National Bird Page #4

into the classified.

And what you're disclosing

that hasn't been out

there is the ill effect in

the horrible negative effect

that this has had on the

actual people doing the work.

And on the innocent

people being blown up.

And the shaky legal reasoning.

I mean all three of these

are the perfect storm

of this cluster-f*** that we

call it the drone program.

From Pacifica, this

is Democracy Now.

America does not take

strikes to punish individuals.

We act against

terrorists who pose

a continuing and imminent

threat to the American people.

And when there are

no other governments

capable of effectively

addressing the threat.

ANCHORWOMAN (ON TV): In a major

policy address on Thursday,

President Obama defended the

secret overseas drone war,

but said the United

States cannot

continue waging what he

described as a boundless

global war on terror.

Obama's comments came one day

after Attorney General Eric

Holder confirmed US drone

strikes have killed four US

citizens in Yemen and Pakistan.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:

(ON TV):
Simply put,

these strikes have saved lives.

Moreover, America's

actions are legal.

We were attacked on 9/11.

Within a week,

Congress overwhelmingly

authorized the use of force.

The people would

defend drones, and defend

the way that they're used.

They always say,

you know, they...

They protect American lives by

not putting them in harm's way.

But what they really do is

they just embolden commanders.

They embolden decision makers

because there is no threat.

There is no immediate

consequence.

They can do the strike,

and they can potentially

kill this person that

they're so desperate to get

and to eliminate because

of how dangerous...

Potentially dangerous...

They could be to US.

But if it just so happens that

they don't kill that person

or there's some other people

involved in the strike,

and you get killed

as well. You know,

there's no consequence for it.

When it comes to

high value targeting,

every mission is to go

after one person at a time.

But anybody else that's

killed in that strike

is just blanketly assumed

to be an associate

of the targeted individual.

So as long as they

can reasonably

identify that all the people in

the field of view of the camera

are military aged males...

Meaning anybody who is believed

to be of age 16 or older...

They are a legitimate target

under the rules of engagement.

If that strike occurs

and kills all of them,

they just say that

they got them all.

[crowd booing]

WOMAN:
OK, we'll take one

more question for John McCain.

Doesn't McCain have a daughter

that's of military age?

CROWD:
Oh, good idea,

send his daughter.

Yeah. How about sending your

daughter, John. What about that?

DANIEL:
People often

times get mixed

up in the anti-drone movement.

Trying to say that we

should just ground drones

and we just eliminate

drones from our lexicon

and never allow them

to exist in this world.

It's just too dangerous.

And I don't necessarily

agree with them

because drones are going

to be a part of our life

here pretty soon.

They're going to be...

Most likely they're

going to be doing things

that we were only able to do

with people in a plane before.

They're gonna be like dusting

crops, or planting seeds,

or are doing

humanitarians surveillance

to... during floods

and disasters...

To try and locate victims.

You know, they're

gonna be there.

But there's also that

other dangerous side

to them that makes

war so easy and so

convenient and so simple

that the people who have access

to this technology and access

to this capability just say,

well, why wouldn't I use this?

It's too easy.

The most disturbing thing

about my involvement in drones

is the uncertainty if anybody

that I was involved in kill

or capture was civilian or not.

There's no way of knowing.

LISA:
There's a bomb,

they'd drop it. It explodes.

Then what?

Does somebody go down there and

asked for somebody's driver's

license?

Excuse me sir, can

I have your driver's

license to see who you are?

I mean, does that happen?

How do we know?

How is it possible to know

who ends up living or dying?

WOMAN:
So folks, welcome

to the Commonwealth Club.

We have the great privilege

tonight to have a chance

to talk with General

Stanley McChrystal, who

had a very distinguished

34 year career

in the American military.

His last assignment

was as the commander

of the International

Security Assistance Force

in Afghanistan.

Won't you, Commonwealth

Club members,

join me in welcoming

Stan McChrystal.

[applause]

STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL: Think

about today's world,

and you can get information

from everywhere in real time.

You can talk to anyone

in your organization.

In my situation awareness...

From what we would call it...

We had about 12

screens on the wall,

and they were all showing

operations in real time...

Full motion video we called it.

Like, live TV from Predator.

Unmanned, aerial vehicles

above them.

So we could watch every

one of our operators

land in a helicopter, get out of

a vehicle, move on the target.

And because of a

system we set up

that went through

our secure internet,

we could hear every

radio transmission.

And if I was

sitting in Baghdad,

I could hear radio transmissions

from a raid in Afghanistan.

And if I wanted to,

I could reach down

and talk to Sergeant

X on the ground,

on an objective in Afghanistan.

Now I never did that,

but the technology

now allows you to do that.

So the first thing to

understand is that's deceptive.

It's seductive and deceptive

because if you see things

in two dimension, you get

the opinion that you're

at 10,000 feet, you

see this photograph,

you know what's going on.

You don't know what's

going on. You know

what you see in two dimensions.

[chattering]

Lisa?

L-I-S-A?

Yep.

And I'm...

Go on with the question, please.

OK, so I'm very curious.

I understand that

you're a little

wary about the drone program.

And I'm wondering what your

views of the program are.

Yeah. I think drones are here

to stay and they're necessary.

But you have to understand

how people pursue things.

So it's one thing to do things,

but it's another to anger

a population in the process.

So I think you've got to

make the value decision.

You gotta say... in each

case you gotta make

the decision... is it worth it?

Because you are going to create

some ill-will in the process.

I also think we need to

explain it to the world better.

But again I'm not one of

those people who thinks

it's not gonna be around.

I mean, technology...

- Oh, no.

Doesn't go back.

It doesn't... yeah,

once it's out of the bag.

It's out of the bag.

And it's not immoral or moral,

but it has to be understood.

And it has to be

described to people,

and it has to be carefully used.

I just think it's

that important.

Well, I just want

to say thank you.

I read your book and

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes