Drone Killings and Torture: Peace Activists to be “Rehabilitated” in Jail

[Octafish]

Drone Killings and Torture: Peace Activists to be “Rehabilitated” in Jail

Institute for Public Accuracy
Press Release, December 15, 2014

Students gather at the site of a suspected U.S. drone strike on an Islamic seminary in Hangu districtMarcy Wheeler writes in “From Bush to Obama, Eyes Wide Shut: The same memo Bush used to wall himself off from the details of CIA torture is keeping Obama’s drone war alive” that: “On the second day of Barack Obama’s presidency, he prohibited most forms of physical torture. On the third, a CIA drone strike he authorized killed up to 11 civilians.”

Also, see: “U.S. drone strikes kill 28 unknown people for every intended target, new Reprieve report reveals.”

KATHY KELLY, kathy at vcnv.org, @voiceinwild

Co-coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, Kelly was just sentenced to three months in prison for protesting against drone killings. Recently in Afghanistan, Kelly is currently in Chicago. She will be in New York City around Christmas and in Washington, D.C. just after New Years. She has been told to “self-report” by the court on Jan. 23.

She recently wrote the piece “Drones and Discrimination: Kick the Habit,” which states: “On December 10, International Human Rights Day, federal Magistrate Matt Whitworth sentenced me to three months in prison for having crossed the line at a military base that wages drone warfare. The punishment for our attempt to speak on behalf of trapped and desperate people, abroad, will be an opportunity to speak with people trapped by prisons and impoverishment here in the U.S.

“Our trial was based on a trespass charge incurred on June 1, 2014. Georgia Walker and I were immediately arrested when we stepped onto Missouri’s Whiteman Air Force where pilots fly weaponized drones over Afghanistan and other countries. We carried a loaf of bread and a letter for Brig Gen. Glen D. Van Herck. In court, we testified that we hadn’t acted with criminal intent but had, rather, exercised our First Amendment right (and responsibility) to assemble peaceably for redress of grievance.

“A group of Afghan friends had entrusted me with a simple message, their grievance, which they couldn’t personally deliver: please stop killing us.

“I knew that people I’ve lived with, striving to end wars even as their communities were bombed by drone aircraft, would understand the symbolism of asking to break bread with the base commander. Judge Whitworth said he understood that we oppose war, but he could recommend over 100 better ways to make our point that wouldn’t be breaking the law.

“The prosecution recommended the maximum six month sentence. ‘Ms. Kelly needs to be rehabilitated,’ said an earnest young military lawyer. The judge paged through a four page summary of past convictions and agreed that I hadn’t yet learned not to break the law.”

JACK GILROY, jgilroy1 at stny.rr.com

Gilroy recently completed a two month sentence for protesting drone killings at the Hancock Air base in upstate New York. See from Syracuse.com: “Grandfather of eight/drone protester says he was not ‘corrected’ at Jamesville Correctional Facility.” Gilroy wrote the play “The Predator” about drone killing.

MARK COLVILLE, amistadcwh at yahoo.com

Colville is a member of the Amistad Catholic Worker in New Haven, Conn. and is, like Gilroy, one of about 100 activists who have been charged following protests at the Hancock Air base organized by the Upstate New York Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars.

He was recently on the program “Democracy Now!,” where he stated: “The United States government, through its drone program, is claiming the legal right to targeted assassinations, extrajudicial killings, indiscriminate killing and the targeting, deliberate targeting, of civilians. For example, even the military admits that one of its modes of operation in drone strikes is something that they have called ‘double tapping,’ which is that after striking a target, the drone is directed back to that same target 20 minutes or a half an hour later in order to strike again after first responders have come to help the wounded. And so, it’s on a foundation of criminality. And as we’ve experienced in the numerous public actions and arrests at Hancock Air Field, this program operates beyond the reach of courts and law. And what we’re trying to do is to get courts to [address] the criminality in which the United States government is engaged through the drone program.”

See IPA news release: “31 Protesters Arrested at Drone Base in Syracuse.”

