The Boeing Company Message Board

Was placing the flag on the moon another "false flag" event according to the Perils of Spartakook?

Simple strategy. Anybody that threatens libdem crony capitalism power gets attacked. Libs have tried their best to figure out how to eliminate Fox News, and Rush. And if they could exercise their commie like desires they would do it. Obama again stays hands off telling the folks this is not anything he supports, and then sends out his thugs to do the dirty work, then comes riding in saying he is working on solving the problem. BS only lasts for so long.

THE GOVERNMENT HAS NEVER GIVEN A RATIONALE FOR ASSASSINATION
While one might assume that the government has given a valid justification for his claim that he can assassinate anyone anywhere, the Washington Post noted yesterday regarding assassination by drone:

In outlining its legal reasoning, the administration has cited broad congressional authorizations and presidential approvals, the international laws of war and the right to self-defense. But it has not offered the American public, uneasy allies or international authorities any specifics that would make it possible to judge how it is applying those laws.



***



“They’ve based it on the personal legitimacy of [President] Obama — the ‘trust me’ concept,” [American University law professor Kenneth Anderson] said. “That’s not a viable concept for a president going forward.”



***



Under domestic law, the administration considers [assassinations] to be covered by the Authorization for Use of Military Force that Congress passed days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. In two key sentences that have no expiration date, the AUMF gives the president sole power to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against nations, groups or persons who committed or aided the attacks, and to prevent future attacks. [But the government just broadened the authorization for use of military force from those who attacked us on 9/11 to include the Taliban and the vague category of "associated forces".]



***



The authorization did not address targets’ nationality or set geographical boundaries, and there was “nothing about the permission of the government” of any country where a terrorist might be found, the former official said.

ALMOST ANY AMERICAN COULD BE ARBITRARILY LABELED A "TERRORIST"


As I've previously noted, this is especially concerning when almost any American could be labeled a "terrorist" if the government doesn't happen to like them:

It is dangerous in a climate where you can be labeled as or suspected of being a terrorist simply for questioning war, protesting anything, asking questions about pollution or about Wall Street shenanigans, supporting Ron Paul, being a libertarian, holding gold, or stocking up on more than 7 days of food. [And the FBI says that activists who investigate factory farms can be prosecuted as terrorists.] And see this.



And it is problematic in a period in which FBI agents and CIA intelligence officials, constitutional law expert professor Jonathan Turley, Time Magazine, Keith Olbermann and the Washington Post have all said that U.S. government officials “were trying to create an atmosphere of fear in which the American people would give them more power”, and even former Secretary of Homeland Security – Tom Ridge – admitst hat he was pressured to raise terror alerts to help Bush win reelection.