ACLU Demands Information on Drone Usage

[The Northerner]

In a release dated February 1, 2012, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) indicated it had filed a lawsuit demanding our government release information about the ongoing and now expanded drone aircraft program, a program the Union calls the “government’s targeted killing program.” The ACLU is an advocate for civil liberties, founded in 1920 to defend freedom of individual Americans to speak out against war. Its motto is “Because Freedom Can’t Protect Itself.”

The complaint says, in part:

Our government’s deliberate and premeditated killing of American terrorism suspects raises profound questions that ought to be the subject of public debate. Unfortunately the Obama administration has released very little information about the practice — its official position is that the targeted killing program is a state secret — and some of the information it has released has been misleading.
…We’re seeking, in addition to the legal memos, the government’s evidentiary basis for strikes that killed three Americans in Yemen in the fall of 2011.

This issue of unmanned war machines indeed may be of significance. In recent days the president seems to be going to some length to discuss the drone program as it pertains to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. Additionally, we recall that a few weeks ago an American drone on a surveillance mission was captured and retained by the authorities in Iran.

In late January the president publicly acknowledged drone strikes on Pakistan for the first time. President Obama said, "A pinpoint strike is ‘less intrusive’ of other countries' sovereignty than other military ways to target al Qaeda.” Speaking on a YouTube video, in a story printed in Al Jazeera, the Arabic-language news network, he referred to drone strikes as being “targeted and focused;" aimed at active terrorists in tough terrain remote areas near and between Afghanistan and Pakistani borders.

Read more: http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/aclu-demands-information-on-drone-usage/

[T S Justly]

1. Was transparency an Obama campaign promise? Well, was it Mr. ACLU, whoever you are?

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110315005580/en/AP-Finds-Obama-Fails-Transparency-Campaign-Promise

[woo me with science]

3. Thank you.

Thank goodness for the ACLU and the part of the press that still strives to keep us aware.

[Puregonzo1188]

2. K&R

[Luminous Animal]

4. Glenn Greenwald writes a scathing article about this today...

Last edited Thu Feb 2, 2012, 11:27 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/aclu_sues_obama_administration_over_assassination_secrecy/singleton/undefinedsingleton/#comment-3118631

So the Most Transparent Administration Ever™ refuses even to confirm or deny if there is an assassination program, or if it played any role in the execution of these three Americans, because even that most elementary information is classified.

What makes this assertion so inexcusable — beyond its inherently and self-evidently anti-democratic nature — is that the Obama administration constantly boasts in public about this very same program when doing so is politically beneficial for the President. The day Awlaki was killed, the President himself began a White House ceremony by announcing Awlaki’s death, trumpeting it as “a major blow to al Qaeda’s most active operational affiliate,” boasting that “the death of al-Awlaki marks another significant milestone in the broader effort to defeat al Qaeda and its affiliate,” and then patting himself on the back one last time: “this success is a tribute to our intelligence community.” Here’s how Obama hailed himself for the Awlaki killing on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno:

THE PRESIDENT: But al Qaeda is weaker than anytime in recent memory. We have taken out their top leadership position. That’s been a big accomplishment.

(Applause.)

JAY LENO: Can I ask you about taking out their top leadership, al-Awlaki, this guy, American-born terrorist? How important was he to al Qaeda?

THE PRESIDENT: Do you — what happened was we put so much pressure on al Qaeda in the Afghan/Pakistan region –

JAY LENO: Right.

THE PRESIDENT: — that their affiliates were actually becoming more of a threat to the United States. So Awlaki was their head of external operations. This is the guy that inspired and helped to facilitate the Christmas Day bomber. This is a guy who was actively planning a whole range of operations here in the homeland and was focused on the homeland. And so this was probably the most important al Qaeda threat that was out there after Bin Laden was taken out, and it was important that working with the enemies, we were able to remove him from the field.

(Applause.)

.....


There’s only one place in the world where these programs cannot be discussed: in American courts. That’s because, when it comes time to have real disclosure and adversarial checks — rather than one-sided, selective, unverifiable disclosure — and when it comes time to determine if government officials are breaking the law, the administration ludicrously claims that it is too dangerous even to confirm if such a program exists (and disgracefully deferential federal courts in the post-9/11 era typically acquiesce to those claims). So here we have the nauseating spectacle of the Obama administration secretly targeting its own citizens for assassination, boasting in public about it in order to show how Tough and Strong the President is, but then hiding behind broad secrecy claims to shield their conduct from meaningful transparency, public debate, and legal review, all while pretending that they are motivated by lofty National Security Concerns when wielding these secrecy weapons. The only thing worse than the U.S. Government’s conduct of most affairs behind a wall of secrecy is how cynical, manipulative and self-protective is its invocation of these secrecy powers.

[RobertEarl]

5. Technology is not controlled tight enough

Especially when it comes to the racket that goes by the name of war.

[Luminous Animal]

6. Kick.