by Mike Adams
the Health Ranger
October 11, 2011
You know things are bad in the realm of tyranny when even Reuters runs a
story that admits the White House openly engages in the outright murder of
U.S. citizens whom the White House deems "enemies."
In an article entitled, Secret panel can put
Americans on "kill list",
"American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are
placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior
government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions,
according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or
decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National
Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is
there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by
which it is supposed to operate."
If that sounds like a report you'd usually read
on NaturalNews or InfoWars, that's because we're usually the first to
report on true conspiracies that exist in the corrupt, criminal government
running rampant across America today. But this particular assassination
conspiracy was so outrageous - and so illegal - that even Reuters had to
cover it (to their credit, by the way).
The existence of this secret "kill list" means the U.S. government can now
decide, completely outside of law, to brazenly murder any person it wishes.
And this is all apparently A-OK with President
Obama, the Nobel
I wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize committee will consider revoking its peace
prize from a recipient who now operates as part of a secret "kill list"
murder squad. If not, then we ought to just rename the whole thing the Nobel
Murder Prize, huh?
Orwell said it best:
War is peace! Freedom is slavery. Ignorance
ABC News even went to
bat on this issue
Reuters wasn't alone, by the way, in questioning the White House
justification for this murder.
ABC News Reporter Jake Tapper also had some
hard-hitting questions for White House Press Secretary Jay Carney about the
legal justification (ha!) for this killing of an American-born man.
Watch the jaw-dropping exchange between Jake Tapper and Jay Carney in the
following video link.
This will give you a deep (and disturbing)
understanding of the astonishing lawlessness that has taken hold in America,
where the term due process means absolutely nothing and the President's men
can now simply order the murder of anyone he wants, for any reason, without
presenting even a shred of evidence to support such actions:
The full transcript of this exchange is found
The quagmire of
How many laws and rights has President Obama violated in this executive
murder of an American citizen?
There are federal laws against murder
There are two amendments
in the Bill of Rights that protect due process
There is an executive order
on the books banning assassinations
Plus, there's is God's law (or
natural law) under which the unjustified murder of another human
being is a severe violation
But the Obama administration says murder is right only as long as the U.S.
government does it.
This is equivalent to arguing that the King's word is
law because the King says it is, which implies that the King is gifted some
supernatural authority which the People themselves do not possess. And that
stands in complete violation of the very founding principles of our nation
which exists on the commonsense premise that All Men Are Created Equal -
i.e. there is no "King" among us whose actions or intentions are immune from
the scrutiny of law.
Don't misunderstand me in all this: I'm not saying the target of all this -
Anwar al-Awlaki - is innocent.
But the point is that we don't really KNOW
who is innocent or guilty until evidence is presented and a person has their
day in court. One of the most fundamental principles of Common Law is that
those accused of crimes may face their accusers and see the evidence
presented against them. This is guaranteed under U.S. law as well as the
Bill of Rights.
Yet President Obama - who has also seen fit to
Bush's torture regime at Gitmo - apparently believes all those laws and
rights do not apply to the government itself.
The King again, remember?
Friends, this is the very definition of tyranny. You are staring it in the
face. Secret kill lists? Really? Why not just roll in the Stasi secret
police or Nazi SS?
This is how it starts:
First the killing is "only" for
real enemies. And then it's for political enemies.
Then it's for
journalists, entrepreneurs and academics... until you end up with a total
police state tyranny where the government itself is held back by nothing
other than the whims and fetishes of its own tyrants who operate under the
delusion that they are granted power over the common people by God himself.
This is what all kings and tyrants throughout world history have believed,
by the way.
Jake Tapper from ABC News stood up to Carney over all this.
That's why he
asked these pointed questions which Jay Carney flippantly dismissed, almost
as if to say,
"How dare the slaves ask their King to explain his actions!"
We are about to lose
the Republic to total tyranny
That's where things are in America today:
Your rights have been overrun.
laws that were once meticulously constructed to place limits on the
government itself have been utterly abandoned by that government even as the
complacent People watched and did nothing for far too long.
Tyrants in the government today now run
surveillance on raw milk distribution centers,
threaten home gardeners with prison time
and bring guns to the front steps of innocent moms to
force their children to take psychiatric medications.
Government now murders Americans using secret kill lists, and then does not
even feel it has any obligation whatsoever to present any evidence at all
supporting its actions!
If there are no limits on this government power, and the government itself
willfully violates the law at every opportunity, then where do you suppose
this is all headed? It can only end with the total concentration of power
into the hands of tyrants.
If you disagree with that, I ask you: What will
stop that from happening? Huh? What will stop it?
The zombies in Atlanta sure won't stop it. They're too engaged in their
hypnotic collectivist chant to think for themselves.
