White House Won’t Comment on Reuters Story About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill List’
EmailReuters’ Mark Hosenball today reported http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005 that: “American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials. There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.”
Hosenball reported that the panel “was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.”
Asked for comment about the below Reuters story, National Security Staff spokesman Tommy Vietor sent me the following statement:
“I cannot provide details about our cooperation with the Yemeni government on counterterrorism operations. As a general matter, however, it would be entirely lawful for the United States to target the high-level leaders of enemy forces who are plotting to kill Americans both under the authority provided by Congress for the use of military force in the armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces as well as under established international law that recognizes our right of self-defense.
“The legal analysis would be slightly different with respect to U.S. citizens, as we would have to take into account any constitutional protections that might apply to a U.S. citizen who is leading enemy forces in their efforts to kill innocent Americans. Any time we use force, I want to assure you that we do so with extraordinary care and in full accordance with U.S. law and the international law of armed conflict.”
Of course, I didn’t ask about cooperation with the Yemeni government on counterterrorism operations.
So being more specific, I asked about the Reuters’ story detailing the existence of a secret panel that can put US citizens on a kill list with no due process or public legal justification.
Vietor said the paragraph he sent provides “All the guidance I have for you on the question of legality…We have no additional comment.”
You may recall a few days ago White House press secretary Jay Carney was even less forthcoming on this matter. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/todays-qs-for-os-wh-9302011/
-Jake Tapper
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
Can someone tell me WHY Obama wants to give Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a civilian trial on US soil yet at the same time he has no qualms about using a secret panel who acts as judge and jury for American citizens??
Just asking.
Posted by: Denbo | October 6, 2011, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
Thank you for writing about Hosenball’s article. Please follow-up with this and let us know if there’s any action taken. Americans should be wary of a panel that has the ability to put Americans on a secret list for assassination.
Posted by: John S | October 6, 2011, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm
Obama vanquished Osama,
and Osama’s top generals, O Mama!!
8 yrs -Bush couldn’t, O Damn-A!!
Posted by: vkmo | October 6, 2011, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm
I read yesterday in Reuters about the secret panel that was used in al-Awlaki’s assassination, composed of unknown individuals who don’t have to reveal specific reasons or evidence.
The assassinations seem to only require allegations and insistence that it’s being done for security. Are our greatest threats from within or from outside threats that don’t have to be explained beyond allegations and insistence? I guess it was predictable that the strikes on foreigners would be turned on Americans.
How many drone strikes, over almost a three year time period, did it take to kill al-Awlaki? In the process, how many in the way of innocent men, women, and children were taken down before him? How much are we paying for this in both money and potential consequences?
Posted by: jane r. | October 6, 2011, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
A Democrat Party President TARGETS and kills an American citizen in a foreign country.
Where is Code Pink?
Where is Cindy Sheehan?
Due process? What no Guntanamo trial?
Where is the rent-a-mob liberal outrage?
Yeah that’s right.
THEY are vociferously protesting about a painted rock somewheres in Texas.
Posted by: Zexufang | October 6, 2011, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
If Obamas political rivals start turning up dead, then I will start worrying….Terrorist,on the other hand ,whether they be american or foreign have no place on this earth, eliminate them any way that they can
Posted by: Yep I said that | October 6, 2011, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
Posted by: Zexufang | October 6, 2011, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
Haven’t seen any right wingers out there protesting either. It appears most Americans don’t have a problem with drones taking out al Qaeda leaders.
Posted by: Cole | October 6, 2011, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm
Posted by: Zexufang | October 6, 2011, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
I would have been outraged if Bush did this. But as a Progressive, I find war much more palatable now than before. In fact, I find it downright cool now. Sure, Bush was a war criminal, but Obama is a warrior when he does the same thing. Plus I trust him to violate the Constitution because he’s much smarter than any Tea Partier. After all, he was a community organizer. I’m not a hypocrite. Kool-Aid has just sharpened my thinking. If anyone disagrees with me, I call them a racist even though I’m Caucasian.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Posted by: Cole | October 6, 2011, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm
We anti-war types hated Bush, but we love Obama even though we have more war than ever. I hope he targets more US citizens. It’s a great precedent and the kind of change I voted for. Obama! Obama! Obama!
