Al Duncan
“Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws,” Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild


Meet The Author


About The Book




Author's  Articles

Purchase with Paypal
 or Credit Card

Select Book delivery Location
 Includes shipping


Select DVD delivery Location
Includes Shipping








Holder: It’s ‘Legal’ to Drone Strike Americans

Melissa Melton
February 5, 2013


NBC news has produced a chilling, confidential Department of Justice (DOJ) white paper outlining the supposed legality of extrajudicial drone strikes on U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism even without intelligence to show involvement in a plot to attack America.

While admitting that U.S. citizens are still afforded constitutional protections such as due process when they travel abroad, the 16-page report claims, “The U.S. citizenship of a leader of al-Qa’ida or its associated forces, however, does not give that person constitutional immunity from attack” [emphasis added]. Continuing, “The Due Process Clause would not prohibit a lethal operation of the sort contemplated here.”

As it has with thousands of men, women, and children in the Middle East, our federal government apparently thinks it’s somehow allowed to use drones to openly murder Americans outside the law of our land.

The memo also claims, “This conclusion is reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation by the United States against a U.S. citizen.” Regardless of its extraordinary nature, such lethal drone operations would be “justified as an act of national self-defense.”

According to the DOJ, a lethal strike against an American citizen is okay if he or she is a suspected al-Qa’ida leader on foreign soil and the following three conditions are met:

1) an informed, high level official of the U.S. government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States;

2) capture is infeasible, and the United States continues to monitor whether capture becomes feasible; and

3) the operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles.

The paper does not discuss considerations of drone strikes on Americans suspected of high-level terrorism on domestic soil.

Although this is the first time this deadly assertion has been spelled out in black and white, the U.S. government has already killed multiple U.S. citizens with drone strikes. Born in Denver, Colorado, Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son was an American citizen when he was murdered in a strike in Yemen. According to family member accounts, the teenager was not even involved in the suspected terrorist activities for which his father (also a U.S. citizen) was killed in another U.S. drone strike a week earlier.

Neither al-Awlaki nor his son were afforded due process before they were killed.

Even the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for the indefinite detainment of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism without a guaranteed trial, at least pretends to consider the Authorization for Use of Military Force’s inability to deny an American their constitutional rights.

The New York Times reported on Obama’s “secret kill list” at length last spring, noting the list included several U.S. citizens and two teens, “including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.” The article outlines how the president deems himself judge, jury, and executioner of those on the list.

Despite multiple Freedom of Information Act requests placed by the ACLU and others, the government has yet to release any information on its extrajudicial drone killings, what requirements must be met to be added to the list, or how the president goes about choosing the next suspect to die by drone.

Even as it amps up the drone war in Yemen, reports have come out just this month that the U.S. is now mulling over expanding drone strikes to Mali, a region that admittedly houses secret U.S. drone bases. Former Rand Corporation head Bruce Hoffman felt most Americans would not consider this action to be controversial because it isn’t “boots on the ground,” a position illustrating just how much unmanned aerial vehicles have further dehumanized American wars.

It’s time more Americans admitted these unconstitutional drone strikes are more than just controversial; they are murder. How can the DOJ “ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans” as its mission statement claims it must when it is calling for the outright extrajudicial slaying of American citizens?

The American system of criminal justice is supposedly based on the idea that one is innocent until proven guilty. Now, not only are we guilty until proven innocent, but apparently, proof is no longer required.

Similar/Related Articles


  1. White House: U.S. Drone Killings Legal to Combat Threats
  2. 3 Killed in US Drone Strike in Pakistan
  3. Pakistan Tribal Sources say U.S. Drone Strike Kills al Qaeda Commander
  4. 8 Killed in Drone Strike in Pakistan’s Tribal Region
  5. Campaigners seek arrest of former CIA legal chief over Pakistan drone attacks
  6. US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan
  7. Senators ask Obama for legal basis for targeted killings of Americans
  8. US Drone Strike Kills 8 Militants, Says Pakistan
  9. Drone Strike Kills Four in Pakistan
  10. Top Al Qaeda bomb maker did NOT die in drone strike, claim Yemenis after body search
  11. US Drone Strike ‘Kills Eight in Pakistan’
  12. Drone Strike Kills Four in Pakistan

The only thing that makes sense it that they are purposely, intentionally bankrupting America and destroying the middle class—nothing else makes sense.

