Legal Experts Slam Assassinations of US Citizens
Civil liberties advocates and legal authorities struck back Friday at what they describe as the “deliberate targeted killing of U.S. citizens far away from any active hostilities, as long as the executive branch determines unilaterally that they meet a secret definition of who the enemy is.”
In an admission that took the intelligence community and its critics by surprise, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair acknowledged in a congressional hearing Wednesday that the U.S. may, with executive approval, deliberately target and kill U.S. citizens who are suspected of being involved in terrorism.
The American Civil Liberties Union is among those expressing serious concern about the lack of public information about the policy and the potential for abuse of unchecked executive power.
Attorney George Brent Mickum, who has defended a number of Guantánamo Bay detainees, told IPS, “I guess my sense is that it’s just more fear mongering. They kill somebody and don’t need to offer any justification.”
“We have killed thousands of innocent civilians while attempting to target alleged operatives. And let us not forget how frequently our intelligence has been wrong about alleged operatives,” Mickum noted.
He added, “My clients Bisher al Rawi, Jamil el-Banna, Martin Mubanga, abu Zubaydah, and Shaker Aamer all are alleged to have been operatives based on intel. In every case that intel was incorrect. I don’t have any expectation that our intel with respect to alleged American operatives is likely to be any better.”
Another constitutional scholar, Professor Francis A. Boyle of the University of Illinois Law School, told IPS that “this extrajudicial execution of human beings” violates both international human rights law and the fifth amendment of the U.S. constitution.
“The U.S. government has now established a ‘death list’ for U.S. citizens abroad akin to those established by Latin American dictatorships during their so-called dirty wars,” he said.
The human rights advocacy community was equally forceful in its pushback. Daphne Eviatar, an attorney with Human Rights First, told IPS, “The short answer is that combatants can be targeted and civilians cannot under international law. Their citizenship isn’t relevant. But just being a ‘suspected terrorist’ doesn’t necessarily mean they’re a combatant.”
She added, “The key question, and where there may be serious disagreement, is whether the person targeted is ‘directly participating in hostilities’. If not, and they’re targeted, it’s a war crime.”
Chip Pitts, president of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, told IPS, “As with its embrace of the [George W.] Bush approach to indefinite detention, the Obama administration’s even greater reliance on targeted extra-judicial killing – including of U.S. citizens – is a tragic legal, moral, and practical mistake.”
“Even for those who accept the legitimacy of the death penalty, this further undermines the rule of law that is our best weapon in the fight against true terrorists, while completely subverting due process and constitutional rights of U.S. citizens,” he said.
Ben Wizner, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project, said, “It is alarming to hear that the Obama administration is asserting that the president can authorize the assassination of Americans abroad, even if they are far from any battlefield and may have never taken up arms against the U.S., but have only been deemed to constitute an unspecified ‘threat.’”
Testifying before the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, Blair said, “We take direct action against terrorists in the intelligence community.”
He said U.S. counterterrorism officials may try to kill U.S. citizens embroiled in extremist groups overseas with “specific permission” from higher up.
In response to questions from the panel’s top Republican, Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, Blair said, if “we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.”
Blair’s remarks followed a Washington Post article reporting that U.S. President Barack Obama had embraced his predecessor’s policy of authorizing the killing of U.S. citizens involved in terrorist activities overseas.
The Post reported that “After the Sep. 11, 2001, 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 example, has to pose ‘a continuing and imminent threat’ to U.S. persons and interests.”
The Obama administration appears to have adopted exactly the same policy as its predecessor.
The Post, citing anonymous U.S. officials, said the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Joint Special Operations Command have three U.S. citizens on their lists of specific people targeted for killing or capture.
Blair said he was offering such unusually detailed information in public because “I just don’t want other Americans who are watching to think that we are careless.”
Blair didn’t specifically articulate the standards he used, saying only that “We don’t target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans.”
Hoekstra cited an incident in 2001 in which Peru’s air force shot down a plane carrying U.S. missionaries, killing a woman and her seven-month-old daughter, after the aircraft was misidentified as a drug-smuggler.
“We were careless and we were reckless,” Blair replied. “I want to make sure that this committee does everything that it can and within its power that it does not allow the community to be reckless and careless again.”
The Washington Post story, by Pulitzer Prize-winner Dana Priest, revealed that, “In November 2002, a CIA missile strike killed six al Qaeda operatives driving through the desert. 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.”
The article says, “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.”
(Inter Press Service)
Read more by William Fisher
- Yemen Funneled US Aid to Insurgency War – December 13th, 2010
- Govt Accused of Fuzzy Math in Gitmo Report – December 10th, 2010
- Of WikiLeaks, Whistleblowers and Whipping Boys – December 10th, 2010
- Government Forced to Release Docs on Spying Program – December 6th, 2010
- WikiLeaks Bolsters Claim of Deadly US Attack in Yemen – December 1st, 2010





Jeremiah
February 6th, 2010 at 5:57 am
It looks like the Obama administration—the "kinder," "gentler" face of imperial tyranny—is endeavoring to "normalize" this sort of heinous activity. How long before they try to break us into the notion of assassinating U.S. citizens on U.S. soil? And how long before dissenters begin disappearing into the night, never to return?
In the days of my blithely oblivious youth, I never imagined my country would come to this. Is there any hope? Must we impotently await the coming of a total state? Or can we only hope that the economy will topple (a bitter pill that!) and take the state with it?
keltrava
February 6th, 2010 at 7:55 am
Take a look at the anti terrorism industry. It has one key element for which millions are paying with their lives, homes, livelihood. And that is to make Israeli war mongering actions legitimized by employing them by the USA.
911, the financial crises,terrorism,Iraq invasion, Afghanistan war, etc etc all is linked to the totally unbalanced support of Israel by Jewish funded Congress,Senate and White House.
The problem isn't Pakistan, Iraq or the Middle East. The problem is Washington and New York.
anti_republocrat
February 6th, 2010 at 8:12 am
This was exactly what I feared would result if Congress failed to impeach Bush. Bush set the precedent and Congress confirmed it. Obama is now continuing in these unconstitutional policies.
The only remedy is to impeach Obama and indict Bush and Cheney NOW, but of course that will not happen.
persnipoles
February 6th, 2010 at 9:50 am
First I read "executive branch determines unilaterally that they meet a secret definition of who the enemy is," then I wince: "…the U.S. may, with executive approval, deliberately target and kill U.S. citizens who are suspected of being involved in terrorism." If the definition of "who the enemy is" is "secret," why are we to presume it has anything to do with "terrorism" or 'suspicion of involvement in terrorism' as we know it? 'Cause they say so? Why so many uncharged at Gitmo & Bagram? Did they meet such a "secret definition," allowing torment-in-perpetuity as such 'definitions' permit regardless of facts?
Smiddy
February 6th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
…and the really fab bit is… the govt can bump off those who make too much of a fuss over the govt being able to bump people off…
it's not long before Americans will be yearning to be ruled by Saddam Hussein….. ironic or what..??
peacenik12
February 6th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
I can not believe what is happening to US. It appears that The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion were not forgeries after all.
Baz
February 6th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Yeh but your not "really" killing americans if they are arabs or muslims so its ok…..
Baz
February 6th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
my friend, we are soooo far past that……. George and Dick should have already served 7 years in jail by now…
sammy
February 6th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
This puts a whole new meaning to the No Fly List. You are now free to move around the cabin but you may not come back.
Steve Hogan
February 6th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
One would think this revelation would be splashed all over the front page of every newspaper in America. If you needed further proof that the media are in bed with the government, this should suffice.
lydia
February 7th, 2010 at 2:29 am
The US is already shooting Americans without trial. The only difference is that in taking these state sponsored executions overseas, they risk the possibility of ostracizing the host countries if these executions are taking place without the knowledge or permission of the respective governments.