top of page
  • Writer's pictureRalph Goodwin

US 4 Permissible "Mother May I"


SQYX - CEO +1NC 12507091809

Published By : Goodwin-RC : CEO +1News Central

FEB 19TH, 2024

In Consideration Of The Alleged Assassination Of Alexei Navalny


"2.7Contracting. Agencies within the Intelligence Community are authorized to enter into contracts or arrangements for the provision of goods or services with private companies or institutions in the United States and need not reveal the sponsorship of such contracts or arrangements for authorized intelligence purposes. Contracts or arrangements with academic institutions may be undertaken only with the consent of appropriate officials of the institution."

Executive Order 13355 is a United States Presidential executive order signed on August 27, 2004, by President George W. Bush.[1][2] Its goal was "Strengthened Management of the Intelligence Community". It supplemented and partially superseded Executive Order 12333, signed in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, and was in turn partially supplemented and superseded by Executive Order 13470 in 2008. Note : See Mercer Law Review (1992) "Assassination And The Law Of Armed Conflict" : Note "Assassination Permissibility"

Many of the clauses of the new executive order changed how US intelligence agencies were governed and how they ultimately reported to the President, to reflect that when Executive Order 12333 was signed, the DCI Director of Central Intelligence was also the nominal chief of all US intelligence agencies.[1] President Bush had created a new position, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and the changes reflected that the US intelligence agencies were to report to the President through the DNI."

"In the early fall of 1990, Air Force Chief of Staff General Michael Dugan boasted that if war actually erupted between the United States and Saddam Hussein's Iraq, American planes would probably target Saddam, his family, and his mistress. When Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney learned of Dugan's boasting, he immediately fired him, explaining to reporters that Dugan's comments constituted a potential violation of the U.S. ban on assassinations. 2 Despite their impropriety, General Dugan's comments raised a recurring question: Can the President order the assassination of a foreign leader?"

"Any discussion of assassination raises serious moral questions. Any aversion to condoning assassination must be tempered by the realization that in certain instances assassination can save lives. For example, President Abraham Lincoln concluded that assassinating a leader is morally justified when a people has suffered under a tyrant for an extended period of time and has exhausted all legal and peaceful means of ouster.3"

" German officials cited this "justifiable tyrannicide" rationale to defend a plot to assassinate Hitler during World War II.4 Commentators have argued that if the plot had succeeded, millions of lives would have been saved. 5"

"Questions about assassination's legitimacy have played an integral part in the political history of other nations, but Americans have acutely felt the shadow of assassination both domestically and internationally. Domestic assassinations, such as those of Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, as well as plots to assassinate foreign leaders, such as Patrice Lumumba, Rafael Trujillo, and Ngo Dinh Diem, have tainted the American political landscape for over two centuries."

"Although many scholars have discussed assassination, few have agreed upon a comprehensive definition of the term. 6 Nevertheless, while no comprehensive definition of the term "assassination" exists today, most would probably recognize an assassination when they see one. 7 Central Intelligence Agency plots to eliminate Cuba's Fidel Castro and the recent efforts to bomb the personal compound of Libya's Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi graphically exemplify the term "assassination."

"Although the ban on assassination contained in Executive Order 12,333 has the force and effect of a congressional statute,1 2 the President can evade the order's mandate and legally carry out the assassination of a foreign leader in four ways. He could: (1) Ask Congress to declare war, in which case a foreign leader exercising command responsibility would become a legitimate target;' 3 (2) Construe Article 51 of the United Nations Charter to permit the assassination of a foreign leader based on either a right to self-defense or a right to respond to criminal activities;' 4 (3) Narrowly interpret the order as not restricting the President as long as he does not approve specific plans for the killing of individuals;' 5 or (4) Overrule the order, create an exception to it, or permit the Congress to do the same. 16"

"By using any of these methods, a president could theoretically order the assassination of a foreign leader without violating Executive Order 12,333." Note : Executive Order (2004) 13355 Amends E.O. 12,333 / see Cornell 1985 "Unleashing The CIA Violates The Leash Law" : CIA MEMO (2016) : Permissibility : Restrictions Handbook (2016) : See Also, The Phoenix Team (1967)

"Throughout the program, Phoenix "neutralized" 81,740 people suspected of VC membership, of whom 26,369 were killed, and the rest surrendered or were captured. Of those killed 87% were attributed to conventional military operations by South Vietnamese and American forces, while the remaining 13% were attributed to Phoenix Program operatives.[8]: 17–21 "

