Those who kill innocent people.

[scarletwoman]

Tonight on Minnesota Public Radio there was a particularly striking program segment from "The World", about the drone strikes in Pakistan. "The World" (produced by PRI in partnership with the BBC) is a nightly program that plays on MPR Monday through Friday at 7 p.m.

Please accept my profuse apologies in advance - I am not able to offer much in the way of specific details in this post. It's just that after listening to that segment, I felt compelled to say something.

And, it's just that... I don't know about anybody else, but I have found the entire concept of drone strikes so utterly abhorrant that it's literally painful to think about them. What power do we, who live under the rule of the swordhand, have to stop them?

And, what about those against whom the sword is wielded?

Some good people, social justice activists in Pakistan, are working on a new way to resist and fight back.

They are building a legal case that asserts: since the drone program is being directed by the CIA, and since the CIA is a civilian organisation, the drone attacks are murder, nothing else. No foreign civilian is allowed to murder a citizen of another nation. Particularly since no declared state of war exists between Pakistan and the U.S.

"Those who kill innocent people are murderers."

This organization (whose name I am unable to recall, nor recall the name of the extraordinarily eloquent spokesman being interviewed) is doing some heavy duty work on the ground to get a clear accounting of who has been killed, recording the stories of the survivors, surveying the damage in the villages that have been hit.

It may be that the most powerful means of our own deliverance from the rule of the swordhand has to arise from those have been bloodied by our blade. At the very least, attention must be paid.

sw

(For those who may be interested in listening for themselves, and whose computers function better than my poor old Compaq Presario (still operating on Windows 98), go the Minnesota Public Radio.org website and pick out "The World" from their program list.)

[midnight]

1. CIA is a civilian organisation, the drone attacks are murder, nothing else.

No foreign civilian is allowed to murder a citizen of another nation. K&R

[scarletwoman]

2. Thank you for the K&R.

:)

[azul]

3. The gray area of legalized murder is lending this activity cover.

Lawyers and scholars have got the issue so clouded that they must have lost sight of what they are actually doing. It is killing people without charge or trial: cold-blooded murder.

If it's war its legal, just doesn't hold water in a world where aggressive acts of war are illegal, especially if war is undeclared. Is the rule of law then defunct?

[scarletwoman]

9. If Law doesn't step up, there is little hope. The big question is, are there enough human beings

on this earth, still possessed of consciences, to mount an effective challenge to the forces of the anti-law unlawful?

sw

(Edited to make my subject line less absolutist.)

[tekisui]

4. I heard it, too. I was going to come back home and find a link to post.

Thanks for the reminder!

Here is a link: http://www.theworld.org/2011/07/questions-about-the-effectiveness-us-drone-strikes-in-pakistan/

[scarletwoman]

6. Thank you for posting the link!

There was something about what was being said in that segment that just really struck me. It was so good to hear something true and real being said about this practice of murdering people from the sky.

Thanks again,
sw

[tekisui]

7. It grabbed me, too. I think it was hearing, for the first time,

a family member of someone who was killed in the drone strikes. Hearing a voice and a name when the US will not even admit that it is happening was powerful.

Then to realize that it has been played out for years to over a thousand families.

How anyone can support the drone war in Pakistan or Yemen is beyond me.

[scarletwoman]

10. "How anyone can support the drone war in Pakistan or Yemen is beyond me." Agreed.

This really must not stand.

[KG]

12. i'll bet there wouldn't be a drone war if the US had a Nobel peace prize winner for a president.

oh, wait, what?

[scarletwoman]

14. It is very wearying to live in Bizzaro World.

[Divernan]

34. They should demand that Peace Prize be returned!

[Octafish]

5. ''Those who kill innocent people are murderers.''

Who really won World War II?

[scarletwoman]

22. As I said, we live under the rule of the swordhand.

:hug:

[leveymg]

8. The CIA is two agencies; a civilian analytical body, and a paramilitary operations directorate.

That is the way it has been organized from the beginning in 1947 National Security Act, and anyone who will tell you otherwise is woefully ignorant of its actual history.

One needs to read the National Security Act of 1947, as amended: http://intelligence.senate.gov/nsaact1947.pdf There is amazing stuff in there such as discretionary funds for authorizations for $150 million covert operations that don't need to be appropriated by Congress, and a lot more.

We effectively haven't been a Constitutional republic, as the Founders would have understood it, since the very beginning of the Cold War.

[scarletwoman]

21. Indeed, we have a National Security State, not a Constituional republic.

Communism was the best friend the predatory Owner Class could have ever wished for.

[sad sally]

11. The US has outsourced fighting to machines. The horrors of these action will have repercussions.

New Film on Drone Attacks in Afghanistan, "Silent Screams"

" is so cruel as to be beyond the pale of human tolerance." ~Senior British judge Lord Bingham of Cornill

"this unlawful program fits the academic defiinition of 'terrorism.' Drone attacks are unlawful, indiscriminately kill civilians, create fear and are ideologically driven for a political goal." ~Carl Herman, LA County Nonpartisan Examiner

http://www.kcse.tv/video/2178/Silent-Screams-The-Impact-of-US-Drone-Attacks?du

[scarletwoman]

13. It is the very definition of terrorism, imo. Thank you for your post, the headsup on the film, and

the link. :yourock:

sw

[provis99]

15. the Allies justified killing civilians during World War II.

Hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese people were killed for being enemy civilians.

the current rules of war essentially justify the mass killings of civilians as a war necessity.

Killing enemy leaders is of course, assassination, and morally unjustifiable, according to political leaders.

[scarletwoman]

17. Are we at war with Pakistan? How are the "rules of war" applied when one is dropping bombs

on the citizens of a country that is our purpoted ally?

[provis99]

25. of course we are at war with Pakistan.

We haven't officially declared war since 1941, but have been involved in many undeclared wars since then. At current count, we are involved in five wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, and Pakistan.

[scarletwoman]

27. Nor have Pakistan, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen (etc., etc.) declared war on the U.S. It's not very sporting.

Wouldn't it be a sight to see if any of these countries DID declare war back at us?

Like, really, officially to the rest of the world: "Hey world, this is __________, we've decided that we will no longer tolerate U.S. aggression on our soil. We are declaring war on the U.S. and we are marshalling our entire military to engage in battle."

I'm sure someone, somewhere has gamed this scenario by now. I wonder how it turned out?

sw

[Forkboy]

16. K&R

[scarletwoman]

18. Thank you.

:hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Murderers.

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder." Albert Einstein

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Mohandas K. Gandhi

[scarletwoman]

20. Thank you for posting those perfect quotes!

Have I mentioned lately that I love you? :loveya:

:hug:
sw

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Aww, shucks, Miss Scarlet.

:blush:

[felix_numinous]

23. They do it in our names-

and as long as we do not take a public stand against them, their victims will mistake them for us! How many times do Americans mistake Middle Eastern people for what their governments do????

This is why public displays of dissent are critical, so that other countries get the message that the citizenry of the US is not as asleep, complicit or stupid as they are led to believe--because if there is any karmic backlash against us, we will need every BIT of mercy and evidence we can get when that time comes. We have to start thinking ahead.

I am not sure American people want to think about backlash--and who is to say that has not happened already (not mentioning specific events)?? I believe that when the US has public displays of dissent against violence, we earn the respect of people overseas--this we CAN do.

How much respect was gained by Iranians when they stood up for themselves? We saw the humanity--and knew that the people were not complicit in what the government was up to. We need to do the same thing. Peacefully, of course.

[scarletwoman]

29. I absolutely agree with you about the importance of public displays of dissent.

However, the rest of the world knows us too well by our actions.

No matter how much we may wish to separate ourselves from complicity in the war machine our government runs in our name, we still look to preserve our comforts. And these comforts obtain through living under the Rule of the Swordhand.

It will take much more than peace marches to redeem ourselves.

sw

[G_j]

24. drone attacks are criminal

and should be treated as such

[scarletwoman]

30. Indeed. Hi, G_j, always good to see you!

:hug:

[G_j]

36. how anyone can see it differently

is beyond me..

:hug: :loveya:

[bobthedrummer]

26. It's privatized too-mercenary, even to targeting and tracking. n/t

[scarletwoman]

31. Hired civilian killers committing murder. It's illegal, period.

Thank you for posting.

[Ichingcarpenter]

32. you might look at this thread

About the CIA and people taking legal action

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=439&topic_id=1501709&mesg_id=1501709

[scarletwoman]

33. Your link needs fixing. It takes me to a posting window, not to the thread.

I've looked for the thread but haven't found it yet.

Thanks,
sw

[scarletwoman]

35. ...

[lunatica]

37. I'm anti war in any shape or form

But the use of drones is particularly insidious and depraved.

It won't be long before they are used in the skies over our country in the guise of fighting crime. Some will be unarmed, but some will be armed. It seems inevitable at this point.

[saras]

38. The next step: combine drone strikes and torture

Now that we're clear that torturing people, even innocents is okay, and remote-control attacks on foreign populations, even civilians, are okay, let's just combine the two and make drone weapons that go to foreign countries and torture people at random.

Maybe little land mines, not really big enough to kill but just take limbs off, and brightly colored like kid's toys? Been there, done that.

Maybe we could make bullets out of poison, so that they can keep on killing even after the war is over. Been there, done that.

Sorry. I just can't think of anything evil enough.


"Those who kill innocent people are murderers." Simple enough. The only trick is to start housecleaning at the top and work down systematically.