Front Page
NMJ Search
International
Islamofascism
Government & Politics
National & Local
Progressivism
Culture Wars
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google




Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), said Holder's "refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on US citizens and on US soil is more than frightening -- it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans."
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Holder: Drone Strike to Kill
US Citizen on American Soil Legal

HuffingtonPost.com
The Obama administration believes it could technically use military force to kill an American on US soil in an "extraordinary circumstance" but has "no intention of doing so," US Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter disclosed Tuesday.

Holder's March 4 letter was disclosed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who had asked whether the Justice Department believed President Barack Obama had the legal authority to order a targeted strike against an American citizen located within the United States.

The Obama administration, Holder said, rejected the use of military force where "well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat." But in theory, it'd be legal for the president to order such an attack under certain circumstances, Holder said.

"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," Holder wrote.

"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 like a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001," Holder continued, referring to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Holder said he would "examine the particular facts and circumstances" if such an emergency were to arise.

Paul, who had threatened to filibuster the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director over secrecy about the US drone program, said in a statement that Holder's "refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening -- it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans." Holder's letter was first reported by Adam Serwer of Mother Jones.

Holder is scheduled to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a Justice Department oversight hearing on Wednesday morning. Earlier in the day, members of the Senate Intelligence Committee said the administration had agreed to allow members of the committee to see all of the Office of Legal Counsel memos relating to the targeted killing of American citizens.

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE: 03/05/2013

Editor's Note: The tyrant Holder's words are chilling and, in fact, quite illegal. The Posse Comitatus Act, 18USC§1385, passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, prohibits federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. Nowhere in that law -- or in the Constitution -- does the Executive Branch have the authority to, as Mr. Holder stated, "to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States." With the substantial military build-up of the Homeland Security Department (read here), it is well past time for serious people to be asking serious questions of this administration, accepting no stonewalling. Normally, the media would be outraged at such statements and actions...but we don't have a free mainstream media anymore...


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a tax deductible donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal.  The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project's goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2013    Content Copyright © Individual authors
A Division of BasicsProject.org
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server