Secret U.S. Government Memo Justifies Assassinations of American Citizens
Being a leader of al-Qaeda or even a group associated with the infamous terror network is sufficient for the U.S. government to legally order an American citizen’s assassination, even without the existence of intelligence revealing that the individual is plotting against the country.
This assessment was crafted by the U.S. Department of Justice in a secret, 16-page memo to justify the Obama administration’s use of drones and other military means to kill Americans overseas who cannot be captured.
NBC News obtained the classified memo that says President Barack Obama can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaeda or “an associated force.” The clearance to assassinate does not require any intel showing the targets have actively plotted to attack the U.S.
The memo has formed part of the legal basis for the administration’s expanded drone campaign against al-Qaeda figures in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Among those assassinated were Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, two U.S. citizens who were not indicted by the U.S. government or charged with any crimes before they were killed in Yemen two years ago. Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, was also killed by an attack from a drone.
The confidential “white paper” offers an expansive definition of self-defense, including a “broader concept of imminence,” to explain the non-necessity to obtain actual intelligence revealing an ongoing plot against the U.S. before targeting Americans for assassination.
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the paper states.
The New York Times reported that the white paper is not the classified memorandum created by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to approve al-Awlaki’s killing. “But its legal analysis—citing a national right to self-defense as well as the laws of war—closely tracks the rationale in that document,” according to Charlie Savage and Scott Shane.
Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, issued a statement that “The parallels to the Bush administration torture memos are chilling. Those were unchecked legal justifications drawn up to justify torture; these are unchecked justifications drawn up to justify extrajudicial killing. President Obama released the Bush torture memos to be transparent; he must release his own legal memos and not just a Cliffs Notes version for public consumption, particularly when scores of civilian lives are at stake. Despite this attempt to appear transparent, the program remains opaque.”
-Noel Brinkerhoff
To Learn More:
Justice Department Memo Reveals Legal Case for Drone Strikes on Americans (by Michael Isikoff, NBC News)
The Justice Department’s White Paper on Targeted Killing (by Jameel Jaffer, American Civil Liberties Union)
Memo Cites Legal Basis for Killing U.S. Citizens in Al Qaeda (by Charlie Savage and Scott Shane, New York Times)
Department of Justice White Paper: Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen Who Is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa’ida or an Associated Force (U.S. Department of Justice) (pdf)
Senators Demand Secret Memos on Targeted Killing (by Greg Miller, Washington Post)
How Obama Transformed an Old Military Concept So He Can Drone Americans (by Spencer Ackerman, Wired)
11 Secret Documents Americans Deserve to See (by David Wallechinsky, AllGov)
- Top Stories
- Unusual News
- Where is the Money Going?
- Controversies
- U.S. and the World
- Appointments and Resignations
- Latest News
- Bashar al-Assad—The Fall of a Rabid AntiSemite
- Trump Announces He Will Switch Support from Russia to Ukraine
- Americans are Unhappy with the Direction of the Country…What’s New?
- Can Biden Murder Trump and Get Away With it?
- Electoral Advice for the Democratic and Republican Parties
Comments