The Democrats and Republicans sure won't stop it. They all worship Big
Government, after all, because that's from where they both draw their power.
And the executive branch of the government itself won't stop it - they're
the ones who gain power from all this tyranny!
There is no one who can stop this other that We the People - People who take
to the streets and resist tyranny, speak out against criminality in the
government, and nip at the heels of tyrants at every opportunity.
Run the tyrants out of town, I say. Demand the restoration of our Republic,
which means that ALL MEN (and woman) must abide by the same laws and
recognize the same rights of others. There are no exceptions to these rules.
Those who violate them are operating outside the law and are therefore
criminals who should be arrested and prosecuted.
Mark my words, friends: If we allow our own government to run a secret kill
list targeting "guilty" Americans, then it won't be long before we find
ourselves on it.
There are times in history when the criminality of the government is so
outrageous, and so inexcusable, that it is not merely the right but
of the People to intervene and restore the rule of law upon those who
falsely believe they are above it.
Transcript of exchange
between Jake Tapper and Jay Carney
See the video far above:
TAPPER: You said that Awlaki was
demonstrably and provably involved in operations. Do you plan on
MR. CARNEY: I should step back. He is clearly - I mean "provably" may be
a legal term.
I think it has been well established, and it has certainly
been the position of this administration and the previous administration
that he is a leader in - was a leader in AQAP; that AQAP was a definite
threat, was operational, planned and carried out terrorist attacks that,
fortunately, did not succeed, but were extremely serious - including the
ones specifically that I mentioned, in terms of the would-be Christmas
Day bombing in 2009 and the attempt to bomb numerous cargo planes headed
for the United States.
And he was obviously also an active recruiter of
al Qaeda terrorists. So I don't think anybody in the field would dispute
any of those assertions.
TAPPER: You don't think anybody else in the government would dispute
MR. CARNEY: Well, I wouldnít know of any credible terrorist expert who
would dispute the fact that he was a leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula, and that he was operationally involved in terrorist attacks
against American interests and citizens.
TAPPER: Do you plan on bringing before the public any proof of these
MR. CARNEY: Again, the question makes us - has embedded within it
assumptions about the circumstances of his death that Iím just not going
TAPPER: How on earth does it have - I really don't understand. How does
- heís dead. You are asserting that he had operational control of the
cargo plot and the Abdulmutallab plot. Heís now dead. Can you tell us,
or the American people - or has a judge been shown...
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, Jake, Iím not going to go any further than what
Iíve said about the circumstances of his death and --
TAPPER: I don't even understand how they're tied.
MR. CARNEY: - the case against him, which, again, youíre linking. And I
TAPPER: You said that he was responsible for these things.
MR. CARNEY: Yes, but again...
TAPPER: Is there going to be any evidence presented?
MR. CARNEY: I don't have anything for you on that.
TAPPER: Do you not see at all - does the administration not see at all
how a President asserting that he has the right to kill an American
citizen without due process, and that heís not going to even explain why
he thinks he has that right is troublesome to some people?
MR. CARNEY: I wasnít aware of any of those things that you said actually
happening. And again, Iím not going to address the circumstances of
Awlakiís death. I think, again, it is an important fact that this
terrorist, who was actively plotting - had plotted in the past, and was
actively plotting to attack Americans and American interests, is dead.
But Iím not going to - from any angle - discuss the circumstances of his
TAPPER: Do you know that the Center for Constitutional Rights and the
ACLU tried to get permission to represent Awlaki? And his father had
asked them to do that. But they needed to get permission from the
Treasury Department so that they could challenge his being on this
targeted killing list. And the administration, the Obama administration
refused to let them represent him, to not even - he couldn't even have
the ACLU representing him.
MR. CARNEY: Well, I would send those questions, or take those questions
to Treasury or Justice. I don't have anything on that for you.
TAPPER: What do you think constitutional law professor Barack Obama
would make of this?
MR. CARNEY: I think he spoke about it today.
Secret Panel Can Put...
Americans on "Kill List"
by Mark Hosenball
October 5, 2011
American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or
capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then
informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which
is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current
and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its
existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant
preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was
killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a
citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to
discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge,
Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula, al Qaeda's Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put
on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their
alleged involvement with militants.
The White House is portraying the killing of Awlaki as a demonstration of
President Barack Obama's toughness toward militants who threaten the United
States. But the process that led to Awlaki's killing has drawn fierce
criticism from both the political left and right.
In an ironic turn, Obama, who ran for president denouncing predecessor
George W. Bush's expansive use of executive power in his "war on terrorism,"
is being attacked in some quarters for using similar tactics. They include
secret legal justifications and undisclosed intelligence assessments.
