100 votes

Eric Holder: 'The President has no authority to use weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil'

Eric Holder: 'The President has no authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil'

The following is the letter sent to Rand Paul by Attorney General Eric Holder:

Dear Senator Paul:

It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.

Sincerely,

Eric Holder

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-07/some-advice-america...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/07/obama-admini...

A special thank you to AnCapMercenary for the video link below:


http://youtu.be/Y74dbCvikOg



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Even the Founding Father saw government as evil, sweetpea.

.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I think they saw government as...

necessary because of evil. But lets say you're right, why did they bother creating a necessary evil?

http://www.standupforyourrights.me/?p=1047 (Fraud and the Federal debt)
http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

The founding fathers stated

The founding fathers stated why they created this government: to ensure peace, domestic tranquility, to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the people of these united States.

________________________________________

It's really irrelevant in the scheme of things..

I see government as evil as well but needed in SOME instances even as I hate it but THIS particular government is out of control evil. I'm pretty sure the Anarchist feel the same way about THIS government as I do and they would probably prefer MY version of government over yours which is what we have now.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

If we get to the point where limited constitutional government

versus anarcho-capitalism is the debate,it will be a very good thing. Don't hate the anarchists.

I think we're already there

And before you think it's a good thing, you might want to see what the anarchists have to say in the post I linked to below. And by the way, I'm not hating on anarchists, but I do oppose their anarcho-barbarian ideology because of the threat it poses to a limited Constitutional Republic.

http://www.dailypaul.com/276369 (Anarchists say RP is an anarchist)
http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

You think we're already there?

You haven't noticed the fascist-communist state we happen to occupy at the moment? I think we're a long way from either limited Constitutional government or anarchy. We live in a controlled world where nearly everything we see, touch or eat is regulated and standardized from creation to consumption. The police will murder you for being home when they come knocking. Entitlement programs are ubiquitous both for the rich and the poor, while everyone else pays through the nose to keep it all running. The only annotated right in the Bill of Rights that is still honored at all is the 3rd amendment, until they decide to violate that too. Far from Constitutional, and far from anarchistic (in the Rothbardian sense of course). I say a move toward either would be a great thing.

Yeah I think somebody has been chasing the dragon

if they think "we're already there".

I don't trust people who make completely and utterly fucked up "observations" like that.. My COINTEL siren goes off.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

anarcho-barbarian? please.

first of all, An-Caps have been on this site pretty much since its inception (at least during the more than 5 years i have been here). Secondly, anarcho-capitalists are different from "anarchists" (in the lefty sense of the word). And their position is based on the ideas espoused in the NAP and Voluntaryism...the two most peaceful philosophies one can adhere to. So, how are they "barbarian"? Is it because they dont relent , at least on some level, that force should be used against others to fund a "republic" (which, by the way, was lost almost as soon as it was founded.)?
And what about the Mises Academy? Founded by An-Cap lew Rockwell...is the Mises Academy also an affront to Ron Paul's ideals? If so, why is he a Senior Fellow there? Dr.Paul may not be an An-Cap, but he is a Minarchist, and probably a lot closer to Anarcho-capitalist than you would be comfortable with.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

I suggest you read what the ancaps...

had to say at my post. Bottom line, they hide behind the idea of limited gov't as a means to promote their agenda to create a stateless society. There are nine pages of comments from anarchists at the link below, I challenge you to find one anarchist or ancap comment that supports our Constitution and Bill of Rights as they were created.

http://www.dailypaul.com/276369

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

This guy is an anti-AnCap

This guy is an anti-AnCap nutcase.

Ron Paul is a voluntaryist, he is a follower of Rothbard - he is an anarchist. He, however, would be satisfied with minarchism as would I.

If you support a limited...

Constitutional Republic with a Bill of Rights, why don't say so instead of dancing around the issue by saying you support "minarchism"?

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

After one month and roughly

After one month and roughly 13 hours worth of emails, phone calls,Fillabustering, and public grillings of Holder and Brennan ...The Regime finally finds us worthy to trot out their Monkey Erand Boy for a two sentence response. Priceless.

Not impressed.....

Believe me, as soon as I read the response I felt there is something sinister about the response. I don't remember Rand asking "if they were non-combative" I thought the question was, does the administration believe it's constitutional/legal to target & kill US Citizens on US Soil, with Drones, Period. Very disturbing to say the least.

No, a little sick to my stomach, actually.

