End Times and Current Events
August 16, 2017, 09:56:14 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Barack Obama 'has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil

Shoutbox
July 24, 2017, 11:47:30 am Exodus 3:14-15 says: Yeah, just saw Dr. Johnson talking about it in his last audio study. Haven't listened to it yet, but looking forward to hearing that.
July 23, 2017, 03:58:47 am Christian40 says: i learnt that magnesium is one of the best things for the body and should be like a number one for good health
July 18, 2017, 04:09:19 am Christian40 says: BBC International on youtube has some good videos by Dr Gene Kim
June 21, 2017, 05:50:35 pm Exodus 3:14-15 says: Mark, I don't want to flood your pm box. But just wanted to say I emailed bro Scott about this issue.
April 29, 2017, 05:20:18 am Christian40 says: What i'm thinking a strike on North Korea possible on some occultic date May 1? the aftermath of WW3 will bring in the Antichrist? Yeah Mayhem in May?
April 20, 2017, 04:55:44 pm Mark says:
April 06, 2017, 09:26:29 pm Mark says: TRUMP LAUNCHES 50+ MISSILES AIMED AT SYRIA
March 05, 2017, 01:16:17 am Christian40 says: i hope the rapture is this year i encourage You to keep working for the Lord
March 05, 2017, 01:06:24 am Christian40 says: i'm glad that the summer is over in Australia the heat was making me feel crazy its a good month to be in now
February 19, 2017, 07:55:44 am Exodus 3:14-15 says: The month of February just FLIES BY, doesn't it? It being a < 30 day month helps too! (Unusually warm this month too!)
View Shout History
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Barack Obama 'has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil  (Read 611 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« on: March 07, 2013, 04:12:37 am »

Barack Obama 'has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil'

President Barack Obama has the authority to use an unmanned drone strike to kill US citizens on American soil, his attorney general has said.


It is now confirmed, as to why they collected everyone's GPS address in Amerika

 Eric Holder argued that using lethal military force against an American in his home country would be legal and justified in an "extraordinary circumstance" comparable to the September 11 terrorist attacks.

"The president could conceivably have no choice but to authorise the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland," Mr Holder said.

His statement was described as "more than frightening" by Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, who had demanded to know the Obama administration's position on the subject.

"It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans," said Mr Paul, a 50-year-old favourite of the anti-government Tea Party movement, who is expected to run for president in 2016.

Mr Holder wrote to Mr Paul after the senator threatened to block the appointment of John Brennan as the director of the CIA unless he received answers to a series of questions on its activities.



Mr Paul on Wednesday evening took to the floor of the Senate to launch an old-fashioned filibuster in an effort to delay a vote on the approval of Mr Brennan for CIA director. “I won’t be able to speak forever, but I’m going to speak as long as I can,” he said, before embarking on several hours of criticism of Mr Obama's compliance with the US constitution.

Mr Obama has been sharply criticised for the secrecy surrounding his extension of America's "targeted killing" campaign against al-Qaeda terrorist suspects using missile strikes by unmanned drones.

The secret campaign has killed an estimated 4,700 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. A quarter are estimated to have been civilians prompting anger among human rights campaigners.

According to research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, drone strikes killed between 474 and 881 civilians – including 176 children – in Pakistan between 2004 and last year.

Criticism within the US has focused on the implications for terror suspects who are also US citizens, after Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical cleric born and educated in the US, was killed in Yemen in 2011.

The administration claims it has the legal authority to assassinate Americans provided that they are a senior al-Qaeda operative posing an imminent threat and it would be "infeasible" to capture them.

This justification emerged only last month in a leaked memo from Mr Holder's department of justice. Mr Obama this week agreed to give Congress his full set of classified legal memos on the targeting of Americans.

Civil liberties campaigners accuse the president and his aides of awarding themselves sweeping powers to deny Americans their constitutional rights without oversight from Congress or the judiciary.

Mr Holder stressed in his letter that the prospect of a president considering the assassination of an American citizen on US soil was "entirely hypothetical" and "unlikely to occur".

Yet "it is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorise the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," he wrote.

Appearing in front the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, Mr Holder reiterated that "the government has no intention to carry out any drone strikes in the United States".

Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, told him his reference to "extraordinary circumstances" such as September 11 or the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbour were "extremely concerning".

"It is imperative that we understand the operational boundaries for use of such force," Mr Grassley said. "American citizens have a right to understand when their life can be taken by their government absent due process."

Daphne Eviatar, a senior counsel at Human Rights First, said: “It’s hard to see how authorities could not be in a position to arrest someone yet be able to kill them.

“The administration should publish all its legal memos on targeted killing. Classified information can be redacted if necessary. There is no reason for legal opinions justifying ongoing US programmes to be kept secret.”
 
      
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9913615/Barack-Obama-has-authority-to-use-drone-strikes-to-kill-Americans-on-US-soil.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8

Social Buttons

Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2013, 02:51:44 pm »

American's shoot back

Deer Trail, a small Colorado town, is considering a measure that would allow its residents to hunt for federal drones and shoot them down.
 
