Assassination by Leak: US floats Trial Balloon of Droning an American to Death

(By Tim Cushing)

Administration Officials Perform Some Very Public Handwringing Over Extrajudicial Drone Killing (via Techdirt)

The administration has sort of painted itself into a corner with its new rules on drone strikes. It’s apparently seeking to take out a US citizen who has joined al-Qaeda and is “actively plotting” against the US. Multiple issues have arisen, thanks…

——-

Related video:

RT reports, “Drone Dissent Downed: US activists in dock for protests against UAVs”

8 Responses

  1. Please file under “Who Cares?”, which is right behind “Whatever We Do Is Ipso Facto Legal” in the drawer marked “Memory Hole.” Or at least formerly marked as such, until labeling on all filing related to “Policy” was redacted for national security reasons…

    • Seems to me we are reaching that point where our lords and masters, having corralled us with our faith in the myths of our Exceptional Democracy and Freedom! ™ are feeling their oats and ready to abandon all pretense and just tell the rest of us to go f___ ourselves (along with the EU, and even members of Congress), that they are going to routinely just go on and do whatever goddam all they feel like doing to anyone at any time, close the pen doors, open the chute and put their Judas Goats to work herding us up to the killing and flensing floors of their abattoirs… No rules, no structure except raw power. Where has this all been seen before?

  2. “And the least it could do is follow the rules without carrying on in public, trying to conjure up some sort of sympathy for the difficult decisions it faces.”

    So much for the virtue of transparency, I guess.

  3. If this is an Administration attempt at “transparency,” it is sadly mistaken. Those who oppose drone strikes will not be swayed. And all it accomplishes is to notify the intended target of a potential strike.

    The Obama Administration is well within legal limits to target the American Jihadist, both under the terms of the Authorization for the Use of Military Force and under the terms of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. American citizenship does not grant anyone a shield against targeting if he is actively engaged in the Al-Qaeda war against the U.S.

    • Violating other countries’ sovereignty is a violation. The only exceptionalism is that of exceptional criminality and hubris!

      • “Violating other countries’ sovereignty is a violation.”

        Not if that country is harboring an Unauthorized Enemy Combatant and does nothing about it. The United States then has the right to pursue the Enemy within said country’s territory.

    • “If this is an Administration attempt at “transparency,” it is sadly mistaken. Those who oppose drone strikes will not be swayed.”

      They will, however, have their bluff called and a talking point taken away from them.

      As with al Qaeda, Bill, the target of public messaging is not the committed opponents, but the reachable people in the middle.

    • Like, the “intended target” would not know he has a laser dot on his forehead if this “transparency” were left “opaque.”

      And just in case anyone has forgotten Bill’s riff on how it’s all legal and stuff… Repeated restated regurgitated repetition is the stuff of successful learning, and propaganda…

Comments are closed.