Newsflash:
Rep. Donna Edwards Rep. Barbara Lee Letters: Targeted death
Sunday, 10 February 2013 19:45

Letters: Targeted death

Written by  Los Angeles Times | Letters
Air National Guard Members in Syracuse, N.Y., learn to maintain an MQ-Reaper drone, a type used in Afghanistan. Members of Congress are expressing growing concern about drone strikes abroad against individual terrorism suspects, especially if they are Americans. Air National Guard Members in Syracuse, N.Y., learn to maintain an MQ-Reaper drone, a type used in Afghanistan. Members of Congress are expressing growing concern about drone strikes abroad against individual terrorism suspects, especially if they are Americans. Carolyn Cole, Los Angeles Times

Re "Obama agrees to release files on drone strike," Feb. 7

The recently leaked Justice Department memo that outlined the overly broad and vague legal boundaries used to justify drone strikes should shake the American people to the core.

While I applaud President Obama for releasing more information to the Senate and House intelligence committees, the root of the problem remains: The administration is using the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed by the House on Sept. 14, 2001, as one of the justifications for the lethal use of drones. As the only member of Congress who voted against this blank check, I believe now more than ever that we must repeal it.

We need a full debate of the consequences of the September 2001 action, and meaningful oversight by Congress is vital. As commander in chief, it is Obama's duty to keep our country safe, but Congress must not retreat from its constitutional obligation of oversight. These checks and balances are the foundation of our democracy, and they must stay intact.

Rep. Barbara Lee

(D-Oakland)

Obama has a lot in common with George W. Bush, who rationalized torture using the same kind of legal mumbo jumbo Obama is using to kill American citizens anywhere without due process. What happened to change we could believe in?

Dawn Sharp

Claremont

Several years ago the United States told the world that torture was no longer morally acceptable and would no longer be used. This week, the United States announced that an "informed high-level official" can approve a strike against an Al Qaeda official, including an American citizen, even without solid evidence that the targeted person is planning a specific operation.

In summary, torture is morally unacceptable but killing fellow American citizens without evidence isn't. Am I the only one confused?

Jerry Vogler

Los Angeles

Using drones to kill certain individuals may be legally justifiable, but their use is morally reprehensible. The collateral damage they cause is indefensible, and the international community doesn't support their use. Deploying drones doesn't conform to America's or the United Nations' idea of human rights.

It is an unwarranted abuse of executive power to resort to using drones so quickly, and other methods should be exhausted to either isolate targeted individuals or bring them to justice first.

Norman Gottlieb

North Hills

Original article on LA Times

Read 2077 times Last modified on Sunday, 10 February 2013 19:51

ERA Legislation in your State

Unratified states Gold - Ratified States Purple

Latest News from the Edwards Campaign

Sign the Petition - Sen. Sanders Run as a Democrat in 2016

Button-SandersPetition

Lori Wallach on the TPP from PDA Progressive Roundtable

Progressive Roundtable with Reps. Ellison and Pocan and Lori Wallach on TPP

TPP: The Biggest Threat to the Internet You've Probably Never Heard Of