Drones are sick. War is ugly anyway, but to turn it into a video game where rich countries rain death and terror on poor ones and pretend it is "defensive" is about as immoral as it gets.
Rand did not mention that.
People planning crimes are still innocent of the crime. It is why we have this silly little tradition called "a trial." I know, I know - our courts are laughable, but still... For the sake of humoring those of us who love truth and justice, how about we go ahead and TRY people for their crimes?
How will a drone know if I am carrying a weapon because I am going duck hunting, or because I am plotting evil? How will a drone know I am an American sitting in a cafe at the table next to a CIA agent, I mean "Al Qaeda terrorist?" Why is it OK to kill anyone for planning a crime? If you have the intel to stop them before they commit the crime, arrest them.
Truly, if Rand is "our guy for liberty" we are too far gone, it is over.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Taking a stand on principle...

in spite of the odds against you, has always been a force for good in the world. Check out this post, "Rand Paul: One person can make a difference".

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342

http://www.dailypaul.com/277342 (Rand Paul: One person can make a difference)
http://www.StandUpForYourRights.me/?p=1264 (Fast and Furious hearing)

'That' question....

'Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?' "The answer to that question is no."

'That' question....

So is the drone only considered weaponized when it has additional weapons beyond those it's normally manufactured with? And is it ok to crash weaponless drones onto citizens? Is someone considered to be 'engaged in combat' when a drone is attacking them? Is it ok to attack them in or from embassies which aren't considered American soil? Is a drone flying in the air considered to be on American soil?

Precisely...

A look at Holder's original draft letter to Rand (satire) touches on this:

http://www.dailypaul.com/277333/original-draft-of-eric-holde...

Does "walking to combat" or "talking about combat" or "planning combat" imply "engaging in combat"?

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!

www.RevolutionCarBadges.com
www.NonNetwork.com

"Dr. Paul further stated that he will be voting for Brennan"

Didn't he end up voting no? I saw that somewhere else on here.

"I will not submit to authority of man. I'm alive, I'm awake, this is more than I can take." -Jordan Page

Holder

I didn't believe him when he and Obama said they "probably wouldn't use drones to kill Americans on US soil, why would I believe them now when he says "we won't" ? What does that prove? Redo the NDAA and take that crap ALL out or it means nothing!

am i living in the twilight

am i living in the twilight zone? isn't holder the one that just said it was legal a few days ago?

Talk is cheap

Talk is cheap and when if comes from a politician it's worthless ;)

Operational definitions of keywords are crucial.

Bill Clinton said it best, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". Chicago could be considered a combat zone. How about combating government corruption and tyranny.

combat noun |ˈkämˌbat|
fighting between armed forces: men killed in combat | pilots re-enacted the aerial combats of yesteryear | [ as modifier ] : a combat zone.
• nonviolent conflict or opposition: intellectual combat.

verb |kəmˈbat, ˈkämˌbat| ( combats, combating or combatting, combated or combatted ) [ with obj. ]
take action to reduce, destroy, or prevent (something undesirable): an effort to combat drug trafficking.

• archaic engage in a fight with; oppose in battle. [ no obj. ] : your men combated against the first of ours.
ORIGIN mid 16th cent. (originally denoting a fight between two persons or parties): from French combattre (verb), from late Latin combattere, from com- ‘together with’ + battere, variant of Latin batuere ‘to fight.’

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

What about other "high level" officials?

Can't help but feel that we've been distracted by SOLELY concentrating on the president as opposed to what the original "leaked" memo stated.

Since the president and the government has NEVER lied to us - I feel SOOO much better now. (sarcasm)

Just PR damage control.

Right!

The President Can't kill Americans but our "fall guy" can...

TwelveOhOne's picture

From Machiavelli's "The Prince"

When the king wants to remove opposition, he hires a henchman. This person charges the opposition with crimes and kills them. After a while, the king then says "oh the people are being oppressed, against my orders!" and kills the henchman in public.

Thus the king looks good, while removing opposition.

Anyone authorized by the president to perform evil actions, is not only responsible directly for their evil actions (no "veil"); but also, the president should be held accountable for the evil actions, because thousands of years ago this "out" was noted.

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

Oh good, Holder said it so it must be true.

I mean, really.

The question is, Is is legal to do it?

Remember Obombya saying, "I'm against NDAA and won't sign it." Then he signed it. Now he says, "but I won't use this power." And of course, he's used it.

Whatever.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a rEVOLution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

deacon's picture

with 3 bills passed

the patriot act,the NDAA,and the expatriation act,they have
declared America an open battle field,with every citizen
condemned as terrorists
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

SteveMT's picture

Like telling the frog that the water is still the same temp...

plus 2 billion rounds of ammo, 2600 armored vehicles, and those FEMA Camps are already built awaiting us. We are being enslaved, and they are saying no we aren't. People keep forgetting that politicians lie.

deacon's picture

true SteveMT

seems there is confusion about this right here on the DP
and some will fight to keep their ignorance
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence