Concerns valid with White House drone scheme
Penning hard-core terrorists up at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba was a bad idea, President Barack Obama has said. Making men dedicated to slaughtering Americans think they might be about to die by drowning is just wrong, his administration has held. But actually killing people, including Americans, with strikes from remote-controlled drone aircraft – with little evidence, and no proceedings other than an OK from the White House – that’s all right.
At least, it is Obama’s policy.
No one outside the White House, the intelligence community and some in the military knows how many people have been executed by Obama’s order. The White House assures us the killings were necessary to safeguard Americans.
Some in Congress are not comfortable with the ethical contradictions in Obama’s judge, jury and executioner drone policy. Lawmakers of both parties have expressed serious reservations, including reasonable ones about the constitutionality of executing American citizens without trials.
Good. Again, the validity of looking into executions by drone is indicated by the wide bipartisan nature of concern. Senators and representatives are right to be concerned about the scheme.
Lawmakers are considering whether there should be a special court to decide when drones can kill American al-Quida suspects overseas, much as a secret court grants permission for surveillance.
That definitely should be considered.