Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Opposing the CIA's Expanded Drone Program - Dennis Kucinch speaks out

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 20, 2012, 2:24 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic (5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHYCcECZ1FI&list=UUXbImodItKyuPmbFVyPar1A&index=1&feature=plcp

"The recent news that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is requesting a significant expansion in its fleet of armed drones threatens to shroud the combat drone program in even further secrecy. At the behest of the Administration, the CIA has been conducting targeted killings abroad absent any oversight and with zero accountability. Increasing the CIA's role in those targeted killings raises further questions about the underlying legality the attacks. It also raises the question of whether it is even appropriate for an intelligence agency to act as a paramilitary force. Paradoxically, it is the Administration that is pursuing this policy, but it will be the CIA that holds the blame if things go wrong.

"The Administration's 'trust us' legal defense of its drone strikes are not enough to assure the Congress, the American people and the international community that such strikes are legal.

"A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on the necessity of and the impact of drones on U.S. national security is clearly in order. Are drones necessary; are they wise; do they make a bad situation even worse?

"Lacking an NIE estimate, approval of the request for more drones would be tantamount to doubling down on the dismissal of international law.

"Drone attacks do not occur in a vacuum. They result in very real and very grave consequences on our relationships with other countries and on civilian populations. The more innocent people we kill, the more enemies we will create."

65 Comments

65 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 8 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

Report : "Living Under Drones : Death, Injury and Trauma from US Drone Practices in Pakistan", from The Stanford Law School and New York University's School of Law :

Thank you very much for your diligent posting in this matter 'Trev'.

fiat lux, fiat pax, fiat justitia ...

[-] 6 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Everyone should read the story of survivor, 14 year-old, Faheem Quereshi, which begins at the bottom of page 68.

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

Peter Bergen, a CNN reporter who is often on the ground in Pakistan, reported on the “efficiency” of the drone attacks. He wrote,

  • "Since it began in 2004, the drone campaign has killed 49 militant leaders whose deaths have been confirmed by at least two credible news sources. While this represents a significant blow to the militant chain of command, these 49 deaths account for only 2% of all drone-related fatalities.", from ...

  • http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/05/opinion/bergen-obama-drone/index.html .

In a New York Times article entitled “Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will”, investigative reporters Jo Becker and Scott Shane maintained,

Finally, "Why have the children killed by U.S. drones received so little attention ? The drone strikes are no less vicious than the shooting of Malala, and every true victim deserves to be acknowledged. Both the Taliban and the United States government have the blood of children on their hands, and those hands can never be wiped clean", from : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32807.htm .

qui tacet consentire ...

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

All great sources. Thanks. This comment form the ich article says it all: "The West still tolerates the wounding and murder of children when it is done by the United States in the name of the war on terror."

How sad is that?

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

Romoney and Obomber barely touched on any of the these matters in their so called 'debate' last night (22nd,Oct.'12) as they are essentially in agreement about the 'State Sanctioned Terror' that are 'drones'. Thus I append the following article in connection with The NYU / Stanford Report linked to at the top of the thread :

"In the United States, the dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the U.S. safer by enabling “targeted killing” of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts. This narrative is false."

Furthermore, from the report : "U.S. drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted-for harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians, beyond death and physical injury. ... Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves."

Finally to answer your albeit rhetorical question, in two words : 'Extremely Sad' !!

cave - 'bellum se ipsum alet' ...

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

That is a another great article. Thanks. I think when we get to the point that war costs nothing to one side, re: no Americans die when a drone wages an attack instead of soldiers, we reach a very dangerous point as human beings.

From the article: "Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles, and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities."

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

This "very dangerous point" is absolutely reached with "Drone Warfare" and many in The US and worldwide recognise the watershed moment you identify but all we got from 'them' last night was :

spero meliora ...

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

That is a very funny article and I needed the laugh today. Also, humor goes a long way in making sense of things sometimes.

Romney on drones: "And it's widely reported that drones are being used in drone strikes."

Another good excerpt: "Neither Schieffer, nor Romney, nor Obama dared to say anything "radical" like, "A very, very small cut in the defense budget would immediately resolve a large amount of our concern over the economy, would immediately halt all this talk of ending Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defunding public schools, closing post offices, and privatizing health care, because a very, very small cut in the defense budget would give us all the money we need, and more, to keep these things solvent. We're not actually broke, America. We just need to realign our priorities."

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

Also for the 'lulz' : "Mitt Romney annoyed the British by saying that London seemed unprepared for the Olympics. You know, putting his foot in his mouth like that is not very presidential. Vice presidential, sure. Yeah, but NOT presidential." !

"Mitt Romney was attacking Obama about the failing education system & he has a point. The USA is graduating millions of people who are so lacking in basic analytical skills, they are actually seriously considering voting for Mitt Romney." !!