"Is it illegal? Of course it is. But it's also illegal to spy on American citizens," resident Phillip Steel told CNN in a phone interview. "If they fly in town, we will shoot them down."
 
Steel said he wrote the ordinance after he learned the Federal Aviation Administration "loosened regulations that would allow the flight of drones in domestic airspace."
 
The FAA recently announced plans to create six drone test sites around the country, none of which has been publicly listed. It plans to allow widespread use of domestic drones in 2015. "The overall purpose of this test site program is to develop a body of data and operational experiences to inform integration and the safe operation of these aircraft in the National Airspace System," the agency said.
 
Drones are cheaper to operate than helicopters. They can be used for multiple tasks, such as monitoring crops and livestock and assessing building damage.
 
Deer Trail, which bills itself as the "Home of the World's First Rodeo," has 584 residents and is 50 miles outside Aurora. The entire town takes up less than one square mile. Any resident can petition for a citizens' initiative and then draft an ordinance.
 
Bounties and shotguns
 
The Town Board of Trustees will vote on the drone ordinance on August 6. If passed, it would legalize the sale of drone hunting licenses for $25 and offer bounties for captured drones. Six trustees and the mayor make up the board. It would take a simple majority vote to pass the ordinance.
 
"It is very symbolic ... it's asserting our right and drawing a line in the sand," Steel said. "It declares sovereignty of the airspace."
 
The ordinance doesn't aim to stop airliner flights, he said. It outlines the rules of engagement for drone hunters and the types of ammunition allowed. Bounty amounts from $25 to $100, and weapons are limited to 12-gauge shotguns.
 
It states that "no background investigation shall be performed" on those seeking a drone hunting license. Additionally, the licenses would be "issued on an anonymous basis."
 
"Unmanned aerial vehicles may be engaged at a vertical distance of one thousand feet or less," and the "licenses shall only remain valid within the geographic boundaries of the Town of Deer Trail, Colorado," according to the ordinance.
 
Federal legislation (18 USC 1361) prohibits stealing or damaging federal government property and establishes provisions for fines and imprisonment.
 
The illegality of the actions within the ordinance doesn't scare Steel.
 
"I took an oath when I joined the military to protect the U.S. Constitution. That oath did not end when I left," he said.
 
When asked if he had ever seen a drone in Deer Trail, Steel said, "In real life, no. I hope I never see a drone in Deer Trail. ... This ordinance is a statement against the coming surveillance society. It's a very clear statement against that."
 
"In all practicality, nobody is going to shoot down any drones any time soon," he added.
 
'Our mark on the map'

Town Clerk Kim Oldfield says she believes the ordinance could benefit the town.
 
"This could actually be something to help fund a community center or build us some roads. We need to find our mark on the map," Oldfield said. "The novelty of being allowed to buy a drone-hunting license could turn into a fun thing."
 
Board of Trustees member David Boyd said the ordinance has a good chance of passing.
 
"I think it's important. I know Phil Steel also wants to make a statement about drones. ... Mostly for us, the outcome we want will be to have some fun and make some money," Boyd said.
 
Deer Trail Mayor Frank Fields says he agrees with Boyd. He said the purpose of the ordinance would be "to have fun and bring in business, tourism and activities for people in town."
 
Colorado Attorney General John W. Suthers said state residents have a sense of humor. He responded to the idea of the ordinance by saying, "A resolution by the town of Deer Trail to allow the hunting of drones is made in the same spirit as the proposal of some rural Coloradans to create a separate state. And both ideas have the same chance to legally succeed: none."

 http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/19/us/colorado-town-drone-ordinance/index.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2013, 05:04:12 am »

Quote
"Unmanned aerial vehicles may be engaged at a vertical distance of one thousand feet or less,"

I get that it's a symbolic protest, but come on, a shotgun won't hit anything at a 1000 feet! That's over 3 football fields long. You won't hit anything at 200 yards (600 feet). Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2013, 05:45:17 am »

I get that it's a symbolic protest, but come on, a shotgun won't hit anything at a 1000 feet! That's over 3 football fields long. You won't hit anything at 200 yards (600 feet). Roll Eyes

You shoot it down with the 30-06, than just give it a peppering with some bird shot after wards.  Wink
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2013, 05:57:16 am »

 Cheesy
Report Spam   Logged
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3828


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2013, 02:30:01 am »

People who fire guns at drones are endangering the public and property and could be prosecuted or fined, the Federal Aviation Administration warned Friday.

The FAA released a statement in response to questions about an ordinance under consideration in the tiny farming community of Deer Trail, Colo., that would encourage hunters to shoot down drowns. The administration reminded the public that it regulates the nation's airspace, including the airspace over cities and towns.

"I want to take a stand against the coming surveillance society that seems to be rushing in on us," Phillip Steel, a resident in town who drafted the ordinance and submitted it for approval by the town board, told "Fox and Friends."

Officials in the town admit they have never seen a drone plane on the Eastern Plains, but they want to make a statement that they think using unmanned surveillance planes to spy on people in the United States is wrong. They say the ordinance is mostly symbolic. They also recognize it's against federal law to destroy federal property.

The FAA for its part said a drone "hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air. Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane."