DHS revamping immigrant welcome materials, set to include Obamacare

Posted By Caroline May On 2:28 AM 01/31/2013 @ 2:28 AM In DC Exclusives - Original Reporting,Politics | No Comments

The welcome materials the federal government directs new immigrants (it’s not politically correct to call them ILLEGAL immigrants) to read — which detail, among other facets of American life, how and where to get government benefits — are in the process of getting a bit of a makeover to increase accessibility for newcomers.

The website, which bills itself as “the U.S. Government’s official web portal for new immigrants,” maintained by the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), will soon feature information about President Barack Obama’s signature health care legislation, USCIS spokesman Chris Bentley told The Daily Caller.

USCIS has already added new promotional banners to the site that make it easier for users to find information about personal finance, child care and emergency information. The agency is working to make the language even more accessible to its target immigrant audience. (RELATED: USDA proposes food stamp parties)

According to a list of changes to the “Welcome” site that the department has already made, provided to TheDC by USCIS, many of the changes are simplifications of the original text.

For example, where the “Government Benefit” section once read:

“Depending on your immigration status, length of time in the United States, and income, you may be eligible for some federal benefits programs. Government assistance programs can be critically important to the well-being of some immigrants and their families. Frequently, however, there is a lack of information about how to access such benefits. Benefits programs can be complicated and you may be given misleading information about how they operate,” followed by a list with links of government benefit websites such as Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, and a site offering information on eligibility for all federal benefits programs.”

The “Government Benefit” section now reads:

“Depending on your immigration status, length of time in the United States, and income, you may be eligible for some federal benefit programs,” followed by the list of benefits programs.

The text on the front page of the site has also been significantly reduced. Initially the text read:

“Welcome to the United States! On behalf of the President of the United States and the American people, we welcome you to this great nation. The United States has benefited from the contributions of immigrants since its founding more than 200 years ago, and we are certain that our newest immigrants will continue this storied legacy. Freedom and opportunity are of the utmost importance in the United States and we wish you the very best as you begin your journey. As a permanent resident, you have made the decision to call the United States your home. It is now your responsibility to learn about this country’s civic values, its rich history, and its citizens. As you settle into your new home, will help you find basic information about the United States and your new community. The Federal Government has a variety of resources for you. We encourage you to learn as much as you can about this country as you are now a valued part of our nation. Your contributions will help ensure the success of the United States for years to come. Congratulations and welcome. We hope you enjoy great success in the United States.”

It now says:

“Welcome to the United States! On behalf of the President of the United States and the American people, we welcome you to this great nation. The United States has benefited from the contributions of immigrants since its founding more than 200 years ago. As you settle into your new home, will help you find basic information about the United States and your new community.”

The project to revamp the website started in spring of 2012 and will be finished in the next couple of weeks, according to Bentley.

Also included in the makeover will be the guidebook new immigrants are encouraged to read, “Welcome to the United States: A Guide for New Immigrants.”

USCIS spokesman Daniel Cosgrove told TheDC the new manual will be out by the end of fiscal year 2013.

When asked if the revamping had anything to do with the president’s push for immigration reform, Cosgrove said that the effort was “an ongoing project” for the department.

As TheDC previously reported, some have concerns about the manner in which the government is promoting government benefits, including in the welcome materials, to new immigrants.

In November, Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions advocated taking the “Government Benefits” page down. (RELATED: Homeland Security promoting government benefits to immigrants)

“Some of these programs are clearly not available for immigrants,” Sessions told TheDC in November, “and it just creates confusion out there and suggests that if you can get into America, you can leave and get onto these programs, and from what we are seeing, many of these people are successful in getting on benefit programs that they are not lawfully entitled to.”

DHS launched in 2007, and the guidebook was first developed in 2004 and revised in 2007.

Update: After publication Sessions weighed in on the department’s expected addition of the Affordable Care Act to

“The administration’s determination to place immigrants on federal assistance, including the President’s health law, will add trillions to the cost of any amnesty,” the Alabama senator told TheDC. “It is wrong and unfair to ask Americans to pay higher taxes and bear more debt in order to provide free benefits to legal and illegal immigrants. Such a policy weakens growth and undermines the core legal and economic principle of immigration – that you should be able to establish before you come here that you are financially self-sufficient.”


Page 1   Page 2    Page 3     Page 4






Other Articles




Quote of the Day


Radio Interviews




Gun Control