SOURCE w/links: http://www.accuracy.org/release/drone-killings-and-torture-peace-activists-to-be-rehabilitated-in-jail/

Don't know about you, but Uncle Sam jailing US citizens who simply protest extrajudicial killing by drone bothers me.

[locks]

1. It should truly bother us all

Thanks

[Octafish]

3. Obama's Expanding Surveillance Universe

Thanks to the permanent war on an idea, we may not "enjoy" the right to beef about the destruction of that old scrap of paper for much longer.



Tomgram:

Obama's Expanding Surveillance Universe

by Alfred W. McCoy
TomDispatch at 4:15pm, July 14, 2013.

EXCERPT...

During the U.S. conquest of the Philippines, Mark Twain wrote an imagined history of twentieth-century America. In it, he predicted that a “lust for conquest” had already destroyed “the Great (American) Republic,” because “trampling upon the helpless abroad had taught her, by a natural process, to endure with apathy the like at home.” Indeed, just a decade after Twain wrote those prophetic words, colonial police methods came home to serve as a template for the creation of an American internal security apparatus in wartime.

SNIP...

How the Global War on Terror Came Home

As its pacification wars in Afghanistan and Iraq sank into bloody quagmires, Washington brought electronic surveillance, biometric identification, and unmanned aerial vehicles to the battlefields. This trio, which failed to decisively turn the tide in those lands, nonetheless now undergirds a global U.S. surveillance apparatus of unequalled scope and unprecedented power.

After confining the populations of Baghdad and the rebellious Sunni city of Falluja behind blast-wall cordons, the U.S. Army attempted to bring the Iraqi resistance under control in part by collecting, as of 2011, three million Iraqi fingerprints,iris, and retinal scans. These were deposited in a biometric database in West Virginia that American soldiers at checkpoints and elsewhere on distant battlefields could at any moment access by satellite link. Simultaneously, the Joint Special Operations Command under General Stanley McChrystal centralized all electronic and satellite surveillance in the Greater Middle East to identify possible al-Qaeda operatives for assassination by Predator drones or hunter-killer raids by Special Operations commandos from Somalia to Pakistan.

Domestically, post-9/11, the White House tried to create a modern version of the old state-citizen alliance for domestic surveillance. In May 2002, President Bush’s Justice Department launched Operation TIPS with "millions of American truckers, letter carriers, train conductors, ship captains, utility employees, and others" spying on fellow citizens. But there was vocal opposition from members of Congress, civil libertarians, and the media, which soon forced Justice to quietly kill the program.

In a digital iteration of the same effort, retired admiral John Poindexter began to set up an ominously titled Pentagon program called Total Information Awareness to amass a "detailed electronic dossier on millions of Americans." Again the nation recoiled, Congress banned the program, and the admiral was forced to resign.

Defeated in the public arena, the Bush administration retreated into the shadows, where it launched secret FBI and NSA domestic surveillance programs. Here, Congress proved far more amenable and pliable. In 2002, Congress erased the bright line that had long barred the CIA from domestic spying, granting the agency the power to access U.S. financial records and audit electronic communications routed through the country.

CONTINUED...

http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175724/

Thank you for grokking what's at stake, locks!

[Luminous Animal]

2. Great post. For those who would like to join or help, please read the article

and click on the links for more information.

[Octafish]

5. In the UK, too.

Police seizing CND T-shirts is ridiculous, says protester

By Leicester Mercury | Posted: January 09, 2015

A peace campaigner accused of criminal damage at an RAF base has said it is "ridiculous" that police apparently took away some of her T-shirts when they searched her home.

Penny Walker said officers took away her diary and other items but she believes they also removed four T-shirts from her flat in Highfields, Leicester.

She was one of four members of the protest group End The Drone Wars who were arrested at RAF Waddington, in Lincolnshire, on Monday.

She said: "When I got home I could see that the police had got into my flat and searched the place.

"They had left a note telling me they had been in my home looking for evidence regarding my arrest at RAF Waddington.

"This is the second time I have had my flat searched by the police.

"What I think is ridiculous is that they have taken away four of my T-shirts."

CONTINUED...

