Kucinich Asks: “Is It Legal for the President to Have a Hit List”?

President Obama has succeeded some extremely bellicose warmongerers who have served as President and yet he is the first President to assert that he had the right to have American citizens killed without due process of law. Even if you trust Obama with all your heart, do you want all Presidents to have this power? Dennis Kucinich asks the question.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today urged fellow lawmakers to support, H. Res. 819, a Resolution of Inquiry that would compel the Administration to release to Congress documents which form the legal basis for the targeted assassination of American citizens abroad. Those documents would include memos from the White House’s Office of Legal Counsel.

A Resolution of Inquiry must be considered within 14 legislative days. Unless Congress adjourns before the deadline, Kucinich will be able to call up the bill with privileged status. Kucinich introduced the legislation on November 28, 2012.

The full text of Congressman Kucinich’s remarks follow.

“Before Congress adjourns, this House should vote on my Resolution of Inquiry about the U.S. use of drones.

“The vote will not be about the thousands of deaths of innocent civilians caused by drones, though that is important. It won’t be about whether the drones are creating more terrorism. It won’t be a vote to stop the killing of American citizens without the due process guaranteed by the Constitution.

“It won’t be about whether our ongoing use of drones constitutes violations of the Constitution and violations of international law.

“The vote will, however, be about something fundamental. We will determine whether or not Congress has the power to require the Administration to release their still-secret legal justification to use drones.

“In matters of the Constitution, in matters of war, ‘trust us’ is neither sufficient legally, constitutionally, nor is it morally acceptable. I urge members of the House to reclaim Congress’ constitutional imperative by supporting H. Res. 819, the Resolution of Inquiry demanding the White House produce its legal justification for drone strikes.”

UN Asks US to Justify Its Killings by Drone

Nobel Peace Award Winner May Be Guilty of Violating the International Law on Human Rights, War & Peace

FROM REUTERS (June 19, 2012)

A U.N. investigator has called on the Obama
administration to justify its policy of assassinating
rather than capturing al Qaeda or Taliban suspects,
increasingly with the use of unmanned drone aircraft that
also take civilian lives.

Christof Heyns, U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial,
summary or arbitrary executions, urged Washington to
clarify the basis under international law of the policy,
in a report issued overnight to the United Nations Human
Rights Council. The 47-member Geneva forum is to hold a
debate later on Tuesday.

The U.S. military has conducted drone attacks in
Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, in
addition to conventional raids and air strikes, according
to Heyns, a South African jurist serving in the
independent post.

“Disclosure of these killings is critical to ensure
accountability, justice and reparation for victims or
their families,” he said in a 28-page report.

“The (U.S.) government should clarify the procedures in
place to ensure that any targeted killing complies with
international humanitarian law and human rights and
indicate the measures or strategies applied to prevent
casualties, as well as the measures in place to provide
prompt, thorough, effective and independent public
investigation of alleged violations.”

Citing figures from the Pakistan Human Rights Commission,
he said U.S. drone strikes killed at least 957 people in
Pakistan in 2010 alone. Thousands have been killed in 300
drone strikes there since 2004, 20 percent of whom are
believed to be civilians.

_______________________________________________

During the U.S. bombing of Yugoslavia, I had the occasion to debate someone on the morality and legality of the bombing. When searching for a legal justification for the bombing of civilians in this undeclared war, my opponent asserted that since the leader of Yugoslavia had been charged with war crimes any military action against the Yugoslav (Serb) people was permissible. “The People are culpable for the crimes of their leaders because they could have prevented them,” said my opponent.

I hope indeed that the world does not adopt that logic. We Americans could suffer immeasurably due to the unprevented crimes of our leaders.

Every President elected during the last 30 years has authorized the commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes. The United States was found guilty of acts of undeclared war against the Nicaraguan people by the World Court (a fact little known in the U.S.) . The U.S. military breached international law, and agreements with Great Britain, by invading Grenada, a member of the British Commonwealth. The invasion of Panama was illegal. The bombing of Yugoslavia was a violation on international and United States law. The bombing and invasion of Iraq was based on a mistake (or a lie). Whenever a nation or its government displeases the government, or its Corporate sponsors, it is bombed, invaded  or quarantined.

News Items

The laws of the United States as well as international law have prohibited torture and have defined waterboarding as torture. This has been true since at least 1945 and lest we believe that such a softie policy was the work of wimpy Liberals, the last law making such a declaration was signed by President Ronald Reagan.

ITEM: George W Bush admits in a televised interview, as well as in his memoir, that he ordered the application of waterboarding to American-held prisoners. 

So George W Bush is a self-confessed war criminal. But this is no mere partisan rant, war crimes are a bipartisan endeavor; to-wit —

ITEM: Lawyers for the Barack Obama administration
told a federal judge Monday that the U.S.
government has authority to kill U.S. citizens

Think about this — Do you want your President to have the authority to decide as to whether you can live or die?  No President has had this power. George Washington did not, Abraham Lincoln did not, Grover Cleveland did not. Do you really have such trust in the man who lives in the White House today?