"Mitt Romney’s wife says her husband loves caffeine free Diet Coke. Or as it's known in the Mormon community, the ultimate gateway drug." !!!

"Romney was hoping to energize Republicans by announcing Paul Ryan as his running mate - but that's like trying to spice up a bowl of oatmeal with more oatmeal." and alas, somewhat more prosaically :

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12130-will-hig-owned-e-voting-machines-give-romney-the-white-house .

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Too funny. And, I had heard about the voting machines. At least he's not shy.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

The whole 'voting machine' situation and 'voter suppression' is a dire threat to what is left of US Democracy (demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy ?!). Please also see :

As you point out, Romoney sure ain't "shy" - he's brazen and incorrigible, just like Lyin' Ryan - more 'oatmeal' anyone ?!!

fiat justitia ...

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

LOL! Did you hear about the phony photo op of Ryan and is wife washing clean pots at a soup kitchen? A total fraud. They had done no, zero, work at that kitchen.

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/ohio_soup_kitchen_slams_ryan_photo_op_he_did_nothing/

And, thanks for the links. :)

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

No I hadn't ! However, thanx to your link - I have now !! Worra Lyin' Ryan, Fraudulent Scumbag !!!

From your link : "Ryan made the unscheduled stop after an event at Youngstown State University, and was there for about 15 minutes. But though the pictures taken shows Ryan apparently doing dishes, the food had already been served and everything had already been cleaned before he got there".

The entire situation was not without repercussions tho' and thus :

multum in parvo ...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

I wonder if they ever have regret, politicians, that is?

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

That'd require a conscience and a fully functional human heart, 'bw' - so I'm kinda doubting it !!

For insight into what I mean :

verbum sat sapienti ...

[-] 7 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Kucinich should be running against Obama right now.

[-] 9 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

He is a voice of sanity in an insane world.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I think he still thinks that what people need to do is work

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

People need jobs in order to work and decent jobs to support themselves and their families.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

people can support themselves with money

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

How do they get that money?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

money is invented to facilitate trade of goods and services

currently, the banks do most of the money creating through loans

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

True, but as you say people need money to live, and people get money mostly through working.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I think if the people had a guaranteed basic income

entrepreneurs would work to get that money

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

I think a guaranteed basic income is a good idea, too.

[-] 4 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Forget the guarantee.

The basic wage needs to be indexed to the cost of living.

Even our pensions and unemployment benefits are indexed to the CPI, or Consumer Price Index. Basic training wages for school leavers in Australia are around ten dollars an hour.

[-] 6 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Call it what you want, but we need to ensure that everyone has enough for the basics.

[-] 5 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I agree entirely.

If people are working fulltime, but still need foodstamps to survive, Heuston, we have a problem.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Exactly!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

that is not a problem

the food stamps will have to be subsidized by those that have collected vast amounts of money

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

I want everyone to be able to vote with their dollar

those that want to collect dollars can work to please everybody

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

too bad the people are too consumed to notice

[-] 5 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Exactly. Nor are they outraged that someone like this was gerrymandered out of office! How does this happen in this day and age?

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

No one cares. MSM coverage of Jill was almost nonexistent.

[-] 0 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 1 year ago

Just like my man Ronnie. How come no one would vote them more than Congressmen?

[-] 8 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Ron Paul is sort of a voice of sanity on war, but he is more about not wanting to spend the money on war. Also, he is for a libertarian free-market economy which would be severely damaging for most people.

[-] -2 points by john23 (-272) 1 year ago

I think that's a pretty big misrepresenation of his stance on war. He uses the cost argument for republicans...but i've heard him spend argue the just war principles of christianity and the moral reasons behind it.

I think the free market would be incredibly benefiicial for most people.

[-] -1 points by john23 (-272) 1 year ago

Once again misrepresented...he never said that you should let someone die because they didn't have insurance....the man used to give medical care to patients for free who couldn't afford it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T9fk7NpgIU&t=0m50s

"are you saying we should just let someone die"

answer

"no"

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

LOL! Of course he's not going to come out and say it.

[-] 2 points by john23 (-272) 1 year ago

So are you reading his mind then? Pretty thin argument you got going.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rv0Z5SNrF4

I understand many on this site don't agree with free markets. But because someone does doesn't mean you misrepresent what they're trying to do....or their morals. This guy is built on morals...and wanting to help people. But because his ideologies don't align with yours you choose to demagogue and twist the truth to portray the the man in a different ligth than what is accurate.

The guy has never accepted a dime from lobbyists (because of his morals)....never voted to raise taxes on anyone....refused the federal pension program because he doesn't agree with the morality of the people funding his retirement....believes in social equality for everyone (gays included)...spent much of his life delivering babies....will vote against wars and be outspoken against them even when his own party is in office....his number one campaign contributor was the United States military (he got more than Obama)....he proposed in his budget while running in the primaries to reduce presidential pay to the national average of workers in this country...he ran a balanced campaign budget..he's is one of the most honest politicians in office today and built around his morals. He still refuses to endorse Mitt Romney- his own freaking party nominee because of his morals.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Okay, so ask him one question. Ask him if, before he unleashes his free market capitalist economic system on everyone, if he would agree that everyone, every single person, should be evened out in terms of wealth. That answer would be telling. My guess is he, like most libertarians, would like to protect his own wealth and use the opportunity of a free, unregulated market system to exploit and amass even more wealth. And from what I know of him, he is quite the skilled investor.

[-] 1 points by john23 (-272) 1 year ago

"free, unregulated market system to exploit and amass even more wealth"

The problem is your argument doesn't hold up with historical data. Even today...if you plot countries vs per capita income and their financial freedom (how free market they are) guess what you get? An almost exponential curve showing the more free people are, the more wealth per capita they have. He doesn't support free markets to amass wealth for himself....he supports them because he's studied economies in great detail for most of his life and realizes that on average the more free a society the better off the people are.

If he was trying to promote free markets so he could be all powerful and suck up all the money....seems kind of strange he'd slash presidential pay down to the national average of ordinary citizens....or refuse lobbyist $$$....or donate the portions of his budget not used back to the treasury every year..he's spent a lifetime trying to help the less educated understand why they're getting screwed.

"He is quite the skilled investor"

That just throws a negative connotation around him. He's made money in the market....yes....but do you know how? Not by the derivatives market, not by unsound investments....but by holding his money in precious metals....which boom when the US devalues its currency and prints money. Something he's activily argued against his entire career (printing of money and stealing YOUR wealth)....so once again, he's putting his money where his mouth is. He understands these graphs intricately and speaks out about them all the time on how their screwing the average working person. And people are too stupid to figure it out:

http://hmscoop.com/MoneySupplyvsCommodities.html

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

There is no country on earth that has a truly free market. The closest we have been to that, and the best example, is the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Think Dickensian conditions. Child labor, extreme poverty, long work hours, low wages. It was this "free market" capitalism that brought about the checks and balances that we do have. Now, I'll be the first to agree that the regulations currently in place do not work for everyone and that they are mainly benefiting the wealthy and large corporations, but what we need are regulations that ensure that all people benefit from the economic system, not just those who hold capital.

And, yes I know about his investments in precious metals. He would love to put that all to play in a free market, because he is no dummy, precisely.

[-] 0 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 1 year ago

It's amazing how being a skilled investor has become such a bad word in some circles.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20240) 1 year ago

Oh, yeah, I said that. No. What I said is that he will stand there and talk Austrian economics as if that would be so great for everyone when in fact it would be so great for him! I might have some respect for libertarians if they would agree to even out the wealth of every single American before implementing their free wheeling unregulated economic system. But, I know they'd never do this because the whole point of the free wheeling system is for them to be on top. They know damn well that capitalism always benefits those who have capital first.

[-] 6 points by Shule (1696) 1 year ago

Unfortunately, I think the real problem in the U.S.A. right now is that the majority of the people in the U.S.A. have become too morally bankrupt to vote for anyone like Kucinich right now.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Is the issue about morals or simply non-compus-mentus?

[-] 2 points by Shule (1696) 1 year ago

Probably a combo of both.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Lack of balls.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

"The more innocent people we kill, the more enemies we create"

[-] 2 points by john23 (-272) 1 year ago

A real politician.

[-] 1 points by NVPHIL (664) 1 year ago

I'm I seeing things or did kucinch call obama out on his bomb it if it moves policy.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

A dollar says to a donut Kucinich is voting for Obama. http://tinyurl.com/cwsuh3r

[-] -2 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

Didn't your candidate just boast about expanding the drone strikes?

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Who is my candidate in your mind?

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

Lol. What mind.....

[+] -7 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

OWS candidate is Obama. And you know it.

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Just because the Tea party sold out to the establishment doesnt mean that Occupy does.

Some will vote for Obama. Maybe 1/3. The other 1/3 will be for Jill/Rocky/Ron/Gary. And then that last third would just never even consider humoring a bunch of criminals like that.

Theres your breakdown.

[+] -5 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

And you know this how?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

LOL wow now I'm getting called an Obama supporter. This forum never ceases to amaze me sometimes.

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

LOL ! Don't fret over 'Gr2' as he has major league (x) & L... (ass & elbow) confusion !!

See : http://occupywallst.org/forum/real-debate-tonight/#comment-862848 !!!

verum ex absurdo ...

[+] -6 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

And your Latin impresses no one. Pretentious childishness.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (20614) 1 year ago

Another 'brain-fart' Biggus Dickus ?!!!

temet nosce ...

[+] -4 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 1 year ago

So you are the representative of OWS? I had no idea. Congratulations.

[Removed]