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Police-seizing-CND-T-shirts-ridiculous-says/story-25832245-detail/story.html

Thank you for grokking, Luminous Animal! On either side of the pond, anti-drone protesters are of interest to the State.

[polly7]

4. K&R. nt.

[Octafish]

9. I used ''acceptable'' images to illustrate the OP and replies because the reality is so awful.

Marjorie Cohn on Drone Warfare: Illegal, Immoral and Ineffective

Tuesday, 23 December 2014 09:39
By Leslie Thatcher, Truthout | Interview

EXCERPT...

Leslie Thatcher: Marjorie, could you describe the genesis of this project?

Law professor, writer and social critic Marjorie Cohn explores human rights and US foreign policy, and the frequent contradiction between the two in her monthly Truthout column, "Human Rights and Global Wrongs." She agreed to an interview with Leslie Thatcher recently about her new book, Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues.

Marjorie Cohn: George W. Bush prosecuted two illegal wars in which thousands of Americans, Iraqis and Afghans were killed. Although Barack Obama continued those wars, eventually he reduced the numbers of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Obama vastly expanded the use of targeted killing - with drones, manned bombers and military raids.

Obama has killed more people with drones than died on 9/11. Many of those killed were civilians, and only a tiny percentage of the dead were al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders. Obama's targeted killings off the battlefield are not only illegal and immoral; they also make us less safe due to the blowback from those who have lost family and friends. There was not much opposition to these killings among the American people.

But when a Department of Justice white paper was leaked and Americans learned that US citizens could also be targeted, people were outraged. That selective outrage motivated Archbishop Desmond Tutu to write a letter to The New York Times pointing out the hypocrisy. I thus invited him to write the foreword to the book, and he graciously agreed. I thought a collection with contributions on different aspects of this policy would be useful. The book explores legal, moral and geopolitical issues raised by the US policy of targeted killing.

In this interdisciplinary collection, human rights and political activists, policy analysts, lawyers and legal scholars, a philosopher, a journalist and a sociologist examine different aspects of the US policy of targeted killing with drones and other methods. Contributors include Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin, former UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine Richard Falk, political activist Tom Hayden, Pardiss Kebriaei of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Jane Mayer of The New Yorker, Israeli human rights activist Ishai Menuchin, New York human rights lawyer Jeanne Mirer, sociology professor Tom Reifer, Alice Ross of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the ACLU's Jay Stanley, philosophy professor Harry van der Linden, and myself.

Many of your contributors compare drone strikes to torture and one to nuclear weapons? Can you explain why?

Like torture, the use of targeted killing off the battlefield is illegal. Both practices are immoral as well. We have seen the atrocious program of torture conducted during the Bush administration. Drones flying overhead terrorize entire communities. They kill thousands of people. The US government engages in "double taps," in which those rescuing the wounded from the first strike are targeted. This practice should be called the "triple tap," as mourners at funerals for those fallen by the drone bombs are also targeted.

Neither torture nor targeted killings make us safer; in fact, they increase hatred against the United States. Professor Richard Falk discusses in his chapter why drones are more dangerous than nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have not been used since 1945 except for deterrence and coercive diplomacy. But drones are unconstrained by any system of regulation.

When even the CIA reports that drone strikes are counterproductive and legal experts seem to agree their use for assassination is illegal, how is it that a distinguished contributor to your book like Richard Falk remains so pessimistic about banning or even limiting their use?

The United Nations special rapporteurs on extrajudicial killing have written extensively about the dangers and illegality of targeted killing off the battlefield, especially the new technology of lethal automated robots, where there is no operator directing the drones; the computer itself decides who, when and where to target. Although most countries use surveillance drones (the United States and Israel use armed drones), the proliferation of armed drones will inevitably spread to other countries.

The Federal Aviation Administration is tasked with developing regulations for commercial drones within the United States. That is a tall order and it will be difficult to enforce. Unless the international community agrees on regulations for killer drones - which is highly unlikely - their use will continue unregulated. Even with regulation, enforcement would be very difficult.

What are your hopes for the future of drones and targeted killing? What will it take to realize them?

