- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Politics
Jon Stewart Slams Obama For Drone Strike Memo (Video)
On Wednesday night's 'The Daily Show,' host Jon Stewart slammed President Obama over a classified memo that provides legal justification for the use of drone strikes against suspected terrorists, including Americans (video below).
According to Mediaite.com, a white paper that the memo was based on was reported on by NBC News. The document said that high-ranking United States could order a drone strike on leaders affiliated with al Qaeda and associated terror groups who were an “imminent threat.”
“So ‘imminent threat,’ in other words, imminent or not imminent,” said Stewart. “Broadly speaking, imminent in the geological sense. So, wait, we can kill an American who is in al Qaeda or al Qaeda-adjacent if they pose an imminent danger, and by ‘imminent’ we mean eventual?”
Stewart pointed out that Democrats had railed against the Bush administration for not releasing legal memos that justified the use of torture against terror suspects.
“We don’t mind you knowing about sh*t we do once we don’t do it anymore,” opined Stewart. “We’re happy to share irrelevant information with the public. We told you we were going to be transparent, we just didn’t tell you it was going to be about the last guy’s secrets.”
Source: Mediaite.com
<
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Comments
Let me set one thing fucking
Let me set one thing fucking straight, anyone, it does not matter what country they are from, if that person is seen as a threat, then yes they should be taken out. Wtf is wrong with people??? Yes, an american can join the Al-Queda. Anyone can no matter their nationality can decide to become a terrorist. We aren't even killing "Law Abiding Citizens". We are killing the enemy and yes innocent people die but that is war and it happens. Also the person who put up the constitution, we're at war, it's not about what's happening in america, it is the enemy.
This is still another case in
This is still another case in which the Obama administration has decided to violate the Constitution - in this case, the Fifth Amendment, which says:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
In this particular case, it's the part that says "...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
If Barack Obama or one of his flunkies in high office can order an American citizen killed with a drone in Pakistan without trying him in a court of law and establishing his guilt of a crime that carries the death penalty, nothing says he can't let a Federal employee do it to you in your home. The Obama administration has repeatedly refused to rule that out.
Why aren't so-called "liberals" (whom William Burke wouldn't claim) screaming about this?
Jon Stewart, tiresome as he can be, is at least being consistent and principled here. The people who claim to occupy higher slots in the media food chain than Stewart aren't.
> Why aren't so-called
> Why aren't so-called "liberals" (whom William Burke wouldn't claim) screaming about this?
We are, you just aren't listening because it doesn't help you make your case.
I'm listening. If you guys
I'm listening. If you guys are "screaming," you're very quiet about it. No Code Pink protests in Lafayette Park, no Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue. In fact, no outrage at all, that I can see.
Face it, from a week after Obama's first inauguration he started breaking campaign promises, and NO ONE from your side of the political spectrum has called him on it. The "unprecedented transparency in government" very quickly became "Chicago politics writ large," while the same folks from your side who screamed about Dick Cheney's Halliburton connections say NOTHING about Valerie Jarrett, Obama's mentor and gray eminence in the White House who was mainly notable prior to Obama's election for being paid five million dollars by the taxpayers to upgrade the same tenement building she let fall into decay - that's right, one of Obama's most influential advisors and one who has an entire Secret Service protective detail, is a millionaire slumlord. This detail has so far escaped the attention of 60 Minutes, CNN, MSNBC, and all the other organizations who went to Wasilla, Alaska at the speed of light after Sarah Palin's nomination to the vice-presidency to dig dirt up on her.
So yeah, tell me about how you're screaming about Obama's malfeasance as President. Just give me a minute to put hip-waders on, first.
Email the President & your
Email the President & your members of Congress to let them know that any government officials who authorizes or participates in killing US citizens without due process will face treason & murder charges before The American People. Start by signing this petition to the White House: http://signon.org/sign/stop-obamas-secret-assassina
Every executive order & law passed under the Bush & Obama administrations that has diminished our 4th amendment rights must to be eliminated and our pre-9/11 liberties restored.
American citizens in another
American citizens in another country planning terrorist actions are no more entitled to due process than their foreign conspirators. Citizenship confers no special privileges in these cases.
The Fifth Amendment to the
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says that American citizens accused of a capital offense ARE entitled to due process. That goes UNLESS these people are actively engaged in war against the United States, as in "enlisted in the armed forces of the enemy." Now, as to whether or not the American cleric allegedly in Al Qaeda met that definition is debatable, from what I hear.
I'd be much more comfortable if there were something on the order of a FISA court that sat on these cases in secret (because operational security requires it). Something that indicates the Executive Branch doesn't have a complete blank check to kill American citizens, because we have a power-mad sociopath in the White House who otherwise cannot be trusted to abuse such power for political reasons.
I think imminent danger means
I think imminent danger means that we are in imminent danger of losing the opportunity to permanently stop him.
Oh, and to cityboy -- due process is only for criminals who have surrendered into custody. A criminal who, by refusing to surrender, rejects the opportunity to receive a fair trial has no one but himself to blame when he's killed without one. That's where the word "outlaw" comes from: a someone who refused a summons to appear before the court could be deemed by that court to be OUTside the protection of the LAW (i.e. anyone could legally kill him).
Well, you cannot legally kill
Well, you cannot legally kill someone in this country who disregards a summons. This is not the 18th century & even a police officer cannot kill an unarmed "outlaw" without facing a murder charge himself. I don't give a damn if Bush & Obama want to line up every lawyer in the world to support their "right" to defend this country, their violations of our 4th Amendment rights have been treasonous. It's pathetic that Republicans wouldn't stand up for our Constitutional rights against Bush, but now all Americans need to unite to prevent this President and all future Presidents from violating the Constitutionally protected rights of every US citizens. It is time that all past, current & future US Presidents (and Congress) remember that their powers come from our Constitution. If there are any changes to be made to our Constitution, it is The People who will make them. Eliminating the Executive Branch all together maybe just the budget cut this country needs!
So exactly how does that
So exactly how does that justify murdering innocent women and children? All at the same time as letting his drug cartel money laundering banking friends run free without even a chance of justice.
Drones are used by psychopaths to murder with, time to defund the pentagon psychopaths.
Those that can't or won't defend themselves can only be slaves.
Stewart is on point with this
Stewart is on point with this one - a memo or SOP of the military should not allow the government to bypass constitutional protections. It's exactly this type of thinking - that we can just exterminate the folks that are making life difficult for us in one way or another - that cause a lot of our international problems in the first place.
Most other civilized nations have done away with the death penalty entirely; and with respect to that playing field, we're doing away with the requirement of due process before executing people.
A "citizen" of the US who
A "citizen" of the US who goes overseas with a band of terrorists to plan and execute actions "that are making life difficult for us" by killing law abiding citizens here, has voluntarily given up both citizenship and constitutional protections.
The constitutional
The constitutional protections you are so freely giving up on aren't things given to people such as citizens, they are absolute limits on the governments power - the government has no power to violate them regardless of whether the people involved are citizens or not.
As for "killing law abiding citizens here", that hasn't been shown at all and without due process it is little more that someone's guess. You can't attribute such plans to someone and allow taking of that persons life while you remove any and all requirements of proving that that is what they are doing - otherwise we are regressing back to McCarthyism, where we pronounced people as guilty because they were accused of something and destroyed their careers because of it.
cityboy - Feb 8 2013 -
cityboy - Feb 8 2013 - 1:40pm "...As for "killing law abiding citizens here", that hasn't been shown at all and without due process it is little more that someone's guess..."
Al Qaeda hasn't been shown to kill law abiding citizens here? Where have you been?
There's been no proof of
There's been no proof of these people being members of Al Qaeda, nor of them actually preparing to do anything - only of them being in the company of people that may or may not be members. Guilt by association shouldn't be enough for a death warrant.
This is true, however, some
This is true, however, some of the (former) citizens have made it a point to let everyone know what they did and are prepared to do. The people we target are members of terrorist organizations, not "people that may or may not be members". Sometimes there are unintended deaths. Like when those Arabic members of a news team were mistaken for terrorists because they were "in the company" carrying equipment that was mistaken for weapons (helicopter attack, not drone; used for example). It's tragic, so were the civilian deaths in the declared wars on all sides.