HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Paying the bin Laden tax.
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:11 AM

 

Paying the bin Laden tax.

"In reality, in the Bush and Obama years, the United States has become a nation not of laws but of legal memos, not of legality but of legalisms - and you don't have to be a lawyer to know it. The result? Secret armies, secret wars, secret surveillance, and spreading state secrecy, which meant a government of the bureaucrats about which the American people could know next to nothing. And it's all "legal."

Consider, for instance, this passage from a recent Washington Post piece on the codification of "targeted killing operations" - ie drone assassinations - in what's now called the White House "playbook":

Among the subjects covered ... are the process for adding names to kill lists, the legal principles that govern when US citizens can be targeted overseas, and the sequence of approvals required when the CIA or US military conducts drone strikes outside war zones.

Those "legal principles" are, of course, being written up by lawyers working for people like Obama counter-terrorism "tsar" John O Brennan; that is, officials who want the greatest possible latitude when it comes to knocking off "terrorist suspects", American or otherwise. Imagine, for instance, lawyers hired by a group of neighborhood thieves creating a "playbook" outlining which kinds of houses they considered it legal to break into and just why that might be so. Would the "principles" in that document be written up in the press as "legal" ones?

Here's the kicker. According to the Post, the "legal principles" a White House with no intention of seriously limiting, no less shutting down, America's drone wars has painstakingly established as "law" are not, for the foreseeable future, going to be applied to Pakistan's tribal borderlands where the most intense drone strikes still take place. The CIA's secret drone war there is instead going to be given a free pass for a year or more to blast away as it pleases - the White House equivalent of Monopoly's get-out-of-jail-free card."
http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/OB08Dj01.html

Somewhere bin Laden and every jihadist that we've killed is laughing their asses off. After all, weren't they the ones who hated the US for its freedoms? Well, no need to be hatin' on us for those now, they're gone. We're now quickly descending to the level of a police state and two bit dictatorship, with any action taken by the president deemed legal simply because they say so.

How sad it is to watch this once great country descend into such a state.

24 replies, 1766 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply Paying the bin Laden tax. (Original post)
MadHound Feb 2013 OP
blkmusclmachine Feb 2013 #1
jambo101 Feb 2013 #2
Jumping John Feb 2013 #3
Ford_Prefect Feb 2013 #8
George II Feb 2013 #11
Ford_Prefect Feb 2013 #12
George II Feb 2013 #13
rhett o rick Feb 2013 #9
George II Feb 2013 #14
rhett o rick Feb 2013 #18
George II Feb 2013 #20
jambo101 Feb 2013 #15
MadHound Feb 2013 #17
pasto76 Feb 2013 #4
Jumping John Feb 2013 #6
Dustlawyer Feb 2013 #5
Robb Feb 2013 #7
George II Feb 2013 #10
rhett o rick Feb 2013 #16
George II Feb 2013 #19
rhett o rick Feb 2013 #21
Ford_Prefect Feb 2013 #22
George II Feb 2013 #23
Amonester Feb 2013 #24

Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:51 AM

1. 1 Party, 2 Faces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:56 AM

2. So we shouldnt have killed Bin Laden?

I think the gist of this Drone affair is to point out to terrorists that having an American passport isnt going to save your sorry ass if you happen to be engaged in terrorist groups or activities.
The idea that all of a sudden the American government is going to now use drones to hunt down and kill innocent American citizens sounds like some concocted alternate reality scenario cooked up by the delusional rightwing nut job media.
If the government really wanted to take some one out they'd just send an agent to your house and blow you away rather than going to all the expense of using drones and missiles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jambo101 (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:30 AM

3. How do you know they haven't? The CIA has conducted secret

 

experiments on men women and children in this country and kept that info secret.

And they have gotten away with murder. Remember the LSD Experiment that they got away with and called a suicide jump in the coverup?

And these are the things we are allowed to know by the government.

How can we even trust these people anymore?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jambo101 (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:00 AM

8. Given the number of deaths due to "operator error" how can you defend the drone program?

The drone policy seems much like warrant-less wire tapping in that the potential of the technology is driving policy rather than the other way around. If the purpose of using such tools is based on limiting or ending terrorist actions then both policies have failed in the larger sense that terror has not ended but rather been spread further afield. It has been amplified by poorly considered use of military answers to what is a complex socially and economically driven problem.

In a nation where anyone is potentially suspect merely by speaking such tools used domestically amount to handing a loaded assault rifle to an angry and confused person in the middle of a crowd.

Ask yourself this: Is anyone, anywhere, safe from an incorrectly targeted search or drone attack?

When there is no oversight to correct errors in judgement, let alone expose the simple truth that such errors occur as commonly it seems they do, how do you maintain accuracy of drone application or wiretapping? When there is no review of policy on legal grounds (never mind moral questions) how are legal distinctions and rights maintained?

While we have not quite reached the security state extremes of Apartheid era South Africa or current day Israel, to name but 2 examples, we are certainly headed there in terms of police application of battlefield mindset to civilian streets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ford_Prefect (Reply #8)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:58 AM

11. When and where did you see anything about these tools being "used domestically"??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #11)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 11:02 AM

12. They are already used in Border Patrol. It is an unverifiable question whether they are armed or

when they will be so. Past experience is that they will be in the field when someone motivated to use them wants it that way. Since they are not bound to warrants prior to use there is no way to tell why or when just like the wire taps.

The point is since there is no oversight we will not know nor will anyone in a position to exercise independent judgement with respect to the public.

The larger problem here is that policy of this type tends to "migrate" both in kind and influence. If the White House is using this kind of summary judgement in pursuit of what it claims are criminals, how long does it take before a county sheriff begins to see his "problems" solved by similar policy and practices, never mind hardware.

How much does this kind of law by decree influence day to day police activities?
Take a close look at this :http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014393670

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ford_Prefect (Reply #12)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:13 PM

13. That was a isolated tragic mistake......

...so now you're assuming that national policy is being based on an isolated error by a couple of local policemen?

Time for you to move to Montana, build a bunker and hide out for the rest of your life. Looks like you won't, or don't, trust anyone.

On the other hand, you could run for President?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jambo101 (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:11 AM

9. "So we shouldnt have killed Bin Laden?" Really? The non sequitur response?


I am guessing your point is that we should sit back, relax and allow our government to kill whomever they wish. That doesnt sound like a typical response from a traditional Democrat.

Of course our government would only kill bad guys and if a few innocents are killed, well it's still cool because it's in the name of righteousness. Of course you understand that the bad guy term is spelled out via the Patriot Act and includes those disrupting the government or major corporations via civil disobedience. But I'm guessing your ok with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #9)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:14 PM

14. That is not the stated nor implied policy....have you actually read the leaked memo...

....or the Patriot Act?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #14)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 04:20 PM

18. Your argument is lacking substance. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #18)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 05:27 PM

20. I'll take that as a "no"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #9)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 02:25 PM

15. No.. thats what our op's logic is trying to suggest

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jambo101 (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 03:32 PM

17. Did you even read the post, or article?

 

It isn't about killing bin Laden, it is about the sad state of affairs in this country brought about by the 911 attacks. Geez, read for comprehension next time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:35 AM

4. how do you know they have?

we can play that game too. I know so many of you on DU love to ramp up the hysteria. in a week or so this too, shall pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pasto76 (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:43 AM

6. The government is full of criminals. If a person wants to be a sheep it is not my

 

problem.

And I do not see this as a game. The CIA's business is killing.

And Gen. S. McChrystal is a liar. And Pat Tillman was killed by a fellow soldier.

I am correct here.

You must agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:37 AM

5. They were waiting for just the right circumstances to do this anyway. The cause was

convenient, the attack on our "freedom," was premeditated!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:59 AM

7. "Somewhere bin Laden and every jihadist that we've killed is laughing their asses off."

Probably not. But I'm encouraged you've found faith, perhaps it will be of value to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MadHound (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:25 AM

10. This is no less frantic, panicked, or extreme.............

.....as the NRAers claiming that Obama wants to take away their guns.

How does the use of drones IN THE MIDDLE EAST descend our government to "a police state and two-bit dictatorship"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #10)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 02:52 PM

16. What is restricting them to only killing in the MIDDLE EAST? And doesnt the sovereignty of

middle east countries matter?

What restrictions are there on who gets killed? What are the checks and balances?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 05:27 PM

19. Thinking that is simply paranoid speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #19)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 06:40 PM

21. Yes and for some, rationalization is the key to happiness. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #19)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:29 PM

22. Talk is cheap George II. Just look and listen and you will learn (we Hope)

Papantonio: Drones Coming To A Backyard Near You

[link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/101797342|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ford_Prefect (Reply #22)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:28 PM

23. I've looked and listened, and learned - but not what you hoped I would - I"m not afraid!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #23)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:01 PM

24. I did the same, and I am not afraid also, it's a police state since a long time.

Even before I was born some sixty summers ago and I'm still here. The only thing I am afraid of is this climate change thingy and the irreversible damages that will soon come to be (and those that already happened). I know nothing is going to reverse that stupid police state thingy unless a real Public Campaign Funding Reform will be passed (and I doubt it will ever pass). The Occupy movement was a good thing for what it did, but it missed some very important points and, obviously, was not enough.

Leaders (with sufficient funding) wanted...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread