Where are conservatives and Christians on his list?

Darn shame if someone felt the same about him.

Any doubts about how Obama thinks he is the emperor. No stinking constitution will stand in his way. Laws are what he decides they will be.

The worst president in history!!!

dear NY slimes, your chickens are coming home to roost, you created this monster and I hope he eats the ones that built him before he comes after the rest of us who are trying to expose him for what he is, the exact opposite of the fairy tale you obtuse media cronies created.

Wait until they start picking off farmers and ranchers and other folks they deem "dangerous."

Every day, Obama looks more like Robert Mugabe, and America looks more like Zimbabwe.

By the way, THIS is why the founding fathers were so adamant about the second amendment. It is not about hunting or home protection. It is about stopping tyranny.

What goeth aroundeth cometh aroundeth. You bought him; you own him.

Initially I had no problem with taking Al Awaki out by drone. Of course I assumed there was ample evidence to support that he was a terrorist and dangerous to the US interests.

However, this rationale terrifies me. There are no standards necessary to justify the action. No evidence required to support murdering an American citizen, just a baseball card for our dear leader. Under this policy, he can decide to take out anyone he wants. Scary.

If you really want a scare, read the Ulsterman Report link posted earlier today. Absolutely chilling behaviour from this President.

like that old saying,you get what you pay for.

How convenient. No more will ATF agents have to wait for a tank to ram firebombs through a window to get rid of Americans deemed to be troublesome like they did in Waco. Now some faceless beaurocrat can decide you´re a threat, and bam, you´re gone.

Most chilling aspect for the NYTimes? It reminds them, a little, of Bush. 2nd paragraph.

Bourne Legacy starring Jeremy Renner.

I guess this means the Times editorial board are a bunch of racists. . .

The Emporer has Spoken. Will his subjects ever notice he wears no clothes?

What difference does it make anyway?

#5, the EPA already has surveillance drones above the midwest, targeting farmers. No one knows how many drones, what data they are collecting, etc.
http://latham.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=299185

Sulzberger has a loooong history (vietnam period)of wishing American´s killed. And indicating he would be willing to assist in that goal.

Crimes and misdemeanors = IMPEACHMENT

Liberal trick: Dumb down the definition of "citizen" to be anything that slinks across the border, or with ideological desires to overthrow the Constitution and establish a caliphate, thereby making "citizens" in the US and abroad criminal, and guilty until proven innocent.
Never mind that the ATF/FBI/DOJ are constantly hitting the wrong house in a raid.

Does this do away with a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law

I can imagine that at some point the right to kill an “informed, high-level official” will morph into the right to kill that "pesky Christian on Elm Street"

Wow, after reading the comments after the editorial, all those liberal, smart, enlightened NYT readers have changed their minds about the use of force against terrorists. Now they seem to think that it´s all right and the ALCU should butt out of obama´s business. What an amazing turnaround.

Good Bye America- it´s just a matter of time now. "You reap what you sow"

If someone joins an army that is intent upon destroying this country, why is he still a citizen?

Ditto #23. This DOES open us all up to being on some emperor´s hit list.

This is the foundation for something else quite larger and more sinister.

Someone woke up and smelled the coffee.

A terrorist is a terrorist, no matter where he is from. If he is threatening the lives of Americans, he has waived ´´due process.´´

Police snipers (and other law enforcement types) kill Americans all the time when they threaten hostages in a shopping mall, or elsewhere. Heck, even a private citizen can kill a person who is threatening the life of another person. An American who threatens the lives of other innocent Americans, by joining or actively supporting terrorists, deserves to die at the earliest possible moment.

#2 many do, but he is only kenyan, not American-- so ´ya can´t touch this´

#26 Yuo´re right. And remember Big Sis and all her talk about domestic threats from extreme right wing groups. Let´s take em out to remove the threat.

Am I just paranoid? ...because all of this makes me think twice about communicating via email with likeminded conservatives...also about posting to sites like this one, which I love by the way. Helps me keep my sanity.

Bogus claim: It had the air of a legal justification written after the fact for a policy decision that had already been made, and it brought back unwelcome memories of memos written for President George W. Bush to justify illegal wiretapping, indefinite detention, kidnapping, abuse and torture.

Bush would get legal opinions before making decisions. He would then inform Congress according to law. When information was leaked to the press, they would disagree with the decisions. But Bush followed the law. Obama doesn´t bother to get legal opinions up front. When forced, he will have someone craft an opinion after the fact. These nearly always sloppy and ill thought out.

And just wait until Obama´s "Superdrone" video game expands its activities from foreign soil to U.S. territory, and its target list from Al Qaeda terrorists to "domestic terrorists", like say, the Tea Party, hmmmm? I know, I know, paranoia -- it will never happen.

The horse has already left the barn. He has all the essential ingredients for complete domination; the media, academia, no opposing political party to speak of, and an overwhelmingly ignorant and apathetic population. He is now unstoppable, and he knows it!

So the government cannot "torture" aka waterboard foreign national terorists but okey dokey to kill American citizens with drone attacks.

Do you suppose Fox News is on the "kill" list? Peace Prize King gone awry.

I certainly hope that no one in say, North Korea decides that Øbama is a "threat to their security"...

All Ldotters should see the movie "Minority Report".

The NYT is fully outraged!

In fact - - they might even add a second "tut" to the first one they just uttered - - making it a full "tut-tut" - - a sign of unbridled fury not known anywhere this side of Hell.

I´ve heard that their Style section may not even review Moochelle´s next haircut - - that´s how outraged they are!

Obama´s only mistake was not allowing the NYT to get in on the drafting of the document; then they´d be okay with it, but not being part of the decision causes them to wonder if they aren´t at the table of power like they thought they´d be. It´s a pure power discussion with liberals, nothing to do with constitutional questions.

So, in their minds, an American can be killed without due process, but an enemy MUST have due process.

# 28, totally misses the point IMHO. The issue here has nothing to do with the bad guys.

Agree with #42 (except for "nothing").

Funny how the NYT commenters have suddenly become so hawkish.

So, just now the liberals are starting understand this guy we have as our President is a fiend? Shame on those blind idiots. Lowinfo types are very disturbing.

Might there be a connection albeit paranoid between limiting the right of a citizen to have a gun and legitimizing the government´s right to kill that citizen with a drone?

It is perfectly o.k. for the President to order the assassination of U.S. citizens just whatever you do don´t waterboard terrorists for information.

Democrats care nothing about the American Constitution.

If De al Qaeda residenial wh bogus curtsying bleached bath house queen Ø´blo the blamer could it would change all Americans to desert camel jockies.

Ala Akbar Yaw´all

Refresher course: From the Washington Times, 2009
"Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S".

Well, we all know that wiretapping the phones of suspected terrorists abroad who are US is citizens is much worse than killing them--right?

I´m likely already on the list - conservative.......tea party believer....... Republican supporter/voter......Obama criticizer.

The leftists and dunderheads who put him in office will go along with this super idea, and enjoy it, till they do something he really, really doesn´t like and they´ll be on the list too.

Everything´s just peachy, isn´t it, with this wonderful man as our ´boss´ - as Chris Rock calls him?

Their definition of "terrorist" will no doubt evolve over the next few years, as will the geographical areas where these hits will be permissible.

As easy as BO takes people out with drones, it sort of makes you doubt he had trouble ordering the hit on OBL. The storyline that he did, doesn´t make sense.

All I know is, if Valerie Jarrett´s deadbeat tenants in Chicago start getting mysteriously whacked from above, I´m going to be very suspicious.

There is a big distinction between requiring prior legislative briefings and/or civilian judicial approval of targeted killing of Americans engaged in overseas combat operations against the U.S., and requiring after-action reviews.

A mandatory after-action review of every targeted killing of an American enemy combatant is appropriate and should be written into law immediately. However, it would be a serious national security mistake to treat overseas American enemy combatants as domestic criminals.

In situations where domestic criminals pose an immediate threat to innocent life, the legal authority to use lethal force can range from a citizen acting in self-defense, to cop on the scene or a law-enforcement SWAT commander.

There are very good reasons why enemy combatants are treated differently from domestic criminals. Enemy combatants—U.S. citizens or not—engaged in or planning violent acts against the U.S. itself outside its borders are committing extraterritorial acts of war. For this reason, the authority to use lethal force ultimately resides in our Commander-in-Chief—whoever may be in office at the time.

If extraterritorial American enemy combatants are given immunity from lethal strikes without prior due process in civilian courts, we should expect a continuous flow of damaging national security leaks and a dramatic rise in the recruitment of American citizens for foreign operations by organizations like al-Qaeda.

Obozo either does not lift a finger and watches Americans die before his very eyes (Benghazi) or he wants to kill them. Crazy Kenyan!

None of you can tell anyone what to do now. It is over. We are never going to have freedom again. We will forevermore be a socialist country. We will have someone telling us how we live, how we eat, how we dress, what we drive, and on and on, and there is nothing we can do about it.

For the life of me I just don´t understand. According to the President and his Justice Department, the foreign planners and executors of the 9.11 attacks should not be rushed to judgement but should enjoy the same defense court privileges reserved for American citizens but American citizens accused of encouraging similar acts aren´t entitled to the same court privileges but rather should be ´eliminated´. It´s not that I believe that American citizens threatening to do us harm should not be dealt with harshly, it´s just that I can´t grasp the rationale of the President making distinctions between terrorists and granting foreign terrorists greater protections.