The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has maintained an assassination list of U.S. citizens for the last eight year and has actually assassinated Americans, according to January 27 Washington Post story.

The Post reported a story of a predator drone strike in late 2001 in Yemen:

"The target was Abu Ali al-Harithi, organizer of the 2000 attack on the USS Cole. Killed with him was a U.S. citizen, Kamal Derwish, who the CIA knew was in the car.

"Word that the CIA had purposefully killed Derwish drew attention to the unconventional nature of the new conflict and to the secret legal deliberations over whether killing a U.S. citizen was legal and ethical.

"After the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush gave the CIA, and later the military, authority to kill U.S. citizens abroad if strong evidence existed that an American was involved in organizing or carrying out terrorist actions against the United States or U.S. interests, military and intelligence officials said. The evidence has to meet a certain, defined threshold. The person, for instance, has to pose 'a continuing and imminent threat to U.S. persons and interests,' said one former intelligence official."

One may expect the Bush administration to give the military and the CIA the “authority” to assassinate American citizens without trial. The Bush administration had made a point of claiming unlimited power under the lawyerly advice of the Justice Department's John Yoo and had imprisoned American citizens Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi for years without trial. Only after taking the Hamdi case all the way to the Supreme Court — and taking the Padilla case to the Supreme Court twice — did the Bush administration concede it couldn't throw an American citizen away in a CIA dungeon forever without a trial. Assassination was only the next logical step to the Bush administration policy of the “unitary executive.”

But the Post explains that “the Obama administration has adopted the same stance.” This might be surprising to casual observers, since the Obama administration has publicly claimed a restoration of law and order. The Post noted that “as of several months ago, the CIA list included three U.S. citizens,” and explained that Obama “has embraced the notion that the most effective way to kill or capture members of al-Qaeda and its affiliates is to work closely with foreign partners, including those that have feeble democracies, shoddy human rights records and weak accountability over the vast sums of money Washington is giving them to win their continued participation in these efforts.”

Don't expect establishment Republicans to raise a hue and cry over this continuation of Bush administation policies similar to their outrage over Obama continuing Bush's outlandish spending policies. Many in the John Yoo wing of the Republican Party — which is today the dominant wing of the party — continue to campaign against “giving” rights to foreign detainees. A recent example of that includes the Republican “response” to Obama's “State of the Union” address January 27 by Bob McDonnell, Virginia's new Governor. McDonnell told the nation:

Americans were shocked on Christmas Day to learn of the attempted bombing of a flight to Detroit. This foreign terror suspect was given the same legal rights as a U.S. citizen, and immediately stopped providing critical intelligence. As Senator-elect Scott Brown says, we should be spending taxpayer dollars to defeat terrorists, not to protect them.

Constitutionalists have long known that rights flow directly from God; they are not "given" by government. The Declaration of Independence acknowledges as “self-evident” that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Those Founding Fathers fought against the British view that rights could be canceled because they resided far from the mother land. They fought a war to secure rights as “unalienable” — inseparable gifts from God. Then the Founders ratified a Constitution that protected — not “gave” — the rights Americans already possessed from God. The Bill of Rights was added immediately afterward — not to dole out rights, but — to limit the Federal government and prevent it from infringing on rights the people already possessed.

Politicians in both parties running Washington today have flouted this self-evident truth at least since the September 11 attacks under the excuse that we are “at war” (even though Congress explicitly rejected a declaration of war). Their argument is based on the false premise that government “gives” rights to people, leading to the false conclusion that if people clothed with government authority dislike some people with a certain threshold of intensity, then those people probably ought not to be “given” rights. It is an argument as much marked by an openly atheistic worldview as it is one that quickly turns to brutality and an end to all law. The Bush administration's declaration that foreign detainees in this undeclared war (Note: The Constitution requires only Congress can declare war) have no rights led to the assassination of Americans without trial in a matter of months after the September 11 attacks. The lesson of the last few years is that political leaders cannot take away the rights of some people without endangering the rights of everyone.

