Home / terrorism / Wall Street Journal Defends Killing Americans With Drones
Print Friendly and PDF

Wall Street Journal Defends Killing Americans With Drones

Written by Gary North on March 7, 2013

Senator Rand Paul filibustered yesterday for 13 hours against John “Drone Man” Brennan’s nomination to run the CIA. This outraged the Wall Street Journal.

Give Rand Paul credit for theatrical timing. As a snow storm descended on Washington, the Kentucky Republican’s old-fashioned filibuster Wednesday filled the attention void on Twitter and cable TV. If only his reasoning matched the showmanship.

It was great showmanship indeed. He delayed the nomination. He also got enormous national publicity for a key issue: a statement by Attorney General Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder that he sees no reason why drones should not be used to kill Americans inside the borders of the United States.

The Wall Street Journal sides with Holder.

Holder tried to weasel out of the government’s position.

Senator Paul had written the White House to inquire about the possibility of a drone strike against a U.S. citizen on American soil. Attorney General Eric Holder replied that the U.S. hasn’t and “has no intention” to bomb any specific territory. Drones are limited to the remotest areas of conflict zones like Pakistan and Yemen. But as a hypothetical Constitutional matter, Mr. Holder acknowledged the President can authorize the use of lethal military force within U.S. territory.

The Journal is unconcerned. It’s all a tempest in a tea pot, we are assured.

Calm down, Senator. Mr. Holder is right, even if he doesn’t explain the law very well. The U.S. government cannot randomly target American citizens on U.S. soil or anywhere else. What it can do under the laws of war is target an “enemy combatant” anywhere at anytime, including on U.S. soil. This includes a U.S. citizen who is also an enemy combatant. The President can designate such a combatant if he belongs to an entity—a government, say, or a terrorist network like al Qaeda—that has taken up arms against the United States as part of an internationally recognized armed conflict.

Who decides who is to get himself “droned”? The President. To whom does he answer? Nobody. Who is to say who is guilty or innocent? The President. What if he’s wrong? Tough bananas.

Such a conflict exists between the U.S. and al Qaeda, so Mr. Holder is right that the U.S. could have targeted (say) U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki had he continued to live in Virginia. The U.S. killed him in Yemen before he could kill more Americans. But under the law Awlaki was no different than the Nazis who came ashore on Long Island in World War II, were captured and executed.

No different? Really? Those spies were captured, tried, and executed. Not all of them were executed. The government appointed seven generals to try the case in a military court. (The accused had initially come ashore in military uniforms.) There were 3,000 pages of trial transcripts. Two of the eight were given prison sentences. They were released early.

Yet the supercilious writer for the Wall Street Journal insisted that there is no difference between this and the President’s ordering an assassination by a drone — a drone that will probably kill innocent bystanders, as American drones usually do in the Middle East.

Wedding party, anyone? Watch your invitation list. It could be a killer. It is in Pakistan.

Yet the supercilious hack who wrote the editorial thinks he scored big.

The Wall Street Journal, compared to the influence of Matt Drudge, is a backwater. Here was Drudge’s lead headline this morning.

There was a large photo of Sen. Paul.

The Wall Street Journal is an Establishment outlet. Its influence, minimal now, will fade.

Four decades ago, I wrote book reviews for the Journal. It was an influential newspaper back then. Today, it is a struggling shell of its former self. It has not brought its paper-based profits with it in the transition to digital. For this, we should rejoice.

Continue Reading on online.wsj.com

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

53 thoughts on “Wall Street Journal Defends Killing Americans With Drones

  1. ccfonten says:

    NO. Not this president nor any past or future presidents have the Constitutional right to order military strikes (eg: drone strikes) against any American citizen without due process. This is the 5th Amendment. It reads: "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 offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be 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."
    The other law on this is Posse Commitatus. I may not be spelling it accurately, but the law essentially states that the military (who control the drones) is not allowed to attack on American soil on American citizens. This law was enacted in 1878.
    What is truly frightening, is that Holder actually had to be badgered into admitting that the use of drones on American citizens inside America IS unconstitutional by Rep Gomert. That scares the behoonies out of me. And NO word from the lying thug in chief on this.

  2. Patricia says:

    Good for Rand Paul and all those supporting him. What Obama and the dim Dems seem not to understand is what goes around comes around. I hope the career Republicans in Congress have an inkling NOW why the Tea Party wants young men like Paul, Cruz, Lee and many others like them in Congress. They are the ones that will protect the Constitution.

  3. Pete Koch says:

    The Wall Street Journal has lost another readers. We need to boycott them NOW.

  4. At least Rand Paul had the guts to do a talking filibuster instead of yet another bullshit silent filibuster like the rest of the sackless Republicans have been doing.

  5. Thousands of rounds of ammo purchased by a government agency that seldom needs to fire a weapon, thousands of armored vehicles equipped with tires to run on city streets purchased by our government, thousands of drones coming to our skies, attempted to confiscate arms that could realistically be used in self defense, Constitution ignored, only a hand full of Congress persons such as Rand Paul willing to stand up and be counted. Don't be afraid Americans but be alert, very alert.

  6. Rabelrouser says:

    As the Rule of Law, through the Constitution continues to be shreded apart, there will always be those Tories who will defend that shredding. Those who will defend the tyrants "vision" of the {LAW} as a personal plaything to have changed, to its meaning, at a moments notice.
    The peoples ears do not hear, nor do their eyes preceive the daily destruction of the Rule of Law, the Constitution , their Rights, Libertys and Freedoms.
    Endless debate through their mouths will premeate the void of solutions that they offer, which befalls their personal resolve.
    The actionless always fall prey to those who transform and change for their own pleasure.
    Does this offer only surrender as the only course?

  7. Clarion_call says:

    People of like mind must join in solidarity against this intrusion by the WSG in the day-to-day lives the citizens of this country. They must be held accountable for this attack by people who refuse to support a paper that advocates raw violence against the citizens of this country. Do you mean to tell me that the extensive law enforcement capability of this country is inadequate to handle this kind of situation? Give em a break; this is tyranny raising its ugly head!!!! One if by sea; two if by the government coming after your freedom.

  8. Kudos to Sen Paul. He had the courage to do what many of the other gutless Republicans cannot or will not do – take on this lying tyrant in chief and his lying enforcer of injustice.

  9. Wonder how the WSJ would feel about a drone strike on their offices if they run afoul of king odumber.

  10. Eddy Fudd says:

    Don't worry, my journalistic friend, the "Illegal alien" will pout and cry and eventually go back to Kenya, with or without Louie's help, where he is a citizen (unlike his status in America) and Americans will mark that day (sooner than you think) with great joy (and some actual dancing/singing in the streets)!

  11. Eddy Fudd says:


  12. Eric Phillips says:

    No body reads this rag any longer….WSJ is just a shadow of what it used to be…

  13. As more members of the Conservative/ Tea Party/ Libertarian parties begin to stand up for the Constitution we are beginning to discover those that are against it. Today the Wall Street Journal came out of the closet. I'm sure there are many yet to come.

  14. What is the difference in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times anyway? Both are published in New York by liberals.

  15. The government of the Roman Empire was one of the most evil governments in the history of the governance of man; yet, it would not tarket its citizens without a fair trial before Ceasar. Christianity may have died an early death had this government not delayed the trial, conviction, and execution of St. Paul until he could have a trial before Ceasar in Rome. Where does Eric Holder think he has the authority to execute American citizens without due process? Obviously, he thinks that his boss is god himself and that he has the authority directly from his boss-god.

  16. am2sweet says:

    Since I feel it is wrong to send drones after any of us I don't think the president should have any right to order any military against us. That is what the police here are for not the president. Obama has done nothing but overstep the bounds of his office. Why he hasn't been tossed out already I don't know but I have refused to make any donations to my party until he his gone. And have told them that on several occasions when they have called. They no longer call which is fine with me. It seems that one politician is the same as most others with a few exceptions. Too bad those few good ones don't throw a fit and toss Obama out on his ear along with Pelosi, Reid and a few more. These people have done nothing but work against the true American people. Now even the Muslims here are being told that our laws mean nothing and they aren't obligated to follow them. I ask. What other country bends to the will of all who move there or visit there? That is our biggest mistake.

  17. armati et accincti says:

    I do not hink anyone reads that trash to begin with…….

  18. Johny Nail says:

    This Wall Journal writer may be an expert on the Constitution but not the US Constitution which clearly state every American is in entitled to due process of law. How wonderful are these idiots that believe dunking a man’s head under water (water boarding for you liberals) is worse than burning a person alive or beheading them and now they are willing to ok in their screwed up minds murdering Americans on American soil. But do not hurt the little islamic murderers who hide behind women and childrem. Americans, who think this regime controlling American will protect you; you are simply next on their target list and you are too stupid to realize it.

