* “We sleepwalked into nuclear age, now we are sleepwalking into drone age”.
The Daily Mail on Sunday ran a story titled “CIA chiefs face arrest over horrific evidence of bloody ‘video game” sorties by drone pilots.
The article appeared just two days after; the United Kingdom Parliament launched a new group headed by MPs Tom Watson and Zach Goldsmith to investigate into the rapid spread of drones in battle field and civilian life.
Director of legal Charity Reprieve group, Clive Stafford Smith, has told the parliamentarians the usage of drones by U.S government in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen is like “death penalty without trial”.
Smith has said that “We sleepwalked into nuclear age, now we are sleepwalking into drone age”.
A report published in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism stated that in Pakistan in drone strikes between 2004-2012 an estimated 2,593 to 3,365 people were killed including 474-884 civilians, 176 children and between 1,249-1,389 were injured.
Smith has raised several questions. One of them was whether the drone campaigns fall into any legal frame work-“as well as the secrecy over who is killed and whether they inspire extremism”.
In the backdrop of the developments, it is also reported that drones are becoming increasingly a key weapon beyond battlefield-but the legal framework for using them in civilian airspace remains problematic, politicians heard. At present it’s perfectly legal to fly your own drone, such as the £300 iPad-controlled Parrot, to within 150ft of your friends and neighbors.
The Daily Mail said that a Human Rights Lawyer working for Pakistan’s Foundation for Fundamental Rights has assembled damning evidence against the drone strikes in Pakistan.
It said the lawyer, Shahzad Akbar, who also works for British human rights charity Reprieve has found heartbreaking “detail” of deaths of teachers, students and Pakistani policemen in drone strikes. “It also describes how bereaved relatives are forced to gather their loved ones’ dismembered body parts in the aftermath of strikes”, the newspaper reported.
Apparently the lawyer had filed two separate court cases against two U.S officials, Jonathan Bank, a former head of CIA in Islamabad and Jonathan A. Rizzo, former CIA lawyer for the drone strikes that alleged to killed civilians.
Akbar has told the newspaper that he has statements from 82 victims’ families in connection with over 30 drone attacks.
He has said that the first case was heard at a court in Islamabad and an international arrest warrant to be issued against the two former CIA employees.
Akbar said while the other court case is pending, the families of drone victims would like further drone strikes in Pakistan to be declared as “acts of war”. In a lame argument he points out that Pakistan air force must try to shoot down the drones and Pakistan government should cut all diplomatic ties with the United States and murder investigations should be launched against all those responsible.
The newspaper said that when reached a senior CIA officer for a comment he supposedly to have stated that “we do not discuss active operations or allegations against specific individuals.’ A White House source last night declined to comment”
Read More…
The Daily Mail on Sunday ran a story titled “CIA chiefs face arrest over horrific evidence of bloody ‘video game” sorties by drone pilots.
The article appeared just two days after; the United Kingdom Parliament launched a new group headed by MPs Tom Watson and Zach Goldsmith to investigate into the rapid spread of drones in battle field and civilian life.
Director of legal Charity Reprieve group, Clive Stafford Smith, has told the parliamentarians the usage of drones by U.S government in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen is like “death penalty without trial”.
Smith has said that “We sleepwalked into nuclear age, now we are sleepwalking into drone age”.
A report published in the Bureau of Investigative Journalism stated that in Pakistan in drone strikes between 2004-2012 an estimated 2,593 to 3,365 people were killed including 474-884 civilians, 176 children and between 1,249-1,389 were injured.
Smith has raised several questions. One of them was whether the drone campaigns fall into any legal frame work-“as well as the secrecy over who is killed and whether they inspire extremism”.
In the backdrop of the developments, it is also reported that drones are becoming increasingly a key weapon beyond battlefield-but the legal framework for using them in civilian airspace remains problematic, politicians heard. At present it’s perfectly legal to fly your own drone, such as the £300 iPad-controlled Parrot, to within 150ft of your friends and neighbors.
The Daily Mail said that a Human Rights Lawyer working for Pakistan’s Foundation for Fundamental Rights has assembled damning evidence against the drone strikes in Pakistan.
It said the lawyer, Shahzad Akbar, who also works for British human rights charity Reprieve has found heartbreaking “detail” of deaths of teachers, students and Pakistani policemen in drone strikes. “It also describes how bereaved relatives are forced to gather their loved ones’ dismembered body parts in the aftermath of strikes”, the newspaper reported.
Apparently the lawyer had filed two separate court cases against two U.S officials, Jonathan Bank, a former head of CIA in Islamabad and Jonathan A. Rizzo, former CIA lawyer for the drone strikes that alleged to killed civilians.
Akbar has told the newspaper that he has statements from 82 victims’ families in connection with over 30 drone attacks.
He has said that the first case was heard at a court in Islamabad and an international arrest warrant to be issued against the two former CIA employees.
Akbar said while the other court case is pending, the families of drone victims would like further drone strikes in Pakistan to be declared as “acts of war”. In a lame argument he points out that Pakistan air force must try to shoot down the drones and Pakistan government should cut all diplomatic ties with the United States and murder investigations should be launched against all those responsible.
The newspaper said that when reached a senior CIA officer for a comment he supposedly to have stated that “we do not discuss active operations or allegations against specific individuals.’ A White House source last night declined to comment”
Read More…
0 comments:
Post a Comment