Friday’s court decision in federal court
by Judge Rosemary Collyer sends a chilling message to ordinary citizens of the
United States. At issue was the rights of American citizens to due process and
civil liberties under the First, Fourth and Fifth amendments. The judge tasked
with defending the concept of the rights of the citizen against the rights of the state
fell back and punted.
Citing that “The same reasoning applies
here. The powers granted to the Executive and Congress to wage war and provide
for national security does not give them carte blanche to deprive a U.S.
citizen of his life without due process and without any judicial review.” And “Plaintiffs
further admit the inapplicability of Fourth Amendment principles by asserting
that the United States killed the three men with missiles from unmanned drones.
Unmanned drones are functionally incapable of “seizing” a person; they are
designed to kill, not capture. As the decedents were not “seized,” Plaintiffs
have not stated a Fourth Amendment claim.” and “The Constitution does not
guarantee due care on the part of state officials; liability for negligently
inflicted harm is categorically beneath
the threshold of constitutional due process.” On the matter of Abdulrahman
Alawki, Judge Collyer basically said that if the US government kills you in the
attempt to wage its “war on terror” then they are not responsible for their accidents. The lawsuit was brought by
the father of Anwar Alawki, who while admittedly becoming a citizen “at odds
and arms against the US Government” was otherwise in no way charged with any
crime, but due to his role as Al Qaeda propagandist (and even Osama Bin Laden
didn’t take him as seriously in that as did Barack Obama, apparently) had been
droned to death without charges or trial during the great “War on Terror”
initiated by the Bush administration and carried on to this time by the Obama
one. In my mind this case was less about that of Anwar (although having the
ability to posthumously state one’s own Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights at
law seems pretty tenuous) but more to do with the killing of his innocent son,
who had no connection at all to the jihadi ideology of his father.
It’s hard to wrap one’s head around this
decision dismissing Mr. Nasser Alawki’s case. Here is a man who brought his
grievance through the federal judicial system seeking justice for the
“accidental” killing of his grandson. His personal faith in American justice
was so laughably naive that he actually thought
the Constitution provided him some means
of redressing it. But instead, Judge Collyer worked diligently to find the
legal loopholes through which the Executive branch could shove the drone that
killed his grandson. And, apparently, now, going forward into the bleak
police-state future, any citizen whom they should choose to place on their
target list for secret “national security” reasons. Because “the courts are not
the place” for this to be decided, but by Congress and the Executive”. Boy
howdy, we all know what paragons of wisdom they
all are, don’t we.
This is Hitler-type justice at work, in my
opinion. Now, any future president has the right though the use of secret
accusations to disappear any citizen they choose, indefinitely detain them
without course to law and access to legal remedy. The president has said you
must die, and of course, with all the powers of the state at his command, the
president will assure that you shall. We went from terrorists being criminals
to legitimized warriors - subject to military law and not civil legal
penalties- and Judge Collyer made it clear that the propagandized war on
terror, rooted in fear and insecurity over the 9/11 attacks, will continue with
the “battlefield” now extended to every inch of the globe, including the United
States of America. Of course Mr. Obama didn’t want to kill young Abdulrahman. He was “just doing his job”.
Actually,
contrary to Ms. Collyer's opinion, there is an applicable section of US law
that pertains to this case. This is sections 241 and 242 of the US Criminal
Code which read:
US CODE 241 & 242
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 13 - CIVIL RIGHTS
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 13 - CIVIL RIGHTS
§ 241. Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or
intimidate any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free
exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the
Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so
exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or
on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise
or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured - They shall be fined not
more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death
results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for
life.
§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation,
or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or
District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or
protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different
punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien,
or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of
citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one
year, or both; and if bodily injury results shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results shall be
subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.
http://justification/crt/about/crm/242fin.php
"For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of
law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials
within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that
official's lawful authority if the acts are done while the official is
purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official
duties,. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute
include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as
well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are
acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by
animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or
national origin of the victim.
So Ms. Collyer felt herself incapable of
judging these officials in a similar manner to the criteria used upon judgment
of Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg. It’s not surprising, given the hubris of
America’s leaders and appointed officials, at this time, that there should be a
cringing from acceptance of any personal responsibility in this, and that the
judiciary, which was actually our last hope against tyrannical powers assumed
by the Presidency, could and would actually step in to uphold the rights of
citizens. Nowhere in her decision does Ms. Collyer recognize the existence or
relevance of this statute regarding ‘color of authority.’
Never mind any attempt to actually arrest and bring to heel these
criminals to our way of life, now, the expediency of a drone can conveniently
discorporate them from a distance, and collateral damage- being the wrong
person in the right place at the wrong time- can get you killed, and our leaders
do not have to say “oops, sorry” any longer. They wouldn’t anyway, but that is
beside the point. Once the slippery slope was defined to include Muslims or any
other future out-group of Americans it can now be redefined by any US President
under his “Commander in Chief” powers, subject to the decision. Your government
is always right, and even with the judge herself saying it “raised serious
constitutional questions” she decided she was not the person, and “the courts
are not the place,” for making the judgment
in favor of a citizen over the long arm of the state. It is a truly cowardly
position for a judge to take, but she has taken it, and now the Executive
branch can decide just who lives and who dies. And go scot free when they make
“a mistake.” We’re living under an official military dictatorship now. Madison and Jefferson must be tossing by turns
and throwing fits from their graves.
yes, call us old-fashioned, but some of us still believe in due process and the rule of law:
http://antiwar.com/blog/2014/05/15/drone-lawyer-kill-a-16-year-old-get-a-promotion/
*****
http://original.antiwar.com/andrew-p-napolitano/2014/04/23/a-legal-way-to-kill/
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/10/barack_obama_pulls_a_george_w_bush_lies_misinformation_and_chemical_weapons/
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/2014/04/14/seymour-hershs-blockbuster-obama-on-the-red-line-and-on-the-rat-line/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/12/silicon-valley-nsa-reform-taking-so-long
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/2014/04/14/seymour-hershs-blockbuster-obama-on-the-red-line-and-on-the-rat-line/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/12/silicon-valley-nsa-reform-taking-so-long
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23010-pass-the-drone-strike-transparency-act
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-drone-ranger-obamas-dirty-wars
No comments:
Post a Comment
Le Surrealist apprécie vos pensées, comments et suggestions. Continuez-les venir ! Doigts Heureux !