Tweet
Screen shot from C-SPAN broadcast of President Barack Obama’s announcement of John Brennan’s nomination to position of CIA chief
A “rule book” for drones that the administration of President Barack Obama has been developing is reportedly near completion, according to the Washington Post. Unnamed US officials told the newspaper the CIA is set to benefit from a “major exemption” that would allow them to continue conducting CIA drone operations without having to follow the rules. But the Obama administration is fine with this exemption because John Brennan, a national counterterrorism adviser, is set to take the position of CIA chief. The articleby Greg Miller, Ellen Nakashima and Karen DeYoung appropriately declared:
The adoption of a formal guide to targeted killing marks a significant — and to some uncomfortable — milestone: the institutionalization of a practice that would have seemed anathema to many before the Sept. 11 , 2001, terrorist attacks. [emphasis added]
The “rule” book, which the Obama administration has described as a “counterterrorism ‘playbook,’” is expected to outline “the process for adding names to kill lists, the legal principles that govern when US citizens can be targeted overseas and the sequence of approvals required when the CIA or U.S. military conducts drone strikes outside war zones.” Last year, the Post reported Brennan was responsible for “compiling the rules for a war that the Obama administration believes will far outlast its own time in office, whether that is just a few more months or four more years.” He devised the dystopian-sounding “disposition matrix,” which included the “administration’s evolving procedures” for targeted killings against individuals the administration believes are members of Al Qaeda and its affiliates or at least have minimal ties. However, the Obama administration was unable to convince the CIA that it should abide by these rules so its Pakistan operations will not have to follow the new rules.
The decision to allow the CIA strikes to continue was driven in part by concern that the window for weakening al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan is beginning to close, with plans to pull most US troops out of neighboring Afghanistan over the next two years. CIA drones are flown out of bases in Afghanistan.
“There’s a sense that you put the pedal to the metal now, especially given the impending” withdrawal, said a former US official involved in discussions of the playbook. The CIA exception is expected to be in effect for “less than two years but more than one,” the former official said, although he noted that any decision to close the carve-out “will undoubtedly be predicated on facts on the ground.” [emphasis added]
The key there is “predicated on facts on the ground.” The global War on Terrorism, as it stands currently, is a permanent war. The CIA will always be able to point to “threats” in order to prevent the agency from being subject to constraints. The history of the agency is a history of taking advantage of the reluctance of presidents to oppose its commitment to operating in the shadows outside of the law.
According to the Post, the Obama administration is convinced with “playbook” architect Brennan at the helm the exemption may be closed in one to two years. A former administration official told the newspaper, ”CIA officials are likely to be ‘quite willing, quite eager to embrace’ the playbook developed by their presumed future director…It’s his handiwork.’”
Brennan apparently agreed to the compromise “late last month during a meeting of the “‘principals committee,’ comprising of top national security officials, that was led by” him. At minimum, Brennan consented to a decision that would allow him to take over the agency and not have to follow his own rules.
The process, legal principles and information on sequence of approvals in the book of “rules” should be made public. Supposedly, it will include “requirements for White House approval of drone strikes and the involvement of multiple agencies — including the State Department — in nominating new names for kill lists.” If what the Post reports is accurate, the majority of it will be the outcome of interpretations of what is and is not legal. However, the Post story suggests Americans will continue to be subjected to secrecy and propaganda around US drone operations, as the “rules” will be classified. What the public learns about it will be what officials are willing to selectively leak to the press to convince the public to calm down and trust the Obama administration.
The government under Obama has fought efforts by the American Civil Liberties Union and New York Times to have the legal basis for the targeted killing program released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). On January 2, a judge mostly dismissed both a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and the Times and concluded, “I can find no way around the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the Executive Branch of our Government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws, while keeping the reasons for their conclusion a secret.” One should not expect any change. Should the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) submit a FOIA request and pursue a lawsuit to force the release of at least some of the “rules,” the Obama administration will fight to keep concealed the text of “controls” it plans to apply to its targeted killing program.
Additionally, US Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, who serves on an intelligence committee that by law is supposed to have access to classified legal opinions on the targeted killing program, has been denied access to documents containing the legal basis for the CIA and military programs, particularly when the government may kill US citizens with drones. Would members of Congress get to read this “rule” book once complete? Or would the administration continue to obstruct access on behalf of the national security state?
And though this may be considered a “rule” book, one must dispel all illusions and ask, what happens if the “rules” are not followed? Does anyone expect the administration to do anything to any official or section of the agency that would make it impossible for that official or section to enjoy wide latitude to execute operations “necessary” to kill targets?
Think about the nature of the drone programs now: They operate completely in the dark free from the constraints of law. There is no judicial review of targets selected for execution. If the government counts the members of Al Qaeda or its affiliates killed, it does not make such counts public. If civilian deaths are counted, it does not make such counts public either. It will neither confirm or deny how many people are being assassinated extrajudicially. The officials involved know there are aspects that are completely immoral. They also are well aware that government agencies could be launching attacks with flying killer robots for the next century if the status quo remains in tact because all involved are able to operate with great impunity.
These same officials have now developed a “rule” book and the public, without being able to read it, is expected to believe that it will constrain the programs? How do we know that aspects that have stirred outrage have not been made permissible by “rules” written by individuals who have an interest in keeping the drone programs going? Does anyone else see how perverted this is that a third party did not develop the “rules”?
Those who favor more accountability and transparency may find this is a step in the right direction, but one could argue it is a proactive measure to dissuade the establishment of any process of independent judicial review and may be worse than now.
Currently, the administration can claim drone operations are somewhat new and officials are working through all issues and concerns to develop policies that make everything more legal and just. After careful deliberation, the president will retain the power to act as judge, jury and executioner. The Executive Branch will continue to pervert the concept of “due process” by arguing they engage in a fair process of reviewing intelligence to appropriately determine who to kill. There will be nothing to excuse the inhumane, immoral and lawless acts of the Obama administration in countries like Pakistan, Somalia or Yemen, but, having been further entrenched in government, it will be even more impossible for Congress, civil society organizations or US citizens to challenge the technocratic barbarism of empire.
24 Comments
Just fucking priceless. A rule book for MURDER. Shades of Parallel Universe’s.
Absurd notwithstanding, I’m now absolutely convinced, either our water supply has been contaminated with brain sucking alien parasites, or conspiracy theory’s of lobotomy inducing Chemtrails are indeed true, as there is no other possible explanation for this breach of moral sanity into Orwell x infinity squared.
Breathtaking. I submit “folly” is a massive fucking understatement. This whole murder by drone thing, by any measure of human history, is the plum bob of Resurrections truth.
This leaves but one question. What in God’s name are WE going to do about it?
What really disgusts me is the use of the term “playbook”. What fucking game are we playing?
“Rule” books and “playbooks”, like those for Chutes and Ladders, set out the rules for ALL the players. What “rules” are our murdered victims to “play” by: Hide and Seek?
There’s a reason why our country was set-up with the military reporting to the President.
The continuing escalation of the police toward militarization is a very bad omen for every American citizen. As we decay further and further into the fascist xenophobia of us citizens as the enemy, our rights and liberties will fade from memory and national discourse. The “playbook” of 24/7/365 surveillance combined with kidnapping, assassination, torture, and indefinite detention are the signature trademarks of a totalitarian dictatorship. We are left with only have the appearance of a democracy. If we, the People of the United States of America are not in a state of war with domestic tyrants, then what would you call it?
So a judicial system that regards school prayer as a threat to constitutional freedoms finds nothing wrong with drone executions?
Secret law, secret rules, secret “playbook,” secret assassination, secret citizen murders, secret players, secret, secret, secret.
These are not the drones you’re looking for.
I fail to see how Obama’s policies are any worse or repugnant than those of his predecessors.
The bombing campaigns of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon….. Or the backing of dictators by the above. The only thing difference is his skin color. All leaches, weasels, snakes and scum. Or surrogates for the leaches, weasels, snakes and scum on Wall Street. If not Saruman then Gríma Wormtongue.
Book Salon up with Marcus Rediker’s The Amistad Rebellion: An Atlantic Odyssey of Slavery and Freedom hosted by Nicholas Guyatt
… indeed … Hush Hush Game being played about picking out who dies/is made dead.
…Obama and CIA can know–you/me/we can’t know– because Obama and CIA said so…
Yankee Doodle Deadly
Thank you KG … stay with it
Then I submit you are fucking blind. In that case, maybe this one is easy enough…. What’s the difference between Obama and a catfish.
I digress, Bush’s idiocy notwithstanding, the difference is…(drum roll please) none of his predecessors fucking VAPORIZE AMERICAN CITIZENS WITH A HELLFIRE MISSILE!! Now, wasn’t that easy? Yesireeebob, ole King O, armed with a “secret” get out of jail free card, courtesy of Eric aka “the butcher” Holder, now declares your good ole “due process” is..yup..you got it..YOUR DEATH!! But my heavens, not without ..well, let’s just call it.”some kind of” process. Yesireeebob. I mean, there’s RULES to this here game and by george, they’re gonna follow them. To the letter M.. for Murder. You betcha. Rules I tell ya.
Rules of Murder
1. Pick a card, any card.
2. Shuffle deck.
3. Insert card into deck backwards.
4. Perform magical transformation trick.
5. Spread deck on table face down.
6. Voila, exposed card=guilty.
7. Step up to bar.
8. Propose toast to Bugsplat’s.
9. Go home
10. Sleep well now that the “terrorist” is nothing but vapor.
11. See #1
See? Rules. Now we can all relax.
bartender, one Scotch, one Bourbon, one beer…er..on second thought, make them doubles…hangover be damned.
On a side note, for those of you who trust ole Obomination would only declare American citizens as a “terrorist”, if they were some kind of “threat” to the United States, right? Well sooprise sooprise sooprise.
http://www.examiner.com/article/feds-identify-2nd-amendment-activists-as-terrorists-ohio-drill
bartender, another round of doubles for everyone..on me.
ps. This shit is getting weirder by the day.
The drones “operate completely in the dark free from the constraints of law” as far as the American public is concerned. In the target areas, the campaign is obviously not a secret, and there is universal jurisdiction for war crimes.
When the laws are secret. Everyone is criminalized.
When “due processes” is translated into we “do a process”.
Nothing is forbidden. And when the “secret rules”
that separate mad bloodlust from “civilized” Warfare are ignored
No one will know, because the Rules are Secret, for our own good.
Luckily the whistleblowers reward, is spelled out in invisible
Ink. As are our “protections” from the benevolent overlords setting
the production schedules for the soylent green factories.
But it’s ok because all the secret rules will Protect You!
Remember, during the Bush administration, they turned it into a game of cards, with Ben Laden being the Ace of Spades.
That is not the standard we should be applying. We really can’t do a thing about Presidents Washington through Bush anymore. But every President should be judged by right or wrong, not by whether he is “only” as bad as his worst predecessors.
Armed combat when both sides are aware they are fighting is different from murder of individuals by drone. But, again, there is no reason to remain silent about murder by drone because other Presidents in our over 200 year history have done some very crappy things. That kind of thinking gets us only more crap, not a better direction.
No, as stated, there are other differences. But, most importantly, he happens to be the only President we have now.
Are you saying that America’s having bad Presidents in the past means citizens can never speak out again?
Poetry. Thanks.
No doubt, but that reason was not murder by drone.
We also have a new standard for surveillance now: “untrustworthy.”
Untrustworthy to whom? The CIA? The FBI? The President? Some bureaucrat?
The last pretense of the 4th Amendment is gone.
Thank you, Kevin.
Again, I wish there were a way to recommend a thread that you start.
If I could, I would.
What happens to an uber wealthy person who becomes so paranoid he starts to think the drones might come after him? The motu don’t get along with anyone including each other. The rules are needed for them mostly; the rest of us are just fodder or collateral damage or targets.
Great reportage as usual, Kevin!
Murder, by any other name, is murder still.
Self-Pardoning is illegitimate in all cases. Child Murderers President Obama and John Brennan can claim that they are allowed to carry out these Murders. But they are lying.