By Any Means Necessary: Using a Graphic Novel to Get More People Talking About Drones

I'm digging into Verax: The True History of Whistleblowers, Drone Warfare, and Mass Surveillance by Pratap Chatterjee and Khalil.

(Shoutout to Eastwind Books of Berkeley for featuring the book and inviting the authors to a public event in February.)

I've decided to read a chapter a day and share some some comments.

Get a copy and read along with me!


Chapter One

Aha! Putting two and two together. The author Pratap Chatterjee is (at the time the book begins) with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism -- the prime source of information on what's really happening with drone warfare -- especially civilian victims of drone attacks.

Main takeaway for me from Chapter One: the number of outlets of all different types that need to work together to get the word out to the general population about the carefully crafted hidden nature of modern warfare!

(Very "meta"! Verax itself is a demonstration of that fact!)

Bonus reading: search for content on mainstream media response to the problem of drones


Chapter Two

Remember when everyone was up in arms about the NSA?

Main takeaway for me from Chapter Two: I've been paying attention to how out of hand surveillance and information technology are getting ... in theory ... but I (and all of us) need to start to deal with it seriously as part of our daily routine. Starting right now ....

Bonus reading: another tale of scientists who did work for the government and then expected the government to be grateful for their warnings: Unfinished Business in Chicago (Nuclear disarmament, that is)

Chapter Three

True, true, true . . .

Main takeaway for me from Chapter Three: I flashed back to CODEPINK's 2012 "Drone Summit: Killing and Spying by Remote Control" in Washington, DC. That's where I saw Shazad Akbar speak, and it was after that that I came home determined to Make Drone Killing 100% VISIBLE!

Bonus reading: There was a period in 2014 when it seemed as if members of Congress might succeed in getting the US government to come clean with the facts on drone killing.


Chapter Four

It's all about software? That makes it hard for most ordinary citizens to get interested in. (And that's exactly the way the government likes it . . . . )

Main takeaway for me from Chapter Four: I know a little bit about tech . . . AND . . . every day I crawl a little further away from it, because it is so "boring." We need to do anything we can to get people to care about how technology is being used.

Bonus reading: Give science fiction a chance . . . These classics are painfully relevant today ("science fact"): 1984 . . . I, Robot . . . Ender's Game . . . Hunger Games . . . .


Chapter Five

Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200. Go directly to watch CITIZENFOUR.


Chapter Six

Well this was supposed to be a paced read of a chapter a day but it's now getting into the breaking of the Snowden revelations (per CITIZENFOUR) and pretty un-put-downable . . . .

(Oh, and a line spoken by Snowden in CITIZENFOUR that made me feel sheepish about my book recommendations two chapters back: "It's not science fiction. It's happening right now . . . . ")


Chapter Seven

Reading this chapter (and watching CITIZENFOUR) brought back memories of when the Snowden story first broke. At that time, it felt to me as if he was living what Jesus experienced -- the risk, the fear . . . . (I called him "The 365-Day Man.") We're coming up on Holy Week this year and I think it is worth reflecting on what it means in today's world to go up against Empire.

By the way, I thought Khalil's illustrations in this chapter were a great example of how comics can be used to convey the spatial and temporal relationships between a complicated combination of events.

About to break the Snowden story . . . in Verax . . . .

Chapter Eight

As someone who has spent a lot of time in hotel rooms in Hong Kong, the main feeling I had reading this chapter (and watching CITIZENFOUR) was, "The world is so small. You think you're a world away from them catching up with you, but when they decide to, they can pounce on you in an instant . . . . "

I also thought: "Hong Kong isn't home but at least I can imagine hiding out in Hong Kong. What I can't image is . . . where do you go from there?"


Chapter Nine

How well I remember Edward Snowden's arrival in Russia:

Edward Snowden's Russian lawyer, Anatoly Kucherena

Do you remember the story about Snowden's lawyer and the Dostoevsky novel? I wrote "Edward J. Snowden's lawyer didn't give Snowden a copy of Crime and Punishment to help him better understand himself. He gave it to him so he could try to understand where he came from." (See Reflecting on America's Split Personality (Moscow Airport Summer Reads). )

That was in 2013. In a way, it was the gift that kept on giving. Here I am on Crime and Punishment again, in 2016: Crime Without Remorse: A USA Specialty.


To be continued . . . .


Please share this post . . . .

The Truth About Drones (*NOT* APPROVED by the US Air Force)

National Bird screened this week in Berkeley. It gives first hand accounts of the way the US drone program ruins the lives of drone operators, undermines any real attempt to "defend" the US, and -- most of all -- massacres innocents.

More on
Drone Pilots Speaking Out

National Bird contrasts the "excitement and glory" of Air Force and Army recruiting with the reality people face when they enlist and serve in the US military.

Young people toying with the idea of becoming a drone operator will drop it like a hot potato after seeing what it's done to others. "The drone program gives people PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]," says a former operator in the film, against the background of her attempt to get the VA (Veterans Administration) to acknowledge her condition. "What's so surprising about that?"

Another participant in the drone program -- someone who appears again and again as calm, cool, and collected on screen -- talks in the film about his suicidal ideation. Yikes.

Can't they put it behind them? Yet another former participant in the drone program, who came in person to participate in the discussion period following the screening, put it this way: "Once you're in the drone program, there's no escape."

No wonder more and more former drone operators are speaking out . . . .

U.S. "Precision Strikes" in a Nutshell

National Bird also sums up why the officer class has become more and more skeptical about drones.

All you have to do is watch the film's clip of Gen. Stanley McChrystal going on national TV in Afghanistan to apologize for the February 21, 2010, massacre of innocent Afghans to understand why no being an officer in the US military is becoming a fool's errand.  (In an appearance at a book talk in San Francisco, McChrystal offers the understatement of the year: the drone program needs to do a better job of "not generating ill-will.")

What happens when large numbers of people decide it just isn't a good idea to become an officer because the technology and systems and approaches and policies of the US "defense" establishment are programming massive blowback into everything the military does?

Drone Victims: Just Dots? Just Dirt?

National Bird is dedicated to the people killed in the February 21, 2010, massacre, and it is the recounting of that event that is the most difficult part of the film to watch.

This film is essential watching for anyone who still thinks US air strikes kill "bad guys."


"I lost part of my humanity working in the drone program," says one of the operators profiled in National Bird. She's got company: the drone program is being carried out in the name of everyone in the US; losing our humanity has become a national condition.


Related posts

Leveling Up is the creative work that demonstrates just how thoroughly America's new ways of warfare have become intertwined with the other dominant strands in our culture.

(See Level Up, Step Up, Grow Up, Man Up . . . Wake Up)












Anyone who cares about stopping drone killing should take a friend and go see Good Kill, and then do it again, and again.

(See GOOD KILL: Struggling to Bring the Truth of Drone Killing Out of the Shadows )







Grounded raises tough questions. I was hoping that the play would challenge the idea that killing people with drones is good. It's a reflection of the seriousness of this work that that is just one of the issues it raises; others include our society's willingness to destroy the people who we employ to "serve" ("serve our country," serve us in general), our culture's worship of violence / use of force, and the consequences of pervasive surveillance.

(See Why GROUNDED Is Soaring: Putting Drone Dilemmas In Your Face )

THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING: Drone Pilots Speaking Out

"Why focus on drone attacks?"

I have written over and over again that people who want peace and an end armed conflict need to push back against the "dronification" of war.

The people who want to perpetuate (and worsen) the state of perpetual war that we have become embroiled in love drones -- maximum killing, maximum terrorizing subject populations, maximum overlordship -- all with a minimum of asking for the consent of the US general public.

"Hey: there are no 'boots on the ground'! Isn't that what you wanted?"

(Out of sight, out of mind . . . . )

It turns out there was just one little problem with their scheme.

Operating drones and other robotic killing machines still requires some human operators. And despite all their hopes to the contrary, the military establishment has discovered that human operators have consciences.

"Have we forgotten our humanity in the pursuit of vengeance and
security?" Former Drone Operators Speak Out Against Drone Killings

Two years ago, I attended the CODEPINK Drones Conference in Washington, DC, and saw the ex-drone operator Brandon Bryant speaking out about how killing people with drones is wrong. At the time I thought, "How many more are there like him . . . ?"

Now, three more former drone operators have come forward to blow the whistle on the US drone killing program.

At the end of March, 2016, there will be another major US mobilization against drone warfare. Now I'm wondering, "If there are four, is it possible there are even more? Could there be ten . . . ?"

I encourage everyone to read the stories of the courageous drones whistleblowers, and share this information widely.

It's not just about them; it's not just about drones. It's about whether the people can wrest back control of the killing power of the state from those who think they've found the way to conduct 24/7/326 permawar with no opposition.


Related posts

In my opinion, the reason to focus on drones is this: when we focus on drones, the general public is able to "get," to an unusual extent, the degree to which popular consent has been banished from the process of carrying out state violence. (Sure, it was banished long ago, but the absence of a human in the cockpit of a drone suddenly makes a light bulb go off in people's heads.) It takes some prodding, but people can sense that drone use somehow crosses a line. And that opens up the discussion about how our consent has been eliminated from the vast range of US militarism.

(See "Why focus on drone attacks?")

The U.S. military is desperately trying to beef up the ranks of its drone pilots - to meet a "near insatiable demand for drones." There's only one way that's going to happen, and that's if we let our young people think that it's okay to sign up. The world of military service is more abstracted and foreign than ever. If ever there was a time that young people needed guidance from others about what military service might mean for them, that time is now.

(See Mothers Don't Let Your Children Grow Up to Be Drone Pilots)

Anyone who cares about stopping drone killing should take a friend and go see Good Kill, and then do it again, and again.

(See GOOD KILL: Struggling to Bring the Truth of Drone Killing Out of the Shadows )







Apparently, even though the military is moving as fast as it possibly can toward robotic killing, it still can't get the small number of people it needs to come volunteer and operate the controls.

(See DRONE WARRIORS: Say Hello to the DoD's $125,000 Ostrich Feather)







Today we live in a different world. Without the draft, the people have "checked out." It is like Rome ... the legions do the work of empire and the people are kept happy with bread and circus. (Or Starbucks and "Dancing With the Stars," if you prefer.)



(See Not Your Father's Antiwar Movement )

GOOD KILL: Struggling to Bring the Truth of Drone Killing Out of the Shadows

Ethan Hawke in Good Kill

I saw the movie Good Kill last night.  I have five observations (below) but the most important thing I have to say is: anyone who cares about stopping drone killing should take a friend and go see this movie, and then do it again, and again. Here's why . . . .

(1) You can object to the frame of this movie -- US-centric, macho, militaristic -- but that's in fact where the public is starting from.

 . . . you have to go where the conversation is!

(2) "Good kill." Wait for the scene when the protagonist describe an attack on a home containing the "target" as well as the target's wife and children. And then the attack, hours later, on the funeral . . . .

 . . . because, after all, they're just dots, right?

(3)  "It never ends." It's worth it to get people to this movie just for the one-minute long exchange about the rationale for the "war on terror."

 . . . what happens when preemptive violence is automated?

(4) "Lawful orders."  The movie is all about being a cog in a machine where all you do is follow someone else's orders, and your thinking is not welcomed. Any kid thinking about enlisting in order to break out of the world they're "stuck" in should see this movie. (See In Whose Machine Will YOU Be a Cog?)

 . . . counter-recruitment starts at home

(5) You can object to the fact that the movie focuses on how hard it is on the soldiers. But if we expect soldiers to resist, don't we need to invest the time and energy to empathize with them, too?

. . . the care we owe our veterans

I don't know if everyone in the movement to stop drone killing will agree with me about these observations. Drop a comment below -- pro or con -- and let the drone debate proceed!