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm
I would have been outraged if Bush did this.
_______________________________________
Bush’s pet neo-con war in Iraq killed more that 100,000 Iraqis, and thousands of Americans – and no weapons of mass destruction were found. Nada. Zip. And then after all that death, and even more maiming, Bush joked maybe the weapons of mass destruction were hidden under his desk.
On the other hand, President Obama campaigned on using targeted drone strikes to take out al Qaeda leaders, and is doing exactly what he said he would.
Right wing dolts apparently don’t know the difference.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
I know, right? I remember Obama promising more war and campaigning on killing US citizens and ignoring the sovereignty of countries. If Bush had done this, I would have called for his impeachment, but I fully support Obama. I used to protest Guantanamo, but I’m cool with Obama not closing it even though he promised to. I’m also cool with his expansion of the Patriot Act and continuing rendition. If you want war done right, you really need a Democrat to do it. Obama! Obama! Obama! If a Republican becomes president in 2012, I’ll hate war again and will start marching. But don’t call me a hypocrite.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Actually during the campaign and in the debates with McCain, Obama said clearly he would take out al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan, if Pakistan wasn’t willing to do it themselves. That is exactly what he’s been doing, but he’s done it in cooperation with Pakistan. Same with Yemen.
You missed the other point, Bush’s pet neo-con war in Iraq killed more that 100,000 Iraqis, and thousands of Americans – and no weapons of mass destruction were found. Nada. Zip. And then after all that death, and even more maiming, Bush joked maybe the weapons of mass destruction were hidden under his desk. Fail.
There is a big difference, that apparently a lot of right wing (should I use the word again . . . okay I will) dolts can’t see.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
Obama also campaigned on increasing the effort in Afghanistan. That he did as well.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
Oh, so you would have supported Bush taking out Al Qaeda with drones in Pakistan and Yemen if they weren’t willing to do it themselves. We differ on that. I only support Obama doing that, not Bush.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
Yes, but you’re a phony fabrication trying to be clever, and failing miserably.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Right. That’s one of the main reasons I voted for him. I feel the escalated violence in Afghanistan proves that Obama is succeeding. Now that he’s targeting US citizens, I’m convinced he’s the best war president of my lifetime. It’s a shame Bush didn’t do this. Progressives might have even warmed up to him.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
If Obamas political rivals start turning up dead, then I will start worrying….Terrorist,on the other hand ,whether they be american or foreign have no place on this earth, eliminate them any way that they can
Posted by: Yep I said that | October 6, 2011, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
Why didn’t the press ever follow up on what happened to Jack Wheeler? Hero. Dead. Nobody knows why. Hmmmmm…..
Posted by: wheresmymoney | October 6, 2011, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
I’m sorry you feel that way. I agree with you on most things.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
It’s like the way we conservatives are seriously concerned about debt and spending…whenever a Democrat is in the White House.
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
It’s too bad Bush didn’t finish the job in Afghanistan but instead he diverted military attention to Iraq and allowed the Taliban to regroup, killed more that 100,000 Iraqis, and thousands of Americans – and no weapons of mass destruction were found. Nada. Zip. And then after all that death, and even more maiming, Bush joked maybe the weapons of mass destruction were hidden under his desk.
People opposed Bush for good reason.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
It’s like the way we conservatives are seriously concerned about debt and spending…whenever a Democrat is in the White House.
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
But we didn’t mean to run up deficits and debt, it was just a mistake.
Posted by: Fellow Republican | October 6, 2011, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
Yeah, I know. My liberal friends were outraged that Bush wasn’t much more aggressive in Afghanistan. I guess you were the same way. Did you organize a pro-war march or anything?
