This could get scary!

[DanISSELisdaman]

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-leg

[KeithKSR]

In essence the President could order a drone strike against anyone protesting against his policies and claim it was done for national security and Holder and the Justice Department are claiming this is legitimate.

Add this to DHS hording guns and ammo and it looks like Obama is planning to wage war against the citizens of our country.

[jazyd]

Scary an d NBC says nothing

[suncat05]

While I do not fully agree with this policy, I do see instances where this might be the only viable option to do something with an active traitor who would be outside the borders of the CONUS. The killing of Al-Awalaki(sp?)is a good example.
Aside from situations like that I think, based on what I've read, that the policy is very open-ended, open to 'liberal interpretation' and therefore to abuse of authority by somebody in the position to do so, whether willingly or unknowingly.
It also seems to leave the policy open to allowing the killings to happen ANYWHERE. That I am certainly not in favor of, especially within the borders of CONUS. That is a big no-no in my mind. If the alleged traitor is within our borders then every possible means of physical capture should be utilized to do so. Outside of CONUS is a different story, and of course may be dictated by circumstances and access to their physical location along with a reasonable chance of capture with no loss of friendly forces.

[badrose]

Scary an d NBC says nothing

I don't expect NBC to do anything. They're a known quantity. What I'm disappointed in is the lack of an outcry from conservative lawmakers. Senators, Congressmen, and Governors. Their silence is very bothersome.

[UKHistory]

I certainly am worried about how the rules of engagment of this policy will be reinterpreted and applied to US citizen within the US.

Part of my problem with this document and how we have conducted this unofficial war. No declaration of war means that there is no end to hostilities; no end to extreme measures and abuse of civil liberties.

One example of where both political parties are not that different from one another is in how this conflict has been prosecuted. Patriot Act was authorized under a republican and continues under a democrat.

[KeithKSR]

I certainly am worried about how the rules of engagment of this policy will be reinterpreted and applied to US citizen within the US.

Part of my problem with this document and how we have conducted this unofficial war. No declaration of war means that there is no end to hostilities; no end to extreme measures and abuse of civil liberties.

One example of where both political parties are not that different from one another is in how this conflict has been prosecuted. Patriot Act was authorized under a republican and continues under a democrat.

No Commander in Chief needs carte blanche.

Looks like politicians on both sides of the aisle are upset over this memo. http://www.examiner.com/article/power-to-kill-citizens-leads-to-senate-threat-over-obama-appointees


Even Bob Beckel came down against Obama on this one, and he usually is all for whatever Obama wants.