TAKE ACTION

Take a friend 

and go see Good Kill.

Then do it again. 

And again.

Food for thought: what kind of movies are seen by LARGE numbers of people . . . ? http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/


Related posts

Grounded raises tough questions. I was hoping that the play would challenge the idea that killing people with drones is good. It's a reflection of the seriousness of this work that that is just one of the issues it raises; others include our society's willingness to destroy the people who we employ to "serve" ("serve our country," serve us in general), our culture's worship of violence / use of force, and the consequences of pervasive surveillance.

(See "Everything Is Witnessed": Searching for "the Guilty" in GROUNDED )


In Chicago on Good Friday, 2013 (March 29), a cast consisting of long-time Chicago antiwar activists was joined by a NY playwright (and defendant in actions against US drone bases), Jack Gilroy, for one of the events kicking off a month-long campaign of anti-drones events across the country: a performance of Gilroy's play, The Predator.

(See "The Predator" in Chicago - Good Friday, 2013 - "A Passion Play for the Drones Era")

Eventually, in large part due to Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, Uncle Tom's Cabin, the United States was converted from a country in which a small number of people thought slavery needed to be ended into a country determined to act to end slavery. This literary work took the movement wide, and it took it deep.

Why is a novel an important tool for creative resistance?


(See Creative Resistance 101: Uncle Tom's Cabin )

7 Ways the Ugly Facts About Drones Are Hidden in Plain Site in UNMANNED

Drone Pilots: Recipe for disaster

Drones.

The damage they do extends to the very people operating those drones. 

The "kill chain" includes a lot more than just uniformed military. 

They're the leading edge of the ubiquitous surveillance in American society.

Now someone's put it all together in a work of popular fiction.

Unmanned is a recent novel by Dan Fesperman, and it focuses on drones. When I first saw it, I thought, "Is this going to glorify what the U.S. government is doing with drones?" But from the first page, it was clear that (a) Fesperman knows what's really going on with drones; and (b) he's not afraid to lay it on the line.

The book opens with a drone strike that kills several children, and Fesperman zeroes right in on what it means for the drone pilot:

"Already he feels the moment taking root in a fallow corner of his imagination -- a seed of torment, a nascent preoccupation." (Unmanned, p. 4)

Unmanned by Dan Fesperman

And Unmanned takes off from there.

There were so many places in this book where I thought, "Holy mackerel - he knows about that? It's as if he was part of the same anti-drone movement that I've been so deeply involved in for the past several years!" 

And then I thought, "Is it possible that ordinary people reading this book will just 'blip' right over all of these facts? Will they think what this book is revealing is just science fiction?"

I think Unmanned is provides an extremely valuable opportunity for us -- if we can get lots of people reading and talking about this book, and if we can get people to take seriously what's described there -- to realize that it is fact, not fantasy.

A novel is a tremendous way to reach a mass audience.

It's time to encourage a base of fans for Unmanned. (And for the sequel to Unmanned. Oh yeah -- it's coming!) We need to use all the tools at our disposal -- blogs, wikis, Facebook, Twitter, and more -- to get people talking about the shocking facts that are right there in black and white in this highly readable book.

Here are a just few footnotes to kick the project off.  Please help build this conversation with further comments about Unmanned on this blog post and elsewhere!

(1) - p. "Creech Air Force Base, a bustling little place tucked against barren mountains, a mere forty miles from Vegas."

(2) - p. 57 and throughout - contractor IntelPro - a subtle reference to a hallowed tradition of surveillance and repression of dissent in the U.S.: COINTELPRO

(3) - p. "Because if you're not acting officially, then who needs a warrant? . . . read the PATRIOT act."

(4) - p. 164 "One of probably at least a hundred worldwide chapters of a bunch of tinkerers and geeks known as DIY Drones."

(5) - p. 174 "Right now the FAA is choosing six nationwide test sites."

(6) - p.190 " . . . the Global Hawk drone that crashed near Salisbury, Maryland, just a few months ago."

