The Shocking Inefficiency and Deadly Outcome of US Drone Wars

dronesEarlier this year, Congressman Alan Grayson invited a Pakistani family who witnessed their grandmother getting blown up by a US drone to testify in front of Congress. After jumping through legal hoops for months, the Rehmans finally arrived to DC to testify about how drone warfare has tragically impacted their lives.

However their lawyer, Shazad Akbar, was suspiciously missing. The State Department inexplicably refused to grant him a visa, despite the fact that Akbar had traveled to the US many times before. Ultimately, only five members of Congress took the time to show up and listen to the Rehman family’s message.

I had the great opportunity to provide the Rehman family, including Rafiq, his children Zubair age 13, Nabeela age 9, as well as their lawyer, Jennifer Gibson, a platform on Breaking the Set to tell their somber story.

***

The Rehman Family on Breaking the Set 

Many people in this country have accepted the false notion that drone strikes are a necessary evil to fight the ubiquitous threat of terrorism. Yet the government’s logic to either use ground troops or drones to fight ‘terror’ is a false dichotomy that must be countered.

The common argument that drones are the most strategic and effective weapon in modern warfare has been proven categorically false. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as many as 926 civilians have died in Pakistan alone from US drone strikes. Not to mention the fact that the civilian death toll could be as high as 3,595, considering how the simple act of being a military aged male in a strike region deems you a militant worthy of execution in the eyes of the US government.

An in-depth study done by the New America Foundation showed that drones only have a two percent average success rate at killing high level targets on the ground. This means that 98% of the time, innocent people are probably being killed.

Beyond these cold death statistics, it’s crucial to recognize that every casualty from these shadow wars is a human being like you and me. These people have faces, names and families left behind to mourn their loss.

If Islamic extremism is a threat, it needs to be dealt with in other ways. The US government should be working with foreign governments to capture alleged high level terror targets and put them on trial. It shouldn’t be a problem for Obama to release proof of their guilt if these suspects are already considered dangerous enough to outright execute.

Every drone strike that hits these remote villages causes twenty new ‘terrorists’ to form with renewed hatred toward the US government. Not only are drones ineffective, but they arguably cause the proliferation – not reduction – of terrorism.

Despite the inefficient and counter-intuitive nature of drone wars, these flying death traps dominate modern warfare. Their continued use becomes more clear when taking into account how Bush’s drone architect said that the reason Obama has ramped up drones is to avoid the bad press of Guantanamo Bay.

This is the stark reality we’re living in. The President is a constitutional lawyer who opts to assassinate people in order to not deal with the messy consequences of sending them into a Gitmo-style prison abyss.

I urge you to heed the words of the Rehman family. Resistance to unmanned killer drones must be formed in mass in order to end this criminal policy once and for all.

Abby Martin for Media Roots

***

LIKE Breaking the Set @ http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet
FOLLOW Abby Martin @ http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin

All the Unfit News

On 15 October 2013, the New York Times featured an op-ed piece from the Israeli Minister of Intelligence entitled ‘How Palestinian Hate Prevents Peace.’ Publishing such disinformation harms the New York Times’ readership, since the Intelligence Minster deliberately omits historical context and social realities from his commentary.

Rudimentary knowledge of recent history shreds the Intelligence Minister’s pablum. To begin with, Zionism and Judaism are completely different. Zionism is a fabricated ideology of aggression, which was created in the late 1800s, whose implementation colonizes much of the Eastern Mediterranean. Judaism, on the other hand, is a religion of peace.

With this fresh breath of history, one is now able to properly assess the following assertions from the Israeli Intelligence Minister:

“The Palestinian Authority’s television and radio stations, public schools, summer camps, children’s magazines and Web sites are being used to drive home four core messages. First, that the existence of a Jewish state (regardless of its borders) is illegitimate because there is no Jewish people and no Jewish history in this piece of land. Second, that Jews and Zionists are horrible creatures that corrupt those in their vicinity. Third, that Palestinians must continue to struggle until the inevitable replacement of Israel by an Arab-Palestinian state. And fourth, that all forms of resistance are honorable and valid, even if some forms of violence are not always expedient.”

