RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Intro: "Campaigners against US drone strikes in Pakistan are calling for the CIA's former legal chief to be arrested and charged with murder for approving attacks that killed hundreds of people."

Activists opposed to US drone strikes in Pakistan are calling for John Rizzo to be arrested over claims he approved attacks that killed hundreds of civilians. (photo: Stephen Crowley/NYT)
Activists opposed to US drone strikes in Pakistan are calling for John Rizzo to be arrested over claims he approved attacks that killed hundreds of civilians. (photo: Stephen Crowley/NYT)

Former CIA Legal Chief Wanted for
Murder by Drone

By Peter Beaumont, Guardian UK

16 July 11


Campaigners seek arrest of former CIA legal chief over Pakistan drone attacks. UK human rights lawyer leads bid to have John Rizzo arrested over claims he approved attacks that killed hundreds of people.

ampaigners against US drone strikes in Pakistan are calling for the CIA's former legal chief to be arrested and charged with murder for approving attacks that killed hundreds of people.

Amid growing concern around the world over the use of drones, lawyers and relatives of some of those killed are seeking an international arrest warrant for John Rizzo, until recently acting general counsel for the American intelligence agency.

Opponents of drones say the unmanned aircraft are responsible for the deaths of up to 2,500 Pakistanis in 260 attacks since 2004. US officials say the vast majority of those killed are "militants." Earlier this week 48 people were killed in two strikes on tribal regions of Pakistan. The American definition of "militant" has been disputed by relatives and campaigners.

The attempt to seek an international arrest warrant for Rizzo is being led by the British human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith of the campaign group Reprieve, and lawyers in Pakistan. The lawyers are also building cases against other individuals, including drone operators interviewed or photographed during organised press facilities.

A first information report, the first step in seeking a prosecution of Rizzo in Pakistan, will be formally lodged early next week at a police station in the capital, Islamabad, on behalf of relatives of two people killed in drone strikes in 2009. The report will also allege Rizzo should be charged with conspiracy to murder a large number of Pakistani citizens.

Now retired, Rizzo, 63, is being pursued after admitting in an interview with the magazine Newsweek that since 2004 he had approved one drone attack order a month on targets in Pakistan, even though the US is not at war with the country.

Rizzo, who was by his own admission "up to my eyeballs" in approving CIA use of "enhanced interrogation techniques," said in the interview that the CIA operated "a hit list." He also asked: "How many law professors have signed off on a death warrant?"

Rizzo has also admitted being present while civilian operators conducted drone strikes from their terminals at the CIA headquarters in Virginia.

Although US government lawyers have tried to argue that drone strikes are conducted on a "solid legal basis," some believe the civilians who operate the drones could be classified as "unlawful combatants."

US drone strikes were first launched on Pakistan by George Bush and have been accelerated by Barack Obama.

Much of the intelligence for the attacks is supplied either by the Pakistani military or the ISI, the country's controversial intelligence agency.

Both have blocked journalists and human rights investigators from visiting the tribal areas targeted, preventing independent verification of the numbers killed and their status.

While Stafford Smith of Reprieve estimates around 2,500 civilian deaths, others say the number is closer to 1,000. US sources deny large numbers of civilian deaths and say only a few dozen "non-combatants" have been killed.

While killing civilians in military operations is not illegal under international law unless it is proved to be deliberate, disproportionate or reckless, Stafford Smith believes the nature of the US drone campaign puts it on a different legal footing.

"The US has to follow the laws of war," he said. "The issue here is that this is not a war. There is zero chance, given the current political situation in Pakistan, that we will not get a warrant for Rizzo. The question is what happens next. We can try for extradition and the US will refuse.

"Interpol, I believe, will have to issue a warrant because there is no question that it is a legitimate complaint."

The warrant will be sought on the basis of two test cases. The first centres on an incident on 7 September 2009 when a drone strike hit a compound during Ramadan, brought by a man named Sadaullah who lost both his legs and three relatives in the attack.

The second complaint was brought by Kareem Khan over a strike on 31 December 2009 in the village of Machi Khel in North Waziristan which killed his son and brother.

Both men allege Rizzo was involved in authorising the attack. The CIA refused to comment on the allegations.

The pursuit of Rizzo will further damage US-Pakistani relations, which are already under severe strain following years of drone attacks and the killing of Osama bin Laden in May. Last week the US suspended $800m (£495m) in military aid to Pakistan.

The US launch its first drone strike against a target in Pakistan in 2004, the only one for that year. Last year there were 118 attacks after Obama expanded their use in 2009, while 2011 has so far seen 42.

The use of drones has been sharply criticised both by Pakistani officials as well as international investigators including the UN's special rapporteur Philip Alston who demanded in late 2009 that the US demonstrate that it was not simply running a programme with no accountability that is killing innocent people. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+28 # Activista 2011-07-16 18:49
Very significant - believe that statistics is 50 civilians per one "high value target" - deaths of up to 2,500 Pakistanis in 260 attacks since 2004 -
Now on 911 there were few CIA and NSA personnel killed (did not hear about any children) by terrorists - Google!:
children killed by drones
between US and Israel there are HUNDREDS!
Who are terrorists here?
+9 # Rita Walpole Ague 2011-07-17 05:16
Google: Colorado Springs Independent, Jan. 21, 2010. Following their request for documentation, included in the documents I forwarded to the DOJ as I sought a much needed investigation re. police brutality in the super fusion center of the nation, Colorado Springs, was an address given at the Northern Command Center in which 'terrorists' also now include anarchists (i.e. peace and justice advocates/activ ists, environmental activists, animal rights activists, etc.. The Oh Bomb Ah administrations ' DOJ refused to investigate blatant and ongoing police brutality, which has tortured many here in the 'America the Beautiful' city, including the children teargassed with their parents prior to the U.S. entry into the war in Iraq as they peacefully protested our entry that lied into war.

