The Obama administration has admitted for the first time what has been widely reported but never explicitly confirmed by officials that the U.S. has killed four American citizens in its drone war in Pakistan and Yemen.
In a letter to Congressional leaders Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder disclosed that the administration had killed Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan in the same 2011 strike in Yemen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki a couple weeks afterward, and Jude Mohammed, who was killed in a 2011 strike in Pakistan.
Only the elder Awlaki, the letter insists, was killed deliberately, while the others “were not specifically targeted by the United States.”
The letter does not go into the intended targets or the reasons behind the strikes that killed Abdulrahman al-Awlaki and Jude Mohammed.
Instead, the bulk of the letter focuses on justifying the deliberate assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki. Holder writes that Awlaki was not targeted simply for speaking out against the U.S. or for advocating violence against the U.S., but for being instrumental in actual terrorist plots, including the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner in December 2009 and an October 2010 plot to bomb cargo planes bound for the United States.
The letter did not make explicit any new arguments for why unchallenged government claims of Awlaki’s guilt made in secret nullified his Fifth Amendment rights to due process. Indeed, previously disclosed legal arguments were employed.
The Obama administration has said that, in the case of Awlaki or any other American citizen targeted in the drone war, secret internal review processes by mostly unelected officials meet the standard of due process in the context of the war on terror.
The administration has also unilaterally redefined the legal standards that justify the use of force. The Justice Department’s leaked memo on targeted killings showed that it has adopted a “broader concept of imminence” than what has traditionally been required. The memo claimed that actual intelligence of an ongoing or imminent plot against the U.S. is simply not a standard the administration chooses to impose on itself.
When Americans wake up to the fact that Padina and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki were American citizens deserving of due process as are we all, they will have no trust in DC. Which will ultimately redound into civil chaos and quite possibly grand scale regime change, not via the ballot.
What does "being intrumental" mean? Does it mean that Awlaki gave the bomb to the person who was to blow it up? Or did he make it?
As far as all the reports at the time go, there was no link whatsoever. The deranged young man that was reported to the American Embassy in Nigeria by his own father, as being violent and possibly dangerous, came to the US via less then clear visa approval. And according to the witnesses from the same flight, he had a minder with him during transit in Amsterdam. How did this clearly mentally disturbed person that was turned in by his father manage to get visa to US, or travel anywhere. The only connection is whatever official story is, and given the subject — none of that sounds realistic at all. In an interview on TV former US Ambassador in Yemen said that his rethoric was the problem.
Obama deserves the death penalty. At least he, like other murderers, would get a trial–something he doesn't believe other American citizens are entitled to have.
Every US president in history deserves/deserved the death penalty.
So what's the excuse for killing the other 3? And has anyone paid any price for those "accidental" killings? I guess part of the "rules of war" is that no one is accountable anymore.
There is no statute of limitations for murder. We need to work towards restoring the rule of law so that these murders will be subject to prosecution.
The War on Terror" is succesful in creating more terror, and making the US population more and more terrorized, and less and less demanding any responsibility from public officials. The upper echelons, corporate leaders and politicians have created their own heaven on earth, which to themselves prove them right beyound any doubt..
So 3 out of 4 were 'not killed deliberately' ? Then they assert that drone strikes are 'surgical' and no innocent bystanders are ever hurt.
If our government has killed three Americans (who) “were not specifically targeted by the United States.” (so faraway!!) "in its drone war in Pakistan and Yemen."
It sure begs the question………. Just how many of the people living there have we killed who in our drone war in Pakistan and Yemen. (who) “were not specifically targeted by the United States.”
ANTIWAR.COM,
Obomber admits to killing "untargeted" amerikans in drone attacks. I think the FBI spying on you is the least of your worries…………………..But wait, it gets better says Eric Holder………………..
Using the pretext of 'a war on terror' seems to give the U.S. some justification for murder.
America is flouting its own laws, international law, and every aspect of decency.
It should be hauled before the ICC and dealt with!
1/4 Americans killed by "smart" drones accidentally, and we're supposed to believe they use discretion targeting FOREIGNERS. 25% intentional kill rate of your own citizens, what the hell is it against brown people no one "important" cares about?