum, as reported Friday, but allegedly at Camp LeJeune as well.

Illegal govt destruction of used ammo alarms gun owners

He is apparently attempting to create a shortage of ammunition for the private gun owners too....

It just gets better every day doesn't it.......
Don't know how he's getting away with this, but it makes me more nervous after seeing a drone fly over the highway very near my house last summer......

TYRANNY!!!!!!!! This is getting rediculous! How much power are they gonna give this guy and his goons. They won't let the states secede, they won't change, and they are gonna kill anyone who challenges them. I think there is only one thing left to do, and its not join em.

reply to post by CIAGypsy


Yeah, if you side with terrorists (who are evil..) you might get blown up. American citizen or not. Do you see a problem with this? I don't. Cite a misuse of the protocol and you might change my mind.

Originally posted by butcherguy
I think that you will find it very easy for the government to add more organizations to the list,

like:
-The NRA
- The FFA
- The Boy Scouts of America
- The Girl Scouts
You know, whoever they feel like putting on a list.

See if you qualify as a potential list victim (terrorist).... take the test

Everyone is a potential terrorist to them AS IT SHOULD BE. Have you noticed they have done a good enough job that people are trying to say that Al Queda does not even exist!? Have any of your loved ones been snatched up yet? Chill out, they are doing their JOB - PROTECTING YOU.

When they start violating the constitution (which they have done) then let me know.

reply to post by NarrowGate

US citizens should be arrested, tried and convicted.....
before they are executed.

If it's okay to do it in Pakistan (not to mention blowing up children), how long before they let us have it, here in our own country, under the same 'rules of engagement'?

This would be fine and dandy if the terms were concrete but they aren't. A terrorist could could come to mean anyone who doesn't like the administration or who questions the why of things. Give it a few years and that could mean everyone. It sounds though if you live in the USA and you mind your own business and dont go traveling to countries with known terrorist organizations you will be fine. So the best thing everyone can do is be good little boys and girls and mind their p's and q's.

Right now the USA and all it's inhabitants are on hot plate so to speak. Everyone is turning against each other slowly, even parts of the government is turning on it's own. This is scary.


He has less than four years now people please vote with your mind not your heart next time.

It's why I don't think they like what they term "assault weapons" as the only rumored times drones were taken down was with rifles and semi automatics from what I remember at least in past threads.

And thats why I wouldn't give them up. They obviously don't intend to send expensive armies door to door.