A repository for Marcospinelli's comments and essays published at other websites.

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen

Sunday, September 26, 2010


Obama, as president and Commander-in-Chief, can end DADT with an executive order (A group of experts in military law concluded Obama can end DADT with the stroke of a pen:  http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf while Congress works on ending it through legislation, and while individuals and groups go about ending it through the courts (the Log Cabin Republicans lawsuit has taken 6 years to get to last week's decision in the federal court).

There's no reason all can't happen simultaneously, and should.  One of the many benefits of an executive order ending DADT is that its implementation begins to knock down the fallacies that exist about gay men and women serving in the military.  It gets people used to it.

It also refocuses attention where I think it always should have been:  The purpose of our military and our true state of preparedness.  

How is it that this nation that allegedly stands as a beacon for individual liberty and universal justice can justify separating any competent professional soldiers from service for their sexual orientation in this time of war?  

Do you remember this?: 

==According to the February 2005 GAO report, seven hundred fifty-seven (about 8 percent) of these separated servicemembers held critical occupations ("voice interceptor," "data processing technician," or "interpreter/translator"), as defined by the services. Also, 322 members (about 3 percent) had some skills in an important foreign language such as Arabic, Farsi, and Korean. Government Accountability Office, February 2005. http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05299.html ==


It makes this criminal:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/afghanistan-whistleblower-claims-us-interpreters-speak-afghan-languages/story?id=11578169



About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


"he was let go"
============================

In June 2002, a Denver federal judge signed off on an arrest warrant for al-Awlaki for passport fraud, and not terr0rist activities.  

On October 9, the Denver US Attorney's Office rescinded the arrest warrant, having nothing to do with the Saudis.  The prosecutors withdrew the warrant because they felt they ultimately lacked evidence of a crime, according to US Attorney Dave Gaouette, who authorized its withdrawal. 
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


"The Constitution's just a piece of paper."  -George W. Bush



On Keith Olberman's show, Jonathan Turley likened the Bush team to The Sopranos for their Constitutional abuses -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaLbE


Obama
is a continuation of the Bush crime spree.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


Awlaki has never been charged with a crime, much less convicted of one.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


Many commenters don't really understand what's going on here.  So in an attempt to refocus, here goes:

In response to the lawsuit filed by Anwar Awlaki's father asking a court to enjoin Obama from assassinating his son, a US citizen, without any due process, the administration late last night, according to the Washington Post, filed a brief asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit without hearing the merits of the claims.  

That's not surprising:  both the Bush and Obama administrations have repeatedly insisted that their secret conduct is legal but nonetheless urge courts not to even rule on its legality.  

But what's most notable here is that one of the arguments the Obama DOJ raises to demand dismissal of this lawsuit is "state secrets":  in other words, not only does a president have the right to sentence Americans to death with no due process or charges of any kind, but his decisions as to who will be killed and why he wants them dead are "state secrets," and thus no court may adjudicate their legality.


That, in and of itself, should be shocking to all Americans.  


That Obama would do this on the heels of the 2008 campaign where he campaigned for himself as a champion of the Constitution and against Bush's disregard for the rule of law, in addition to the fact that Awlaki has never been charged with a crime, much less convicted, leaves no doubt about Obama's character: He has none.


To those who excuse what Obama's doing as the result of something he's been told in intelligence briefings since assuming office, what do you possibly imagine would justify the literal end this Constitutional democracy?   That's what his effort is telling you, by the way -- That this noble experiment is over.  But back to the question: Imagine the worst.  What could it possibly be?  


There's no coming back from this.  


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


Awlaki's never been charged with a crime, much less convicted of one.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Invokes 'State Secrets' Claim To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Targeting Of U.S. Citizen


President Obama would not circumvent the Constitution in this situation if he didn't feel the need to.
===================================================

This has got to be one of the most disturbing comments I've ever seen online (if not the most), & one that has to have teachers and civil libertarians (and anyone who's even moderately schooled on civics) wringing their hands and saying kaddish for the USA.

The Constitution isn't "a suggestion"; it's the law of the land.  No law is merely a guideline, as you seem to think the Constitution is, something "we'll try to adhere to, but if it becomes too cumbersome or doesn't enable us to do what we want to do, we're free to ignore it".  
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

About This Blog

  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP