From Dick to Obama: the Age of Murder.gov

[georgephillip]

Where does Obama get his legal justification for the mass murder of civilians...someplace most Democrats don't want to go:

"At last we know. The mysterious legal authority for Barack Obama’s killer drone program flows from another administration with an elastic interpretation of executive power: that of Richard Nixon.

"In a chilling 16-page dossier known simply as the White Paper, one of Obama’s statutory brains at the Justice Department cites the 1969 secret bombing of Cambodia as a legal rationale justifying drone strikes, deep inside nations, against which the United States is not officially at war.

"This startling disclosure is drafted in the antiseptic prose of an insurance adjuster announcing the denial of a claim based on a pre-existing condition.

"Yet, the bombing of Cambodia (aka Operation Menu), which involved more than 3,000 air strikes, was almost universally acknowledged as a war crime.

"Now the Obama administration has officially enshrined that atrocity as precedent for its own killing rampages."

The Game of Drones » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

 

[Meathead]

What's the point of dingbat links to support dingbat arguments?

 

[BreezeWood]

there should be accountability for drone strikes a with public disclosures.

 

[georgephillip]

What's the point of dingbat links to support dingbat arguments?

Making it easier for fascist trolls to respond to content?

 

[georgephillip]

there should be accountability for drone strikes a with public disclosures.

How about prosecutions for war crimes?

"Since Obama’s election, the CIA has overseen nearly 320 drone strikes in Pakistan alone, killing more than 3,000 people, as many as 900 of them civilians. Among the dead are at least 176 children."

The Game of Drones » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

 

[HUGGY]

Precident matters. That may be the most insidious legacys handed down by Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Ford's pre-emptory pardon of Nixon was astonishing. It's amazing what these people have done under the cover of chaos.

There has been a steady over reach of presidential authority since Eisenhower warned of the political military industrial complex.

Singling out Obama at this stage of the game seems a bit glib as he has only actually bent the rules to kill actual terrorists. So far I don't see Obama having to get up behind the podium and say he is sorry for the targets he has chosen. The biggest alligator tears from his opposition seem to have been when he DIDN'T use his drones as in Benghazi.

Ya... the past presidents I have noted has gone head long down the slippery slope. THEN we had 9/11 and EVERYTHING changed. FOREVER. Technology has embeded change that can't be undone as well. The internets.. communication in general... has made it possible for goat herders to fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people and directly attack our Pentagon and the White House. Preventing such acts in the future has been job one. Obama has done a fair job at keeping the bad guys in check. AND yes some of them have been American citizens. At some point we have to trust that the president we elect makes good choices using bad law and the other tools he has inherited.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

"Yet, the bombing of Cambodia (aka Operation Menu), which involved more than 3,000 air strikes, was almost universally acknowledged as a war crime.

That's not true.

 

[georgephillip]

Precident matters. That may be the most insidious legacys handed down by Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Ford's pre-emptory pardon of Nixon was astonishing. It's amazing what these people have done under the cover of chaos.

There has been a steady over reach of presidential authority since Eisenhower warned of the political military industrial complex.

Singling out Obama at this stage of the game seems a bit glib as he has only actually bent the rules to kill actual terrorists. So far I don't see Obama having to get up behind the podium and say he is sorry for the targets he has chosen. The biggest alligator tears from his opposition seem to have been when he DIDN'T use his drones as in Benghazi.

Ya... the past presidents I have noted has gone head long down the slippery slope. THEN we had 9/11 and EVERYTHING changed. FOREVER. Technology has embeded change that can't be undone as well. The internets.. communication in general... has made it possible for goat herders to fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people and directly attack our Pentagon and the White House. Preventing such acts in the future has been job one. Obama has done a fair job at keeping the bad guys in check. AND yes some of them have been American citizens. At some point we have to trust that the president we elect makes good choices using bad law and the other tools he has inherited.

Who should be accountable for the 176 children murdered on Obama's watch?
Even if you are correct about relative Evil, what happens when the next Republican moves into the White House? Drones over Mexico?

