Groups Reject Holder’s Defence of Targeted Assassinations

[Vincardog]

2. . Attorney General Eric Holder DID NOT outlined the statutory justifications for murdering

citizens of the USA solely on executive order without review. He spat some sound bytes and threw sand in the air trying to cloud the issue. The constitution of the US is clear. "the government cannot deprive U.S. citizens of life without due process of law" is absolutely clear.
It does not say unless the President says their name is on a list and he want's to kill them".

The 5'th says

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[1]

If a Grand Jury is required "except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, when in actual service in time of War"
Unless you are in the military and there is a War declared. It seems like the whole Military Tribunal canard is a load of BS.
It also seems that the claimed powers are unconstitutional.

We are either a nation of laws for ALL or we are not a nation of laws.