Secret panel can put Americans on “kill list”
Breaking News, Headlines, Liberty Thursday, October 6th, 2011
By Mark Hosenball | Reuters
WASHINGTON – American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvement with militants.
The White House is portraying the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of President Barack Obama’s toughness toward militants who threaten the United States. But the process that led to Awlaki’s killing has drawn fierce criticism from both the political left and right.
In an ironic turn, Obama, who ran for president denouncing predecessor George W. Bush’s expansive use of executive power in his “war on terrorism,” is being attacked in some quarters for using similar tactics. They include secret legal justifications and undisclosed intelligence assessments.
To read more, visit: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005
Short URL: https://reteaparty.com/?p=3673
So who has been the one presidential candidate who has been brave enough to speak out against this?
RON PAUL!
I’m telling you, we need to do everything we can to get him elected. I am sick of the media belittling him in favor of Romney, Perry, Cain & the like who are just puppets for our corporate & military industrial masters.
PLEASE, this is our LAST CHANCE to get our country out of the gutter. If Ron Paul is not elected, America will implode.
Street people deserve their inconveniences…
Our soldiers are dying for them to lend aid and comfort to the enemy in this manner. They are in violation of numerous laws, health, etc. but mainly that of sedition.Sedition Act of 1918
The Sedition Act of 1918 (Pub. L. No. 65-150, 40 Stat. 553, enacted May 16, 1918) was an Act of the United States Congress that extended the Espionage Act of 1917 to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light or interfered with the sale of government bonds. One historian of American civil liberties has called it “the nation’s most extreme antispeech legislation.”[1]
It forbade the use of “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for 5 to 20 years.[2] The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times “when the United States is in war.”[3] It was repealed on December 13, 1920.[4]
Though the legislation enacted in 1918 is commonly called the Sedition Act, it was actually a set of amendments to the Espionage Act.[5] Therefore many studies of the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act find it difficult to report about the two “acts” separately. For example, one historian reports that “some fifteen hundred prosecutions were carried out under the Espionage and Sedition Acts, resulting in more than a thousand convictions.”[6] Court decisions do not use the shorthand term Sedition Act, but the correct legal term for the law, the Espionage Act, whether as originally enacted or as amended in 1918.
In reply to Mr. Baloney – The pertinent point is not whether or not Awlaki was hostile to the United States – we can certainly presume that to be the fact based on his public statements. The pertinent point is that as a citizen of the United States he was entitled to the protection of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution and was not afforded the same. The lawful action to take would have been to capture him and bring him back to the U.S. to stand trial. By not doing so the Obama regime has indicated yet again that it is essentially lawless and a danger to all citizens who may oppose its totalitarian policies. Ms. Kennedy is correct as far as Rep. Paul’s opposition to these policies proving, if any proof were needed, that he is the only candidate for President who continues to believe in a Republic based on the rule of law.
He was in Yemen. Is the Yemeni government calling for the extradition of U.S. officials to prosecute them for a homicide that happened in Yemen?
Good point Tom.
Rhonda
October 14, 2011/Friday
Based on how this article is worded, it has to be a fake. If the panel is “secret” and the actions of it are “secret”, how can we know about it to begin with and then what it really is doing if it really exists? Something secret means we are not aware of it, but rather only certain “members” would be. This article represents the information as openly to the public as any other article of media information while classifying it all as “secret”. Therefore I contend by this directive that the Anwar al-Awlaki incident as brought to the country’s attention is a red herring for some other devious reason.
Rhonda
October 14, 2011/Friday