The CIA has always had a reputation as a rogue agency. Hollywood has portrayed this agency a lot of ways, mostly negative. It is well documented that the CIA tried to assassinate Fidel Castro. They were also involved in other activities that angered the liberal left. After some embarrassing mistakes, the Church Committee was authorized to investigate alleged abuse by the CIA. The liberal left was among the loudest voices demanding congressional oversight:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Church_Committee_Created.htm
There have been three Executive orders on assassinations. The first, 11905 was issued by Gerald Ford on February 18, 1976. The second, 12036, was issued by Jimmy Carter on January 24, 1978. The third, 12333 was issued by Ronald Reagan on December 4, 1983. To the best of my knowledge, this executive order remains in effect.
The Reagan order contained the same language as the Carter order:
“No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.… No agency of the Intelligence Community shall request or otherwise encourage, directly or indirectly, any person, organization, or government agency to undertake activities forbidden by this order or by applicable law.” [
When there is a Republican President, the liberal left expresses outrage at the very hint of an assassination. George W. Bush was even criticized for the mission that killed Saddam Hussein’s sons during a fire fight, even though this was during a war and they were definitely shooting back.
http://www.mcgeorge.edu/documents/centers/government/TARGETING%20SADDAM-Final%20Draft.pdf
But the liberal left has been deafly silent on this subject during the Obama administration. They said nothing when Obama ordered the “hit” on Osama bin Laden. There was not even a pretense of taking him alive. (I am glad he is gone, but justified or not, this was an assassination.) Now, according to the Washington Post, Obama administration has allegedly transformed the mission of the CIA from intelligence gathering to a full time assassination squad.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-shifts-focus-to-killing-targets/2011/08/30/gIQA7MZGvJ_story.html
Bill Clinton attacked Yugoslavia without approval from congress and he made no attempt to get UN approval. NATO said it was ok, so it was ok. When some members of congress, including Tom Campbell and Dennis Kucinich filed a Declaratory Relief action against Bill Clinton, the majority of the liberal left and the main stream media just ignored the issue:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/ratner.htm
George Bush attacked Iraq with both UN approval and bi-partisan approval from congress, yet the liberal left still considers this to be an illegal war. (They rarely, if ever, mention Yugoslavia.) Obama attacked Libya, with no authority, and refused to even call it a war. Yet the liberal left, and the supporting main stream media, has been noticeably silent.
If this article is correct than Obama is apparently conducting wide scale assassinations. Bush ordered drone attacks on terrorists, in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. But, the Bush administration at least argued that this was an exception to the rule during a time of war. The liberal left was vocal in their criticism of Bush for doing this.
The Obama administration has expanded this to places like Yemen and Libya, where he himself says we are not engaged in war. He won’t even call it combat. He has not requested authority from congress or anyone else. In addition, Obama refuses to use the word war in describing the fight against terrorism. Apparently the only standard for Obama is whether or not he (or the French) thinks it’s a good idea.
The liberal left and the mainstream media still tries to portray the Bush administration as evil because of the decision to water board certain terrorists. So far, no one seems to be concerned over Obama turning the CIA into Murder Incorporated. I guess killing terrorists is ok, as long as we don’t water board them first. In addition killing them eliminates the inconvenience of having to decide whether or not to use military tribunals instead of trying them in federal court.
It is my understanding that at least some of these people are U.S. citizens. That raises some serious questions. Do we really want the President of the United States able to order the assassination of an American citizen solely because he considers them a threat? Sometimes the rule of law is messy and it gives undeserved protection to our worst offenders. But there is a reason for the rule of law. I can perhaps understand why, in an emergency a President may deliberately violate the law. Lincoln certainly did that during the civil war when he suspended the writ of habeas corpus. But at least Lincoln acknowledged this and explained the justification for his actions. In addition, even during the civil war there were people who challenged Lincoln about this decision. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney, ordered Lincoln to hand over John Merryman, an active and vocal secessionist, who was being held by the military:
http://www.etymonline.com/cw/habeas.htm
Taney ordered Merryman brought before him on a writ of habeas corpus and commanded the military officer in charge of Merryman to show “the cause, if any, for his arrest and detention.”
Lincoln just ignored the order. (Keep in mind that Taney was also the Supreme Court Justice who issued the Dred Scott decision.) But the point is that at least the issue was discussed and Lincoln did explain his reason for making these decisions. In retrospect, Lincoln is considered to be one of our greatest Presidents because he made the decisions that saved the Union. If you want more information on how this has been viewed legal scholars following is the link:
http://millercenter.org/president/lincoln/essays/biography/9
Obama, on the other hand, has given no explanation or justification at all.
A President has the duty to protect the country and one suspects other Presidents have authorized missions that were legally over the line. I am relatively sure that no one is overly concerned with regard to the health and well-being of the terrorists being targeted by Obama in Yemen and Pakistan. But, if Bush had done this there would be loud calls for his impeachment from the liberal left. Instead all we hear now deafening roar of silence. In addition, it appears we are sacrificing our intelligence capabilities in exchange for just eliminating specific people. In my opinion it was the downgrading of our intelligence operations under Bill Clinton that lead to 9-11 in the first place. At best this appears to be another convenient short term fix as a replacement for long term strategic planning.
TDM