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:29 pm 10:29 pm
Yeah, I know. My liberal friends were outraged that Bush wasn’t much more aggressive in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:29 pm 10:29 pm
Yes but you’re just a phony fabrication trying to be clever, and failing miserably. But still, it might help if you red and understood . .. . Bush received almost universal support on Afghanistan because of 9/11.
On the other hand, Bush’s pet neo-con war in Iraq killed more that 100,000 Iraqis, and thousands of Americans – and no weapons of mass destruction were found. Nada. Zip. And then after all that death, and even more maiming, Bush joked maybe the weapons of mass destruction were hidden under his desk.
President Obama campaigned on using targeted drone strikes to take out al Qaeda leaders because of 9/11, and is doing exactly what he said he would.
Right wing dolts apparently don’t know the difference.
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
Yes, who could possibly foresee that all those trillion dollar tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans, two wars and an unpaid for drug program would create huge deficits? But the middle class should feel obligated to pay down all of the resulting debt of course.
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm
Posted by: Zane | October 6, 2011, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
I think you said that a couple of times already. Relax, I’m on your side. So you supported Bush being more aggressive in Afghanistan, right? Did you write your Congressman or President Bush to express your concerns? Did you organize a march to express your discontent with his lack of attention in Afghanistan? Did you participate in anti-war marches against Iraq? What did you do?
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 6, 2011, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
Yes, who could possibly foresee that all those trillion dollar tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans, two wars and an unpaid for drug program would create huge deficits? But the middle class should feel obligated to pay down all of the resulting debt of course.
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm
Listen it was no skin off my back, we Bushs are pretty wealthy. Heh, heh. I felt just awful about that economic collapse on my shift though. Heck, we just didn’t see it coming.
Posted by: George W. Bush | October 6, 2011, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm
Of course we conservatives have no qualms about eliminating enemy leaders. We just hadn’t counted on Obama being so good at it.
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
Posted by: con game | October 6, 2011, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
Compared to Bush, Obama has been much more effective at eliminating Navy SEALS too.
Posted by: Justin | October 6, 2011, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
Posted by: Justin | October 6, 2011, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
Justin I’ve never seen anything as appalling as George W. Bush, Republican president joking about how maybe the missing weapons of mass destruction were hidden under his desk – after thousands of Americans had died and many more maimed because of those non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
p.s. – you’re blaming Obama for the death of Navy Seals? on what grounds?
Posted by: George W. Bush | October 6, 2011, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
Posted by: George W. Bush | October 6, 2011, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
Obama publicly identified the Navy SEALS, our most elite and most highly-trained special operations forces, as Bin Laden’s shooters for a photo op so that he could attach his name to them. This totally exposed them. Most of those same Navy SEALS were later deliberately targeted and killed in a revenge attack by the Taliban.
Were their deaths worth it?
Posted by: Justin | October 7, 2011, 12:06 am 12:06 am
Posted by: Justin | October 7, 2011, 12:06 am 12:06 am
Nonsense.
Posted by: Chuck | October 7, 2011, 12:07 am 12:07 am
Obama publicly identified the Navy SEALS . . . for a photo op
Posted by: Justin | October 7, 2011, 12:06 am 12:06 am
There was no photo op at all. And no photo taken of the President with the SEALS.
Posted by: Chuck | October 7, 2011, 12:14 am 12:14 am
Most of those same Navy SEALS were later deliberately targeted and killed in a revenge attack by the Taliban.
Posted by: Justin | October 7, 2011, 12:06 am 12:06 am
None of the SEALS killed had been on the in Laden raid. None.
Posted by: Chuck | October 7, 2011, 12:27 am 12:27 am
Most of those same Navy SEALS were later deliberately targeted and killed in a revenge attack by the Taliban.