The US government learned from the Vietnam War that Americans were disturbed by the graphic images of the carnage the US government wrought against the Vietnamese, and that outrage fueled the antiwar movement. The images and stories of drone victims are not part of our national discourse. Medea Benjamin personalizes the victims in her chapter.

Americans are justifiably outraged about the beheading of US journalists (although gays in Saudi Arabia, a close US ally, are also beheaded). But if Americans were to see photographs of the body parts of children blown to bits by US drone bombs, it would not sit well. It is incumbent on us to pressure our elected officials to rein in this deadly policy - by letters, emails, phone calls, sit-ins, op-eds and letters to the editor.

Now that we have seen how the CIA lied about the necessity for and results of the Bush torture program, we should demand that the CIA get out of the killer drone business. And just as those responsible for the torture must be prosecuted, Obama must be brought to justice for his illegal targeted killing program. Accountability requires information, so we should educate ourselves about what our government is doing in our name. It is my hope this book will assist in that endeavor.

SOURCE: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/28163-marjorie-cohn-on-drone-warfare-illegal-immoral-and-ineffective

Thank you for grokking and your links, polly7! As long as people still care, Justice, like Democracy, still has a chance.

[polly7]

20. Thank you so much for all your valuable information Octafish.

I really recommend that people do follow this link and view the whole film:

http://unmanned.warcosts.com/stream

[sabrina 1]

6. I see a lot of support here on DU for Free Speech lately. They stand with those who

exercise that right, they say. That is good news because we have a huge problem of our own in this country with Government suppression of our Free Speech rights.

This is one perfect example. I am sure this OP will receive hundreds of Recs since we appear to have found our 1st Amendment again in the wake of the horrific murders in France.

Kelly is a true patriot who has more courage than all of our leaders together in her little finger.

It is despicable that SHE not the war criminals who are walking free, is going to jail for exercising her right to free speech.

Yes, I know 'trespassing'l. Don't tax payers pay for that property? Doesn't that give them right to express their grievances on THEIR own property?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy? Gandhi

[Octafish]

11. ''At the end of the war if there are two Americans and one Russian left alive, we win!''

Gen. Thomas S. Power, USAF.

Did the U.S. Military Plan a Nuclear First Strike for 1963?

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Essay_-_Did_the_US_Military_Plan_a_Nuclear_First_Strike_for_1963

[elias49]

8. We cannot allow remote-control killing to stand.

No repercussions, no remorse, no guilt, no humility. Just a joy stick - yeah JOY stick - and a command from a superior.

[Octafish]

10. I'm getting worried that soon they won't need the All-Volunteer Army.

All Cheney's heirs will have to do is press a button and it's "Goodbye, protesting rabble." Unfortunately for the 99-percent, it's also "Goodnight, Democracy."

How the Pentagon’s Skynet Would Automate War

by NAFEEZ AHMED
Vice.com, November 24, 2014

Pentagon officials are worried that the US military is losing its edge compared to competitors like China, and are willing to explore almost anything to stay on top—including creating watered-down versions of the Terminator.

Due to technological revolutions outside its control, the Department of Defense (DoD) anticipates the dawn of a bold new era of automated war within just 15 years. By then, they believe, wars could be fought entirely using intelligent robotic systems armed with advanced weapons.

Last week, US defense secretary Chuck Hagel ann​ounced the ‘Defense Innovation Initiative’—a sweeping plan to identify and develop cutting edge technology breakthroughs “over the next three to five years and beyond” to maintain global US "mili​tary-technological superiority." Areas to be covered by the DoD programme include robotics, autonomous systems, miniaturization, Big Data and advanced manufacturing, including 3D printing.

But just how far down the rabbit hole Hagel’s initiative could go—whether driven by desperation, fantasy or hubris—is revealed by an overlooked Pentagon-funded study, published quietly in mid-September by the DoD National Defense University’s (NDU) Center for Technology and National Security Policy in Washington DC.

SNIP...

The NDU study warns that while accelerating technological change will “flatten the world economically, socially, politically, and militarily, it could also increase wealth inequality and social stress,” and argues that the Pentagon must take drastic action to avoid the potential decline of US military power: “For DoD to remain the world’s preeminent military force, it must redefine its culture and organizational processes to become more networked, nimble, and knowledge-based.”

CONTINUED...

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-the-pentagons-skynet-would-automate-war

Then, the 1-percent can protect their loot with drones-n-robots. Better than an army, with VA hospitals and retirement and all that stuff those leechers leech.

[gratuitous]

12. Oh, you nervous nellies!

I have been reliably informed, right here today at DU, that "smoking" people is "one of the president's best calls." You're just being "shrill" because any "innocents murdered" were "obviously a terrorist operative" who deserved to be "smoked."

But I'll cast my lot with Kelly, Gilroy and Colville any day of the week.

[Octafish]

18. Justifying mass murder has become so au courant these days.

Have you met the new semiotician specializing in Big Ticket themes, Dr. Tyler Cowen?

The Pitfalls of Peace

The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth

Tyler Cowen
The New York Times, JUNE 13, 2014

The continuing slowness of economic growth in high-income economies has prompted soul-searching among economists. They have looked to weak demand, rising inequality, Chinese competition, over-regulation, inadequate infrastructure and an exhaustion of new technological ideas as possible culprits.

An additional explanation of slow growth is now receiving attention, however. It is the persistence and expectation of peace.

The world just hasn’t had that much warfare lately, at least not by historical standards. Some of the recent headlines about Iraq or South Sudan make our world sound like a very bloody place, but today’s casualties pale in light of the tens of millions of people killed in the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century. Even the Vietnam War had many more deaths than any recent war involving an affluent country.

Counterintuitive though it may sound, the greater peacefulness of the world may make the attainment of higher rates of economic growth less urgent and thus less likely. This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war focuses the attention of governments on getting some basic decisions right — whether investing in science or simply liberalizing the economy. Such focus ends up improving a nation’s longer-run prospects.

It may seem repugnant to find a positive side to war in this regard, but a look at American history suggests we cannot dismiss the idea so easily. Fundamental innovations such as nuclear power, the computer and the modern aircraft were all pushed along by an American government eager to defeat the Axis powers or, later, to win the Cold War. The Internet was initially designed to help this country withstand a nuclear exchange, and Silicon Valley had its origins with military contracting, not today’s entrepreneurial social media start-ups. The Soviet launch of the Sputnik satellite spurred American interest in science and technology, to the benefit of later economic growth.

War brings an urgency that governments otherwise fail to summon. For instance, the Manhattan Project took six years to produce a working atomic bomb, starting from virtually nothing, and at its peak consumed 0.4 percent of American economic output. It is hard to imagine a comparably speedy and decisive achievement these days.

SNIP...

Living in a largely peaceful world with 2 percent G.D.P. growth has some big advantages that you don’t get with 4 percent growth and many more war deaths. Economic stasis may not feel very impressive, but it’s something our ancestors never quite managed to pull off. The real questions are whether we can do any better, and whether the recent prevalence of peace is a mere temporary bubble just waiting to be burst.

Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/14/upshot/the-lack-of-major-wars-may-be-hurting-economic-growth.html?_r=0

In his work examining our political economy, Dr. Cowen has found that while the future really looks bleak for most of us, those at the top, thankfully, are in for continued and more excellent good times. He shared insight with Steve Inskeep of NPR.

Tired Of Inequality? One Economist Says It'll Only Get Worse

by NPR STAFF
September 12, 2013 3:05 AM

Economist Tyler Cowen has some advice for what to do about America's income inequality: Get used to it. In his latest book, Average Is Over, Cowen lays out his prediction for where the U.S. economy is heading, like it or not:

"I think we'll see a thinning out of the middle class," he tells NPR's Steve Inskeep. "We'll see a lot of individuals rising up to much greater wealth. And we'll also see more individuals clustering in a kind of lower-middle class existence."

It's a radical change from the America of 40 or 50 years ago. Cowen believes the wealthy will become more numerous, and even more powerful. The elderly will hold on to their benefits ... the young, not so much. Millions of people who might have expected a middle class existence may have to aspire to something else.