  19. maurice B. Craghead says:

    more const.
    I don't understand why everyone, including the illegal, do not read and follow their Constitution. This was spelled out in law as "the law of the land". I took that oath myself when I entered the service of my country. Love it or leave it! Start with Article 1, no where in this constitution does it authorize Congress the authority to delegate the power to borrow money on the credit of the U.S. That money should belong to congress, alone and to the people. No where in this constitution does it authorize them the power to Coin money. Since the Federal Reserve system is no more a part of the U.S. government, no more then Federal Express or Federal Can company, no more than any other private company this makes the FEDERALReserve System Unconstitutional, thus violating the entire Section 8 of Article 1. Article 4, Section 4 tells us that this country is not a Democracy, but is guaranteed a REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Article 6, Paragraph 2, Explains in detail that any laws made by Congress, the Senate, or even the President, and TREATIES, must be in agreement with the Constitution or it is no law at all.
    Read it. Now tell me I am wrong!

  20. barb patton says:

    Mr Paul must not take any notice whatsoever what any leftist marxist media rag has to say about him. Mr Paul needs to know that WE THE PEOPLE are relieved to find 1 person who is not afraid to stand up and talk the talk, walk the walk, and ignore the latte one's lies and skull duggery. Thank you Mr Paul.

  21. GreyHawk says:

    The WSJ is totally wrong on this matter and they know better. Every American on American soil is entitled to due process under the law. That doesn't mean that they are entitled to due process unless the President or some other jerk in the Government says he/her doesn't deserve due process and therefore can be killed at any time along with whoever happens to be standing close to the target. Where is the WSJs' brain? It certanily ins't it's normal place, or maybe that is now normal with the WSJ.

  22. GreyHawk says:

    Well I "hink" you are wrong, I "hink" a lot of peorple do, but I hope fewer will now.

  23. Anyone who is a subscriber should stop a desist immediately.

  24. Vert well said.(And soooo true).

  25. When all is said and done. more will be said than done.

    American citizens enamored with the vile tenets of Mohammed and his Moon god will continually demonstrate that an occasional Hellfire missile up the wazoo can do wonders for winning the hearts and minds amongst the rest of us Yankee infidel dogs.

  26. The WSJ is right. There is/was no danger of drone strikes on US citizens inside the US.

    Drones are a weapon of war used against combatants who are beyond the reach of traditional military/law enforcement means.

    Anwar al Awlaki was a combatant for the enemy even though he was an American. He was in a foreign country running a war against Americans. He was outside US jurisdiction and could not be arrested. She we have let him continue unmolested? The Constitution is US law and does not apply in foreign countries.

    The only legitimate use of drone attacks that I can see in the US is during a foreign invasion or incursion.

    The Journal was right.

  27. And many were stupid enough to give his another term. What were you thinking? Obama has never revealed what his true intentions are and he never will. Get a clue.

  28. Amen, amen my brother! The communists/nwo-ists have control of just about everything now – press, "Hollowwood," courts, business, academia and even many churches. It is the last days, Good against Evil! These Godless ghouls are luciferians, no doubt about that! Brennan, Brennan, Hagel and "Lurch" Kerry, all communist bastards! The NWO-ists have their chess pieces in place and AMERIKA is about to be checkmated! If we wan't our freedom then , as T. Jefferson had wisely stated: ' the tree of liberty need's to be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots.' – that is were this dead Republic is now and that is the message that must be heard across the nation like a raging wild-fire of righteous revolution!

  29. oldgringo says:

    And to all Coloradans…Let us not forget to boycott The Denver Commie Post!

  30. The Wall Street Journal has been a leftist rag for quite some time. That’s perfectly fine. However, if you are a subscriber, just realize what you are supporting with your money.

  31. OldTechie says:

    Thank you! I was waiting for someone to bring up that point. American citizen or no, when you take up arms against your home nation with the express intent of causing death to its citizens, or the overthrow of its duly elected/appointed government – without an EXTREMELY just reason (see: American Revolutionary War) – then you have effectively renounced your US citizenship, and have become an enemy war fighter.

    Let there be hellfire!

  32. LiberalsRCommies says:

    Outraged? But nothing substantial is being done. Thats how you should read it. Tell me why our beloved government hasnt already outlawed the use of drones over American airspace?……………………… Did you hear that? Nothing but silence.

  33. Bobbie Tier says:

    yes, boycott wall street journal now

  34. Hey OldTechie, you and CaptainKudzu up there seem to be missing the point to all this. When one man (the president) decides that someone (anyone) is or might be a "danger" and can unilaterally order to execute them then you no longer have the rule of law. No due process. Therefore the Constitution fails to be the law of the land and we are no longer a republic, but a dictatorship. Which do you want? You cannot have them both. They are anathema.