(7) - p. 234 "He set the drone on the coffee table, and they couldn't help but stare at it. Smaller than a butterfly, or even a hummingbird."

TAKE ACTION:

* Read Unmanned

* Add comments to this post and others to 

encourage discussion of Unmanned.

* Introduce Unmanned to a book club or 

activist group where you live.

Related posts

Hmmmm . . . it seems like the facts are right there in the open. Do people think they are exaggerated?  Or are they too wrapped up in the man-to-man intrigue (watch out Jack! he's coming up behind you!) to be troubled by the real "clear and present danger"?

(See THE UGLY FACTS IN "RED OCTOBER": And You Thought the Nuclear Threat Was Hush-Hush )

Re-reading George Orwell's 1984 recently made me see at least 15 ways 2013 is like the world he describes in the book . . . .

(See 2013 = 1984 ? )











 

Eventually, in large part due to Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, Uncle Tom's Cabin, the United States was converted from a country in which a small number of people thought slavery needed to be ended into a country determined to act to end slavery. This literary work took the movement wide, and it took it deep.

Why is a novel an important tool for creative resistance?


(See Creative Resistance 101: Uncle Tom's Cabin )

A big Hollywood production of Ender's Game is scheduled for release on November 1. It's a perfect opportunity for us to ask: Are we happy seeing our schools turned into "Battle Schools"?

(See "Ender's Game" and the Militarization of Youth: Can We Talk About This? )

Why Air Shows Are a Very Effective Place to Protest Drone Killing and Drone Surveillance

 Coming off our experience this past weekend once again protesting against drone killing, drone surveillance, and related acts of militarism at the Chicago Air and Water Show, I am more confirmed than ever in my view that air shows are a very effective place to get our message out to the public.

I should start by saying that the Chicago event is a free public event that takes place on public space along the Chicago lakefront, so it is especially suitable for public speech.  Understanding that other venues may not afford the all of the same characteristics of the Chicago event, I offer several observations:

Chicago Air and Water Show

(1) The perfect nexus

When the war planes are roaring overhead, it is very easy for people to understand why you are there talking about war and weapons of war.

This is very different than the situation we so often encounter trying to speak to people on a street corner, where people rush on by, eager to get on with their busy lives.

There's nothing like an F-22 coming in low over the reviewing stand to focus people's attention on the problem of war.

2012: Rev. Loren McGrail leads a discussion

(2) The opportunity to talk to people

People come out to air shows to spend the day, often bringing their whole family. They're curious, and they've got the time to talk.

At our protests at the Chicago Air and Water Show, we've displayed a 1/5-size replica of a Reaper drone. That's a conversation starter, if there ever was one!

And there's no shortage of people to talk to: over a million at the 2-day Chicago Air and Water Show, for instance.

To paraphrase Willy Sutton: protest at air shows . . . 'cause that's where the people are!

Guide to the protest at the 2012 Chicago Air and Water Show

(3) Every air show needs a handout

We realized that the Chicago Air and Water Show  doesn't provide a program book for attendees. So we print one and distribute it.

This year, we printed a 2-sided 17x11 sheet that folded to become a program book about the problem of drone assassinations, rendition flights, and other aspects of U.S. militarism, and distributed them to attendees.

(You can read the text of our 2014 Chicago Air and Water program book on the website of the Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo.)

2014: "Anti-war activists slam Boeing’s sale of arms to Israel"

(4) The press shows up

We've found that the press comes to these events, and covers our activities -- especially if we do good press work in advance.

In many locations, the annual air show is a recurring story for the press, and they want to know what's new this year.

More at #GazainChicago

(5) We make our own press

We rely on a broad spectrum of media to get our message out.

It's extremely valuable to integrate our message into the social media relating to the air show.

2014: "During a demonstration against Boeing, protestors held a die-in at North Ave. beach, where
spectators came to watch the Air & Water Show." | Nader Ihmoud, PalestineinAmerica.com

(6) Room to practice creative nonviolence

One of the great things about the Chicago Air and Water Show is that there is space and time for us to practice an array of creative nonviolence.