SNIP...

Some people, he predicts, may just have to find a new definition of happiness that costs less money. Cowen says this widening is the result of a shifting economy. Computers will play a larger role and people who can work with computers can make a lot. He also predicts that everyone will be ruthlessly graded — every slice of their lives, monitored, tracked and recorded.

CONTINUED with link to the audio...

http://www.npr.org/2013/09/12/221425582/tired-of-inequality-one-economist-says-itll-only-get-worse

For some reason, neither Dr. Cowen nor Mr. Inskeep brought up the subject of the government using its powers to do something about the economy, like in the New Deal. So, to me, it's like a broken record, when I have to report that "Commercial interests are very powerful interests," uttered same Feb. 14, 2007 White House press conference where pretzeldent 43 also said, "Money trumps peace." Pretty much always the on-message 24/7/366 for most of the last century, apart from a few great Democratic administrations. Perhaps that's why is is so odd to see it echoed on DU. Thank you for noticing and opposing it, gratuitous.

[rhett o rick]

13. k & r. Thanks for posting. nm

[Octafish]

19. Obama Has Killed More People with Drones than Died On 9/11

Obama Has Killed More People with Drones than Died On 9/11

Many Civilians Are Being Killed By Drones

Posted on January 6, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog

Law school teacher Marjorie Cohn – president of the National Lawyers Guild – writes:

Obama has killed more people with drones than died on 9/11. Many of those killed were civilians, and only a tiny percentage of the dead were al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders.

She may be right …

The Council on Foreign Relations estimates that U.S. drone strikes outside of Iraq and Afghanistan have killed 3,674 people.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that up to 4,404 people have been killed – just in Pakistan and Yemen alone – between 2004 and 2014.

While it’s hard to estimate how many additional people have been killed by drone in Iraq and Afghanistan, a December 2012 report by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that US and UK forces had carried out over 1,000 drone strikes in Afghanistan over the previous five years. Given that numerous people are often killed by each drone strike, it is reasonable to assume that several thousand people have been killed by drone in that country.

And many Iraqis have also been killed by drones … long before ISIS even appeared on the scene. So – altogether – the number of people killed by drone is probably well above five thousand.

In contrast, under 3,000 people were killed on 9/11.

CONTINUED w links...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/01/american-drones-killed-civilians-bombing-cambodia-vietnam-war-died-911.html

Most importantly: Comparisons are odious, the sage said. When it comes to lost human beings, how can one compare infinities?

[rhett o rick]

21. What's the ratio of "good kills" to innocents? Using drones is profitable for the MIC. nm

[Octafish]

22. Cost-Plus Collateral Damage

One man's child is just another Fodder Unit for the BFEE.

From the true and good Friends:

Understanding Drones

EXCERPT...

According to recent reports, the Pentagon now has some 7,000 aerial drones, compared with fewer than 50 a decade ago. The fiscal year 2012 budget included nearly $5 billion for drone research, development and procurement. This figure represents the known costs; it does not include funding that may be classified. The CIA has about 30 Predator and Reaper drones, which are operated by Air Force pilots from a U.S. military base in an unnamed U.S. state. The Department of Homeland Security has at least nine unarmed Predator drones with a tenth purchase planned for September 2012. The cost per flight hour varies by type of drone. Predator and Reaper drones cost about $2,500-3,500 per flight hour; larger armed systems such as the military’s Global Hawk cost about 10 times as much: approximately $30,000 per flight hour.

SOURCE: http://fcnl.org/issues/foreign_policy/understanding_drones/

Report: Customs and Border Protection drones cost $12,255 per hour

http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=1145882

[WillyT]

14. Huge K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Octafish]

23. FCNL Drone Bookmark

From the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a Quaker Lobby in the Public Interest:

Drones are quickly becoming one of the U.S. military's primary weapons as the administration shifts from big wars to small ones. Here's what you need to know.

http://fcnl.org/issues/foreign_policy/understanding_drones/

[malletgirl02]

15. K&R nt.

[JEB]

16. K&R for the original post and subsequent informative posts and links.

[liberal_at_heart]

17. K&R