This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Dear American: It's An "Extraordinary Circumstance" And This Drone's Coming For You
In response to Rand Paul's letter asking 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," we now have an answer. Attorney General Holder responds, in a word "Yes." Of course, it is caveated with 'extraordinary circumstances' and 'necessity' but as Mike Krieger so subtly summarizes: "the military can assassinate U.S. citizens on U.S. soil." As NBC reports, the letter from Holder surfaced just as the Senate Intelligence Committee was voting 12-3 to approve White House counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan to be CIA director. The vote came after the White House agreed to share additional classified memos on targeted drone strikes against U.S. citizens overseas. As Rand Paul commented, "this is more than frightening... it is an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans."
Full Holder Letter:
Dear Senator Paul,
On February 20, 2013, you write to John Brennan requesting additional information concerning the administration's views about 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 US government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and have 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 country 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 individual have been arrested and convicted of terrorism-related offenses in our federal courts.
The question you have posed is entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur and 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 Dec. 7, 1941 and Sept. 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 Holder,
Attorney General
»
- 30016 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Executive decision, Bitchez!
Who's the fucking "decider" now bitchez????
I predict the honeymoon with lame duck Obama is about to be over with the left and progessives soon!!! If they don't realize the great bambozzling they got with this guy, they will realize it soon, when drones are flying over their union rallys and anti WTO/occupy rallys (riots) in the coming years!
But before you idiot globalist republicans start smiling, every gun owner in America will be considered a "threat" to any government power and "stability" regardless of who occupies the white house in the future!!!
So what's the decision if the "imminent threat" is hiding in a subsidized housing project in Chicago??????? Ohhhhh, the conundrum.............
And let's not forget the collateral damage...
I suggest everyone begin to choose their neighbors wisely.
It will only be extraordinary the first time.
I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale
Shoot straight for once, you Army pukes - Red Dawn (1984)
Get a good lawyer.
Law school professor and former criminal defense attorney tells you why you should never agree to be interviewed by the police.
http://www.planbeconomics.com/2013/03/05/why-you-should-never-talk-to-th...
This reminds me of a few months ago when ZH posted that israeli video of the drone attack on a city street. Imagine sitting in traffic when the car next to you gets droned... that is one scary ass future.
Where do our laws allow the attorney general of our country to officially “imagine” policy?
Laws? Where we're going we don't need laws.
We already have imaginary markets, imaginary elections, imaginary inflation and unemployment numbers, imaginary prosperity, imaginary fucking freedom... Why ask about "laws" when the Honorable John Corzine has shown us we so obviously have an imaginary justice system, too?
Time to burn it all down. Washington D.C. has become a lawless cesspool that threatens each and every one of us. Nuke it from orbit; it's the only way to be sure.
If Terrorists hate us for our freedoms...
What happens when our own Government ALSO hates us for our freedoms?
It seems the two have found a very common ground. Tell me how it's different?
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
And in the coming Drone Wars, I wonder who will be our (new) friends.
Strange days and stranger days coming.
Prepare Yourself.
The way I see it, there are a whole shitload of "droneable" people just looking for a reason. These assholes in DC know better.
White House Guide to Surviving Obama Drone Strikes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnoTG1sxGEk&feature=player_embedded
Holder uses this letter to open the door to the authority to kill US citizens with drones.
He does not circumscribe or limit this authority - simply saying they can do so if law enforcement authorities cannot.
He and the next A.G. will argue case-by-case basis, meaning the AG and President have the authority as they determine.
I thought we already had several "gas explosions" that RT called drone strikes.
the gov does hate your freedoms, it fears them.
Easy Fix - if they take away our freedoms then the terrorists will like us AND so will our Gov't. Solved
Win-Win...oh shit, where's my gun?
But but ... note that Holder mentions "lethal force," not drones specifically. There is nothing really special about drones in this regard; just another weapon.
