US Attorney General Eric Holder has presented the White House’s justification for killing American citizens on foreign soil without trial. He says it is OK to do so because America is “at war with a stateless enemy.”
Holder argued drone killings like that of Al-Qaeda figure Anwar al-Awlaqi last September are “in full accordance with the Constitution.”
"'Due process' and ‘judicial process' are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security," the attorney general said. "The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process."
"Given the nature of how terrorists act and where they tend to hide, it may not always be feasible to capture a United States citizen terrorist who presents an imminent threat of violent attack," he said in a speech Monday at a law school in Chicago.
"Our government has both a responsibility and a right to protect this nation and its people from such threats," he added.
Holder says in some cases acting without a court decision is the only realistic alternative, because the situation is changing in real time and a window of opportunity may close.
"In this hour of danger, we simply cannot afford to wait until deadly plans are carried out – and we will not," Holder said.
He promised such actions will only be taken against senior terrorist figures.
He also defended the use of drones by US forces.
“The use of advanced weapons may help to ensure that the best intelligence is available for planning and carrying out operations, and that the risk of civilian casualties can be minimized or avoided altogether,” Holder argued.
The practice is blamed for hundreds of civilian deaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but allows fast response without the use of American ground troops in operations.
Unlawful killings?
At least three US citizens have been killed by US forces on foreign soil in recent months. Civil rights groups cried foul after the attack on Awlaqi in Yemen. US citizen Samir Khan was killed in the same attack, and Awlaqi's US-born teenaged son was killed in October in a suspected US air strike in Yemen.
President Barack Obama hailed the death of Awlaqi as a major blow to Al-Qaeda, but critics said it amounted to an assassination to deliberately kill a US citizen without a prior attempt to indict him.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit seeking the release of documents authorizing such drone strikes. After Holder’s comments, it lashed out at the attorney general’s position.
"Few things are as dangerous to American liberty as the proposition that the government should be able to kill citizens anywhere in the world on the basis of legal standards and evidence that are never submitted to a court," ACLU National Security Project director Hina Shamsi said in a statement.
She added that anyone willing to give such power to Obama must first assess whether he is ready to give it to every subsequent president as well.
Israel ‘reserves right to strike Iran’, may have already decided
Israel will decide for itself whether to strike Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Barack Obama. He may have already decided to do so, some media suggest. The US is stressing the need to find a diplomatic resolution.
The two leaders met Monday in the White House ahead of Netanyahu’s speech later today before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Israel fears Iran is seeking to develop an atomic bomb, although Tehran insists its nuclear plans are strictly civilian.
“Israel must reserve the right to defend itself and after all, that’s the very purpose of the Jewish state, to restore to the Jewish people control of our destiny,” Netanyahu told Obama while the two leaders were seated in the Oval Office.
Netanyahu pushed back against the Obama administration’s repeated attempts to dissuade Israel from attacking Iran.
“My supreme responsibility as Prime Minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate,” he told Obama.
On Sunday, Obama told the AIPAC conference in Washington that the US "will not hesitate" to use force to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
“I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he said. “And as I’ve made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests.”
However, the US President stressed that diplomacy could still succeed.
“I firmly believe that an opportunity remains for diplomacy – backed by pressure – to succeed,” he said. “The United States and Israel both assess that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon, and we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program.”
But Israel may have already decided to proceed with a military action against Iranian nuclear facilities.
“All US intelligence officials are confident the Israeli leadership has already decided to attack Iran, unless a significant change happens in the coming weeks or months with the Iranian nuclear program,” Israeli Channel 2 reports, citing sources in the American administration.
Israel fears it may soon lose its window to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. Washington, on the other hand, is pressuring Tel Aviv to hold off on what it considers would be a premature and dangerous attack on Iran, arguing that economic sanctions require time to take hold.
‘Israel won’t strike’
Despite Netanyahu’s harsh rhetoric, Joshua Holland, an editor at the alternative news portal AlterNet, thinks Israel is not likely to attack Iran.
“It would put Israel in a position where it is the aggressor in the eyes of much of the international community,” he told RT.
“I think that this is saber-rattling by and large on Israel’s part, in order to put pressure on Western powers to increase the sanctions regime against the Iranian government,” Holland said, adding that, “The sanctions are reportedly working.”
Holder argued drone killings like that of Al-Qaeda figure Anwar al-Awlaqi last September are “in full accordance with the Constitution.”
"'Due process' and ‘judicial process' are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security," the attorney general said. "The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process."
"Given the nature of how terrorists act and where they tend to hide, it may not always be feasible to capture a United States citizen terrorist who presents an imminent threat of violent attack," he said in a speech Monday at a law school in Chicago.
"Our government has both a responsibility and a right to protect this nation and its people from such threats," he added.
Holder says in some cases acting without a court decision is the only realistic alternative, because the situation is changing in real time and a window of opportunity may close.
"In this hour of danger, we simply cannot afford to wait until deadly plans are carried out – and we will not," Holder said.
He promised such actions will only be taken against senior terrorist figures.
He also defended the use of drones by US forces.
“The use of advanced weapons may help to ensure that the best intelligence is available for planning and carrying out operations, and that the risk of civilian casualties can be minimized or avoided altogether,” Holder argued.
The practice is blamed for hundreds of civilian deaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but allows fast response without the use of American ground troops in operations.
Unlawful killings?
At least three US citizens have been killed by US forces on foreign soil in recent months. Civil rights groups cried foul after the attack on Awlaqi in Yemen. US citizen Samir Khan was killed in the same attack, and Awlaqi's US-born teenaged son was killed in October in a suspected US air strike in Yemen.
President Barack Obama hailed the death of Awlaqi as a major blow to Al-Qaeda, but critics said it amounted to an assassination to deliberately kill a US citizen without a prior attempt to indict him.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit seeking the release of documents authorizing such drone strikes. After Holder’s comments, it lashed out at the attorney general’s position.
"Few things are as dangerous to American liberty as the proposition that the government should be able to kill citizens anywhere in the world on the basis of legal standards and evidence that are never submitted to a court," ACLU National Security Project director Hina Shamsi said in a statement.
She added that anyone willing to give such power to Obama must first assess whether he is ready to give it to every subsequent president as well.
Israel ‘reserves right to strike Iran’, may have already decided
Israel will decide for itself whether to strike Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Barack Obama. He may have already decided to do so, some media suggest. The US is stressing the need to find a diplomatic resolution.
The two leaders met Monday in the White House ahead of Netanyahu’s speech later today before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Israel fears Iran is seeking to develop an atomic bomb, although Tehran insists its nuclear plans are strictly civilian.
“Israel must reserve the right to defend itself and after all, that’s the very purpose of the Jewish state, to restore to the Jewish people control of our destiny,” Netanyahu told Obama while the two leaders were seated in the Oval Office.
Netanyahu pushed back against the Obama administration’s repeated attempts to dissuade Israel from attacking Iran.
“My supreme responsibility as Prime Minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate,” he told Obama.
On Sunday, Obama told the AIPAC conference in Washington that the US "will not hesitate" to use force to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
“I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he said. “And as I’ve made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests.”
However, the US President stressed that diplomacy could still succeed.
“I firmly believe that an opportunity remains for diplomacy – backed by pressure – to succeed,” he said. “The United States and Israel both assess that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon, and we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program.”
But Israel may have already decided to proceed with a military action against Iranian nuclear facilities.
“All US intelligence officials are confident the Israeli leadership has already decided to attack Iran, unless a significant change happens in the coming weeks or months with the Iranian nuclear program,” Israeli Channel 2 reports, citing sources in the American administration.
Israel fears it may soon lose its window to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. Washington, on the other hand, is pressuring Tel Aviv to hold off on what it considers would be a premature and dangerous attack on Iran, arguing that economic sanctions require time to take hold.
‘Israel won’t strike’
Despite Netanyahu’s harsh rhetoric, Joshua Holland, an editor at the alternative news portal AlterNet, thinks Israel is not likely to attack Iran.
“It would put Israel in a position where it is the aggressor in the eyes of much of the international community,” he told RT.
“I think that this is saber-rattling by and large on Israel’s part, in order to put pressure on Western powers to increase the sanctions regime against the Iranian government,” Holland said, adding that, “The sanctions are reportedly working.”
No comments:
Post a Comment