The US; A Terrorist State and Sponsor of Terrorism?
Eric Holder Justifies Murder by Presidential Decree.
A terrorist state is one that acts in a way to strike fear in the hearts of civilian populations in order to promote its own agenda. Thus, while the US freely condemns states like Iran, North Korea, Syria and Gadhafi’s Libya, our own allies such as Israel, Bahrain, Russia, Philippines and others, also fit the description of being a terrorist state.
Of course, if one dares to be so “unpatriotic” as to examine the actions of the United States, we too, fall comfortably within this category. Our so-called “sanctions” that are designed to inflict sever deprivations on civilian populations with the goal of “regime change” are nothing less than terrorism.
A state that sponsors terrorism, is one that supports acts of terrorism perpetrated by clients and proxies. Unfortunately, the US falls smack-dab in the middle of this description as well! Consider our support for Israel’s activities against the Palestinians, the fact that we are funding ($400 million in 2010 budget) and materially supporting the MEK (listed as a terrorist org by the State Dept.) in Iran to conduct attacks on Iranian installations and civilians.
We continue to move from bad to worse; just when we start thinking the US could not POSSIBLY get any lower in moral standing, it does. During the regime of King George the Worst, we actually believed it was a trait peculiar to the Republicans, where people were persecuted for their beliefs, inside AND outside of the US. Torture was justified by re-defining the word in such a way that just about anything could be done, without crossing the line (John Yoo wrote this breath-taking opinion in his White House memo, which was then used to justify all acts of torture inflicted upon an almost exclusively Muslim population: “It is not torture unless the person is experiencing pain equivalent to massive organ failure and even then, it is not torture if the person inflicting it, does not intend it to be torture“). The US did do just about everything to it prisoners…who conveniently happened to be Muslim, so few voices were raised in protest against US actions.
We all breathed a collective sigh of relief when King George the Worst was replaced by Obama. We anticipated a rule of law under the constitution, closing of Gitmo, easing of the “War!” on Muslims…er, on “Terror” and a greater focus on improving the national condition in areas of infrastructure improvements, healthcare and all other matters studiously ignored by the King George the Worst regime.
No such luck.
Obama the Democrat, Obama the Black Man, wanted to prove that Democrats could be as evil as Republicans and that Black folk could be as brutal as the White rulers before.
Gitmo did not shut down, the “War!” in Iraq got worse, as did the “War!” in Afghanistan and the drone attacks in Pakistan multiplied, as did the civilian losses.
Healthcare, infrastructure and other improvements remained ignored while banks and industry got over a Trillion dollars in benefits…NOT counting the monies funneled to industry in the conducting of the many declared and undeclared “War!”s we have opened up.
In an amazing act of one-upsmanship with King George the Worst, Obama ordered the murders of three US citizens (Anwar Al-Awlaki, his son Abdel Rahman and Al-Awlaki’s associate, Samir Khan) in Yemen, by imperial fiat…no formal charges, no trial and no sentencing, not even in absentia.
Yesterday, US Attorney-General Eric Holder gave a speech at Northwestern University’s law school in Chicago where he said the US was on sound legal grounds when the President ordered the killing of Al-Awlaki (see Holder: US can legally kill Americans in terror groups and Holder asserts U.S. authority to kill citizens deemed terrorists).
Shades of John Yoo!
Just as the Bush regime went through artful gymnastics to justify their tortures and their many other crimes against humanity, the Obama Regime (as it is more and more, turning out to be) is practicing for the Liars’ Olympiads in justifying arbitrary murders and imprisonments of no-combatants and of US citizens…as long as they are “Muzlem“, appears to be the subscript.
In his speech justifying the Al-Awlaki murder, Eric Holder asserted that there was some process which resulted in the order to kill Al-Awlaki, “Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process“, said Holder. “The Fifth Amendment provides that no one can be “deprived of life” without due process of law. But that due process, Holder said, doesn’t necessarily come from a court“.
Either the top US Lawyer has forgotten his constitution or, he is hoping nobody will contradict him because he is wrong, clearly so!
- Article III of the constitution reads in part: “The trial of all crimes except in cases of Impeachment, shall be by jury“.
- Article V of the Bill of Rights reads in part: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand jury…nor shall any person be…deprived of life, liberty of private property, without due process of the law…”.
- Article VI of the Bill of Rights reads in part: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him…”
Holder tried to hide behind the “due process of the law” clause but he obviously ignored the fact that when the constitution refers to “due process of the law”, it means laws that are constitutionally valid and any law that is in contravention of the constitution is not an enforceable law of the land.
The administration could also argue that they could not hold a trial with the accused because he was not in the US. Fine, hold a public trial anyway, with an attorney for the accused, the trial could continue in absentia. It may not be the best of choices, but at least, it would not be a murder by Presidential decree.
” For a targeted killing to be carried out, three conditions would have to be met” he said.
-The government had to determine that the individual being targeted “poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the U.S.” That evaluation would consider the “relevant window of opportunity to act,” the possible harm to civilians, and the likelihood of heading off future attacks.
-”Capture is not feasible.”
-The operation would have to be conducted in a manner consistent with four fundamental rules of war: the target must have military value; the target must be lawful, such as combatants or civilians engaged in hostilities; collateral damage must not be excessive; and the weapons chosen must not “inflict unnecessary suffering.”
We already know what the Administration means when it asserts that “collateral damage must not be excessive“. From the point of view of us Muslims, the unwashed of the world, it means a single “Judeo-Christian” killed by mistake is “excessive”, but when it comes to terrorists…er, “Muzlems” the term “excessive” becomes abstract and indefinable.
Consider the case of the Drone-murder of Baitullah Mesud, a presumed Taliban leader. The US attacked about 29 sites where they presumed he was and killed over 80 men, women and children, before they finally “got him!”; the phrase “excessive collateral damage” was never even discussed.
We now know for a certainty, there there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) in Iraq, yet the King George the Worst administration insisted there were WMDs in Iraq and on that basis, invaded and killed tens of thousands of Iraqis.
The point is, what happens when this or, another administration decided to label a certain person or persons as “Terrorist posing an imminent threat against the US” and they are later proven to be wrong?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?…Who will guard the guardians?!
On a roll, Holder went on with, “In this hour of danger, we simply cannot afford to wait until deadly plans are carried out. And we will not.”
How bravely spoken! or is it a case of a lawyer gone bad, who is now seeking to warp the laws to fit the desires of his master?
If the constitution of the United States was meant to be adhered-to only when everyone was comfortable, then there is no point in having a constitution. Patrick Henry famously said:
The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.
“In this hour of danger” is precisely when the proper judicial process becomes crucial.
US Attorney-General Eric Holder has placed himself right next to former Attorney-General John Ashcroft and White House Counsel John Yoo. At the same time, President Obama has placed himself right next to King George the Worst and in the conniving company of former Vice-President Dick Cheney and former Secretary of Defense, Don Rumsfeld.
What a deep, destructive disappointment to those of us who exulted when Obama won.
No comments yet.