Start A Petition

About the White Paper

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: Maddow, National Security, Obama, Video )

- 1934 days ago -
See 1st comment

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


TomCat S (129)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 6:55 am
The has been much ado about the white paper in which the Obama administration has claimed the authority to kill US citizens abroad, without oversight or transparency. Regardless of my overall support for Obama, I must oppose this policy, based more on what I do not know about it than on what I do know.

David C (29)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 7:16 am
on my reading about this its just a white paper TC

Teresa W (782)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 7:21 am
noted, thank you

. (0)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 8:23 am
noted with thanks, TC, so glad you are were missed and hope your health keeps improving. No one does a cartoon or fits a tin foil hat as good as you !

Kit B (276)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 9:19 am

According to this White Paper report it is not just Obama that can issue these orders but a "high placed" official. Does that mean a CIA operative? Who and based on what does this apply? Scrap away the sensationalize and we don't know much.

If this is about a US citizen working directly for an enemy of the United States, then I would think the laws are already in place for acts of treason.

Jim P (3257)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 9:21 am
It's absurd, it's illegal, it's completely antithetical to democratic values, and it's morally repugnant.

Tell President Obama: Assassinating Americans without due process is wrong. Click the link below to automatically sign the petition:

At times like this, outspoken dissent is an important political act.

Ty, Tom.

Wednesday February 6, 2013, 11:14 am
I would have to agree Tom I just don't fully understand but I would have to be concern. No president or anyone should have that kind power.

Thanks Tom so glad to see you out and about :)

. (0)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 3:01 pm
Kit's statement made a lot of sense. Please read it, and consider he last sentence.

Mary T (178)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 5:59 pm
Thanks Tom, I myself have deep concerns about this and have signed a few petitions on this.

David C (131)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 6:16 pm
concerned.......couldn't there be some "checks and balances" either via legislation or court review that would be able to set some limits????? isn't that supposed to be why the US has a separation of powers????

John B (185)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 9:46 pm
Thanks Tom for the posting and the link the full text of the white paper and welcome back. I have and will continue to oppose this policy because I feel it is not only illegal and we as a people are better better than that. Read and noted.

Edith B (146)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 10:25 pm
I am totally against this. It is a violation of our constitution and bill of rights, whether it is Obama or anyone else.

Lynn Squance (235)
Wednesday February 6, 2013, 11:11 pm
While I have far more trust in Mr Obama, as others have also said, what about the next guy in the Oval Office? One person, no matter who it is, should have that level of authority. The checks and balances of government have a real purpose.

If the US aspires to be the leader of the free world, then it must act like it. One of the things about the Romney/Ryan ticket that sent shivers up my timbers was the idea of "taking want we want from whomever we want, when we want", an extension of Manifest Destiny. The US actions and authority levels must be such that that cannot happen, be it foreign or domestic. That kind of power cannot be concentrated in one person.

Nimue Michelle Pendragon Gaze (339)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 3:45 am
I don't know enough about it, but it sounds pretty rank.

TomCat S (129)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 5:02 am
Thanks everyone. There seems to be little disagreement here. I'm sure I will cover this again when I know more.

pam w (139)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 9:00 am
GOOD! Please do, Tom....thanks!

Maria B (7)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 9:03 am
Thanks Tom.

Carol started a thread yesterday also about this issue also, because it is quite concerning:
I post the link here in case you or somebody want to check there too!


Maria B (7)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 9:10 am
A government official can make the decision to kill an American by drone when he "believes" that this person could be a threat? Only a judge can make such a decision. The government can't just have a free pass and go and kill citizens. According to lots of reports Obama killed with 300 drone strikes about 3.000 people! Can you imagen how many civilans and children were also killed in these strikes? They haven't been warned and haven't been aware of a strike like this. This is terrible! How can they justify this?

The media is all over this now. (not only in the US, also in Europe ...)

Here is an excerpt from an interesting article from

"Neil Macdonald: U.S. media complicit in Obama's drone doctrine"
"It’s also clear American media outlets are comfortable suppressing news the government does not want published. Today’s story reveals not just that the Americans have operated a secret drone base for years in Saudi Arabia, but that the Post, along with various other news organizations, have been keeping that fact to themselves at the government’s request.

"Obama's 'war on whistleblowers'
All these hardened security measures were begun under the Bush administration. President Obama, who once denounced them and even, as president, ordered Bush legal memos be made public, has not just amplified Bush’s programs, but has begun vigorously hunting down and prosecuting officials who leak details."
Here another interesting one:

"Outrage Mounts in Media Over Obama Drone 'Kill Rules' "
"Greg Mitchell on February 6, 2013 - 9:59 AM ET
On Monday night, NBC News revealed that leaked sixteen-page memo outlining (at last) the administration’s rules for drone strikes against US citizens abroad. Ever since, the chorus of criticism—mainly from progressives and media outlets long accused by conservatives of being “in the tank” for Obama—has grown to a deafening level."

Carlene V (202)
Thursday February 7, 2013, 3:38 pm
Thank you Tom. I have signed a few petitions to stop this. It is not right and although Obama is "the man", I don't think any President shouldl have this power. Brought up on treason, yes, drone strike to kill, no.

TomCat S (129)
Friday February 8, 2013, 4:36 am
Thank you all. I agree with Carlene I believe that Obama will take the necessary care, but who knows what the future might hold. Imagine, if you will, a Bagger exercising such authority.
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.