When spreading the above decontextualized inaccuracies, the Intelligence Minister has resorted to a revolting trick: deliberately conflating Judaism and Zionism in order to garner support from U.S. readership. In reality, Palestinian grievances are aimed specifically against Zionist oppressors, not against Judaism, Jews, or any specific religion. There is nothing anti-Semitic about self-determination or about wanting to live free from military occupation. Calling criticism of Israel “anti-Semitic” demeans Jews everywhere and dilutes shared histories worldwide.

The Minister also fails to mention that it is the obligation of the occupying power, Israel, to care for the women, men and children under military occupation. This includes refraining from forcibly transferring the people it occupies and refraining from collectively punishing those under its control. Yet Israel does both on a daily basis, often through ceaseless colonialism. Israel’s other violations of international law are not featured in the Minister’s New York Times opinion piece.

The Israeli Intelligence Minister takes issue with Mahmoud Abbas attending a presentation of an Egyptian poet and various other acts of “incitement” against the “Jewish state and the Jewish people.” Again, Palestinian grievances have nothing to do with Judaism. This grand misdirection distracts from the core issue: Palestinians are fighting an anti-colonial struggle against undemocratic, racist ethno-religious ideology.

The Minister alleges Palestinian media reminds “viewers that Palestine extends ‘from Eilat to Rosh Hanikra’ — that is, not just the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but the entire land of Israel.” The Minister deliberately omits his support for colonizing “Judea and Samaria,” otherwise known as the West Bank. Fetid hypocrisy at its finest.

The Minister cites two gestures of Israeli goodwill, which he defines as “a courageous attempt to build trust and improve the atmosphere surrounding the negotiations”:  a) Israel’s “anguished decision on July 28 to release over 100 convicted terrorists” b) efforts to help the Palestinian economy.

These “terrorists” were convicted in the court of Zionist colonialism, which detains indefinitely, punishes arbitrarily, and prioritizes ethno-religious supremacy for colonial purposes. This is hardly a fair arbiter, Minister. As you know, the word “terrorist” is often used by those in power against those who resist imperial agendas.

By “Israeli efforts to help the Palestinian economy,” one may presume the Intelligence Minister is referring to this recent U.S. plan, a Band-Aid on gaping colonial sores. In other news, ending military occupation and settler colonialism, and allowing for commercial self-determination has a chance to positively affect the Palestinian economy over the long-term. The Minister has removed this option from the table.

He chimes in reminding us, “Palestinian leaders must now reciprocate by immediately and fully halting their encouragement and sponsorship of hatred.” Duly noted, sir. Fait accompli. He then threatens reconciliation, stating “Israelis will become more skeptical about the peace process and we in the Israeli government will have greater difficulty taking the additional confidence-building steps that we have been considering,” unless “Palestinian leaders” stop inciting hatred.

The Israeli Intelligence Minister, who also works as Minister of Strategic Affairs, knows exactly what he’s doing. In a strategic capacity, he’s trying to milk the Palestinian Authority of any remaining vestiges of anti-colonialism. In doing so, he finesses the PA into facilitating the final stages of a colonial agenda: mandatory silence as Judea and Samaria are gradually wrested into Zionist control. Meanwhile, resistance is deemed hatred – a classic imperial ruse.

Christian Sorensen for Media Roots

Abby Martin Deconstructs the Corporatocracy on Coast to Coast AM

Abby Martin talks to John B. Wells on the widely syndicated Coast to Coast AM radio show about the rise of alternative media, her citizen journalism with Media Roots, Occupy Oakland activism and how the TV show Breaking the Set has managed to piss off people in high places, including Rand Paul, Nestlé and the Israeli lobby.

***

Check out Abby’s art at abbymartin.org

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Reply

Media Roots Radio – Manufactured Agitprop on the World’s Stage

Abby and Robbie Martin discuss the news of the day including a District Court judge forcing torture victims to pay their torturers’ legal fees; Latin American leaders standing up to US imperialism in light of the NSA leaks; the establishment’s use of agitation propaganda to manufacture outrage at other nations while promoting an undercurrent of American exceptionalism.

