U.S. intelligence chief talks about [killing] American targets

Reuters ^ | Feb 3, 2010 | By Tabassum Zakaria

[Jim Robinson]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In unusually frank public comments, the top U.S. intelligence chief said on Wednesday that spy agencies could target Americans involved in terrorism but must get permission before a potentially deadly strike.

"We take direct action against terrorists, in the intelligence community," Dennis Blair, director of national intelligence, said at a House committee hearing.

"If ... we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that," he said, without mentioning where the permission came from.

The Washington Post reported last week that President Barack Obama approved a December 24 strike against a compound in Yemen where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was believed to be meeting with regional al Qaeda leaders.

The CIA and the U.S. military's Joint Special Operations Command maintain lists of individuals they seek to kill or capture, and both lists included at least three Americans, The Washington Post said.

The comment on American targets in a public setting is highly unusual from a current intelligence official and even the congressman asking the questions was caught by surprise.

In making such decisions, "whether that American is involved in a group that is trying to attack us, whether that American is a threat to other Americans, those are the factors involved," Blair said.

"We don't target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans," he said.

[Jim Robinson]

In other news, the director of Homeland Security declares "Bible-toting, Constitution defending" Tea Party people as potential security threats...

[Jim Robinson]

Wonder if they will read us our Miranda rights?

[pissant]

Paint yourself black and get a Nigerian passport, you might have a shot.

[chuck_the_tv_out]

they gave up their right to be called American the minute they supported islamic jihad.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

a December 24 strike against a compound in Yemen

Why does that date seem familiar to me for a strike on a compound? December 24...12/24...24....24...

That's it!

[OneWingedShark]

Hm, this could be read in quite a disturbing mindset: what if we, as a people, were to block-in DC, grinding ALL traffic to a halt and demanding that the Government, say, acted with fiscal responsibility and no longer spent more than it ‘makes’?

Could _THAT_ be considered harmful to America?

[Abathar]

""We don't target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans""

For now...

[TADSLOS]

That fine line just got a whole lot fuzzier.

[bamahead]

"We don't target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans," he said..."Unless DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano deems their speech threatening to Americans, then it's on"

[BallyBill]

Bush/Cheney were a bunch of ACLU’ers compared to these tactics.

[verity]

You just jumped the shark with that comment.

[DGHoodini]

When people who are American citizens take up arms in a foreeign force at war with the United States, it is an automatic revokation of their American citizenship and all that it entails. That is the Law, and has been the law, for as long as I can remember. Every American that has joined Al Quaeda, is NO LONGER AN AMERICAN CITIZEN NO MATTER WHAT THE SHYSTER ENEMY ACLU PLAGUE RATS SAY!!!

[RobRoy]

When was this ever NOT true? Heck, they got Bonnie and Clyde.

[camerongood210]

Hm, this could be read in quite a disturbing mindset: what if we, as a people, were to block-in DC, grinding ALL traffic to a halt and demanding that the Government, say, acted with fiscal responsibility and no longer spent more than it ‘makes’? Could _THAT_ be considered harmful to America?

There's a reference to Valkerie in all of this to me.

[OB1kNOb]

"We don't target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans," he said.

I guess it depends on what the definition of "threatens" and "Americans" means........

I don't trust leftist liberal moral relativists when it comes to defining terms.

[ntmxx]

“...target them for taking action that threatens Americans...”

Uhmmm…I wonder, can they also do the same to crazy-arse and POS Illegal aliens, foreigners, and foreign leaders that “threaten Americans”? Or are they exempt and is this an attempt to target only Americans with impunity.

[PhilDragoo]

[wolfcreek]

The umm *rights* will be plainly printed on the Hellfire. Read quickly.

[potlatch]

Hmmm, and meanwhile The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is purchasing Remington shotguns for the Criminal Investigation Division. Shoot, I never knew the IRS NEEDED guns to do its job! They didn't use them for Obama’s tax dodging CZARS!

Good graphic Phil.

[Caesar Soze]

Your comment is written in such a way as to invite the reader to come to a conclusion. I have no idea what that conclusion is supposed to be, though. Would you mind elaborating?