This year our presence featured a die-in as well as food distribution by Food Not Bombs.

Two years ago, we featured a group of Buddhists doing meditation.

And there's room for multiple peace and justice groups to come do their thing side-by-side.

2012: Members of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship invited onlookers
to join them in silent meditation.

(7) A chance to learn and improve

For better or worse, air shows come back to our cities year after year. They're like clockwork.

That gives us an opportunity to look closely at our experience each year, think about what worked well and what needs improvement, and come back and do an even better job the next year.


Major air shows - Fall 2014

East
Cleveland, OH
Mt. Clemens, MI
Virginia Beach, VA
Daytona Beach, FL
Memphis, TN
Jacksonville, FL
Rome, GA
Pensacola, FL
Houston, TX

West
Sacramento, CA
Salinas, CA
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Reno, NV
Pearl Harbor - Hickham, HI

More fall 2014 air shows


Related posts

Year after year, hundreds of thousands of people from Chicago and the surrounding area gather on the lakeshore to watch aerial displays by an array of planes. Most don't suspect that they are being subjected to an intense propaganda effort by multiple branches of the U.S. military.  The Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo views this as a perfect opportunity to engage with the public and enlist them in the growing movement against U.S. war, torture, surveillance, and other crimes.  We will join activists from many other peace and justice groups who have had a growing presence at this event in recent years.

(See August 16-17: Protest U.S. Kidnapping, Torture, and Drone Assassinations at the 2014 Chicago Air and Water Show Protest )


July 2014 - Many organizations from across the city joined the call by Anti-War Committee – Chicago, Jews for Justice in Palestine, U.S. Palestinian Community Network and 8th Day Center for Justice: Protest Boeing Death Machines in Gaza: Demand Chicago Drop Boeing from Air and Water Show!

(See No Drones Illinois Endorses Call to Drop Boeing from Chicago Air and Water Show)

A large contingent participated in creative resistance activities at the 2012 Air and Water Show.

(See Taking the NO DRONES! Message to the Masses at Chicago's Air & Water Show for full details.)








"Overall, a great success," said David Soumis. "We had a lot of people riding by in cars, buses, trucks, and golf carts. A lot of thumbs up, a few one finger salutes, a lot of questioning glares, and tons of people that could only see the hood of their car."

(See Welcome to Oshkosh! (got drones?) )








My jaw dropped when they opened the trailer and I saw the four KnowDrones model drone fuselages resting on foam cushions, with their wings neatly strapped to the front wall of the trailer. "These are some very, very serious people," I said to myself.

(See Nationwide: Getting SERIOUS About STOPPING the Drones Menace )

"Why focus on drone attacks?"

Drones: serving man. (Or . . . ?)

The months of April and May saw a large number of protests against the U.S. program of targeted killing with drones, and progress in challenging that program in Congress.

An interesting question was raised on a listserve:  "Why focus on drone attacks?" The questioner -- a dedicated peace activist with an inquiring mind -- explained that he felt a bit perplexed:

As far as I understand, these drone attacks cause damage similar to that caused by other kinds of weapons – cruise missiles, air-to-surface missiles fired by planes or helicopters, gravity bombs, artillery.

I don’t think that the anti-drone campaign would be pleased if the drone attacks stopped, but the same level of U.S. attacks were carried out by other weapons – say manned flights carrying missiles. Would that be better in some way? If it would be better, I ask you to explain to me how or why it would be better.

Here's how I responded:

In my opinion, the reason to focus on drones is this: when we focus on drones, the general public is able to "get," to an unusual extent, the degree to which popular consent has been banished from the process of carrying out state violence. (Sure, it was banished long ago, but the absence of a human in the cockpit of a drone suddenly makes a light bulb go off in people's heads.) It takes some prodding, but people can sense that drone use somehow crosses a line. And that opens up the discussion about how our consent has been eliminated from the vast range of US militarism.

