Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (2 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats   22 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

So That's Why They Kept the Drone Kill Memo Secret

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 7   Valuable 6   Must Read 5  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H1 6/23/14

Become a Fan
  (113 fans)


warisacrime.org
(image by http://warisacrime.org)


Now that the U.S. government has released parts of its We-Can-Kill-People-With-Drones memo, it's hard to miss why it was kept secret until now.

Liberal professors and human rights groups and the United Nations were claiming an inability to know whether drone murders were legal or not because they hadn't seen the memo that the White House said legalized them. Some may continue to claim that the redactions in the memo make judgment impossible.

I expect most, however, will now be willing to drop the pretense that ANY memo could possibly legalize murder.

Oh, and yall can stop telling me not to use the impolite term "murder" to describe the, you know, murders -- since "murder" is precisely the term used by the no-longer secret memo.

The memo considers a section of the U.S. code dealing with the murder of a U.S. citizen by another U.S. citizen abroad, drawing on another section that defines murder as "the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought."

David Barron, the memo's author, needed a loophole to make murder-by-missile a lawful killing rather than an unlawful killing, so he pulls out the "public authority justification" under which the government gets to use force to enforce a law. It's a novel twist, though, for the government to get to use force to violate the law, claiming the violation is legal on the Nixonian basis that it is the government doing it.

Alternatively, Barron suggests, a government gets to use force if doing so is part of a war. This, of course, ignores the U.N. Charter and the Kellogg Briand Pact and the illegality of wars, as well as the novelty of claiming that a war exists everywhere on earth forever and ever. (None of Barron's arguments justify governmental murder on U.S. soil any less than off U.S. soil.)

In essence, Barron seems to argue, the people who wrote the laws were thinking about private citizens and terrorists, not the government (which, somehow, cannot be a terrorist), and therefore it's OK for the government to violate the laws.

Then there's the problem of Congressional authorization of war, or lack thereof, which Barron gets around by pretending that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force was as broad as the White House pretends rather than worded to allow targeting only those responsible for the 911 attacks.

Then there are the facts of the matter in the case of Anwar al Awlaki, who was targeted for murder prior in time to the actions that President Obama has claimed justified that targeting.

Then there are the facts in the other cases of U.S. killings of U.S. citizens, which aren't even redacted, as they're never considered.

Then there are the vastly more numerous killings of non-U.S. citizens, which the memo does not even attempt to excuse.

In the end, the memo admits that calling something a war isn't good enough; the targeted victim has to have been an imminent threat to the United States. But who gets to decide whether he or she was that? Why, whoever does the killing of course. And what happens if nobody ever even makes an unsupported assertion to that effect? Nothing, of course.

This is not the rule of law. This is savage brute force in minimal disguise. I don't want to see any more of these memos. I want to see the video footage of the drone murders on a television. I want to see law professors and revolving-door State Department / human rights group hacks argue that dead children fall under the public authority justification.

 

http://davidswanson.org

David Swanson is the author of "When the World Outlawed War," "War Is A Lie" and "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union." He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for the online (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Feith Dares Obama to Enforce the Law

Obama's Open Forum Opens Possibilities

Public Forum Planned on Vermont Proposal to Arrest Bush and Cheney

Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?

Holder Asked to Prosecute Blankenship

Eleven Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 people are discussing this page, with 22 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Fascinating that soon after the defeat of the Hous... by Samson on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:00:11 PM
At least when the drones are coming our way with e... by Daniel Geery on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:16:44 PM
The 2001 "Authorization for the Use of Military Fo... by Charles Roll on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:44:55 PM
What do you suggest?How about an article outlining... by Richmond Shreve on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:17:32 PM
So you'd have argued against Thomas Becket's famou... by Samson on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:01:46 PM
Ignore this guy. Former OEN editor or not, he is a... by Michael David Morrissey on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:42:22 AM
Interesting about 'Cass Sunstein' and 'cognitive i... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:34:35 PM
David Ray Griffin wrote a whole book about it. Don... by Michael David Morrissey on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:53:22 PM
Mr. Shreve:You are asking the wrong question! We s... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26:30 PM
The NY Times editorial shares the concern of this ... by Richmond Shreve on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:22:03 PM
Mr. Shreve:Your link isn't working! ... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:28:26 PM
Thomas Becket would recognize this policy."What wo... by Samson on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:59:05 PM
Samson:You make an excellent point of crucial impo... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:30:44 PM
I can think of no excuse to break Queen Pal's hard... by Pal Palsimon on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:56:39 AM
Worse, there appears to be nothing we can do about... by Pal Palsimon on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:01:56 AM
Wolf PAC From d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net: bit... by Pal Palsimon on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:06:42 AM
All we really need in a court of law is a judge ... by Pal Palsimon on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:46:37 AM
1. Murder is murder, whether the victims are Ameri... by Michael David Morrissey on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:38:14 AM
Mr. Morrissey:Can we continue the syllogistic thin... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:39:53 PM
Huh? ... by Michael David Morrissey on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:58:53 PM
Exactly! ... by Charles Roll on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:03:30 PM
President Eisenhower spoke of the military industr... by Charles-Eva Manning on Saturday, Jun 28, 2014 at 9:10:34 AM