Connect With Us on Twitter
Follow@nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Archive | Drones RSS feed for this section
Is Edward Snowden Captain America? (Spoiler Alert)
7 AprRobert Redford plays his first super-villain, a neo-nazi conspirator in a world where drones, the NSA, and your Obamacare and IRS records are used to predetermine if you are a traitor to the regime who should be taken out, Minority Report style.
National Review didn’t particularly like it, but they didn’t like Ayn Rand or Edward Snowden either. reason magazine (Kurt Loder) liked it better. I give it a solid B as a movie; I’d give its politics at least an A-. Kevin McCarthy said on Fox and Friends Sunday that it was one of the three best movies of the year so far, and urged movie-goers to skip the IMAX or 3D versions (I’d agree, though I did do 3D), and pointed out that the 8 films in the “Avengers” series based on Marvel comix (Thor etc.) have collectively earned $5 billion to date. Tonight the first Captain America movie airs on FX at 5:30 pm eastern (I never saw it so I can’t comment.) I am tempted to offer that if any DC libertarians want to go see it I’d go with them, but it isn’t really good enough for that; though it was good enough that I will now try to catch the first one on cable, at least while I am puttering around the house.
Revenge star Emily VanCamp has a medium size role as the main eye candy after Chris Evans, though Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow remains sexy. Below Sebastian Stan (also cute enough but mainly appears in the film as a killer cyborg), who plays the titular “winter soldier,” waxes philosophical and actually mentions Kurzweil and the singularity – smell him! And discusses Johansson’s other AI type move Her.
Sebastian Stan,The Winter Soldier,Talks “Captain America” with CBR TV from imtk on Vimeo.
Pakistan political party outs alleged CIA station chief, seeks charges over drone strikes
29 NovPakistan political party outs alleged CIA station chief, seeks charges over drone strikes
Dr. Mazari describe her politics on twitter as:
Shireen Mazari
@ShireenMazari1
Anarchist by temperament! CEO Strategic Technology Resources & SSII; back in PTI fold politically!
Islamabad
[PTI Press Release on Miranshah drone attack]
On behalf of PTI, Central Information Secretary PTI, Shireen Mazari, today issued a strong condemnation of the drone attack on Miranshah last night. She said it showed once again that the US has nothing but contempt for Pakistan’s leadership as it continues to assume these leaders will pay mere lip service to demands of stopping drones when in reality they remain subservient to the US.
This new drone attack is a direct test of the Will of the federal government, Mazari stated. She added that the people of Pakistan expect the Prime Minister to stand up to his commitments on drones as well to fulfilling the APC mandate of stopping drone attacks otherwise it will be clear that the present government is following the same duplicitous approach on drones adopted by the previous government.
Mazari said the PTI was now more than ever before convinced that Nawaz Sharif coming to power through a massively rigged election was part of a larger understanding over acceptance of US diktat – an election NRO.
Mazari asserted that the timing of this latest drone attack, on the eve of the new COAS taking over command, is also a hostile intent message to the military leadership.
Once again the US has shown its utter contempt for the people of Pakistan, the repeated national consensus against drones expressed in Parliamentary and APC resolutions and for the successive democratic political leadership of the country, Mazari concluded.
Today’s White House Anti-War Protest
8 SepA Libertarian Party official actually asked me to be sure and photograph any Libertarian Party representative, even myself, at the protest. I didn’t because unlike last week there wasn’t one, other than me. They were all Campaign for Liberty, Young Americans for Liberty, Ron Paul or Rand Paul libertarian Republicans this time. Just the facts, mam.
Michael Grunwald and the moral question of defensive and retaliatory force against statist cheerleaders
20 AugTime’s Michael Grunwald, Who Wants the Government To “Tread on Me,” Also Wants Julian Assange Droned
Time‘s Michael Grunwald is threatening Julian Assange with proposed drone strikes; may Assange take Grunwald out first, sending a drone or hit man to Grunwald’s South Beach (Miami) home, as long as, unlike Grunwald’s hero Obama, he doesn’t also kill Grunwald’s wife Cristina Dominguez and their children?
