Barbara Lee — Rep. Barbara Lee Joins Current TV to Discuss Drones and Drone Warfare

good

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): evening i'm john people saying this is viewpoint in this month activists around the country are

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): staging national days of action in hopes of driving the public to stop u_s_ drone

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): warfare now on tuesday the senate judiciary committee took its own action a hearing on drone warfare chaired by illinois democrat dick durbin here's the debate as senator durbin

saw it The use of

Speaker 3: drones has in stark terms made targeted killing more efficient and less costly in terms of American blood and treasure. There are, however, long-term consequences, especially when these airstrikes kill innocent civilians

Speaker 4: Consequences like a growing hatred of Americans and America in countries where drones have been

Speaker 5 (lower-pitched voice): deployed. Now, President Obama and drone warfare defenders insist it's the best weapon we have in the war against

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): Al-Qaeda and its affiliates. In April, South Carolina Senator and Tennessee Williams hero Lindsey Graham told a Rotary Club audience

and I quote

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): We've killed 4,700. Sometimes you hit innocent people, and I hate that, but

Speaker 6 (lower-pitched voice): we're at war." Actually, we haven't legally declared war in this country since 1941, and that's the first time an American official

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): put a number on the casualties from the drone war. Now, at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing last February, Chair Dianne Feinstein insisted civilian

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): casualties in that war are typically in single digits. year-by-year. But according to the UK-based Bureau of

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): Investigative Journalism, drone strikes may have killed as many as 3,500 people in Pakistan, among them perhaps 500

Speaker 6 (lower-pitched voice): civilians and nearly 200 children. In Yemen, where drones have been less active, the casualty count could rise to 450, including nearly 50 civilians and ten children. Now at Tuesday's hearing, Yemeni youth activist Faria al-Muslamli, who spent a year at an American high school, described how people from his village reacted to a recent

Speaker 7: drone

strike

Speaker 8 (lower-pitched voice): When they think of America, they think of the terror they feel from the drones that hover over their heads, ready to fire missiles at any time. What the violent militants had previously failed to achieve

One

Speaker 8 (lower-pitched voice): drone strike accomplished in an instant. This is not an isolated instance. The drone strikes are the face of America to many Yemenis

Meanwhile

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): Senator Rand Paul, who filibustered the Senate for 13 hours over

Speaker 6 (lower-pitched voice): the possibility drones might ever be used on American soil against Americans, said this on Where Else? Monday. If

Speaker 9: someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him. kills

Speaker 2 (lower-pitched voice): him. That's funny, because I didn't know summary executions of armed robbery suspects walking out of a liquor store was a libertarian value. Apparently, Senator Paul kind of thought it wasn't, too, because on Tuesday he released a statement that read, in part, I quote, my comments last night left the mistaken impression

Speaker 6 (lower-pitched voice): that my position on drones had changed. It has not. Armed drones may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. threat for

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): more i'm very pleased to be joined once again by the brilliant representative barbara lee democrat of california a member of the appropriations committee and the congressional progressive caucus who has been a leading voice on this issue congressman a pleasure to have you back on viewpoint

Speaker 10: delighted to be with you and thank you for this

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): well thank you know you attended the senate judiciary committee drone hearing on tuesday let me ask how unusual is it for members to cross the aisle to the other chamber for hearings and were you surprised the white house declined to even send a

witness Well

Speaker 11: first I have to just commend Senator Durbin for his tremendous leadership because he wants to get to the bottom of this in terms of identifying the legal basis for the use of drones and really look at what the implications are for counterterrorism as well as the

Speaker 12: constitutional implications. Members of the House seldom go to the Senate to listen in, but I thought it was important for me to sit in those hearings to really listen to what the witnesses had to say. I was disappointed that the administration did not send a witness, but I tell you, the witnesses who were there were phenomenal. And I'm convinced that if we do not repeal this authorization to use force that I voted against in 2001. we're going to see the state of perpetual war forever and in fact the use of drones in many instances create just the opposite effect it creates more hatred more anger more hostility toward our country also john the young man from yemeni died thank you for playing his part of his testimony but i have to also add that he received scholarships from the State Department. He is pro-USA, and this man went back to his village, and his village was devastated by the use of drones, and yet he stands with the American people. He was educated here, and now, you know, he is here

Speaker 13: telling us how terrible this is and how angry people are getting. It's

Speaker 14: terribly true. All the bribes we

Speaker 5 (lower-pitched voice): may pay to the governments of country. countries like pakistan and yemen won't help the loved ones of those who've been killed in these drone attacks from becoming new america haters now last month congresswoman you were one of eight representatives who signed that letter to president obama asking for the legal rationale for the drone

Speaker 1 (lower-pitched voice): war the drone war supposedly as you mentioned justified by that two thousand one congressional authorization to use military force that followed nine eleven which you notably voted against uh... is in your opinion is that going to be enough for the administration to justify continuing this action

Well, I

Speaker 15: think what's important now is that first, the administration answer these questions, and secondly

Speaker 12: it's very important that we have a public debate. Of course, the president is our commander-in-chief, and he's responsible for protecting our country. He's our national security, the top person who has these very awesome responsibilities, and he's doing a phenomenal job. But that does not mean Congress should not be in the loop. We have a system of checks and balances, and so we have to insist that the constitutional rights and and requirements of members of congress are act with actually enacted and that means we have to have a debate we did not have a debate in two thousand and one this blank check has been used

Speaker 11: over and over and over again to justify so many actions that the american people don't even

Speaker 12: realize these actions which now have caused us into as the president said in the state in his inaugural speech a state of perpetual warfare and we've got to stop it and john i have a resolution a bill that would actually repeal that resolution and i have to get course many co-sponsors for that but i think the debate is beginning and i want the house to also have hearings just as senator durbin

Speaker 16: held in the house of representatives to really look at the legal justification for the use of drones

Speaker 17: well and i think that's the big question what is the

Speaker 5 (lower-pitched voice): legal justification senator durbin said on tuesday that ours is a democratic society where the rule of law prevails so let me ask what you think you overseas drone strikes as they're carried out now violate the rule

Speaker 18: of law that we all grew up

with

Speaker 12: Well, there's a difference of opinion on that. Most believe that it was that resolution, the 2001 resolution that gave then President Bush, now President Obama, the broad authority to use force anytime, anyplace, anywhere if he or she deems it's connected to 9-11. That was just such a blank check that it's scary to think about

of

Speaker 12: first of all, how it's been used and how it could be used in the future. That's primarily the understanding that many of us have that they're using as the legal justification. And that is just downright wrong because we never have debated the use of

Speaker 11: drones to engage in targeted

Speaker 5 (lower-pitched voice): killings. Well, Congresswoman, I commend you for your action on this issue. And I would never ask you to speculate or go inside the president's head, but do you think he's aware of the damage this program is already doing to

his legacy

Speaker 12: personal this is a very smart president and he has definitely reshaped america's image and role in the world and this president really gets it he knows what his responsibilities are as commander-in-chief and i have to just say that it's a heavy heavy lift that he has but he i'm sure understands that we have to move forward as members of congress and make sure that these checks and balances are in place and that our democracy prevails and so i believe that he understands this they're looking at these issues they're looking at these uh... legal justifications now

and i'm constantly