It's Likely Putin Could Second POTUS DJT To Assassinate Zelenzkyy

Quid Pro Quo

In 2012, The Vanderbilt Law Review Published A 45-Page Article Titled : "My Fellow Americans, We Are Going To Kill You : The Legality Of Targeting And Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad"

"Id. It is worth noting that the OLC memo was prepared after President Barack Obama gave the order to kill Al-Aulaqi. Jesselyn Radack, Bush Logic in Secret Memo to Assassinate American al-Awlaki, DAILY KOS (Oct. 9, 2011), 1024407/-Bush-Logic-in-Secret-Memo-to-Assassinate-American-al-Awlaki. 10. Members of the Court, however, briefly considered it when deciding a related issue. See Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 597 (2004) (Thomas, J., dissenting) ("[A] Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Predator drone fired a Hellfire missile at a vehicle in Yemen carrying an al Qaeda leader, a citizen of the United States."). 11. See, e.g., David Kretzmer, Targeted Killing of Suspected Terrorists: Extra-Judicial Executions or Legitimate Means of Defence? 16 EuR. J. INT'L L. 171, 191 (2005) (focusing on the targeted killing of terrorists in general)."

"Part I introduces targeted killing. Part II provides background information. It differentiates targeted killing from assassination and execution. It then examines the legality of targeted killing generally, under the frameworks of U.S. and international law. It describes some of the theories advanced in favor of and against targeted killing. Part II also establishes the minimum criteria under which targeted killing is legal. Part III analyzes the issues at the heart of this Note, identifying the additional protections afforded to American citizens and overlaying them onto the targeted killing framework established in Part II. It focuses primarily on the protections in the U.S. Constitution. Part IV draws on the law as established in Parts II and III to advocate the continued practice of targeted killing. It recommends additional protections when the target is an American citizen. Part V concludes that the U.S. government can effectively target and kill U.S. citizens who are participating in armed conflict against the United States abroad while maintaining due process protections for all citizens by notifying the target and affording him an opportunity for a hearing."



Therefore, the US executive orders that provide for circumstances of authority to render identified parties to be assassinated are not clear-cut or consistent. They depend on how the US defines and interprets the terms “political assassination”, “terrorism”, “self-defense”, and “national security”. These definitions and interpretations may vary depending on the context, the target, and the administration in power."

Explanation : Immunity : Observation

"Qualified immunity is a type of legal immunity that protects a government official from lawsuits alleging that the official violated a plaintiff's rights, only allowing suits where officials violated a “clearly established” statutory or constitutional right. “Qualified immunity balances two important interests—the need to hold public officials accountable when they exercise power irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment, distraction, and liability when they perform their duties reasonably.” See: Pearson v. Callahan."

"Truth, Torture, and the American Way: The History and Consequences of U.S. Involvement in Torture is a book by Jennifer Harbury, a human rights lawyer and activist. The book was published in 2005 and has a foreword by Amy Goodman, a journalist and host of Democracy Now! The book exposes the CIA’s involvement in torture practices in various countries, especially in Latin America, and argues against the use of torture on moral, legal, and practical grounds. The book also draws from Harbury’s personal experience of searching for her husband, Everardo, who was tortured and killed by the Guatemalan army with the CIA’s knowledge. The book is a powerful and disturbing account of the history and consequences of U.S. involvement in torture. You can find more information about the book from these sources: Internet Archive, Amazon, Google Books, Goodreads."

"Jennifer K. Harbury (born 1951) is an American lawyer, author, and human rights activist. She has been instrumental in forcing the revelation of the complicity of the United States CIA in human rights abuses, particularly in Guatemala and other countries of Central America during the 1980s and 1990s. Initially, she was trying to discover the fate of her husband Efraín Bámaca Velásquez [es], a Mayan guerrilla leader who was "disappeared" in March 1992 by the Guatemalan military.

After her three hunger strikes, the death of her husband at the hands of the army in 1993 was revealed, together with CIA complicity in his case and other Guatemala Army human rights abuses. Declassified US files revealed that he was tortured and killed by high level intelligence officials in the Guatemalan army, who were also working as paid informants of the CIA. CIA payments to them continued throughout her husband's torture. As a result of her efforts, Congress forced the end to a CIA program.[citation needed] In 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered the declassification of decades of documents related to US activities in Guatemala and other Central American countries, and apologized for US contributions to human rights abuses there while on an official visit to Guatemala.[1]"


Question : Who Has Seen Rupert Murdoch Today : Comment


SQYX - CEO (+1NC) 12507091809

Published By : Goodwin-RC : CEO +1News Central

FEB 19TH 2024

(With References Drawn From The Oedipus Archives)

37 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page