It’s not hard to find out where he lives. The South Beach property tax records are on line:
MICHAEL GRUNWALD CRISTINA DOMINGUEZ LENOX AVE MIAMI BEACH, FL
Here’s a drone’s eye view of his million dollar home, just off Alton.
Time‘s Michael Grunwald is threatening Julian Assange with proposed drone strikes; may Assange take Grunwald out first, sending a drone or hit man to Grunwald’s South Beach (Miami) home, as long as, unlike Grunwald’s hero Obama, he doesn’t also kill Grunwald’s wife Cristina Dominguez and their children?
It’s not hard to find out where he lives. The South Beach property tax records are on line:
MICHAEL GRUNWALD CRISTINA DOMINGUEZ LENOX AVE MIAMI BEACH, FL
Here’s a drone’s eye view of his million dollar home, just off Alton.
You can rent one down the block at 1420 Lenox for a little over $5,000 a month.
The Ideology Behind Michael Grunwald’s Repugnant Tweet
The Time correspondent wrote, “I can’t wait to write a defense of the drone strike that takes out Julian Assange.”
We’re all better than we are at our worst moments*.
It is nevertheless worth dwelling on his Tweet a moment longer, because it illuminates a type that is common but seldom pegged in America. You see, Grunwald is a radical ideologue. It’s just that almost no one recognizes it. The label “radical ideologue” is usually used to describe members of the John Birch society or Noam Chomsky. We think of radical ideologues as occupying the far right or left. Lately a lot of people seem to think that The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald is a radical (often they wrongly conflate the style with which he expresses his views with their substance).
But Grunwald graduated from Harvard, spent a decade at the Washington Post, and now works as a senior correspondent at Time. How radical could someone with that resume possibly be?
Extremely so.
That doesn’t mean that he’s a bad guy, or that he shouldn’t be a journalist. But as someone who finds Grunwald’s ideology as problematic and wrongheaded as I’m sure he finds aspects of my worldview, I tire of the fact that people who share it are treated as pragmatic centrists, while their critics, whether on the libertarian right or the civil liberties left, are dismissed as impractical ideologues.
Grunwald’s Tweet took a lot of centrists by surprise, as if it was way beyond the pale. And I think it was!
But it didn’t surprise me.
Read the rest at The Atlantic Wire.
Drone strikes kill militants in Yemen; Americans urged to leave
6 Augupdated 6:38 AM EDT, Tue August 6, 2013
A Yemeni soldier mans a checkpoint on a street leading to the US embassy compound in Sanaa on August 4, 2013.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- NEW: UK withdraws staff from British embassy in Yemen, follows U.S. lead
- Sources: Members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula are planning an attack
- The United States has heightened its security stance across the Mideast and Africa
- Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri tells operatives in Yemen to “do something”
(CNN) — A pair of suspected U.S. drone strikes killed four al Qaeda militants in Yemen as the United States maintained a heightened security alert in the country and urged all Americans to leave immediately.
Security sources told CNN about the strikes but didn’t offer additional details. A Yemeni official said four drone strikes have been carried out in the past 10 days.
None of those killed on Tuesday were among the 25 names on the country’s most-wanted list, security officials said.
It is unclear whether the strikes were related to the added security alert in the country after U.S. officials intercepted a message from al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to operatives in Yemen telling them to “do something.” The message was sent to Nasir al-Wuhayshi, the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the terror group’s Yemeni affiliate. U.S. intelligence believes al-Wuhayshi has recently been appointed the overall terror organization’s No. 2 leader.
Also Tuesday, the State Department urged Americans in Yemen to leave immediately, citing terrorist activities and civil unrest. All non-emergency U.S. government personnel were also told to leave.
Two U.S. military transport aircraft landed in Yemen on Tuesday to evacuate American citizens.
“In response to a request from the U.S. State Department, early this morning the U.S. Air Force transported personnel out of Sana’a, Yemen, as part of a reduction in emergency personnel,” Pentagon press secretary George Little said in a statement.
Little also said, “The U.S. Department of Defense continues to have personnel on the ground in Yemen to support the U.S. State Department and monitor the security situation.”
The UK Foreign Office also announced it had temporarily withdrawn all staff from the British embassy and would keep the facility shut until employees are able to return.
