PDA

View Full Version : Obama's US Assassination Program? Part 2 by Chuck Norris




bobbyw24
08-03-2010, 05:01 AM
PART 1:

Sound too conspiratorial to be true? Like the cover-up ops of spy novels? Well, it's reality. And it is possibly the most bizarre, inhumane and abusive way that the White House is expanding its power over the American people.

It's not an extremist belief or theory of the far right. It's a fact that has been confirmed by The New York Times, The Washington Post and MSNBC and even documented by the far-left online magazine Salon.com.

And it's the gravest nightmare of U.S. citizens and abandonment of our Constitution to date: a presidential assassination program in which U.S. citizens are in the literal scopes of the executive branch based upon nothing more than allegations of terrorism involvement as the branch defines it.

Of course, the CIA has executed covert assassinations of foreigners for decades. But tragically, Obama is expanding this program to include American, non-Islamic, stateside, homegrown terrorists.

It all started in January, when The Washington Post reported: "As part of the operations, Obama approved a Dec. 24 strike against a (Yemeni) compound where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was thought to be meeting with other regional al-Qaeda leaders. Although he was not the focus of the strike and was not killed, he has since been added to a shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing or capture."

"A shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"?

That's right. No arrest. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet.

While the Obama administration continues its Bush-blaming for the economy, it is mega-morphing Bush policy in covert ops overseas, which was, according to the Post, "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."

Well, in recent weeks, the Obama administration has taken this overseas killing op to a new low: stateside assassinations.

A former director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, confessed before Congress: "We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that."

If you are wondering who the "we" are to whom Adm. Blair refers, they are Smith, Wesson and the White House.

Now we know what deputy national security adviser John Brennan meant when he admitted in May, "And under President Obama, we have built upon the work of the previous administration and have accelerated efforts in many areas." (Remember when Bush's eavesdropping on U.S. citizens seemed harsh?)


http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/07/27/obamas_us_assassination_program
__________________________________________________ ____________________________________

Last week, I gave evidence of how the Obama administration is importing its overseas policy of assassination and implementing it stateside against U.S. citizens it deems as radical threats to American security and safety. (If you have not read Part 1, please do so before you read the rest of Part 2.)

I will reiterate a couple of key points. Deputy national security adviser John Brennan explained that the problem of homegrown terrorists ranks as a top priority because of the increasing number of U.S. individuals who have become "captivated by extremist ideology or causes." He went on to say, "There are ... dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world and ... are very concerning to us."

A former director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, even confessed before Congress: "We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that."

President Barack Obama himself explained in an often overlooked statement within the "National Security Strategy": "We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. ... This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home."

Now it finally is coming to light why, back on Dec. 16, President Obama signed an executive order "designating Interpol as a public international organization entitled to enjoy certain privileges, exemptions, and immunities."

It all comes down to one basic verb. Can you find it in the following paragraph?
Obama's executive order reads, "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL)..."

There's the magic verb: "to extend"!

As I wrote earlier in the year in a column on Interpol, titled "Obama's Secret Vault," is it also just coincidental that Interpol is exempt from typical American search and seizure laws?

Anyone still not connecting the dots?

There is one more titanic element that I must stress. The one overriding dilemma for Americans in Obama's hunt for homegrown terrorists is that he has changed the definitions of terrorism and terrorists. Their definitions no longer necessarily include or imply Islamic extremism or extremists.

Don't ever forget: Obama and his administration repeatedly have played down the actual threat of terrorism by Islamic jihadists. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama promised to close down Gitmo in the first year of his presidency because, he said, it was an affront to American values and justice. He also promised to end the "warrantless wiretaps" of George W. Bush. In March 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano proclaimed there is no terrorism -- only "man-caused disasters." In the same month, the Obama administration also proclaimed that there are "no enemy combatants" and "no war on terror" -- only "overseas contingency operations." And in May 2010, Brennan, Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, added, "Nor we do describe our enemy as 'jihadists.'"
Therefore, we are left to wonder: To the Obama administration, what exactly qualifies as radical extremism and terrorism, and who is on its "shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"? Consider even now who might fall into this category of non-Islamic, non-jihadist, stateside, homegrown terrorists. Do I need to make a list?

http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/08/03/obamas_us_assassination_program_part_2/page/full

IPSecure
08-03-2010, 05:30 AM
Thanks for posting Bobby.

bobbyw24
08-03-2010, 05:33 AM
You're welcome--I will post Part 1 in OP

Aratus
08-03-2010, 12:33 PM
i can remember the upset on the left over potus richard nixon's enemies list...

Philhelm
08-03-2010, 01:40 PM
As for who perpetrates the man-caused disasters in the government's eyes, one needs to look no further than the DHS Lexicon on Domestic Extremism. It came after the DHS report on rightwing extremism and listed all sorts of groups and agendas, both left and right wing. However, nowhere in the report was a mention of Islamic extremism. I'm not one to think that there is a jihadist hiding under my bed, but it was pretty telling what the shift in priority was, especially given our current occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Remember, the government hates us for our freedoms.