 

[georgephillip]

"Yet, the bombing of Cambodia (aka Operation Menu), which involved more than 3,000 air strikes, was almost universally acknowledged as a war crime.

That's not true.

"In official United States Air Force record of US bombing activity over Indochina from 1964 to 1973 was declassified by US president Bill Clinton in 2000. The report gives details of the extent of the bombing of Cambodia, as well as of Laos and Vietnam.

"According to the data, the Air Force began bombing the rural regions of Cambodia along its South Vietnam border in 1965 under the Johnson administration. This was four years earlier than previously believed.

"The Menu bombings were an escalation of these air attacks. Nixon authorized the use of long-range B-52 bombers to carpet bomb the region."

Carpet bombing is often a war crime.

Operation Menu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[HUGGY]

Precident matters. That may be the most insidious legacys handed down by Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Ford's pre-emptory pardon of Nixon was astonishing. It's amazing what these people have done under the cover of chaos.

There has been a steady over reach of presidential authority since Eisenhower warned of the political military industrial complex.

Singling out Obama at this stage of the game seems a bit glib as he has only actually bent the rules to kill actual terrorists. So far I don't see Obama having to get up behind the podium and say he is sorry for the targets he has chosen. The biggest alligator tears from his opposition seem to have been when he DIDN'T use his drones as in Benghazi.

Ya... the past presidents I have noted has gone head long down the slippery slope. THEN we had 9/11 and EVERYTHING changed. FOREVER. Technology has embeded change that can't be undone as well. The internets.. communication in general... has made it possible for goat herders to fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people and directly attack our Pentagon and the White House. Preventing such acts in the future has been job one. Obama has done a fair job at keeping the bad guys in check. AND yes some of them have been American citizens. At some point we have to trust that the president we elect makes good choices using bad law and the other tools he has inherited.

Who should be accountable for the 176 children murdered on Obama's watch?
Even if you are correct about relative Evil, what happens when the next Republican moves into the White House? Drones over Mexico?

The OP is disengenuous. This is NOT the age of presidential murder .. Or U S Government murder. The terrorists have shown no conscience or aversion to killing children. Left unchecked we can certainly expect a hundred times 176 child and other age groups murdered by the terrorists.

I don't seen a zero end game in the murder game. Expecting it to all just go away if only Obama did not have drones is nonsense.

About 400 died in a building collapse recently...many kids...sewing the crap YOUR kids buy in your local malls. There are plenty of places we can save children on the planet. The ones being used as human shields we have no ability to save. We have to eliminate the REAL bad guys as best we can. Try shifting at least some of the blame for children sacrificed in the war on terrorists on the terrorists that place them in harms way.

 

[georgephillip]

Precident matters. That may be the most insidious legacys handed down by Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Ford's pre-emptory pardon of Nixon was astonishing. It's amazing what these people have done under the cover of chaos.

There has been a steady over reach of presidential authority since Eisenhower warned of the political military industrial complex.

Singling out Obama at this stage of the game seems a bit glib as he has only actually bent the rules to kill actual terrorists. So far I don't see Obama having to get up behind the podium and say he is sorry for the targets he has chosen. The biggest alligator tears from his opposition seem to have been when he DIDN'T use his drones as in Benghazi.

Ya... the past presidents I have noted has gone head long down the slippery slope. THEN we had 9/11 and EVERYTHING changed. FOREVER. Technology has embeded change that can't be undone as well. The internets.. communication in general... has made it possible for goat herders to fly airplanes full of innocent people into buildings full of innocent people and directly attack our Pentagon and the White House. Preventing such acts in the future has been job one. Obama has done a fair job at keeping the bad guys in check. AND yes some of them have been American citizens. At some point we have to trust that the president we elect makes good choices using bad law and the other tools he has inherited.

Who should be accountable for the 176 children murdered on Obama's watch?
Even if you are correct about relative Evil, what happens when the next Republican moves into the White House? Drones over Mexico?

The OP is disengenuous. This is NOT the age of presidential murder .. Or U S Government murder. The terrorists have shown no conscience or aversion to killing children. Left unchecked we can certainly expect a hundred times 176 child and other age groups murdered by the terrorists.

I don't seen a zero end game in the murder game. Expecting it to all just go away if only Obama did not have drones is nonsense.

About 400 died in a building collapse recently...many kids...sewing the crap YOUR kids buy in your local malls. There are plenty of places we can save children on the planet. The ones being used as human shields we have no ability to save. We have to eliminate the REAL bad guys as best we can. Try shifting at least some of the blame for children sacrificed in the war on terrorists on the terrorists that place them in harms way.

What if some of us are the REAL bad guys?
Four to five million Muslims have become inmates, refugees, cripples, or dead in the last ten years at the hands of the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. Blowback is inevitable.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

"Yet, the bombing of Cambodia (aka Operation Menu), which involved more than 3,000 air strikes, was almost universally acknowledged as a war crime.

That's not true.

"In official United States Air Force record of US bombing activity over Indochina from 1964 to 1973 was declassified by US president Bill Clinton in 2000. The report gives details of the extent of the bombing of Cambodia, as well as of Laos and Vietnam.

"According to the data, the Air Force began bombing the rural regions of Cambodia along its South Vietnam border in 1965 under the Johnson administration. This was four years earlier than previously believed.

"The Menu bombings were an escalation of these air attacks. Nixon authorized the use of long-range B-52 bombers to carpet bomb the region."

Carpet bombing is often a war crime.

Operation Menu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If carpet bombing is a war crime then you're going to have to look further back than Nixon.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What's the point of dingbat links to support dingbat arguments?

What good is prejudice in the face of an argument? What point is there to it? It has been well documented how frequently Obama has used drones to accomplish military objectives. But wait, it may not stop there. Anwar Al Awlaki was an American born Muslim cleric who encouraged other Muslims to wage Jihad against Americans, even though that is treason, he still deserves a trial and due process under the law. Too bad he was killed in Yemen by a drone strike. Ordered by Obama.

Earlier this year, the Department of Justice Attorney General Eric Holder tried to rationalize the use of drones in "extraordinary circumstances":

The Honorable Rand Paul
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510


Dear Senator Paul:


On February 20, 2013, you wrote to John Brennan requesting additional information concerning the Administration's views abourt whether "the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial."

As members of this Administration have previously indicated, the U.S. government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States, and has no intention of doing so. As a policy matter, moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this ocuntry provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat. We have a long history of using the criminal justice system to incapacitate individuals located in our country who pose a threat to the United States and its interests abroad. Hundreds of individuals have been arrested and convicted of terrorism-related offenses in our federal courts.

The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur and one we hope no President will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States. For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001.

Were such an emergency to arise, I would examine the particular facts and circumstances before advising the President on the scope of his authority.

Sincerely,
Eric H. Holder, Jr.

http://www.paul.senate.gov/files/documents/BrennanHolderResponse.pdf

 

[HUGGY]

Who should be accountable for the 176 children murdered on Obama's watch?
Even if you are correct about relative Evil, what happens when the next Republican moves into the White House? Drones over Mexico?

The OP is disengenuous. This is NOT the age of presidential murder .. Or U S Government murder. The terrorists have shown no conscience or aversion to killing children. Left unchecked we can certainly expect a hundred times 176 child and other age groups murdered by the terrorists.

I don't seen a zero end game in the murder game. Expecting it to all just go away if only Obama did not have drones is nonsense.

About 400 died in a building collapse recently...many kids...sewing the crap YOUR kids buy in your local malls. There are plenty of places we can save children on the planet. The ones being used as human shields we have no ability to save. We have to eliminate the REAL bad guys as best we can. Try shifting at least some of the blame for children sacrificed in the war on terrorists on the terrorists that place them in harms way.

What if some of us are the REAL bad guys?
Four to five million Muslims have become inmates, refugees, cripples, or dead in the last ten years at the hands of the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. Blowback is inevitable.

