Posted on 03/04/2012 8:28:17 AM PST by null and void
If Breitbart was assassinated, it could be perfectly legal under current US laws and policy.
CIA Lawyers Maintains Citizens Could be Targets if they are at War With the U.S.What is a weapon?
December 1, 2011
The Associated Press has reported that top national security lawyers in the Obama administration have determined that U.S. citizens are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaeda.
Answering questions at a national security conference Thursday about the CIA killing of Anwar al-Alwaki, a radical American-born Muslim cleric who Obama descirbed as "the leader of external operations for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula”.
Al-Alwaki had been killed in a September 30 U.S. drone strike led by the CIA in the mountains of Yemen. The radical, whos fiery sermons made him a larger-than-life figure in the world of Jihad, had long eluded capture by CIA and Yemeni security operatives.
However, in 2011, after days of surveillance, the New York Times reported, armed drones operated by the CIA took off from a new secret American base in the Arabian Peninsula, crossed into the northern Yemen border and rained a barrage of Hellfire missiles at a car carrying al-Alwaki and other top operatives from Al-Qaeda's branch in Yemen.
According to the AP, the government lawyers - CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson - did not directly address the al-Alwaki case. But they said U.S. citizens don't have immunity when they're at war with the United States.
Johnson said only the executive branch, not the courts, are equipped to make decisions about who qualifies as an enemy, the AP reported.
Is someone who threatened to end the Obama presidency "at war" with the U.S. in the eyes of the president?
IF the president determined that Andrew Breitbart's release of video of his college days would threaten his presidency, and
IF the president believes his presidency is essential to the continuation of the US government,
THEN the president would be OBLIGATED to remove the threat.
As such he would be required, in his own mind, to issue a presidential finding that Andrew Beritbart needs to be eliminated before the videos are released.
The CIA, would legally be bound to follow the presidential directive and eliminate the threat in a timely fashion.
After all, destabilizing the US government is an act of war, and in perfect alignment with al Qaeda's goals, isn't it? Isn't it?
Although some of us old fashioned folks, bitterly clinging to the Constitution, might argue that it is a freedom of speech issue…
If it is murder, then we have become a third world country where people who speak out or threaten the body government are killed.
If it is true,then we are all targets. It would be time to take proactive steps
I have it from a double-secret source that Breitbart was actually struck by a remnant fragment from comet Elenin.
We were told in the news that he died of natural causes. How did they know that?
Otherwise they would have said “there’s no evidence of terrorism”.
I’m reading it, saving it, posting it elsehwere, and hub is going to print it out and take it to some guys at the fire station.
BTW Iran Contra wasn’t any kind of a crime.
If it was a "hit", it was perfect and no one will ever know. Anyone even questioning it will be labeled a nut. He had heart issues, right? Right? Perfect.
I was surprised to see this exact storyline on NBC’s “The Firm” (Chapter Nine) last night. A soldier returns home to find his son missing but knows that he is dead because he was on the phone with him at the time the son was ‘taken out’.
The soldier’s attempts to reach the truth were thwarted by the feds due to the ‘war on terror’ confidentiality. Who knows when any of us will be determined to be a terrorist and taken out without due process? The Constitution has died.
I'm not saying either way what happened to AB, I'm just saying that if I wanted to eliminate someone and I already knew he had a heart condition, what better way to off him then to “move” his condition along at a faster pace?
Of course the FBI has a file on him - and I am not a conspiracy theorist in the least. Anyone who is in the public eye, runs media outlets, and is considered something of a rabble rouser will have an FBI file.
He was a man that embraced and loved life, all aspects of it. He smoked too much, drank too much, tended towards corpulence and worked 20 hours a day.
‘The candle that burns twice as bright, burns half as long’ & Mr Breitbart burned as bright as a million candles.
He was not assassinated and any talk of that does a disservice to him and his adversaries.
Oh, you are right, but you are using a type B personality assessment of my very type A comment.
You assumed I literally meant I wanted Arpaio’s coroner doing the work. I did not. I was making a rhetorical point that I am not trusting of an elected coroner in a liberal part of the country necessarily. This is where OJ was exonerated after all.
You assumed I meant that a good coroner would necessarily find a murder in his examination. I never meant any such thing.
I was just having a rhetorical chat, not making a legal point.
Excellent idea.
My reply to a post on another thread:
To bring out the worst of FR and let the world laugh at all the conspiracists here?
It really is all right. To some people it is a coincidence. Some people don't like coincidence(s). Some people don't believe in coincidence.
Sure, Savage wants ratings and air time. But he is asking the questions that are in people's heads. On their mind.
I would prefer those questions be asked. I would prefer people voice their opinion.
Because the second you look down, stifle your voice, and just shuffle along, you are headed straight for the gulag.
LIVE FREE OR DIE.
Gee and Obama has the power to kill or detain Americans if they are terrorist. Oh that right, he said he would not use the new power he signed on New Years eve.
He continued to live a hectic lifestyle with little sleep and he died young.
His hard-to-process death is a great loss but to claim he was "murdered" with poison darts, etc., (on another thread) makes no sense. Is it logical to think the "killer" would have known he was going to be out walking at midnight?
How would security protect from poison darts anyway?
Peter and the Wolf!
You are missing the point.
The point isn't whether Breitbart was assassinated, the point is that he could have been, and it would be perfectly legal!
Think that one through, would you?
There's no doubt The FBI has a file on Breitbart. The FBI has a file on you. And me.
Johnson said only the executive branch, not the courts, are equipped to make decisions about who qualifies as an enemy,
We are in the midst of a Revolution and those who could speak up and do something are silent or making fun of it and anyone who does speak up.
Hope things are looking up!
Ron Brown and Vince Foster come to mind.
My point was that it doesn’t matter who does the autopsy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.