You can stop pretending you don’t live under tyranny when the federal government claims authority to use unmanned drones to assassinate American citizens on American soil without due process of law:
“It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States,” Holder replied in a letter [Monday to Rand] Paul’s question about whether Obama “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”
To condense the verbiage, Holder’s answer was “Yes.” Senator Paul observes the obvious:
“The U.S. Attorney General’s refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening — it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”
Collateral damage notwithstanding, drones have proved so effective at wreaking havoc abroad that the Regime is eagerly applying them domestically:
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has customized its Predator drones, originally built for overseas military operations, to carry out at-home surveillance tasks that have civil libertarians worried: identifying civilians carrying guns and tracking their cell phones, government documents show.
The documents provide more details about the surveillance capabilities of the department’s unmanned Predator B drones, which are primarily used to patrol the United States’ northern and southern borders but have been pressed into service on behalf of a growing number of law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service, the Texas Rangers, and local police.
Homeland Security’s specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they “shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not,” meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify “signals interception” technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and “direction finding” technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.
They could be using drones to neutralize troublesome Tea Partiers even now, for all we know.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., believes that President Obama doesn’t necessarily have to announce that an American citizen suspected of terrorism has been killed in a drone strike.
“Maybe. It just depends,” Pelosi replied when The Huffington Post asked her if “the administration should acknowledge when it targets a U.S. citizen in a drone strike.”
ObamaCare is misnamed; it is was actually imposed on us by the infinitely more energetic Nancy Pelosi while Obama played golf during her last stint as Speaker of the House. The domestic use of drones will likely be expanded when the absence of a serious resistance party allows her to regain her Speaker post after the 2014 elections.
By then only a minority will care, given the trajectory of America’s ongoing fundamental transformation. Already 41% of Democrats and 43% of non-whites have no problem with the president using drones to execute Americans in their own country without bothersome judicial formalities.