I'm curious to know if other people agree with me.  What is your experience? Is the movement against drones helping to build consciousness about the deeper issues of consent?  Or are we being sidetracked by paying too much attention to other aspects of drone warfare?

Please join the conversation.

Related posts

Operating drones and other robotic killing machines still requires some human operators. And despite all their hopes to the contrary, the military establishment has discovered that human operators have consciences.

(See THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING: Drone Pilots Speaking Out)



Today we live in a different world. Without the draft, the people have "checked out." It is like Rome ... the legions do the work of empire and the people are kept happy with bread and circus. (Or Starbucks and "Dancing With the Stars," if you prefer.)

(See Not Your Father's Antiwar Movement )

Year after year, hundreds of thousands of people from Chicago and the surrounding area gather on the lakeshore to watch aerial displays by an array of planes. Most don't suspect that they are being subjected to an intense propaganda effort by multiple branches of the U.S. military.  The Chicago Coalition to Shut Down Guantanamo views this as a perfect opportunity to engage with the public and enlist them in the growing movement against U.S. war, torture, surveillance, and other crimes.  We will join activists from many other peace and justice groups who have had a growing presence at this event in recent years.

(See August 16-17: Protest U.S. Kidnapping, Torture, and Drone Assassinations at the 2014 Chicago Air and Water Show Protest )

If the public will join us in asking the question "Who decides?" about drone executions, I believe they will rapidly come to realize that they are utterly dissatisfied with what the government is saying.

(See Who Decides? (When Drones are Judge, Jury, and Executioner) )

Now comes the messy part. We need many more people to engage with with the emotions aroused by drones. This is going to involve many different groups of people, engaging with this topic in many different ways: churches and faith groups . . . young people . . . . The point is: the discourse on drones is going to get out of our hands. It isn't always going to go the way we want. But the important thing is that many, many people are going to be talking about it in the ways that feel appropriate to them.

 (See Democracy vs. Drones)

Elaine Scarry demonstrates that the power of one leader to obliterate millions of people with a nuclear weapon - a possibility that remains very real even in the wake of the Cold War - deeply violates our constitutional rights, undermines the social contract, and is fundamentally at odds with the deliberative principles of democracy.

(See Reviews of "Thermonuclear Monarchy: Choosing Between Democracy and Doom" by Elaine Scarry)

Drone Killings: Come Clean

Lots of people are trying to deduce the extent of U.S. drone
killings. Why doesn't the U.S. just come clean?

How are we going to make progress in ending the menace of drones in the next few months -- i.e. in the first half of 2014?

We are going to have to carefully assess our audience, our messages, and where we put our time, energy, and resources. We need to be alert to what's happening in the broader culture.

It is also important that we are honest with ourselves about the moment we are in.  Is there adequate awareness of the issue? Have people started to become dissatisfied with what the government is doing? Are people ready to embrace the alternative(s) we are proposing?


Awareness: "What's a drone?"

In 2013, a much larger portion of the American public woke up to drones and what's being done with them.

Nonetheless, there are still people who ask, "What's a drone?"

NYC campaign by Essan Attia

My belief is that we will have a continuing need for building awareness.  I believe that it is important to the movement to find ways to increase awareness as efficiently as possible - i.e. using high-leverage communications mechanisms.  We need to accomplish as much as we possibly can without using up all our time, energy, and resources on this part of the campaign.

For instance, I wonder about: in a city like Chicago, would we be better off organizing a big teach-in? Or putting 100,000 stickers on lampposts that say "Drone Strikes: Out of Control"? Which would build more awareness?


Dissatisfaction: It's not just the secrecy ... it's the secrecy, the evasion, the lying, the spying ....

The heart of the campaign, in my opinion, should be find the Obama administration's greatest area of vulnerability with the public and focus on that.

Alternate caption: Same Spying, Different Day

Clearly, the public is outraged by NSA surveillance. Obama's weak response to this is leaving people more and more dissatisfied.  From every indication, this situation is going to worsen with each passing day.

