Let´s not be too hasty in dismissing the possibilities. By this reasoning anyone overtly helping terrorist organizations could be targeted for elimination by drones, even on US soil. I believe a very strong case can be made that both Obama and Holder have aided and facilitated terrorist organizations in Libya, Iran, Mexico, and elsewhere. I believe that qualifies them as legitimate drone targets.

It´s interesting that the name "drone" derives from the military craft´s one-shot capability. Drones are a category of male bees that exist solely for the purpose of having sex with the queen bee, after which, (quoting Wikipedia), "the bulb of the endophallus is broken off inside of the queen during mating- so drones only mate once, and die shortly after."

The Freudian implications the fascination with drone aircraft holds for Obama are immense.

Drones will be legal until a pubbie is elected - the the will be the worst things since the Natzis

I´ve got to admit. I stopped after reading the sentence fragment..."The government’s white paper declares that the Constitution...".
Since when does this admin care about the Constitution? When justifying murder?

I dunno about Peoria, but Dearborn might well be on that list...

Unreal. Had Bush put forth anywhere near the level of never-ending crap the *current* occupant of the White House spews, there would be banners demanding ´IMPEACHMENT NOW!´ hanging from highway overpasses nationwide...

But, now we have a *Constitutional Law Professor* (another Obama lie - he was basically a guest lecturer), who ´claims authority to interpret the Constitution´ in a manner that removes both Due Process - and the burden of government to *prove* their assassination targets actually pose any threat of any imminent nature.

Leaving us with a jackass in chief who claims the authority to murder a US citizen over basically speaking against the US.

Brave New World indeed...

"The government’s white paper declares that the Constitution doesn´t protect citizens who act as senior leaders of al Qaeda from death from above. "

A truly astonishing statement -- coming as it does from the very Holderites and Obamaites who, during the Bush administration, insisted that captured terrorists --NON-U.S. citizens-- must be rescued from Guantanamo and tried on American soil, and given full Constitutional rights.

Given the actual intent of the 2nd amendment,
it would seem only reasonable that private citizens must be able to posses and operate their own private drones.

So. How long until the Tea Party is declared to be a "terrorist organization"...? Or the Republican party for that matter.

Obama is p*ssing on the Constitution. We are moving toward a situation where it will be "legal" for him to have any opponent killed, on American soil or not. No trial, no warning. All that will be necessary is to say, "terrorist."

The same government that wants to deprive its citizens of self defense weapons is concocting ways to kill them with missles dropped from the sky by flying robots.

A century of predictions by sci-fi writers are becoming our reality.
.

Constitutional rights are not given by the government. You have a constitutional right to a presumption of innocence until convicted by a jury of your peers. The cops SWAT the wrong house all the time. What will the government say when they get the wrong house with a drone bomb?

They might say ´oops´.

Ummmm, Skeet time! PULL!