    War you say? War is declared by our Congress with specific goals against a specific nation not a some shadow called "terrorism" or "poverty" of "drugs". By your logic before long the prez will be able to order the execution of drug dealers on any corner. Due process is a protection guaranteed by the Constitution and it makes no distinction about US citizens or others. Without it we are ruled by men not law. You are gravely mistaken and someday may regret what you are advocating.

  35. J. T. Haman says:

    Why should We trust someone who lies continualy ,with Our God Given Right to Life ,when he says the document that orders the government to not "Infringe" or deny those Rights is "Flawed"? Just because he took THE OATH to uphold,does not mean he will,which he has not! If this is too hard to understand then your job as a paperweight is waiting or in worst case scenario,you can be worm food! DUH!

  36. Include mcclame and graham on that list to throw out!

  37. victorbarney says:

    That should clearly indicate that WALL STREET TOO HAS MARXIST(ANTI-CHRIST) MENTALITY! Just saying, it is what it is…

  38. Carl D Sedillo says:

    The Rule of Law is invariably subject to interpretation. "One man's wine is another man's vinegar." As we have seen over again the President has interpreted the Constitution in ways that are total inconsistent with Articles I and II. He has repeatedly used Executive Orders not as the means to provide guidance on existing law as the Supreme Court has stated but to institute new law or abridge existing law. This type of thinking has led to drastic implementation and violations in every case that a totalitarian has taken power. The enemy becomes the person I say is the enemy. This is the issue the good Senator from Kentucky attempted to make—and that question has yet to be answered by the President or his Attorney General.

  39. GreyHawk says:

    I hope the WSJ loses a lot of subxcribers over that bit of stupidity.

  40. Erik Osbun says:

    The Wall Street Journal is wrong about this and many other things. That's why I do not subscribe. I have subscribed, instead, to a better financial newspaper: Investor's Business Daily.

  41. The Wall Street Urinal" Better known as the Joseph Goebbels propaganda Team."

  42. awkingsley says:

    I'm confused by the Wall Street Journal article. Were the Nazis who washed up on Long Island U.S. citizens? I thought we were discussing what action the government could take against U.S. citizens. With the DHS ordering 2,700 light armored tanks, we need to be petitioning to get the DHS to cancel their tank order, and we really need to be concerned about everything else our government is doing to police U.S. citizens – like drones. Government tyranny over U.S. citizens is becoming an enormous threat.

  43. Jacob Steelman says:

    The WSJ is neither left nor right, it is merely an instrument of propaganda for the ruling elite. This is a message from the ruling elite to the citizens and residents of the USA – do not revolt against our policies no matter how unConstitutional and no matter how morally corrupt. If you attempt to revolt we will kill you since we have the weapons to do so.

  44. maybe they should put u people at the head of the list to be shot as it would be no loss

  45. Unless the people of this country are willing to stand up and fight for what they believe to be an injustice, this will only continue on in this vein.

  46. The real question is why havent Any WSJ advertisors gone on record as oppoding this and pulling out their support?cp Cancelling your subscription is like pisding up a rope. We need to find out who is the #1 WSJ advertisor and boycott the crap out of it.

  47. If you want to compalin about this you should get off your butts and join the military to defend our country. As with al Tea party members, they leave it to the other men and women to fight this country's wars. Tea party members are NOT PATRIOTS, they are COWARDS, every last one of them. Even their children will grow up to be COWARDS. So go back in your holes and vegetate. You are good at that, and complaining.

  48. Rabelrouser says:

    Nor will those questions ever be answered in anything other than "politi-speak"; the half hearted attempt to confuse an issue with words that sound direct but leave interpetation open to the speaker for their own purposes. Orwellian in the fact that the lie becomes the truth and the truth is the lie.

  49. From time to time the WSJ inadvertently lets their disrespect for our Constitution "slip" to the public. One should never forget that they are a business and in the business of making money…..first and foremost.

  50. Glenn Robert says:

    Maurice, you are entirely right. If it isn't in there it ain't so. The problem is that the Constitution is not taught in the public schools anymore so the human "drones" do not know any better. WE now have the responsibility to wake them up and Rand Paul started that process. Only by constant vigilance can we win. We must not relax. We must not sleep on this.

  51. Obamy is preparing to become the supreme leader of the USA. Like Hitler was in Nazi Germany. He has started kill US citizens and it will increase. Watch, NO more elections or he will be on the ballot the next time around again against US law. But, tyrants make the law, not follow it or bound by it.

  52. Well, since Wall Street has been caught several times stealing the retirement of so many Americans, it doesn't surprise me that they support Holder and the Government's policy. Brothers in crime stick together.

  53. El Kabong says:

    Hats off to Rand Paul! I signed his petition more than once.