Washington takes precautions
Acting on the intelligence information, the United States heightened its security stance, issuing a worldwide travel alert and closing a number of embassies and consulates over large areas of the Middle East and Africa this week.
The State Department said the substantial security steps reflect an “abundance of caution” over intelligence information that indicated final planning by al Qaeda in Yemen for possible terrorist attacks on Western targets to coincide with the end of Ramadan this week.
Three sources told CNN that the United States has information that members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula are in the final stages of planning for an unspecified attack. Recent jailbreaks in Pakistan, Iraq and Libya all have the fingerprints of al Qaeda operations.
On Monday, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that U.S. anti-terrorism efforts had decimated al Qaeda’s global leadership and greatly diminished its core in Afghanistan and Pakistan, saying the threat had “shifted to some of these affiliates, in particular AQAP.”
Separately, American special forces units overseas have been on alert for the past several days awaiting a mission to attack potential al Qaeda targets if those behind the most recent terror threats against U.S. interests can be identified, a senior Obama administration official told CNN.
The official declined to identify the units or their locations because of the sensitive nature of the information. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel put the units on alert last week, the official said.
CNN’s Barbara Starr and Hakim Almasmari contributed to this report
Commercial Drones Are Now Approved for Aerial Surveillance
30 JulCreepy drone spying is no longer just the purview of the military in the United States. The Federal Aviation Administration recently cleared two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for commercial use surveilling the Alaskan coast, marking a sharp turn for the future of domestic drone use.
One of the drones, an Insitu Scan Eagle 200, will be used by a “major energy company” for monitoring migrating whales and icebergs off the Alaskan coast, while the other one, an AeroVironment PUMA, will monitor oil spills up in the Beaufort Sea. These are the first of what will surely be a significant number of commercial drones use for aerial surveillance around the country.
The arrival of certified commercial surveillance drones comes as a first step to measures in the FAA Reauthorization Act that President Obama renewed last year calling for new regulations to govern the use of commercial drones by 2015. Until now, drones could only fly with an experimental airworthiness and not for commercial purposes. Although that didn’t stopphotographers or journalists from using the machines for specialized purposes. It did kickstart an entire industry of commercial drone manufacturing to make sure there are UAVs ready for purchase when the FAA gives the go ahead.
Read the rest at Gizmodo.
Drones used to kill first responders
13 JulDrone Attack Kills 17 in Pakistan’s Waziristan Region
By REUTERS
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — A U.S. drone strike killed at least 17 people in Pakistan’s restive border region early on Wednesday, Pakistani security officials said, in the biggest such attack this year, and the second since Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif took office.
Most of those killed were fighters for the Haqqani network, according to three Taliban commanders and security officials.
Two missiles hit a house near the main market in Miranshah, the provincial capital of the tribal region of North Waziristan. The region is considered a Taliban stronghold.
Many were wounded in the attack, local tribesman Kaleemullah Dawar said, but rescuers delayed for fear of falling victim to a second attack, a common tactic with drone strikes.
“It was not possible for the people to start rescue work for some time, as the drones were still flying over the area,” Dawar said.
Sharif, who won elections in May, has called for an immediate end to U.S. drone strikes on the grounds that they are a breach of Pakistan’s sovereignty. The U.S. says it is attacking militants in areas the Pakistani army cannot reach.
A drone strike in May killed the Pakistani Taliban’s second-in-command and six others.
(Writing by Syed Hassan; Editing by Katharine Houreld and Clarence Fernandez)
The Vietnam War ended 40 years ago today – Obama drones
29 MarObama terror drones: CIA tactics in Pakistan include targeting rescuers and funerals
Missiles being loaded onto a military Reaper drone in Afghanistan.
The CIA’s drone campaign in Pakistan has killed dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or were attending funerals, an investigation by the Bureau for the Sunday Times has revealed.
The findings are published just days after President Obama claimed that the drone campaign in Pakistan was a ‘targeted, focused effort’ that ‘has not caused a huge number of civilian casualties.’
Speaking publicly for the first time on the controversial CIA drone strikes, Obama claimed last week they are used strictly to target terrorists, rejecting what he called ‘this perception we’re just sending in a whole bunch of strikes willy-nilly’.
