Obama administration admits to killing Americans in drone strikes

Apparently the Constitution doesn’t matter much in Obama-land…

The Obama administration has killed four U.S. citizens in drone strikes, the Justice Department said in new revelations Wednesday, ahead of President Obama’s major national security speech set for Thursday at the National Defense University in Washington.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s letter, obtained by POLITICO and addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), includes justification for the administration’s targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen who was involved with Al Qaeda in Yemen. Obama had confirmed Awlaki’s death soon after it happened in September 2011, but the administration had not, until Wednesday, confirmed that the killing was carried out by American forces in a drone strike.

While I understand and support efforts to keep our nation safe from those who’d do us harm, our Constitution and the protections it affords all American citizens should not simply be cast aside when it’s convenient. Assassinating American citizens without affording them their due process as guaranteed by the Constitution simply isn’t right, no matter if it’s a Republican or a Democrat who’s ordering the assassination.


Related Articles

11 thoughts on “Obama administration admits to killing Americans in drone strikes

  1. Thanks Zach, you’re a true patriot. The oath the President takes is to defend the Constitution.

    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

    “First they came for the communists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.”

  2. If an American had walked across enemy lines in WWII and manned a Nazi anti-tank gun and began targeting and destroying American forces, would you send for the NYPD and try to arrest him and read him his rights?

    1. Cat Kin, I’m not entirely sure how the NYPD fits into this discussion, because you and I both know there are other law enforcement agencies (the FBI being one such agency) that are empowered to deal with American citizens (or foreign nationals for that matter) who’ve committed crimes and are in foreign countries.

      Further, we’re talking about the assassination of American citizens who’ve not been proven to have committed any crimes. None of the individuals who were assassinated by our government were allowed their due process rights as granted to them by our nation’s Constitution, so we’re relying on the word of Eric Holder and whoever else that they committed crimes.

      1. Zach, I really appreciate your concern on this issue. It’s important, as evidenced by the Presidential briefing today. My reference to the NYPD is to indicate that war and crime have different defense criteria. It has been ingrained into the American masses that we are in a war with terrorism. I’ve also stated that the President is a sharp guy but he has a deep learning curve when it comes to high political office. As JFK said after the Bay of Pigs invasion,[paraphrase] “That’s what happens when you depend on experts.” Still, I’m not so sure he hasn’t pursued the best course of action on this matter.

        1. Cat, other than one is dead from a drone strike, what’s the difference between a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, supporting the overthrow of the U.S. government and Sheriff David Clarke saying the federal government is a greater threat than “terrorism?”

          If Americans who know about a terrorist are afraid to go to the government with the evidence, because they think they’ll be on the next plane to Gitmo, it’s that fear that makes us less secure. It’s precisely our freedoms, an open society, that best protect us.

          Yes, Americans have been ingrained with the lie that we’re at war with “terrorism.” It’s to distract us from the oligarchs pillaging of us and the environment.

      2. Cat has a point. You wouldn’t have considered an American who joined up with the Nazis simply to have committed a crime. If we’re at war now, these people are enemy combatants.

        Zach also has a point. These are American citizens entitled to Constitutional rights that others are not entitled to, and the president should not be judge, jury and executioner. It’s a dangerous slippery slope. But if they are plotting harm against our country that is treason. Do you suggest that we make greater efforts to capture them? Tracking them down into a firefight would likely lead to their deaths also.

        However, here’s one more relevant point: more American citizens have been killed by drone strikes by this president than the total number of people who were waterboarded under the last president. Can you imagine if Bush had done this?

        Other than this blog post I wonder where all the outrage is. Where are all those good-hearted liberals demonstrating in the streets? Why wasn’t there a mass protest at the last inauguration with cool college kids turning their back on the president or giving him the finger? Where are the signs depicting him as Hitler or some other tryrant? Where’s all the utter disrepect?

        My only conclusion is that either people have a lot more class now, are too busy on the facebook and twitter, or all that “honorable opposition” from 2001-2009 was nothing more than a put-on by a bunch of phony liberals that the media bought into, ad nauseum. “Na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye.”

    2. Sh!t, had no idea the NYPD was in the European theater. Do you have a link? Was FYPD there too?

      Do you mean the anti-tank gun the German’s nicknamed the “doorknocker” because its puny 3.7 calibre round was useless against anything thicker than a door?


      “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

      Benjamin Franklin

Comments are closed.