FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE
CONTACTS: Ellen Barfield, 410-908-7323
21 June,
2012
Jules Orkin, 201-566-8403
Joan Pleune, 718-855-2581
Beverly Rice, 646-335-2404
Four Defendants Go On Trial 24 June
at DeWitt, NY Town Court
for Opposing Reaper Drone War Crimes at Hancock Air Base
At 9am, Wednesday 24 June, 2015,
Ellen Barfield of Baltimore, MD, Jules Orkin of Bergenfield,
NJ, Joan Pleune and Beverly Rice
of New York City, defended by Attorney Lewis B. Oliver
of Albany, NY, will begin trial
before a six-person jury in the DeWitt, NY Town Court of
Judge Zavaglia, charged with 2
counts of disorderly conduct, one count of trespass,
and one count of obstructing
government administration.
Over 2 years ago, on 28 April,
2013, the four were arrested with 27 others for allegedly
blocking the driveway leading to
the main gate of the Hancock Reaper drone base on
East Molloy Rd, town of DeWitt.
The arrestees that day are
members and colleagues of Upstate Drone Action, a grass-
roots group which calls public
attention to the killing and terrorizing of Afghan civilians
by Hancock's 174th Attack Wing of
the NY National Guard, and urges drone operators
to examine their consciences.
Upstate Drone Action, along with
colleague organizations Veterans For Peace and the
Granny Peace Brigade to which the
defendants belong, believe the killing is immoral
and illegal, violating the United
Nations Charter, and international treaty laws which
under Article 6 of the US
Constitution are part of the supreme law of the United States
and supercede local and Federal
law.
Since 2010 anti-drone activists
have experienced nearly 200 arrests and numerous jail
sentences at Hancock for scrupulously-nonviolent protests, as part of a national campaign
sentences at Hancock for scrupulously-nonviolent protests, as part of a national campaign
to resist drones at a number of
bases.
###
###
A Yemeni man looks at graffiti showing a US drone. (photo: Yahya Arhab/EPA)
America's Drone Policy Is All Exceptions and No Rules
By
Trevor Timm, Guardian UK
21 June 15
The drone strikes in Yemen are
a reminder that the ‘rules’ are virtually meaningless. That sets a terrifying
precedent for the next president
That’s what we learned this week, when Nasir al-Wuhayshi,
an alleged leader of al-Qaida, died in
a strike in Yemen. While this time the CIA seems to have guessed
right, apparently the drone operators didn’t even know at the time who they were aiming at -
only that they thought the target was possibly a terrorist hideout. It’s what’s
known as a “signature” strike, where the CIA is not clear who its drone strikes
are killing, only that the targets seem like they are terrorists from the sky.
Signature strikes has led to scores of civilians being
killed over the past decade, including two completely innocent hostages less than
two months ago. It’s a way of killing that’s been roundly condemned
by human rights organizations and that some members of Congress have tried to outlaw. The
incredible dangers behind such a policy are obvious. Here’s how the New York Times described it
when the White House’s ‘kill list’ was first revealed in 2012:
The joke was that when the CIA sees “three guys doing jumping jacks,” the
agency thinks it is a terrorist training camp, said one senior official. Men
loading a truck with fertilizer could be bombmakers – but they might also be
farmers, skeptics argued.
It was so controversial that, in 2013, President Obama
announced new “rules” for drone
strikes that tightened requirements for when the CIA or any
government agency could attempt to kill someone and were, in theory, meant to
be the end of signature strikes. One of the rules was that a drone target had
to be an “imminent threat” to the US and there had to be a near certainty that
civilians would not be killed. (One would assume it’s close to impossible to
call someone an “imminent threat” when you don’t even know who that person is.)
But it has become increasingly clear that the “rules”
are virtually meaningless and the Obama administration is setting a terrifying
precedent for the next president who can change or expand them on a whim.
After the “rules” were
announced in 2013, the Associated Press reported that the US was
going to stop signature strikes everywhere, including in Pakistan. Then we
found out, through the Wall Street Journal, that actually, no, the president issued a secret waiver for Pakistan
and part of the rules didn’t apply there. Now just this week, we’ve learned from the Washington Post
that Obama, at some point, issued another waiver on the “imminent” rule for
Yemen, allowing the CIA to continue signature strikes there unabated. According
to their report: “US officials insisted that there was never a comprehensive
ban on the use of signature strikes in that country” to begin with.
In other words, a key part of the drone “rules” Obama
laid out in public don’t apply in the two countries where the CIA conducts
virtually all of its drone strikes. Oh, and the “imminent threat” rule doesn’t apply in Afghanistan either,
the only other country where the US military is regularly conducting its
strikes.
As is typical with the US government’s extrajudicial
killing policy, there was no public debate about any of the changes to the
supposed rules, or even announcement that they ever changed - only an
unofficial leak to a journalist after the latest killing.
Beyond the enormous human rights consequences related
to such a dangerous policy, these types of strikes backfire on the United
States, sowing hatred in the populations of bombed
countries and breeding sympathy for al-Qaida where there was none
before. This is why, as the Washington Post suggested in a separate article this week,
drone strikes might be as effective at helping the spread of al-Qaida as
killing its leaders.
It was only two months ago when a US drone accidentally
killed two innocent hostages, one of whom was a US citizen, via a signature
strike. At the time, President Obama publicly apologized and vowed to
deliver a “full” investigation - even while absurdly refusing to acknowledge it
was a drone strike that actually killed them. What happened to that
investigation? If the government’s extreme secrecy surrounding drones is any
indication, we’ll probably never know. It’ll likely be locked in a safe with a
classified stamp on it, destined never see the light of day. In its place, the
CIA has a new example to only extend its grip on extrajudicial killing.
©
2015 Reader Supported News
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-366-1637; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives."
Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment