View Poll Results: Do we Need a Special Court Sytem Set Up to Regualte Drone Strikes?

Voters
12. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    6 50.00%
  • No

    6 50.00%
  • I Don't Know

    0 0%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

    In answers to pre-hearing questions released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Brennan said no further legislation was necessary to conduct operations against al-Qaida wherever it's operating.

    "There is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat," Brennan said at the time.....snip~


    Jay Carney said this morning.

    “The President takes these issues very seriously, and he believes that the conversation about this is valid and that the questions about it are legitimate. And that’s why he has been leading this process internally to — as has John Brennan, by the way — to provide public information as much as possible, mindful of the fact that we are talking about here very sensitive matters, and that these kinds of things — they’re classification — information is classified for very legitimate reasons that go right to our national security interest.....snip~


    Now it was Obama that stated he wanted the American People to know as much as possible. Yet, all Obama did was open the door for the Memo and Brennan's Hearing for Confirmation. Then Obama immediately cut off any flow of information again citing EP and National Security allowing the Memo but sending no other info with it.

    Wyden already complained as well as others saying their staff never received any other information. What caught my attention was Wyden asking Brennan to look into the matter. When one.....he hasn't been confirmed yet. Two.....how would Brennan be able to go around Obama in the first place.

    Sure Obama agree questions are legitimate and valid. He just agrees that they should now not be discussed publicly.

    Last edited by MMC; 02-09-13 at 02:28 AM.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Why destroy the buildings when they can be reused? Gas chambers are the preferred method for mass executions and a great way to show the world what kind of nation we have become.
    Tell obama he is bombing homes.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - During a fresh round of debate this week over President Barack Obama's claim that he can unilaterally order lethal strikes by unmanned aircraft against U.S. citizens, some lawmakers proposed a middle ground: a special federal "drone court" that would approve suspected militants for targeting.



    While the idea of a judicial review of such operations may be gaining political currency, multiple U.S. officials said on Friday that imminent action by the U.S. Congress or the White House to create one is unlikely. The idea is being actively considered, however, according to a White House official.

    At Thursday's confirmation hearing for CIA director nominee John Brennan, senators discussed establishing a secret court or tribunal to rule on the validity of cases that U.S. intelligence agencies draw up for killing suspected militants using drones.

    The court could be modeled on an existing court which examines applications for electronic eavesdropping on suspected spies or terrorists.

    Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Thursday that she planned to "review proposals for ... legislation to ensure that drone strikes are carried out in a manner consistent with our values, and the proposal to create an analogue of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to review the conduct of such strikes."

    Senator Angus King, a Maine independent, said during the hearing that he envisioned a scenario in which executive branch officials would go before a drone court "in a confidential and top-secret way, make the case that this American citizen is an enemy combatant, and at least that would be ... some check on the activities of the executive."
    King suggested that only drone attacks on U.S. citizens would need court approval; other proposals leave open the possibility that such a court could also rule regarding drone strikes on non-Americans.

    Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, questioned the need for creating a new court to review drone targeting lists.

    "We have courts that are fully capable and experienced" in dealing with sensitive national security matters, he said. Federal courts in Washington, New York City, and Alexandria, Virginia, routinely handle highly classified materials yet operate with more transparency and more independence than the ultra-secretive foreign intelligence court, Anders said.

    Geoffrey Robertson, one of Britain's most prominent human rights lawyers, described the current U.S. drone-strike policy as "execution without trial" and "international killing (which) ... violates the right to life."

    Robertson said that in his interpretation of international law, any court set up to review candidates for possible drone attacks would have to publish target lists, so that those listed would have an opportunity either to give themselves up or be able to have friends or relatives petition for their removal from the lists.....snip~

    Support grows for U.S. "drone court" to review lethal strikes

    So if they know this will not be done.....then why is Feinstein WASTING the PEOPLES TIME AND MONEY?

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

    Murder by the governement should only be legal in declared war zones and after a legitimate (constitutional) trial. That is the law. Criminal should be captured, not executed. Regulating killing by drones anywhere in the world only legitimizes the practice. Government killing by any means, including by drones, should be banned outside of declared war zones.

  5. #25
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,540
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Lawmakers Consider Regulating Drone Strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    obama himself needs to step out of the shadows and tell us why Gitmo is inhumane, water boarding is torture but killing suspected terrorist along with any innocent civilian in close proximity is perfectly acceptable. Don't hold your breath.
    It's unacceptable torture to spray water in a terrorist's face, but it's acceptable to blow him into tiny bits with an unmanned drone. How about if we use an unmanned drone to spray water in his face? Is that OK?

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •