Murder is okay when the government does it...drone memo surfaces...

http://www.infowars.com/so-thats-why-they-kept-the-drone-kill-memo-secret/


The memo considers a section of the U.S. code dealing with the murder of a U.S. citizen by another U.S. citizen abroad, drawing on another section that defines murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.”

David Barron, the memo’s author, needed a loophole to make murder-by-missile a lawful killing rather than an unlawful killing, so he pulls out the “public authority justification” under which the government gets to use force to enforce a law. It’s a novel twist, though, for the government to get to use force to violate the law, claiming the violation is legal on the Nixonian basis that it is the government doing it.

Alternatively, Barron suggests, a government gets to use force if doing so is part of a war. This, of course, ignores the U.N. Charter and the Kellogg Briand Pact and the illegality of wars, as well as the novelty of claiming that a war exists everywhere on earth forever and ever. (None of Barron’s arguments justify governmental murder on U.S. soil any less than off U.S. soil.)

In essence, Barron seems to argue, the people who wrote the laws were thinking about private citizens and terrorists, not the government (which, somehow, cannot be a terrorist), and therefore it’s OK for the government to violate the laws.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:http://www.infowars.com/so-thats-why-they-kept-the-drone-kill-memo-secret/


The memo considers a section of the U.S. code dealing with the murder of a U.S. citizen by another U.S. citizen abroad, drawing on another section that defines murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.”

David Barron, the memo’s author, needed a loophole to make murder-by-missile a lawful killing rather than an unlawful killing, so he pulls out the “public authority justification” under which the government gets to use force to enforce a law.  It’s a novel twist, though, for the government to get to use force to violate the law, claiming the violation is legal on the Nixonian basis that it is the government doing it.

Alternatively, Barron suggests, a government gets to use force if doing so is part of a war. This, of course, ignores the U.N. Charter and the Kellogg Briand Pact and the illegality of wars, as well as the novelty of claiming that a war exists everywhere on earth forever and ever. (None of Barron’s arguments justify governmental murder on U.S. soil any less than off U.S. soil.)

In essence, Barron seems to argue, the people who wrote the laws were thinking about private citizens and terrorists, not the government (which, somehow, cannot be a terrorist), and therefore it’s OK for the government to violate the laws.

Posted this on gatorfan's post...you should read as well.

You have no clue about RPA ISR and the details of "who, what, where, why, when, and the so what" of when an HVI/HVT is targeted to be engaged. It's not a flip of the coin as you perceive it to be. We collect all kinds of INT before making that decision. There are some levels of targets that allow more aggressive actions to be taken than others. I am not going into the details of that here by telling you and violating any NDAs I have signed. All you know is what you read second or even third hand. The kid was related to a terrorist, was hanging out with known terrorists responsible for the deaths of US and Coalition Forces, and obviously, there was enough other INT on the dork to seal his fate. I guarantee you that if the Feds could have prevented the OKC attack by McVay, not that they have used drones (and yes we had drones that far back if you research the history on them and POTUS WJC/ DOD used them first in the mid 90s), but he would have been apprehended and dealt with accordingly. The RPA is a tool, a surgical tool that protects our forces and allows us to do what is necessary to protect the citizens. He was just as bad as Bergdahl on another level. Bergdahl was a peeant compared to this kid.

Face it, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

That's just what the Nazis said.

I'm amazed that the govt produced that bs rationalization. I'm going to see if I can find it to read myself.