***

The above timeline is interactive. Scroll through it to find out more about the show’s music and to resources mentioned during the broadcast. To see a larger version of the timeline with clickable resources go to the soundcloud link below the player.

If you would like to directly download the podcast click the down arrow icon on the right of the soundcloud display. To hide the comments to enable easier rewind and fast forward, click on the icon on the very bottom right.

This Media Roots podcast is the product of many long hours of hard work and love. If you want to encourage our voice, please consider supporting us as we continue to speak from outside party lines. If you donate, we want to thank you with your choice of art from AbbyMartin.org as well as music from RecordLabelRecords.org. Much of the music you hear on our podcasts comes from Robbie’s imprint Record Label Records, and Abby’s art reflects the passion and perspective that lead her to create Media Roots.org.

$40 donation: One 8×10 art print and one RLR release (You choose! Tell us in the Paypal notes.)

$80 donation: Two 8×10 art prints and two RLR releases (You choose!)

$150 donation: Four 8×10 art prints and four RLR releases (You choose!)

Even the smallest donations are appreciated and help us with our operating costs.

Thanks so much for your support!

Listen to all previous episodes of Media Roots Radio here.

The Pinky Swear Doctrine

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”

                                          – Dwight Eisenhower, 1961 Farewell Address to the Nation

This speech by Eisenhower demonstrates reflection and honesty that is all too often missing from the Oval Office. The great and wonderful POTUS that we all have come to know nowadays, displaying an image of unreserved authority and grave conviction, is conspicuously missing here in Ike’s speech. Instead, in this brief, bizarre moment of time, we the people were given a glimpse into the little old man behind the curtain; small and stout in stature, yet honest, forthcoming and surprisingly human. Eisenhower’s warning was startling: he dared expose the looming beasts of fascism from within the very den where they dwell and multiply – dogs of war he himself had helped feed and grow over the course of his two terms in office.

How can the military-industrial complex be counterbalanced? It bears repeating: “Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.” This is precisely where journalism ought to come in, educating and alerting the masses so to keep their representatives in check through a sustained, coordinated effort of dissent. The corporatized for-profit Hill, however, has co-opted and annexed the Fourth Estate, providing a nice little addition that’s just down the hall and around the corner from Congress, where representatives can throw it a bone from time to time to keep it happy. Vietnam, The Gulf War, Iraq/Afghanistan – along with multiple covert operations in between, like Operation Cyclone and Iran-Contra, to name a few – clearly indicates war has never been so plentiful and profitable.  Had we an informed citizenry by way of a muckraking press, guarded with an intellectual ability to think critically about the powers that be, then perhaps these wars would have never been.

It would appear Eisenhower’s words of wisdom have fallen on deaf ears.

A disclaimer is in order: my intentions are not to nostalgically wax poetic about Eisenhower because quite frankly he did nothing short of solidifying the idea of not just an unchecked permanent armaments industry but also perpetual military/intelligence operations overseas in order to keep the balance in favor of Western norms and ideology. For instance, under Eisenhower, both Operation Ajax and Operation PBSUCCESS ousted two democratically elected leaders through coups orchestrated by the CIA; that being the Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh, and President of Guatemala, Jacobo Árbenz. This set the precedent for dozens of more coups later on down the road, all in the name of stopping the red menace.

Eisenhower’s reign is an example of the deceptive “benevolent dictator” our framers of the Constitution had duly warned us about, unchained by the inherent checks and balances made explicit in the role of the Executive. Indeed, American foreign policy has effectively dethroned the rule of law, replacing it with the arbitrary whims of officials. The “law is king,” Paine once said; nowadays the order has been reversed, where elitist officials decide when to apply the law as they see fit. President Eisenhower, like our leaders today, said “trust me” to the rest of our governmental branches, conducting military strikes and operations without congressional oversight and thereby paying little mind to constitutional law. And as of recent, we have seen the same rationale entertained by the likes of Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama in their bid to conduct military strikes in Syria. They too have said “just trust us,” asserting that Assad used Sarin on his people without feeling the need to prove it as such.

