anarcho-queer:

Court Allows Obama Administration To Keep Drone Strike Targeting American Citizens A Secret

The President Barack Obama administration does not have to disclose the legal basis for its drone targeted killing program of Americans, according to a Wednesday decision a judge likened to “Alice in Wonderland”.

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen McMahon of New York, ruling in lawsuits brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times, said she was caught in a “paradoxical situation” (.pdf) of allowing the administration to claim it was legal to kill enemies outside traditional combat zones while keeping the legal rational secret.

The opinion comes months after 26 members of Congress asked Obama, in a letter, to consider the consequences of drone killing and to explain the necessity of the program. The use of drones to shoot missiles from afar at vehicles and buildings that the nation’s intelligence agencies believe are being used by suspected terrorists began under the George W. Bush administration and was widened by the Obama administration to allow the targeting of American citizens. Drone strikes by the Pentagon and the CIA have sparked backlashes from foreign governments and populations, as the strikes often kill civilians, including women and children.

In the end, however, the government’s claim of national security trumped the Freedom of Information Act. According to Judge McMahon:

… this court is constrained by law, and under the law, I can only conclude that the government has not violated FOIA by refusing to turn over the documents sought in the FOIA requests, and so cannot be compelled by this court of law to explain in detail the reasons why its actions do not violate the Constitution and laws of the United States. The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me; but after careful and extensive consideration, I find myself stuck in a paradoxical situation in which I cannot solve a problem because of contradictory constraints and rules — a veritable catch-22. I can find no way around the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the Executive Branch of our government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws, while keeping the reasons for their conclusion a secret.

Despite numerous public comments on the CIA’s drone attacks in far-flung locales such as Yemen from various government officials, including former CIA Director Leon Panetta, President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, the government is taking the position in court that it would have to eliminate American citizens* with one of its drones if it explained the legal basis of the program.

In 2011, Obama acknowledged particular CIA drone strikes at a Joint Chiefs of Staff ceremony. Within hours of the CIA drone strike that killed U.S. citizens Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan in Yemen, the president publicly lauded the move as “another significant milestone in the broader effort to defeat al-Qaeda and its affiliates” and then acknowledged the U.S. government’s role, stating that “this success is a tribute to our intelligence community.”

The authorities have conceded, however, that a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion addresses the issue, but maintain that it does not have to be made public. “It is beyond the power of this court to conclude that a document has been improperly classified,” the judge wrote.

Politico’s Josh Gerstein, who first reported the opinion, notes that such a statement by the judge is false, and that in “very rare cases” judges “have done so.”

Meanwhile, survivors of three Americans killed in 2011 by targeted drone attacks in Yemen, including survivors of al-Awlaki, have sued top-ranking members of the United States government, alleging they illegally killed the three, including a 16-year-old boy, in violation of international human rights law and the U.S. Constitution.

The case directly challenges the government’s decision to kill Americans without judicial scrutiny.

The suit (.pdf) is being litigated by the Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU. It seeks unspecified damages and maintains the drone attacks have killed thousands, including hundreds of innocent bystanders overseas. (Other estimates of the campaign come to widely different conclusions.)

The suit, the first of its kind, alleges the United States was not engaged in an armed conflict with or within Yemen — prohibiting the use of lethal force unless “at the time it is applied, lethal force is a last resort to protect against a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury.”

snowshakes:

Malcolm encourages you to vote tomorrow!!

occupyallstreets:

Obama Declares National Emergency, Blocks Russian Assets

On June 25, President Barack Obama issued a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and to the President of the Senate stating that under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, he was declaring a National Emergency due to actions incurred with Russia, and the Russian Federation. The submitted letter provides a declaration to Congress of the President signing Executive Order (E.O.) 13159, and its immediate implementation.

Under this National Emergency and Executive Order, the United States is seizing assets and property owned or managed by the Russian Federation relating to nuclear items and programs tied to Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU).

Pursuant to section 204(b) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 50 U.S.C. 1703(b), I hereby report that I have exercised my authority to declare a national emergency to deal with the threat posed to the United States by the risk of nuclear proliferation created by the accumulation in the Russian Federation of a large volume of weapons-usable fissile material.

The United States and the Russian Federation had entered into a series of agreements that provide for the conversion of highly enriched uranium (HEU) extracted from Russian nuclear weapons into low enriched uranium (LEU) for use in commercial nuclear reactors. There were concerns that payments due to the Russian Federation under these agreements may be subject to attachment, garnishment, or other judicial process, in the United States, which could put implementation of such agreements at risk. In Executive Order 13159, the President therefore ordered blocked all property and interests in property of the Government of the Russian Federation directly related to the implementation of the HEU Agreements so that it would be protected from the threat of attachment, garnishment, or other judicial process. - White House.gov

The ramifications of this Executive Order, along with portions that remain classified from the public, have vast consequences for the American people. Earlier this year, President Obama updated and signed several Executive Orders that deal with the complete control and confiscation of U.S. assets, infrastructure, and manpower in the case of a declared National Emergency. As of yesterday, that National Emergency has been invoked, opening the door for any number of policies to be enacted by the President going forward.

Additionally, this action against Russia and the Russian Federation could have massive consequences for America in regards to foreign policy, and even a potential act of war should Russia see fit to perceive Obama’s actions as such. With NATO and Russia both rattling sabers in the region of Syria, the possible threat of a global conflict increased with this new asset confiscation order.

Events in the Middle East, along with regime changes in Egypt, Libya, and a number of Arab states, are engulfing Russia, Europe, and the United States into a potential global conflict that could quickly grow into something not seen in 68 years. With President Obama declaring a state of National Emergency, and imposing a new asset seizure on properties owned or controlled by the Russian Federation, the ramifications for war on several fronts, along with the potential of liberties and freedoms lost to the American people has increased to dangerous levels.

Edit: The order is an extension of executive order 12919 from the Clinton era.

(via anarcho-queer)

occupyallstreets:

Obama Will Not Sign Executive Order Banning LGBT Workplace Discrimination

After months of dodging questions about the progress of an executive order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in federal contracting, the White House won’t issue the directive, but will instead study whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees require employment protections. The news comes after White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett held a meeting with LGBT advocates to discuss the matter.

Existing studies suggest that 11 to 16 million additional employees would have gained protections as a result of the measure, since many “federal contractors do not currently have those policies, and they employ millions of workers.”

Earlier this month, 72 Congressional lawmakers urged the administration to enact the order, noting that it would “extend important workplace protections to millions of Americans, while at the same time laying the groundwork for Congressional passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).” Data show that “43 percent of LGB people and 90 percent of transgender people have experienced workplace discrimination” and that the overwhelming majority of Americans — 73 percent — would have supported a measure prohibiting it.

Read More

(via anarcho-queer)

forlackofabettercomic:

THANKS OBAMA

(via thefrogman)

cheatsheet:

theatlantic:

Obama to Sandra Fluke: Your Parents Should Be Really Proud

After Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a “slut” and “prostitute” for testifying to Congress about the need for contraceptive health care coverage, the Georgetown law student became something of a lightening rod. Now President Obama has called to thank her. The President called Fluke on the phone just before her appearance on Andrea Mitchell Reports on MSNBC Friday, she told Mitchell, and offered words of support and an implicit rebuke of Limbaugh. This comes after Speaker John Boehner criticized the conservative radio host and at least one advertiser abandoned his show.

Fluke told Mitchell, “[Obama] encouraged me and supported me and thanked me for speaking out about the concerns of American women, and what was really personal for me was that he said to tell my parents they should be really proud.”

Read more. [Images: MSNBC/Reuters]

Allison Yarrow writes about how Fluke isn’t scared of Rush.

Also, watch Fluke’s testimony. 

masteradept:

tobiasgh:

benjamin-bruce:

Basically, neo-conservatives.

^ Yes, the Tea Party and Neo-Conservatives.

The Republican Party et al.

(via commie-femme)

prostheticshoulder:

coonic0rn:

This is the face of an innocent man. An innocent man who is to be executed tomorrow night in Georgia. There was a clemency meeting last night and it was denied. The execution will go ahead. But you can help stop it. Please, please, please, I am begging you, fill in your details on this petition to help save a man’s life. It literally takes 30 seconds so please, fill it in. 

http://action.amnesty.org.uk/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1194&ea.campaign.id=12137&utm_source=aiuk&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=deathpenalty&utm_content=troy2_nib

Please reblog and SPREAD THE WORD. 

And where is the president in all of this? Time to speak up, Mr. Obama.

(via powerkatie)