The deeper impact is that people are realizing, "I've got zero protection from government surveillance -- they know everything about me -- and everything they do is a secret."  This pair of complementary realizations -- surveillance and invasion of privacy on the one hand, and secrecy and deceit on the other -- is likely to create a spiraling sense of cynicism and dissatisfaction.

The movement to stop drone surveillance and warfare can take advantage of this sentiment with a simple demand such as "Drone Killings: Come Clean!" This would play into the opinion that Americans already hold about the government: they're hiding the truth from us, and the truth is probably pretty bad.

Jan 16, 2014 - Congress keeps secret drone program in hands
of CIA. We think. We don't know for sure. Because
the measure is included in the classified annex to the
budget bill. (Or so it is rumored.)

And they are hiding the truth.  The United Nations has called for a full accounting of U.S. drone killings. The U.S. government is stonewalling.

The more the government refuses to "come clean" -- and they will refuse; it's in their nature -- the more dissatisfied members of the general public will become.

Imagine if every candidate who was campaigning for a House or Senate seat in 2014 was forced to take a position on the question, "Do you endorse the call for the Administration to come clean about its record of drone killings?"  It's a simple yes or no question.  If the answer is yes, then we have an ally.  If the answer is "no" -- or even "it depends" or "I don't understand the question" -- then the candidate is saddled with the label "sides with the Administration on hiding truth about drones."

NOTE: the fact that a large number of people have labored to do the best possible job of assembling the facts of the US drone killings despite U.S. government concealment -- see, for instance, this startling infographic illustrating drone strikes in Pakistan -- does not diminish the need for the U.S. government, itself, to come clean and publish the full and authoritative facts.  Rather, it serves to emphasize how shocking it is that the government continues to duck this obligation!

And, of course, we will make it clear that the reason the Administration is hiding truth about drones is that they don't have a satisfactory answer for how decisions about drone strikes are made.  As we have known all along, we need the public to think about how crummy the whole drone program is, and then they will be ready to be on our side. The best way to get them really thinking is to shine a spotlight on the secrecy, evasiveness, and deceit involved in the U.S. drone program.


Embracing the Alternative: Ground the drones

We are not yet at the point that enough Americans are dissatisfied with the solutions being offered by the government.  But we could get there soon.

Sunset

When people realize that the U.S. government doesn't have an acceptable answer to the question "Who decides?" . . . and when they realize that the U.S. government will never "come clean" about its drone killings  . . . they'll be ready to listen to the proposal offered by the movement against drones.

My expectation is that, when that time comes, our proposal will be: GROUND THE DRONES!

By that time, it will be the only proposal people will view as trustworthy.


Related posts

A new U.N. report makes it clear that the U.S. has to report fully on all its drone attacks.

(See 2014: The Year of Transparency (for U.S. Drone Use)?)









One thing's for sure: there's a whole passel of advisers talking to Barack Obama every day about how things are progressing in key districts like the Illinois 12th. (And the Michigan 1st. And the Minnesota 8th. And ... ) I'd like to be a fly on the wall when they tell him the candidate is complaining about the latest anti-drones campaign there. ("Why the hell are there protesters at my appearance in Carbondale with signs that say, 'When will the DEMs stop being the party of Drone Execution and Murder' ???")

(See DRONES: Let's Give Obama a Political Choice He Can Understand in 2014 ) 

If the public will join us in asking the question "Who decides?" about drone executions, I believe they will rapidly come to realize that they are utterly dissatisfied with what the government is saying.

(See Who Decides? (When Drones are Judge, Jury, and Executioner) )

One issue that has a key place in the midterm elections in 2014, I believe, is surveillance.  With each passing day, I am hearing more and more people say that the surveillance issue is something that a wide spectrum of people are deeply upset about. That includes people on the right as well as people on the left -- people who don't usually talk with each other, much less work together for positive change!

(See The Surveillance Issue: The Fulcrum of the 2014 Election?)