Nevertheless Eisenhower had his moment of clarity in the Farewell Speech of 1961. But not only were his words a warning of the commodification of war itself, moreover it warns of the perpetual specter of war according to government narratives alone – with zero factual basis.  And with a disinformed citizenry, one has not the power to act because one is not in the know to begin with.  Just trust us, they say.  Here, embedded in the warning of Ike’s Farewell Address, we have the original prototype of the eventual Wolfowitz doctrine: a maximalist Executive that boxes out congressional oversight, engaging in covert and overt preemptive “operations” in order to prevent large scale wars in the future, operations based on so-called intelligence that never sees the light of day, top-secret and hushed – for elitist eyes only. Give us your uninformed consent; we promise to do the best we can with it.

The American political system has effectively substituted constitutional law for a pinky swear doctrine.

To say the least, our leaders didn’t get Ike’s memo. Or maybe they did – they just made it into a paper airplane, kicking their feet up on the table of discourse and reason, carelessly wielding their duties with a flick of the wrist. Indeed, to make matters worse, the soaring commodification of war has forayed into a sort of fetish for American officials, where they childishly revel in all things related to war on a superficial level that is astounding.

We now have the likes of NSA Chief Gen. Keith Alexander donning himself a modern day Picard by virtue of his spy facility modeled after the bridge of the starship Enterprise from Star Trek. And, furthermore, to add axe-murderer to Creep Street, the NSA facility is known as the “Information Domination Center.”

I have two questions for our trekkie NSA Chief:

While conducting unreasonable searches and seizures, when an analyst inquires whether or not to hack somebody’s private information, do you say “make it so!” whilst swiveling in your armchair? Also, when shredding everything the Fourth Amendment in the Constitution stands for with, presumably, photon torpedos, if you miss the target do you reenact the Annoyed Picard meme? Really, I’m seriously interested.

Likewise, we have Obama and his so-called Terror Tuesdays, where he meets with top national security officials and flips through baseball cards of bad guys, greenlighting drone strikes with an arbitrary point of the finger. Clearly the former Constitutional lawyer must be dyslexic, because he thinks that you are presumed guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around. Also, seeing that these hits are based primarily on intelligence reports that are not vetted by any congressional oversight, I do hope nobody is throwing Obama a Curveball.

Actually, check that, it would appear the al-Majala massacre was just that, a curveball by way of faulty intelligence – and Obama whiffed. But I’m sure he was just doing the best he could with what he had. Mistakes happen. I mean, maybe he just pointed to the wrong baseball card because he was too busy working on his dance moves for the Ellen DeGeneres Show.

While it’s all fun and games for armchair government officials, for those serving on the front lines of war, it’s dead serious. Yet since our media has been bought like a cheap suit, the citizenry isn’t privy to instances where the likes of Seal Team Six pick bullets out of the skulls of innocent victims in a special ops raid gone bad so as not to be held culpable for murder. Nope, in a world where fluffy disinformation is rife and the fetishist military-industrial complex runs amok in all its glory, the Gardez massacre got zero fucking traction by news outlets.

Preeminent war exercised through a permanent arms and intelligence industry, in theory, is supposed to stymie future wars. But whether it’s special operations in the dark of night or drones used via the disposition matrix, there is no such thing as a surgical and precise war. As the anti-war activist meme goes, bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity.  Make no mistake about it, we invade countries to harvest their resources, build bases and gain a geopolitical foothold against other superpowers like Russia.

Here’s a rule of thumb: whenever politicians promise their efforts are good and just when it comes to military action, you can be damn sure they have something up their sleeve. That is the simple fact.

And that is precisely why we shouldn’t just trust them.

Yet while officials of yesteryear had the decency to button up their hegemony and jingoism in some semblance of reality and reason, like Eisenhower, nowadays officials just flaunt it braggadocio-style and care not about the ramifications of their actions. The likes of Obama and Alexander have zero compunction when it comes to the actual cost of war because both of them have been deluded by their own power and prestige as indispensable do-gooders in the world.

A similar delusion was enjoyed by Roman elites. They too dedicated their glory to games and reenactments of old battles in the Colosseum; meanwhile they crumbled within, due to a morally bankrupt autocrat and defanged Senate. Sound familiar?

Written by Mike Micklow for Media Roots