The word "us" is an interesting choice. "Our" interests gets thrown around very casually by some of our elected representatives also. Something like 7% of our imported crude oil originated from the ME during Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Now it is around 5%. This is hardly now and hasn't for a long time been reason to invade countries in the ME. The truth is that no matter who these countries have as leaders they sell thier oil on the open market and we pay for oil on the same open market. "Our" interests in the ME is a myth.

The excuse that it is OUR responsibility to remove dictators because they are evil is also nonsense. People have the government they deserve. It is the responsibility of the citizens of any region to rebel agaist tyranny as we did against the British and as is being seen right now in Egypt, Lybia and now Syria. The results of those rebellions is none of our buisness. No terrorist is going to attack the U S because we did not participate in thier revolution.

 

[georgephillip]

That's not true.

"In official United States Air Force record of US bombing activity over Indochina from 1964 to 1973 was declassified by US president Bill Clinton in 2000. The report gives details of the extent of the bombing of Cambodia, as well as of Laos and Vietnam.

"According to the data, the Air Force began bombing the rural regions of Cambodia along its South Vietnam border in 1965 under the Johnson administration. This was four years earlier than previously believed.

"The Menu bombings were an escalation of these air attacks. Nixon authorized the use of long-range B-52 bombers to carpet bomb the region."

Carpet bombing is often a war crime.

Operation Menu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If carpet bombing is a war crime then you're going to have to look further back than Nixon.

That's for sure.
The official history of war crimes is always written by the winner.

Bombing of Tokyo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dilloduck]

At least those bombings were done in the country that we had declared war against.
That doesn't help the dead much but it gives attorneys something to kick around.

 

[georgephillip]

The OP is disengenuous. This is NOT the age of presidential murder .. Or U S Government murder. The terrorists have shown no conscience or aversion to killing children. Left unchecked we can certainly expect a hundred times 176 child and other age groups murdered by the terrorists.

I don't seen a zero end game in the murder game. Expecting it to all just go away if only Obama did not have drones is nonsense.

About 400 died in a building collapse recently...many kids...sewing the crap YOUR kids buy in your local malls. There are plenty of places we can save children on the planet. The ones being used as human shields we have no ability to save. We have to eliminate the REAL bad guys as best we can. Try shifting at least some of the blame for children sacrificed in the war on terrorists on the terrorists that place them in harms way.

What if some of us are the REAL bad guys?
Four to five million Muslims have become inmates, refugees, cripples, or dead in the last ten years at the hands of the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. Blowback is inevitable.

The word "us" is an interesting choice. "Our" interests gets thrown around very casually by some of our elected representatives also. Something like 7% of our imported crude oil originated from the ME during Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. Now it is around 5%. This is hardly now and hasn't for a long time been reason to invade countries in the ME. The truth is that no matter who these countries have as leaders they sell thier oil on the open market and we pay for oil on the same open market. "Our" interests in the ME is a myth.

The excuse that it is OUR responsibility to remove dictators because they are evil is also nonsense. People have the government they deserve. It is the responsibility of the citizens of any region to rebel agaist tyranny as we did against the British and as is being seen right now in Egypt, Lybia and now Syria. The results of those rebellions is none of our buisness. No terrorist is going to attack the U S because we did not participate in thier revolution.

I don't think it was ever about US crude oil imports from the Middle East as much as it was about control of who received exports of Middle Eastern crude:

"The Anglo-American Petroleum Agreement of 1944 was based on negotiations between the United States and Britain over the control of Middle Eastern oil. Below is shown what the American President Franklin D. Roosevelt had in mind for to a British Ambassador in 1944:

"Persian (Iranian) oil …is yours. We share the oil of Iraq and Kuwait. As for Saudi Arabian oil, it’s ours.[6]"

Eisenhower perceived the oil of the Middle East to be the greatest material prize in world history at the same time the US was the world's leading exporter of oil. Somehow, it always seems to come back to Empire or Republic?

 

[georgephillip]

At least those bombings were done in the country that we had declared war against.
That doesn't help the dead much but it gives attorneys something to kick around.

That's true for Japan's victims, but what about North Korea, Cambodia and Laos?