Liberals criticized the drone attack on an American citizen as
Conservatives criticized Obama for refusing to release a Justice Department
legal opinion that reportedly justified killing Awlaki. They accuse Obama of
hypocrisy, noting his administration insisted on publishing Bush-era
administration legal memos justifying the use of interrogation techniques
many equate with torture, but refused to make public its rationale for
killing a citizen without due process.
Some details about how the administration went about targeting Awlaki
emerged on Tuesday when the top Democrat on the
Committee, Representative Dutch Ruppersberger, was asked by reporters about
The process involves,
"going through the National Security
Council, then it eventually goes to the president, but the National
Security Council does the investigation, they have lawyers, they review,
they look at the situation, you have input from the military, and also,
we make sure that we follow international law," Ruppersberger said.
Other officials said the role of the president in the process was murkier
than what Ruppersberger described.
They said targeting recommendations are drawn up by a committee of mid-level
National Security Council and agency officials. Their recommendations are
then sent to the panel of NSC "principals," meaning Cabinet secretaries and
intelligence unit chiefs, for approval. The panel of principals could have
different memberships when considering different operational issues, they
The officials insisted on anonymity to discuss sensitive information.
They confirmed that lawyers, including those in the Justice Department, were
consulted before Awlaki's name was added to the target list.
Two principal legal theories were advanced, an official said: first, that
the actions were permitted by Congress when it authorized the use of
military forces against militants in the wake of the attacks of September
11, 2001; and they are permitted under international law if a country is
Several officials said that when Awlaki became the first American put on the
target list, Obama was not required personally to approve the targeting of a
person. But one official said Obama would be notified of the principals'
If he objected, the decision would be nullified,
the official said.
A former official said one of the reasons for making senior officials
principally responsible for nominating Americans for the target list was to
"protect" the president.
Officials confirmed that a second American, Samir Khan, was killed in the
drone attack that killed Awlaki. Khan had served as editor of Inspire, a
glossy English-language magazine used by AQAP as a propaganda and
But rather than being specifically targeted by drone operators, Khan was in
the wrong place at the wrong time, officials said. Ruppersberger appeared to
confirm that, saying Khan's death was "collateral," meaning he was not an
intentional target of the drone strike.
When the name of a foreign, rather than American, militant is added to
targeting lists, the decision is made within the intelligence community and
normally does not require approval by high-level NSC officials.
'FROM INSPIRATIONAL TO
Officials said Awlaki, whose fierce sermons were widely circulated on
English-language militant websites, was targeted because Washington
accumulated information his role in AQAP had gone "from inspirational to
That meant that instead of just propagandizing
in favor of al Qaeda objectives, Awlaki allegedly began to participate
directly in plots against American targets.
"Let me underscore, Awlaki is no mere
messenger but someone integrally involved in lethal terrorist
activities," Daniel Benjamin, top counterterrorism official at the State
Department, warned last spring.
The Obama administration has not made public an
accounting of the classified evidence that Awlaki was operationally involved
in planning terrorist attacks.
But officials acknowledged that some of the intelligence purporting to show
Awlaki's hands-on role in plotting attacks was patchy.
For instance, one plot in which authorities have said Awlaki was involved
Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, accused of trying to blow up a
Detroit-bound U.S. airliner on Christmas Day 2009 with a bomb hidden in his
There is no doubt Abdulmutallab was an admirer or follower of Awlaki, since
he admitted that to U.S. investigators.
When he appeared in a Detroit
courtroom earlier this week for the start of his trial on bomb-plot charges,
"Anwar is alive."
But at the time the White House was considering putting Awlaki on the U.S.
target list, intelligence connecting Awlaki specifically to Abdulmutallab
and his alleged bomb plot was partial.
Officials said at the time the United
States had voice intercepts involving a phone known to have been used by Awlaki and someone who they believed, but were not positive, was
Awlaki was also implicated in a case in which a British Airways employee was
imprisoned for plotting to blow up a U.S.-bound plane. E-mails retrieved by
authorities from the employee's computer showed what an investigator
described as "operational contact" between Britain and Yemen.
Authorities believe the contacts were mainly between the U.K.-based suspect
and his brother. But there was a strong suspicion Awlaki was at the
brother's side when the messages were dispatched.
British media reported that in one message, the
person on the Yemeni end supposedly said,
"Our highest priority is the U.S... With the
people you have, is it possible to get a package or a person with a
package on board a flight heading to the U.S.?"
U.S. officials contrast intelligence suggesting
Awlaki's involvement in specific plots with the activities of Adam Gadahn,
an American citizen who became a principal English-language propagandist for
the core al Qaeda network formerly led by
Osama bin Laden.
While Gadahn appeared in angry videos calling for attacks on the United
States, officials said he had not been specifically targeted for capture or
killing by U.S. forces because he was regarded as a loudmouth not directly
involved in plotting attacks.