In a First, U.S. Acknowledges Drones Killing 4 Americans

[davidthegnome]

93. Proof?

We have lots of suspicion, we have significant evidence... what we do not have is proof. What we do not have is a trial, a legal prosecution or defense.

The rights of the American citizen might make things difficult when it comes to fighting some of our own who become terrorists... however, the law must apply to all of us or to none of us. Consider the potential for abuse.

Let's say a severe right-wing politician becomes President... someone like Rick Santorum. Now let's say that there's a political activist from America, a fanatic liberal, who is in some area of the middle east for political purposes, perhaps even for something as bizarre and hopeless as peace. This might potentially lead to meetings with criminals, with terrorists - and so on. My point is not that this HAS happened here, but that it very well could.

This person is then determined to be an enemy, primarily because the President wants to get rid of them. The justification used is that this person was a well known terrorist sympathizer, that he or she was involved with terrorists, had been known to meet with them and so on and so forth. Most people would be suspicious of such a person to begin with, so they might not really care. Others simply would not know enough to care.

So this President, with the authority of the American people, declares this person an enemy. Perhaps this person even has a spouse and children with them when the drone comes in to eliminate the target...

It is the rule of law that protects (or should protect) us from exactly this sort of scenario. When different people, groups, and even military organizations are above the law... many, many despicable abuses of our rights as citizens become all too common.

This is wrong for a variety of reasons. What really concerns me though, is the potential for abuse in the future - anyone who does not fear this, has paid little or no attention to history.