Posted by: Justin | October 7, 2011, 12:06 am 12:06 am
I’m not sure they were the same SEALS, but those 20+ SEALS killed were part of Team SEAL 6, the same unit that killed Bin Laden. But Obama is not responsible for their deaths even though he identified the Team SEAL 6 by name in a press conference. If Bush were President, he would definitely be responsible. Bush is also responsible for the record increase in casualties in Afghanistan on Obama’s watch, along with casualties in WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Vietnam, and all other conflicts around the world today. Obama is not responsible for any casualties ever. He’s protected by hope and change.
Bush is also responsible when the stock market goes down, but Obama is responsible when the market goes up. Bad jobs report? Bush’s fault. Good jobs report? Obama takes credit. See how that works? I’m not biased or anything. That would make me a hypocrite.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 7, 2011, 8:05 am 8:05 am
I support the killing of terrorist with drones,oh yeah you will have collateral damage
but that is the price you pay when you fight an enemy not in uniform, but wearing a tablecloth.
Posted by: deadwrestler | October 7, 2011, 10:16 am 10:16 am
Lib Warrior, your parody is doomed because you’re using liberal as a stand-in for democrat when the democrat party includes conservatives, moderates and liberals. The fact of the matter is that much of the country is center-right when it comes to national security. But anti-war protestors are still protesting war. It would be more authentic if you sought to address and transform the hypocrisy within your own tribe as it would be honest and more relatable. If you want your voice to be heard, come occupy… stand up on your own two feet, not as a poor imitation, and represent.
Posted by: We're the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 10:37 am 10:37 am
… stand up on your own two feet, not as a poor imitation, and represent.
Posted by: We’re the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 10:37 am 10:37 am
The phony pretense apparently gives justification for someone to tell outright lies . .. sleazy.
Posted by: Jan | October 7, 2011, 10:50 am 10:50 am
Posted by: We’re the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 10:37 am 10:37 am
I’m doing that in a nearby town tomorrow. They’re having a rally in a large park. The organizer was on the radio this morning and wasn’t clear what we’re protesting exactly, but worst case I can hang out and meet some cute hippie chicks there. If I can get a free lunch and a date, I’ll be all set. I’m trying to persuade my friends to join me but they’re doing stupid things like working and spending with family. They’re such idiots. Why bother working when you can demand free handouts at someone else’s expense? That’s what made America great.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 7, 2011, 11:16 am 11:16 am
“About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill List’” – ABC News
When I first read this title I said to myself, “finally they are getting to the truth about where Barry expects to find cost savings in his YesWeCan Care™ legislation”.
It was disappointing to find out that’s not the case at all, this story is about some silly Top Ten List of Bad Guy Muslim Terrorists we want to get rid of.
The Bama Health Care Cost Savings remains a mystery.
Posted by: Noz | October 7, 2011, 11:46 am 11:46 am
I’m doing that in a nearby town tomorrow. Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 7, 2011, 11:16 am 11:16 am
Good. You’ll figure it out and shake the inauthenticity if you stand up and participate.
“Wall Street got bailed out; Main Street was abandoned. The top 1% rigs the rules and pockets the rewards. And 99% get sent the bill for the party they weren’t even invited to. “
Posted by: We're the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Posted by: We’re the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Awesome. I’m in the top 2%. I can barely afford my BMW 530d. I’m tired of suffering at the hands of these filthy rich. I won’t rest until they give me a Lexus LFA. I want what’s coming to me.
Posted by: Lib Warrior | October 7, 2011, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm
“I want what’s coming to me.”
I want you to get exactly what you deserve as well, though we may differ as to what you really have coming.
Greed and corruption are destroying the country and our middle class.
Posted by: We're the 99 percent | October 7, 2011, 1:44 pm 1:44 pm
“Greed and corruption are destroying the country and our middle class.” – We’re the 99 percent
Vapid liberal pseudo-values resulting in our empty pop culture is what’s destroying our country.
That and
The trial lawyer cancer
victimhood as a Way-o-Life
multiculturalism
participation trophies
CO2 declared pollution
Deviant behavior declared “normal”
and of course
our irresponsible left leaning PC correct media
Posted by: Noz | October 8, 2011, 9:07 am 9:07 am