The fact that only three Americans remain on the CIA assassination list ought not to comfort alert Americans. If the CIA has the right to kill three Americans without trial, then in principle it has the right to assassinate three million Americans without trial. Nor should the fact that these Americans happened to be abroad while targeted provide any sense of security that our rights won't be violated while residing within our own country. Mere geographical location is no protection against a government that refuses to respect rights, as American citizen Jose Padilla discovered when he was taken into custody in Chicago's O'Hare Airport in 2002. Without the principle of the Constitution and its limits on the federal government, Americans and their inalienable rights and freedoms remain in a kind of peril that no terrorist could ever create.

Hat tip for this story: See Salon magazine's excellent article by Glenn Greenwald entitled: "Presidential Assassinations of U.S. Citizens."

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (6)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Kamal Derwish killing has not bearing on the rest of us, regarding our right to due process, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Lee Gonzales said:

The Bill of Rights trumps Neo-con radio and TV hosts I can hear it now from the brainwashed fans of "el rushbo" and "O'Reilly frackture" that the terrorists have no right to be tried in a civilian court. But as you point out, Mr. Eddlem, Congress hasn't declared war against anyone. No official declaration, therefore no military court martials or no military commissions kangaroo court. Congress has the sole power to decare war therefore this war is a bogus war waged with no clear objectives and with NO immediate victory in mind. It's another of those "no-win" wars like Korea and Viet Nam designed to bankrupt the middle class and grow the central powers in Washington. Those who have been "Hannitized" fall for nonsense that we are really fighting terrorism and that the Obama administration and the "progressives" are just "soft' on terrorism. What they fail to see is that the shills for war under "Dubya" are still shills for war under Obama. The Constitution is mentioned more often these days on the "El rushbo" and Hannity shows. Funny how that word became popular as soon a Obama became president even though the war policy is exactly the same as it was under Bush! The "good Americans" callers and the host Hannity pat each other on the back over bashing socialist Obama and nver mention Article I, section 8. If a Shawn/Limbaugh, O'Reilly listener ever does quote Art. I, sec 8, be prepared for the "war powers" line and that Congress gave its approval. Tell 'em that Bush went to the UN for permission to wage war against Iraq. It's funny how these radio shills may even bash the UN but they never seriously suggest that the USA get Out of the UN?

report abuse vote down vote up

January 31, 2010
Votes: +9

..., Lowly rated comment [Show]

The Griggs said:

Congress pointedly REFUSED to declare war against Iraq -- -- when given an opportunity to do so; the resolution didn't make it out of committee. The resolution referred to above, in which congress alienated its authority to the president, is constitutionally spurious. Even if this weren't the case, it's an easily documented fact that the Bush administration falsified its case for the war (something the British government has been examining in recent days). They therefore didn't meet the conditions laid out in Section 3 (a) (1) and (2) of the resolution: Iraq was never a threat to U.S. national security, and it was in compliance with UN Security Council resolutions (as if enforcement of such measures were within the proper compass of federal authority). By any measure, the Iraq war is an utterly criminal exercise. This cannot be dismissed as a matter of indifference by people who uphold the constitution.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 31, 2010 | url
Votes: +6

zman said:

The CIA kills more people than "Al Qaeda" Perhaps Robert in the first post above should amend his post by saying that nearly all terrorist acts inside the US were committed by terrorists with connections to one or more international intelligence agencies. The "War on Terror" is bogus. It is being (has been) used, as its detractors have been saying since before it began, to incrementally and inexorably crush the Bill of Rights and turn the US into a militarized, federalized police state; I'm far more afraid of the criminal element who have subverted our government and are using it to bludgeon the US into oblivion than I am of the mythical terrorist organization "Al Qaeda" which is nothing more than an intelligence front.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 31, 2010
Votes: +10

Ivan said:

	... Kill all terrorists. If they are American citizens they are committing treason and deserve to die a horrible death!
	report abuse vote down vote up

February 06, 2010
Votes: -2