Under the proposed ordinance, Deer Trail would grant hunting permits to shoot drones. The permits would cost $25 each. The town would also encourage drone hunting by awarding $100 to anyone who presents a valid hunting license and identifiable pieces of a drone that has been shot down.

AIR FORCE DRONE CRASHES, CLOSES FLORIDA ROAD

Steel, 48, said in an interview that he has 28 signatures on a petition — roughly 10 percent of the town's registered voters. Under Colorado law, that requires local officials to formally consider the proposal at a meeting next month. Town officials would then have the option of adopting the ordinance or putting it on the ballot in an election this fall, he said.

The proposed ordinance is mostly a symbolic protest against small, civilian drones that are coming into use in the United States, Steel said. He acknowledged that it's unlikely there are any drones in use near Deer Trail.

The head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation acknowledged in June that his agency uses drones to conduct surveillance in the United States, but said they do so rarely, The Wall Street Journal reported . FBI director Robert Mueller said the agency uses them "in a very, very minimal way, very seldom."

Federal agencies have been using drones for years to monitor the northern and southern borders of the U.S., and those drones have occasionally been deployed to help domestic law-enforcement agencies like the FBI.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/20/faa-warns-shooting-at-drone-could-result-in-prosecution-similar-to-shooting-at/#ixzz2Zh6vlk7K
Report Spam   Logged
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2013, 12:25:15 pm »

Problem, Reaction, Solution...

http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/19/technology/innovation/fire-fighting-drones/index.html?section=money_news_international
8/19/13
Drones can change the fight against wildfires

In their losing battle against wildfires, drones could be a firefighter's ace in the hole.

Wildfires have grown in number and size, but fighting them has remained an old-school game that sometimes relies on paper maps and gut feelings.

Accessing new technology in rural areas where forest fires rage has been a challenge, but the use of new unmanned drones could drastically change the nature of the fight.

"We can get more information for less cost, and it doesn't put anyone in harm's way," said Sher Schranz, a project manager at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who researches fire weather modeling.

Fighting wildfires is a tricky game, since the direction and intensity of the massive blazes can change in seconds. Drones can help in two ways: They can safely gather more information about fire conditions than is currently available, and they can send that information to firefighters on the ground quickly.

Today, firefighters are often sent out with tablets and smartphones so they can be updated about conditions, but those devices don't help if Internet service is weak or non-existent -- which is likely, as wildfires typically rage in rural areas where rough terrain keeps firefighters out of signal range.

Drones can hover over dead zones, providing an Internet signal. That's something researchers are making a priority, said Tim Sexton, the program manager at the Wildland Fire Management Research Development and Applications Program.

Where Internet connections are available, great information about fires can be disseminated to firefighters. Internet-based tools can help calculate the risk of a fire reaching homes or other structures, and they can determine how fires may move, depending on the weather. Currently, firefighters hike up to a ridge where they can get an Internet connection, or they'll work with the local telecom company to set up portable cell towers.

But when those Web-based modeling systems aren't available, firefighters rely on "gut feelings" from those who knew the area well, Sexton said. Without an Internet connection, they have to rely on data they received that morning, which was likely gathered late the night before
.

Information available to firefighters is often so out-of-date, because manned airplanes and helicopter flights that take pictures and infrared images to map the fire perimeter are costly and risky, so they only fly over a fire once or twice a day.
 
Drones, on the other hand, are comparatively cheaper, and more than one can be launched at once. Schranz estimates that a drone can cost as little as $2,000 for an eight-hour flight -- the same price for just one hour of a manned flight.

"Drones can sit up there all day long, or for days," said Sexton.

Drones aren't quite ready to assist in fire suppression, since the fire community is still in the early stages of making sure the technology is applied effectively and safely, said Erin Darboven from the Department of Interior. Unmanned aerial systems are strictly regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Fifty years ago, photos taken from a plane above would have to be dropped in a tube to firefighters below, said Sexton. The process is a lot more advanced today, but drones could be a tool that gives firefighters an edge up in the battle against wildfires.
Report Spam   Logged
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3828


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2013, 09:17:01 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2014, 10:36:46 am »

Memo outlines Obama’s plan to use the military against citizens

 2010 Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the Obama administration’s potential use of military force against Americans.

The directive contains noncontroversial provisions on support to civilian fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the Army Corps of Engineers.

The troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest.

“This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive.

Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec. 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.”

“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,” the directive states.

“In these circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances” under two conditions.

The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”

“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states.

Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.

A U.S. official said the Obama administration considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.

Mr. Bundy is engaged in a legal battle with the federal Bureau of Land Management over unpaid grazing fees. Along with a group of protesters, Mr. Bundy in April confronted federal and local authorities in a standoff that ended when the authorities backed down.

The Pentagon directive authorizes the secretary of defense to approve the use of unarmed drones in domestic unrest. But it bans the use of missile-firing unmanned aircraft.

“Use of armed [unmanned aircraft systems] is not authorized,” the directive says.

The directive was signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn. A copy can be found on the Pentagon website: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdf.

Story Continues →

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/28/inside-the-ring-directive-outlines-obamas-policy-t/#ixzz337SovHMH

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines