Skip to main content

View Diary: Renegade dictator Obama not actually that much of a tyrant after all (66 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Seriously? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Should we look at the Tyrant Dubya and his EO's that were in direct violation of the Constitution, not just what laws congress may or may not have passed....lets look...

    Shortly after 9/11, George W. Bush secretly signed two executive orders. Both violated basic constitutional protections as well as U.S. obligations under international treaties, yet both carried the force of law.

    The first order granted Dubya (and other officials, including the secretary of defense, the secretary of homeland security and presumably certain postal clerks) the right to declare anyone -- including an American citizen -- an "unlawful enemy combatant." A person so declared has no redress, no way to appeal, no ability to challenge that designation. Once a person has been named an enemy combatant, according to the Bush Administration he has no rights. He can be held without charges forever, tortured, you name it—well, actually, the president or the secretary of defense names it.

    In the second covert executive order, Bush authorized the CIA to target and assassinate said "enemy combatants" -- again, including American citizens.

    These two documents first came into play on November 3, 2002, when a CIA-operated Predator drone plane violating Yemeni airspace fired a Hellfire missile at a car containing Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, supposedly Al Qaeda's #1 man in Yemen at the time.

    U.S. officials didn't know that an American citizen, Kamal Derwish, was riding along. (You know what they say about hitchhiking.) "The Bush administration said the killing of an American in this fashion was legal ... this is legal because the president and his lawyers say so -- it's not much more complicated than that," It was reported that "I can assure you that no constitutional questions are raised here," said Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, after the CIA assassinations. "He's well within the balance of accepted practice and the letter of his constitutional authority."

    It's right there in the Constitution between the right to tax and the repeal of Prohibition.

    Anyway, Congress tried to clarify matters in the Military Commissions Act of 2006, part of which -- the section that eliminated the writ of habeas corpus -- got struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. But the rest of the MCA remains in force, including a passage that defines an enemy combatant as anyone who provides "material support" to the "enemy." And who is the enemy? The enemy is anyone the president says it/he/she/they is.  ***Remember this was a Dubya EO that violated the Constitutional rights of American Citizens---but did you say anything about this tyranny?

    Again, there is no distinction between foreigners and U.S. citizens.

    Jose Padilla, the so-called would-be "dirty bomber" held in a Navy brig since 2002, was tried and convicted of such "material support" charges in 2007. (The government couldn't prosecute Padilla for their original dirty bomb charges because they had tortured him so severely that he had been reduced to mental mush.)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site