It's well known that even local police (never mind the military) can kill citizens on American soil without trial in certain circumstances, most notably when they are shooting back at police, or "reaching for a gun". "Oops, our bad ... he was just scratching his crotch, but it looked to the officer like he was reaching for a gun." How many times have you heard that? Police can also kill when someone is in the act of harming others. Remember the famous (but now forgotten) face-eating zombie? A police officer shot him on the spot, no indictment or trial, because he wouldn't stop eating the other guy's face.
If someone were flying a light plane loaded with explosives, of course they could hellfire him. Even Rand Paul wouldn't complain.
What exactly is the question here?
What exactly is the question here?
The questions is one of scale and military involvement in civilian affairs. Yes, a cop can shoot a face eating zombie, but he can't blow up his car from a thousand miles away. When someone has to actually pull the trigger, they put more thought in to the decision. Also, there is a law called posse comitatus which is supposed to keep soldiers and military weapons out of domestic criminal issues. That's why it's a big deal.
nnnggggg.....brrrraaiiinssss...
I'm certain at least half the people in Washington believe posse comitatus is some sort of sex act.
"My opponent opposes gay marriage, and yet he is a well known supporter of posse comitatus !!"
Maybe that is how the Dems can take back the house.
*Changes Zoosk, POF, eHarmony and Match.com profiles*
Thanks man.
Threadwinner.
Yes, and guess who is getting screwed.
But even ZH is full of posts about local police wanting drones. Drones are not uniquely military.
You raise an interesting point -- what if a local police drone operator saw via his drone camera that a bath-salt zombie was eating someone alive. Could he legally pop the zombie remotely? Say his drone has no built-in loudspeaker to say "hey zombie, stop that" before firing. Does that make all the constitutional difference? You could actually forgive Holder for not knowing how to answer that question.
As for role of the military -- after 9-11, there was lots of talk about the Air Force maybe needing to shoot down a civilian airliner full of passengers if it was under the control of hijackers and heading for a target. That was well before Obama and drones. Back then it was GWB, the macho decider who parachutes in his flight suit onto the deck of warships just to keep in shape. No one was complaining then. Or did I miss something? Even now they scramble F-somethings every time a commercial airliner looks overly suspicious, and who complains?
Right. And let's not ignore that cute 1/4-scale DHS Cessna drone that twisted happily in the breeze over Sandy Hook school a few minutes after the massacre of children. Didn't fire a shot. Didju miss something? Yes, when Genghis Bush did his aircraft carrier thing, the MSM - except Foxtards - had a shitfit. .
I even gotta say further -- if you read Holder's statement, all he says is: the president might have the authority to use military force on American soil in case of a military or terrorist attack. President Rand Paul would say the exact same thing. Does anyone here deny that President Rand Paul would say the exact same thing? "Sorry, I couldn't authorize fire on those terrorists because of posse comitatus. It was Kansas, and I have no power to operate there. Plus one of the guys, Mohammad bin Hatar-Fridoom, was a US citizen." Not a chance President Rand Paul would say that.
It's maddening that Holder won't ever say "the president has no power to ...." but Washington insiders are alergic to that phrase. Of course, what the government says and what it does might not match. So Holder's statement is not some reason to cheer. But it's also not at all remarkable, or novel.
OK to be perfectly tedious I'll give you a straight answer.
Your hypotheticals (and the letter from Holder) aren't embracing the totality of the drone memo leaked from (and by) the White House.
Zombie eating face off some dude -> imminent threat -> routine police work. (Seriously.)
Who gets to decide what an imminent threat is? It's codified, there are rules, laws, statutes; you can read about them. (IANAL). They're controversial, and they should be; it's serious business. And yeah, they are applied unevenly and scandalously. But they exist.
Imagine an officer stating to the court I in my sole discretion as the decider in the situation concluded the threat was imminent, so I drone killed the sucka from 1000 miles away. If the facts in the case were that the dude who was shot was sitting in traffic at the time, the officer's conclusions that the dude represented a threat - perhaps months or years from now - or was in "operational control" of a terrorist group - would get laughed out of court. (Even in America 2013).
But these italicized powers are exactly what this American President arrogates to himself.
Status quo ante was that law enforcement would have to arrest scary terrorist US citizen dude on US soil. This American President claims to possess the discretion to assassinate him from a distance (with DoD assets and no due process. Other than some process they do. Which they won't tell you.)
You have to aggregate the semantics of the White House memo with the Holder letter to Paul to get the full effect.
All ist klar?
That's not what Holder said. He said the President might have the right to authorize lethal force in an attack like Pearl Harbor or 9-11. Those examples were chosen to be clear examples of imminent threat. They are nothing like some guy sitting in traffic. (Unless the president were Kiefer Sutherland, and the guy in traffic were on his cell phone issuing orders to commandos who were about to blow up Disney World. But that is not what you mean.)
You are right that Holder did not address the question of whether the President's action would be subject to judicial review the way an ordinary cop's action would. You are right that presidents have a maddening tendency to refuse judicial review on the grounds that it's all top secret and would compromise security. But Holder didn't address any of that. He didn't claim prior immunity from judicial review.
You are also right that Holder did not explicitly disavow the right to kill someone on US soil who was only regarded as a distant (not imminent) threat. But he also didn't claim it.
The Obama guys would rather have their teeth pulled than talk about drones, but I think the real reason is something no one here thinks about. It's not just lust for authority or desire to torment liberty guys. They have non-trivial concerns that their boss, Barry-O, might face threat of prosecution someday for actions in the drone war. Anything they say could be noted by some zealous Spanish prosecutor and used to back criminal charges. They could make everyone at home happy by stating clearly that the principles applied in Yemen do not apply on US soil (i.e. that what they do in Yemen woudl be illegal if done at home). But does that land Obama in the Hague? Or put him in the company of Roman Polanski, people who can't freely travel because of warrants out for their arrest?
Every dystopian sci-fi novel has some variation of a runaway power center murdering people using technology in some twisted manner. It is often tiny explosives or toxins implanted in the body. The hellfire from 15,000 feet method is second only to the "Real Genius" laser from space technique. The state wants to be god, but it can never be that.
This kinda re-defines the President's "enemies list" and executive action for that matter...
Don't let a politician live close to you. First thing the FEDs will do is to get rid of the competition.
"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 Dec. 7, 1941 and Sept. 11, 2001."
Does he mean the date when Pearl Harbor was bombed? It was a regular foreign military attack that has nothing to do with a potential threat induced by domestic American citizens. As regards 9/11, the existing air force defense system would be appropriate measure if properly managed and not obstructed.
Both arguments are a pretext.
They twist facts to suit their agenda, in this case creating dissonance by citing a military attack from a sovereign nation. How exactly would drones have helped on 9/11 anyhow? I can't think of a way. It's better to ask whether Flight 93 was brought down by a sidewinder or 20mm fire from an F-15. It is also better to ask who supplied the anthrax.
The Polaks in Chitcago got it right years ago .... 10 story underground apartments .... hide your money under a bar of soap !
Q. What do you call a Predator/Hellfire missile strike on an Al Qaeda In America target that kills more than 50 innocent bystanders?
A. An obscene drone call.
You are one sick motherfucker.
I set up an email and sent this out to a whole bunch of my friends and associates, some of whom will disown me forever for it...
Or if the aforementioned is in Detroit, we could call it a good start...
A: a conspiracy theory.
WAIT - all the real Americans who defend the Constitution no matter what, will commence marching on the Whote House in 3... 2.... 1.... ummmmm
<crickets>
Were these guys real Americans?
The Bonus ArmyWere these guys real Americans?
Close enough. And they were, at least, active, not asleep.
...and they were run out of town by mounted calvary and live rounds:
http://youtu.be/dWvCCxOUsM8
Asymmetric warfare never sleeps..
and they were run out of town
So.... acting is foolish? They should have acted differently?
What's yer point?
So I need to connect the fucking dots for you all of a sudden? Not all action is created equally with equal impact. So called 'marches' on D.C. will be symbolic and ignored at best, bloody and crushed at worst. Face-to-face confrontation is not how this will be won.
hint: 'Asymmetric warfare never sleeps..'
Oh give me a home,
Where a Predator drone
Can come down from the sky any day.
And when only a word
From Obama is heard
It will send a Hellfire my way.
Home, home USA
Where the drones fill the skies every day
Where your email and tweets
Turn you into dead meat
When suspected by the NSA
Dude, that was very funny, in an unsettling kind of way.
God help us all... and I'm not even remotely 'religious'.
I do believe the Limerick King has some competition.
We should put a stop to it now, though. Skynet is next.
But, but.......they marched on Washington........but.....surely this settled their grievance.........
cavalry
cavelry?
Those too... ;)
Were these guys real Americans?
Define "real"
"every gun owner in America will be considered a "threat" to any government power and "stability" regardless of who occupies the white house in the future..." Key word GUN OWNER(S)...see>> afghanistani cave dwellers kick super powers' arses twice...millions of US gun owners have over 200 years of realitity checking the gov when required...
Well Rand Paul is a Republican and is speaking up. The GOP is filled with RINOs and it is red team blue team with the except of Ron and Rand Paul and maybe one or two others.
The left and progressives love Obummer. Anything he does - they love.
Progressives worship their Savior. He can do no wrong. It's a fanatical, religious mental disorder.
Try not to believe everything your pastor tells you there numb nuts. Obama is real far from progressive and "progressives" don't like him much.
Valid point. I think (hope?) more people are starting to wake up finally. Awareness of the red vs. blue scam when enough recognising that both sides have been completed ass-reamed is the only hope we have.
Italy is important. Enough have realised that they have and are been fucked over royally by the EU and the 'elite' and they have had enough. Sure the solutions will certainly be pretty fucked up and the FSA are all over this as well but hey its a start.
Where isa progressive rally against Obama as the current puppet in the Big Finance Capital power structure I can attend?
Oh, none are scheduled?
The "progressives" are pathetic. About as pathetic as the Republicans that didn't like Bush but wouldn't protest his criminal *ss.
Debt Money Tyranny
http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/4768883/debtmoneytyranny-6-1-pdf-60k?dn=y
Weapons of Mass Debt
http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/3324744/wmdebt-graph-3-79k?dn=y
Sheehan needs to come back for a round on Soetoro - She is probably afraid of him though.
At this point it's full-blown Stockholm syndrome.
Tell me about it! WTF happened to the millions protesting the war? They're really all buying Obama and his bullshit rhetoric? He's 'a black man' so therefore he's better than all the white guys before him? He's the same as Bush, just not as funny.
This is what i want to know- When will any notable figure speak up on national TV and call this 'kill list' what it is: Treason.
I guess they want us to call for a military coup... which would be ok if they just took all 550 or so of those traitors in DC under arrest, then a call for normalcy until elections in one month (hand counted in public, of course)
military coup?things would end up a million times worse with those fucks having a say in anything
The Left is carefully trained, just like our military and police forces. You'll find we won't have many allies against this unconstitutional over-reach by the Feds.
I agree that Obama is just as bloodthirsty and banker beholden as Bush, but do you really think it would be different with Romney? You can't honestly say yes so what is the difference.
go ahead. say it again
I agree that Obama is just as bloodthirsty and banker beholden as Bush, but do you really think it would be different with Romney? You can't honestly say yes, so what is the difference.
Deja vu.
This would be unconstitutional and an impeachable offense by Barack Hussein Obama. Try it Obama and you will be run out on rails.
Try it Obama and you will be run out on rails.
By whom? The neuters who did nothing when half the Bill of Rights was ripped up and burnt?
No one has done a damn thing thus far. The next abomination will see the same response.
True dat, he already did it and got re-elected.
CH1, Perhaps you have found your calling.... TO LEAD THE RESISTANCE.
Hehe... Well....
As my first act as leader, I'd have to to fire the leader. :)
Short wave radios.. Btichez.
Love it CH1 but let's not have a 'resistence meeting of equals' with 'consensus based decision making' shit and all the rest of that fuckin' looser crap.
No 'up twinkles' ?
Twinkles are an important part of consensus building.
Really.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaVvzTyMcls&feature=player_embedded#!
They don't want to lose their $200/month EBT food, 200 minutes/month phone, or get themselves and their pimped out truck blowed up by a Hellfire missle via drone.
I don't think the thinking goes that deep.
The first occurrence will be something some of them might see on TV.
It s alll playing out on TV with the news interspersed with TV dramas glorifying the CIA, FBI, and the government in general.
At most, some may say something like "Huh".
CH1: The next abomination will see the same response.
Dream on, buddy. The Rubicon was crossed when Obama killed two Americans abroad without trial. If that didn't rouse the masses, then only an empty belly will.
You have a mistaken impression of how history progresses... Things always seem to move slowly or not at all until a tipping point... For example, the antebellum period, the years leading up to the American Civil War, extended back some forty years... In fact, there was even talk of a New England succession at one point... Yet when Lincoln was elected things moved quickly... So quickly that he was forced into sneak in Washington to assume office.
I still say a world war will take place ahead of any revolt... but if I am wrong, a revolt/civil war is almost a certainty... The issues dividing this country leave little room compromise. When such is the case people invariably end up killing each other.
In a global conflict, your forces would deploy, leaving only that civilian force, just as powerful and well funded at home to whoop whomever's ass it pleases.
With a military at home, this wholesale ass-whoopin is a bit more complicated.
Um...yeah...bullshit.
Ten years ago it was drones being used for recon and 'surgical' strikes in some far-off thearter of war against people we were supposed to hate, because the hate us for our freedoms and shit.
Then it was the same drones being used in some far off shit hole that wasn't really, ur uh, technically a thearter of war, per se but uh still against the same people good Amurkins should hate.
Next it was drones being used domestically here and there by law enforcement in certian locales like NYC and some near the border...for security of course.
After that it was a drone used to assasinate an american 'citizen'. (I use quotes because of course, even though he was born in the US, he was some fucking A-rab, so he had it coming.)
Fast forward to now, and apparantly it's Homeland drones for recon and surgical strikes against regular, ole, put-a-boot-in-your-ass American citizens.
That's how you boil a frog.
You skipped over the part where the robots throw cinder blocks at misbehaving peons.
Yeah, those things are creepy.
For those who haven't seen it, check out some vids of what will be hunting us in the near future.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9ft8PvImtk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNZPRsrwumQ
Nah, too clumsy and ineffective to throw one block randomly after 15 seconds or so of swinging it back and forth... Nothing to worry about.
Mechanical Hound armed with a lethal injection, like the one in 451 Degrees Farenheit by Badbury - now that's something to work on...
Not to mention in post-collapse when there ain't jack shit for oil/gas, highly inefficient vs. using a cannon fodder thug with a gun.
Thank you for the timeline, BF.
There's that pesky timeline thingy again.
What is it they say about timelines?
Or perhaps the US will institute a process like the UK where they legally strip the target of their citizenship just before they pull the trigger?
Just to keep it less messy.
Former British citizens killed by drone strikes after passports revokedI'm thinking the drone strike and the process serving of legal notice were a two-fer
I have three pet frogs and I can't get one of them to pay me taxes
Next drones could be part of the secret service. Whenever the prez comes around he'll be followed by a black cloud. Talk about a plague on earth.
Of course they CAN....
...it just makes them traitors.
Keep this in mind, Drone Operators/Assassins.
Not even Chaves(RIP) would cast an execution order!
DRONEBOMBA!!!
Well then Rand, WHY DON'T YOU START IMPEACHING HIS ASS?? Introduce an impeachment bill and block EVERY SINGLE BILL till it passes. Tell the others RINOs and democrats who support the drones strikes in the senate to go fuck themselves.
If I were senator, that's what I would do. Block every single motherfucking bill in the senate till Obama and his treasonous ass is hanged for treason.
They've been doing it for years without drones...besides hot tubs are hard to fly around
Only the House of Representatives may start impeachment..
Does this gentleman appear to possess the mettle to commence such a proceeding ?
http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/44922_Boehner_cr...
He appears to possess a sandy vagina and barrels of orange industrial food dye.
Rand gets to play 'good guy' to americans for awhile to build up his cred... but, if you want to know what he really is, look at the footage of him kissing zionist ass in front of that old roman fort, er temple wall in helusalem last month...
'nuff said -all of the rest is just bullshit posturing
These zionists?
Palestinian-only buses on West Bank stir controversy - latimes.comEthiopian women in Israel 'given contraceptive without consent'
I know, all criticism of Israeli policy is tantamount to anti semitism.
I know, all criticism of Israeli policy is tantamount to anti semitism.
No, it's not. Israel is a state and sucks with the best of them.
But when you are deeply obsessed with Israel, we begin to wonder. Why never a bad word about Russia, or Arabia, or the Norks?
"Why never a bad word about Russia, or Arabia, or the Norks?"
Maybe it's because they aren't subverting our government and destroying our country the way the jews, israel and zionists are.
Fucking typical
~~~
I'm going to create an Apartheid state, subvert a foreign government, and do everything I can to reduce all 'goyim' to ashes, but WAIT... Look over there because somebody else might be fucking jaywalking...
I'm pretty sure a solid case could be made that Russia subverted us with its demoralization program and Arabia has been subverting us with its petrodollar leverage. As much as people say our foreign policy is driven by Israel, to my eyes it looks like it's really being driven by the Saudis.
The extent to which AND by whom we are subverted is the extent to which we allow.
being that our leaders have blatantly failed us here:
The extent to which AND by whom I am subverted is the extent to which I allow. Is it any wonder that ammo is difficult to find? People are lining up to time the retail shipments. It does not even hit the shelf.
I mean, under the vast amount of bullshit, this is still America, believe it or not. Sorry .gov :(
Yeah ~ Bolsheviks had zero to do with creating the Soviet State, & the Saudi Royal Family has accomplished everything on its own... IDIOT
~~~
Everywhere I look I see a Russian or a Saudi banker, lobbyist, or ADL... Hollywood is full of Russians & Saudis pumping out statist garbage... CFR, Trilateral Commission, Club of Rome, & Bilderbergs are chock full of Russians & Saudis... Yeah sorry ~ I've been looking in the wrong direction all along, my bad...
my work is done here. On to Sultan Knish....
YES! At least get the conversation moving on this blatent disregard of our Constitution. Start the Impeachment process and follow through! Why play around, Rand Paul? This is the most important of our Liberties and if you simply talk it about you're not stepping up.
> Well then Rand, WHY DON'T YOU START IMPEACHING HIS ASS??
Because Rand is part of the cartoon. Rand would never use terms like Treason, Traitor or Usurper. No, he wouldn't go very far up the ladder that way and might even risk his potentially long future at the trough... or wind up like Sonny Bono or Paul Wellstone ... or worse!
Him and his old man are nothing more than pied pipers, attention whores and, necessarily, good fucking actors.
BFD - .gov believes it can blow anyone up for most any reason, anonymously, without due process. Surprise! Just another fucking day in the asylum.
Free John Corzine!
I have been SCREAMING that for years now, dunno what is Worse a Republitard, DemoRat or a Paultard...The three Stooges of 'merican Kubuki Theatre.....
Remind me again: Which is the 'tard that spells 'kabuki' wrong?