‘Drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties’, he told a questioner at an on-line forum. ‘This is a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists trying to go in and harm Americans’.
But research by the Bureau has found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. A three month investigation including eye witness reports has found evidence that at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners. The tactics have been condemned by leading legal experts.
Although the drone attacks were started under the Bush administration in 2004, they have been stepped up enormously under Obama.
There have been 260 attacks by unmanned Predators or Reapers in Pakistan by Obama’s administration – averaging one every four days. Because the attacks are carried out by the CIA, no information is given on the numbers killed.
Administration officials insist that these covert attacks are legal. John Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, argues that the US has the right to unilaterally strike terrorists anywhere in the world, not just what he called ‘hot battlefields’.
‘Because we are engaged in an armed conflict with al- Qaeda, the United States takes the legal position that, in accordance with international law, we have the authority to take action against al-Qaeda and its associated forces,’ he told a conference at Harvard Law School last year. ‘The United States does not view our authority to use military force against al-Qaeda as being restricted solely to”hot” battlefields like Afghanistan.’
State-sanctioned extra-judicial executions
But some international law specialists fiercely disagree, arguing that the strikes amount to little more than state-sanctioned extra-judicial executions and questioning how the US government would react if another state such as China or Russia started taking such action against those they declare as enemies.
Related article: A question of legality
The first confirmed attack on rescuers took place in North Waziristan on May 16 2009. According to Mushtaq Yusufzai, a local journalist, Taliban militants had gathered in the village of Khaisor. After praying at the local mosque, they were preparing to cross the nearby border into Afghanistan to launch an attack on US forces. But the US struck first.
Not to mince words here, if it is not in a situation of armed conflict, unless it falls into the very narrow area of imminent threat then it is an extra-judicial execution.
Naz Modirzadeh, Harvard University
A CIA drone fired its missiles into the Taliban group, killing at least a dozen people. Villagers joined surviving Taliban as they tried to retrieve the dead and injured.
But as rescuers clambered through the demolished house the drones struck again. Two missiles slammed into the rubble, killing many more. At least 29 people died in total.
‘We lost very trained and sincere friends‘, a local Taliban commander told The News, a Pakistani newspaper. ‘Some of them were very senior Taliban commanders and had taken part in successful actions in Afghanistan. Bodies of most of them were beyond recognition.’
Related article: Witnesses speak out
For the Americans the attack was a success. A surprise tactic had resulted in the deaths of many Taliban. But locals say that six ordinary villagers also died that day, identified by Bureau field researchers as Sabir, Ikram, Mohib, Zahid, Mashal and Syed Noor (most people in the area use only one name).
Yusufzai, who reported on the attack, says those killed in the follow-up strike ‘were trying to pull out the bodies, to help clear the rubble, and take people to hospital.’ The impact of drone attacks on rescuers has been to scare people off, he says: ‘They’ve learnt that something will happen. No one wants to go close to these damaged building anymore.’
The legal view
Naz Modirzadeh, Associate Director of the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) at Harvard University, said killing people at a rescue site may have no legal justification.
‘Not to mince words here, if it is not in a situation of armed conflict, unless it falls into the very narrow area of imminent threat then it is an extra-judicial execution’, she said. ‘We don’t even need to get to the nuance of who’s who, and are people there for rescue or not. Because each death is illegal. Each death is a murder in that case.’
Waziristan residents hold up missile fragments from drone strikes in October 2010 / Noor Behram
The Khaisoor incident was not a one-off. Between May 2009 and June 2011, at least fifteen attacks on rescuers were reported by credible news media, including the New York Times, CNN,Associated Press, ABC News and Al Jazeera.
It is notoriously difficult for the media to operate safely in Pakistan’s tribal areas. Both militants and the military routinely threaten journalists. Yet for three months a team of local researchers has been seeking independent confirmation of these strikes.
Eyewitness accounts
The researchers have found credible, independently sourced evidence of civilians killed in ten of the reported attacks on rescuers. In five other reported attacks, the researchers found no evidence of any rescuers – civilians or otherwise – killed.
Because we are engaged in an armed conflict with al- Qaeda, the United States takes the legal position that, in accordance with international law, we have the authority to take action against al-Qaeda and its associated forces.
John Brennan, counterterrorism adviser to Obama
The researchers were told by villagers that strikes on rescuers began as early as March 2008, although no media carried reports at the time. The Bureau is seeking testimony relating to nine additional incidents.
Often when the US attacks militants in Pakistan, the Taliban seals off the site and retrieves the dead. But an examination of thousands of credible reports relating to CIA drone strikes also shows frequent references to civilian rescuers. Mosques often exhort villagers to come forward and help, for example – particularly following attacks that mistakenly kill civilians.
Other tactics are also raising concerns. On June 23 2009 the CIA killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud, a mid-ranking Pakistan Taliban commander. They planned to use his body as bait to hook a larger fish – Baitullah Mehsud, then the notorious leader of the Pakistan Taliban.
‘A plan was quickly hatched to strike Baitullah Mehsud when he attended the man’s funeral,’ according to Washington Post national security correspondent Joby Warrick, in his recent bookThe Triple Agent. ‘True, the commander… happened to be very much alive as the plan took shape. But he would not be for long.’
The CIA duly killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud in a drone strike that killed at least five others. Speaking with the Bureau, Pulitzer Prize-winner Warrick confirmed what his US intelligence sources had told him: ‘The initial target was no doubt a target anyway, as it was described to me, as someone that they were interested in. And as they were planning this attack, a possible windfall from that is that it would shake Mehsud himself out of his hiding place.’
Up to 5,000 people attended Khwaz Wali Mehsud’s funeral that afternoon, including not only Taliban fighters but many civilians. US drones struck again, killing up to 83 people. As many as 45 were civilians, among them reportedly ten children and four tribal leaders. Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud escaped unharmed, dying six weeks later along with his wife in a fresh CIA attack.
A funeral for victims of a US drone strike.
Clive Stafford-Smith, the lawyer who heads the Anglo-US legal charity Reprieve, believes that such strikes ‘are like attacking the Red Cross on the battlefield. It’s not legitimate to attack anyone who is not a combatant.’
Christof Heyns, a South African law professor who is United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extra- judicial Executions, agrees. ‘Allegations of repeat strikes coming back after half an hour when medical personnel are on the ground are very worrying’, he said. ‘To target civilians would be crimes of war.’ Heyns is calling for an investigation into the Bureau’s findings.
One of the most devastating attacks took place on March 17 last year, the day after Pakistan had released American CIA contractor Raymond Davis, jailed for shooting dead two men in Lahore. Davis had been held for two months and was released after the payment of blood money said to be around $2.3m.
A case of retaliation?
The Agency was said to be furious at the affair. The following day when a massive drone strike killed up to 42 people gathered at a meeting in North Waziristan, Pakistani officials believed it to be retaliation.
Such strikes ‘are like attacking the Red Cross on the battlefield. It’s not legitimate to attack anyone who is not a combatant.
Clive Stafford Smith, Reprieve
The commander of Pakistan forces in the area at the time was Brigadier Abdullah Dogar. He admits that in drone attacks in general ‘people invariably get reported as innocent bystanders’. But in that case he has no doubt. ‘I was sitting there where our friends say they were targeting terrorists and I know they were innocent people’, he said.
Related article: Get the Data: Obama’s terror drones
The mountains in the area contain chromite mines and the ownership was disputed between two tribes, so a Jirga or tribal meeting had been called to resolve the issue.
‘We in the Pakistan military knew about the meeting’, he said, ‘we’d got the request ten days earlier.’
‘It was held in broad daylight, people were sitting out in Nomada bus depot when the missile strikes came. Maybe there were one or two Taliban at that Jirga – they have their people attending – but does that justify a drone strike which kills 42 mostly innocent people?’
‘Drones may make tactical gains but I don’t see how there’s any strategic advantage’, he added. ‘When innocent people die, then you’re creating a whole lot more people with an issue.’
Growing tensions
Drone attacks have long been a source of tension between the US and Pakistan despite the fact that the Pakistan government gave tacit agreement, even allowing them to fly from Shamsi airbase in the western province of Baluchistan, while publicly denouncing the attacks.
In return the US made sure that some of the terrorists killed were those targeting Pakistan.
However the relationship has been stretched to breaking point, first with the raid to kill Osama bin Laden in May and subsequent US accusations of Pakistani complicity, then the NATO bombing of a Pakistani post in November, killing 24 soldiers. In December Pakistan ordered the CIA to vacate the Shamsi base. For a while drone attacks stopped but they resumed two weeks ago.
I was sitting there where our friends say they were targeting terrorists and I know they were innocent people.
Brigadier Abdullah Dogar, former commander Pakistan forces
The US claims the drones are a vital tool that have helped them almost wipe out the leadership of al Qaeda in Pakistan. But others point out they have stoked enormous anti-American sentiment in a country with an arsenal of 200 nuclear weapons.
Peter Singer, director of the 21st Century Initiative at the Brookings Institution, points out the operation has never been debated in Congress which has to approve sending US forces to war.
So dramatic is the switch to unmanned war that he says the US now has 7,000 drones operating and 12,000 more on the ground, while not a single new manned combat aircraft is under research or development at any western aerospace company.
After a remarkable lack of debate, there is starting to be unease in the US at the lack of transparency and accountability in the use of drones particularly as the campaign has expanded to hit targets in Libya, Yemen and Somalia and until recently to patrol the skies in Iraq.
Three US citizens were killed by missiles fired from drones in Yemen last September. Anwar al Awlaqi, an alleged al Qaeda operative, was deliberately targeted in what some have described as the US government’s first ever execution of one of its own citizens without trial. His colleague and fellow citizen Samir Khan also died in the attack. Two weeks later Awlaqi’s 16 year old son Abdulrahman died in a strike on alleged al Qaeda militants.
Such unmanned war is a politician’s dream, avoiding the inconvenience of sending someone’s son or daughter, mother or father, into harm’s way.
The fact that the operations are carried out by the CIA rather than the US military enables the administration to evade questions. The Agency press office responds to media inquiries on the subject with no comment and refusal to give names of those killed or who are on the target list.
Until Obama’s comments last week, the White House would not even confirm the programme existed.
‘We don’t discuss classified programs or comment on alleged strikes’, said a senior administration official in response to the findings presented by the Sunday Times.
Lawsuit
The ACLU filed a lawsuit last week demanding the Obama administration release legal and intelligence records on the killing of the three US citizens in in Yemen.
Privately some senior US military officers say they are extremely uncomfortable at the way the administration is carrying out these operations using the CIA which is not covered by laws of war or the Geneva Convention.
The use of drones outside a declared war zone is seen by many legal experts as setting a dangerous precedent. Aside from allies such as Israel, Britain and France, other countries have drone technology including China, Russia and Pakistan. Iran recently captured a downed US drone.
Heyns, the UN rapporteur, said an international legal framework is urgently needed to govern their use.
‘Our concern is how far does it go – will the whole world be a theatre of war?’ he asked. ‘Drones in principle allow collateral damage to be minimised but because they can be used without danger to a country’s own troops they tend to be used more widely. One doesn’t want to use the term ticking bomb but it’s extremely seductive.’
Additional reporting by Rahimullah Yusufzai in Peshawar, Pakistan
Christina Lamb is the Washington Bureau Chief of the Sunday Times
Sign up for email alerts from the Bureau here.
Related links:
Drone Infographics
Interactive timeline of all recorded CIA drone strikes
An interactive timeline of drone strikes in Pakistan between 2004 and the present date.
Interactive map
This map details the locations of CIA drone strikes in the remote Pakistani tribal areas.
Join the Debate
CodePink meets on Drones
10 MarShouldn’t some libertarians be on this panel?
http://www.geotrees.com/ftp/DroneKilling-PaxChristi-03-23-2013.pdf
Friends, our Annual Assembly, Drone Killing-Not in Our Name!, is only 2 weeks away! We gather at 9 a.m. on Saturday, March 23, at Trinity Washington University in D.C., to learn from our experts in the field:
· Medea Benjamin, co-founder of CODEPINK and author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control;
· Ray McGovern, activist and former CIA analyst; and
· Phyllis Bennis, Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.
Unknown Feed
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
The Insomniac Libertarian 