Yes indeed, Activista, U.S. and Israile terrorism, based on greed and power addiction, is now rampant, and has increased under the very candidate, a man I now call Oh Bomb Ah, for whom I, stupidly, worked so how to get elected.

Oh Bomb Ah is now NOBAMA for soooooo many of us in 2012. We've been shamed once by supporting the pres. who has kicked and killed so many by uppage in killing by drones, and so much more, again and again, and we ain't about to be kicked twice.
+21 # DaveM 2011-07-16 22:10
This horror needs to be reigned in by process of law before it is adopted inside the borders of the United States. Predator drones are already being used for border surveillance. Given the mania for "the war on terror" and "the war on drugs", both of which are being waged by paramilitary forces, how long before someone gets the idea to start hanging missiles on them for "surgical strikes" right here at home.

No need for any of those messy warrants or Miranda warnings or anything of that sort. Dead men tell no tales, and do not appear on court calendars.
+15 # jean lafitte 2011-07-17 00:31
If we are going to indict John Rizzo and the drone operators, we must look upward for their superiors in the chain of command.

I'm not going to name names, but their initials are Leon Panetta and Barack Obama. Of course, all are culpable, but let us not forget who is ultimately responsible.
+4 # futhark 2011-07-17 02:02
As Randy Newman says in his satirical "Political Science""

"They all hate us anyhow,
So let's drop the Big One now..."

Why bother with "surgical strikes" when you can just fumigate the whole country with poison gas? Geneva Convention? We don't need no stinkin' Geneva Convention!

Let's see how the evildoers respond to a little indiscriminate genocide!
+21 # Habib Khan 2011-07-17 03:46
What is the difference between a terrorist killing innocent civilians and a drone killing innocent civilians? Can one act justify the other?
Even the war should have some ethics. The use of drones in populated areas has no justification if it kills innocent civilians besides the known terrorist.
Also, what does it achieve? Every time it is used it creates more terrorists than it eliminates so it is highly counterproducti ve.
I hope the use of double standards will end some day.
+5 # rm 2011-07-18 11:43
Habib -- the difference was identified by Noam Chomaky a long time ago. When a "terrorist" kills innocent civilians it is "retail" terrorism. When the US or Israel kills innocent civilians it is "wholesale" terrorism. The numbers make the difference. Kill one person and you are a murderer. Kill 100,000 like General Patraeus and you are a hero.

It is also a matter of who is getting killed or terrorized. Chomsky also presented his theory of Worthy and Unworthy victims. So if the victims are Arabs or Pakistanis, then they are unworthy of our sympathy or outrage and the terrorists (i.e., US military or CIA) who killed them deserve no blame. But if the victims are amricans or israelis, then they are worthy of our sympathy and outrage and we must support the retaliation of our military, even when it kills tens of thousands of innocent victims.

There is a logic to this, even if it is a twisted and evil logic. The mass media adheres to the logic without the slightest deviation.
+18 # Ralph Averill 2011-07-17 04:25
How can the US gov't. claim to be on "solid legal basis" when it refuses to recognize the World Court?
"Much of the intelligence for the attacks is supplied either by the Pakistani military or the ISI, the country's controversial intelligence agency."
A great way for the Pakistani gov't to wage war on its own citizens by proxy. Got a personal score to settle? Someone you don't like? Make a phone call with latitude and longitude coordinates. The Pakistani gov't. can then condemn the attack with clean hands. Slick.
+4 # Activista 2011-07-18 01:03
U.S. favorable ratings, in most Arab countries, have now fallen to levels lower than they were in 2008, the last year of the Bush administration. In Morocco, for example, positive attitudes toward the United States went from 26% in 2008 to a high 55% in 2009. Today, they have fallen to 12%. The story was much the same in Egypt, where the U.S. rating went from 9% in 2008 to 30% in 2009 and has now plummeted to 5% in this year's survey.
They hate US - Mr. AIPAC Obama more than BUSH -

+2 # Activista 2011-07-18 09:30
NACO (bloody Hilary) rebels are advancing on oil port (pipeline) Brega (Libya) - Obama drones "protecting" civilians ...
"that the Brega offensive ...
On Friday, Nato jets (BOMBS) – soon to be bolstered by four extra Tornados from the UK – destroyed 14 military vehicles at Brega, compared with 17 destroyed there during the previous six days."
and US drones
+1 # 2012-11-28 20:18
John Rizzo frames innnocent americans and people thru the world for a torture program called Project Bluebeam. His victims are killed or commit suicide from severe pain thru EMF waves. Project Bluebeam satan worshippers are in US Govt. PROTEST and spread the word. It's real! Evil beyond words. Govt keeps him on payroll. Pray and protest his removal from CIA torture program. Protest also to him at his address:
3845 Resevoir Rd Washington DC 20007

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.