Rand Paul is a neo-con hack, but you leave his father out of your bullshit. F U!
I junked ya for posting while brainwashed.
This also gives the military the green light for a military coup against the FEDs.
You wish.
From the same asshole that violated their own federal gun laws by running illegal weapons across the Mexican border in order to make a case that gun shops were dealing with the Drug Cartels. The Constitution is DEAD. Game on, Bitchez.....
I can't wait for "fast and the furious 2" when Holder gives a bunch of drones to the mexican drug cartel and they start drone attacking our border agents.
The British were fucking aghast at our boys sniping them off from the treeline in the Revolutionary War as it was "ungentlemanly" and violated the "rules of engagement." We are going to fuck around trying to work within the system in pursuit of Justice until all is lost.........
trying to work within the system in pursuit of Justice
It's the gutless thing to do. Therefore it is popular.
We are going to fuck around trying to work within the system in pursuit of Justice until all is lost.........
Um what ever your Smoking Pleaze Share it must be some GOOD Shit.
Its not Justice its JustUS, as 'ol George Carlin said....Its a Big Club and YOU AIN'T In it!!!!!
Eith time for a Revolution or to Leave the USSA, choice is OURS............
Eith time for a Revolution or to Leave the USSA
Or just drop out of the slave system wherever you are.
Sounds good. How exactly does one 'drop out' of this slave system? Seems to me any opportunity to actually opt out of this....passed us all by multiple decades ago.
As fucked up as it is to say, the only option remaining is active resistance, the type that means blood in the streets. We're all just waiting for someone else to get the party started, because most of us have some form of understanding that once the party starts, the REAL pain, suffering, and horror begin.
Sigh. Fuck you bankster globalist scum-slurping shit-scarfing gutter-dwelling demon parasites. Fuck you all very much.
Or the Chinese or someone similar hack the drones, and turn them on their "masters."
I hope I get out before Kristallnacht.
this is not fascism because they say it isn't
Everyone knows you need to see a moustache and big ovens before there's anything to worry about. Until then, carry on....
Go ahead. I moved and did not tell anyone where. I did not tell USPS or IRS. I feel sorry for the guy that moved into my place.
The question was whether the president could authorize a drone strike against American citizens without giving them a trial, and the examples given were the attack on Pearl Harbor, and 9-11; both violent strikes committed by non-citizens. Surely, the Attorney General could have given a better example than this.
Surely, the Attorney General could have given a better example than this.
Why should he bother? There won't be any consequences either way.
Especially when the US Government knew about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance, because the Japanese secret communication codes had already been broken and decyphered, and when the US Government knew about 9-11 in advance, because it as an Inside Job.
Note Holder's lack of historical knowledge.
Pearl Harbor was a military attack on military targets. The military does not need Presidential authorization to defend and even immediately counter-attack. Holder is saying that no one at Pearl, Hickam, Wheeler, Ford Island should have fired back because the Attorney General, a law enforcement officer, had not advised the President on the legality of military defense. We were at war as soon as Japan dropped the first bomb. Roosevelt's speech to Congress ...
He's just asking Congress to declare it.
As to 9/11, only a totally incompetent administration would not now have plans in effect and the legal backing for necessary actions in a rich variety of circumstances. To wait around for the Attorney General to gather the facts and then legally advise the president in the middle of a terrorist attack is unconscionable and inexcusable.
Holder is the scurrilous, lying, putrid vomit of a communist orphanage. He and his boss, the Constitutional Law professor, should be disbarred and impeached for anti-American activities and stupidity. Holder, with the blood on his hands of dozens of Mexican national and a Border Patrol agent avoids the whole question of a CIA or CBP drone strike by focusing on the "military" as if the Air Force are the only ones with drones. The question was not about the military, it was about the President authorizing a drone strike! Only a cross between a weasel and a hagfish could twist words to avoid the question and yet still mock the Constitution. Disgusting.
You either get this or you don't. The new world order is real. You are being enslaved. Your best chance financially is gold and silver. You better be ready, IT IS ON!
I have been looking into this NWO and they have a lot of good ideas and their direction is good , but the biggest problem is that it splits the people into two types the 1% the "have's" the TPTB the rich . Then there is the 99% the poor the SLAVES (whatever you want to call them) I feel that most people including Zero Hedge readers look at this situation from the slave point of view and how fucked we would be . Now if you looked at it from the Masters point of view it is the best thing that could ever happen .
That is the whole problem with ther idea , you see most people are very happy with being slaves , they love it, the Government takes care of them from the cradle to the grave; they go to work, pay taxes, go along with wars or whatever they have been programmed for that week by the television and are very happy being farmed .
But then there are the problem people , the people who see what is giong on and they create broblems for the 1% for they keep telling the slaves (who are very happy in their bubbles and wish you would fuck off and stop telling them about things, like chem trails, the dollar collapse or sticking up for countries that in their minds should be bombed, and how bad the food is etc) so what the 1% will do is to try to get rid of these people by FEMA camps & saying that we are all crazy killers etc
At this point, this is where they all fuck up on the world domination bit. You see people start seeing people get killed or "commit suicide" and this spooks the sheep , which in turn wakes people up and you then get a positive feedback and then they (the 1%) loose... game over.
So I have been thinking about how they could try something different this time . Take the continent Australia, tell the people you can only go there if you are willing to live with no Government and be completely isolated from the rest of the world, if you go there you will never leave and all the worst things you can think of that scare slaves will happen there , you know Al Quadia terror bombs , baby killers, no McDonalds!!
This has a two fold result , 1 you create a place where the people who see what is going on can go and leave the Masters and slaves in their symbiotic relationship in perpetual harmony and giving the 1% their never ending bogeyman. 2, therefore giving the more awake people a place to go and not creating so many problems that wake the heard up and upset the 1%
Thus the planet lives in perpetual harmony ~ that is until March 22nd 2013
"that is until March 22nd 2013"
Aw shirt, why did you have to say this?
Typical attack date.
Why is there this energy to start something, or to execute a false flag event during the Easter time?
In recent history, there sure seems to have been a lot of strange things that happen during this time period.
Hahahaaaahhahaa, nice post!!
...stone age, monarchy, republic, empire... stone age, monarchy, republic, empire...etc., etc.
I see Stars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ucd0Zi27lU
As i live in Oz this would work very nicely as i wouldnt need to move. A big up arrow for you my friend.
Sounds just like the EU "shoot to kill" authorization in case of uprisings slipped in with the Lisbon Treaty.
I wish some one else would take this and run with it, Rand Paul is a moron.
see john39 above.
My 3D printing is just now the finishing touches on a scaled model of a P-51 mustang "ready to take on the man." can't wait to paint the New York State flag on her tail...
fuck the constitution!...Its for pussies.
You will live under the amount tyranny you are willing to put up with.
Thats pretty much what the Constitution says. A message from the founders of the United States of America, "you make your bed, you sleep in it".
Just ask the average American all they need is an iphone, the NFL and some fast food.
Everthing else is an externality that doesnt concern them.
"The road goes on forever and the party never ends"
-Pat imabigfatpussyGreen
I think it's lost on many people, who exactly the founders target audience was/is. I don't think it was the cocksuckers we bitch about "But you took an oath..!!!"
It's you...and me.
So far...we suck at freedom.
The fact that Holder even mentioned Pearl Harbor and 911 and still pretends that the highest level officials didn't know they were coming is all I need to know. They 'will' drone American citizens and have every intent on doing just that.
They won't stop at HE ordinance.
USA citizenisms will be hit with nerve gas warheads from above.
We are going to see what the bottom level of hell is before this pyscho is through.
Bank on it.
"The question you have posed is entirely hypothetical" - AG E.Holder, 3/5/13
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" - Prez B.Clinton, testimony before the Grand Jury