The introduction of armed police and national guard, often equipped in riot gear with deadly weapons, adds dangerous elements to these otherwise peaceful campus protests and echoes a dark chapter in American history where in 1970 failures of University leadership enabled escalations that led to the deaths of six student protesters in the May 1970 Kent State and Jackson State massacres.

The following is a statement from Laurel Krause, sister to Allison Krause who was a 19-years-old honors student when she was murdered at Kent State University: 

“On May 4, 1970 my sister Allison Krause was killed by the Ohio National Guard on the campus of Kent State University as she protested against the Vietnam war and Cambodian invasion. 

“Three other students were shot dead that day by guardsmen and many other students were injured. As the family member of a peaceful student protester killed by the state, I am aghast at the way that Columbia University President Minouche Shafik, along with administrators at other U.S. institutions of higher education, have endangered the lives and well-being of student protesters by inviting militarized police onto campuses to disperse protesters.

“I urge President Shafik, and other University administrators across the country to hear the demands of ALL student protesters, to encourage and facilitate zones of free expression, and to support the right of your students to protest an ongoing genocide on campus without the threat of state violence and militarized force. 

“In 1970 failures of Kent State University leadership enabled the massacre which left ‘Four Dead in Ohio.’ Our institutions must learn from these past mistakes to not use militarized responses against unarmed, peaceful student protesters by calling in the National Guard, bringing in State Troopers or deploying Police in riot gear. 

“We must not repeat the horrors of Kent State 54 years later.” 

-30-

Laurel Krause is the co-founder of the Kent State Truth Tribunal and the Allison Center for Peace

Nearly 500 community members in favor of the resolution rallied outside City Hall, then packed into the Council Chamber and two overflow rooms. While emotions ran high, pro-ceasefire community members respectfully engaged with the Council, and waited patiently for hours as the resolution was introduced, debated, amended, and passed. The grassroots turnout was organized by Somerville for Palestine, a newly formed inter-faith, intergenerational, interracial group of Somerville residents standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people and demanding an immediate and lasting ceasefire. About 10 people opposed to the resolution attended as well. 

On the steps of City Hall, Somerville High Student Sarah Kapadia, who founded the SHS Muslim Student Association and organized a student walkout in support of Palestine in November, addressed a crowd of hundreds in advance of the Council meeting. “I am standing here on behalf of the whole Somerville High School,” said Kapadia, “It is crucial that we raise our voices to advocate for justice and peace in Palestine.” 

Council President Ben Ewen-Campen introduced the resolution, saying that “for the last 100-plus days, we have seen a military campaign that has been the most devastating bombing campaign in our generation, killing tens of thousands of people, huge numbers of them innocent children. Something like 2 million people are now homeless and hungry, on the brink of starvation, being denied basic humanitarian aid. I am one of the many, many people in our community and beyond who believes that this needs to end, and it needs to end now.” Explaining that he struggled for many months with the decision to bring forward this resolution, he said “the truth is that this is an issue that is coming from the bottom of my heart. My moral convictions compelled me to draft this resolution, pure and simple.” Councillor Ewen-Campen’s full statement can be read here. 

Jamal Halawa, a Somerville High Teacher and Palestinian American resident who has lived in the city for over twenty years, testified before the council urging them to support the ceasefire resolution. “Simply put, voting for a Ceasefire signals to Palestinian and Arab Americans and Muslims in Somerville that our lives matter,” Halawa said. Halawa’s full speech can be found here.

Carina Kurban, the granddaughter of a Palestinian refugee who was ethnically cleansed from Haifa in 1948, shared the stories of direct brutality her family has faced at the hands of Israel, including when their home in Southern Lebanon was commandeered by the Israeli military for nearly two decades. As a 20 year old college student, Kurban told the council, she was stopped at Ben Gurion airport while traveling to the West Bank, “interrogated and humiliated for 8 hours, denied entry, strip searched, jailed, sexually harassed, assaulted, deported in handcuffs, and banned from the country indefinitely – and I was given no reason other than ‘terrorism’.” Kurban said, “We need a permanent ceasefire, and for Israel to be held accountable. Because without both, the situation will go back to what scholars like Noam Chomsky have called ‘an incremental genocide’ rather than an accelerated one.” Kurban’s full speech can be found here.

Long time Somerville resident Alain Jehlen, the son of a Holocaust survivor and husband of State Senator Pat Jehlen, urged Somerville Councilors to vote in favor of the Ceasefire Resolution. “It makes me furious that the Israeli government is using Holocaust victims like my family as a reason to slaughter Palestinians. Mass bombing, the systematic demolition of homes, and depriving everyone of food and water have nothing to do with defending Jews… The lesson for us from centuries of oppression capped by the murder of millions is that nobody should ever go through that again. Not just Jews, but nobody. Every human life is equal.” Jehlen’s full comments can be found here.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Boston PSL (@bostonpsl)

Councilor Willie Burnley Jr. was supportive of the resolution from the beginning. “For 110 days, the Apartheid State of Israel has dropped tens of thousands of bombs on Gaza, destroying more than 70% of homes, killing more than 25,000 people (the vast majority of which are women and children). We have a duty to listen to our constituents, to demand that our elected leaders put pressure on President Biden, and to end this genocide before it is too late!” Councilor Burnley Jr’s full speech can be found here.

Somerville for Palestine has been circulating a public letter to Senators Markey and Warren calling for a ceasefire and solidarity with Palestinians, with over 800 signatures from Somerville residents. The City Council resolution represents the next step in Somerville standing up for peace. Somerville for Palestine organizer Sara Halawa stated, “I’m so incredibly proud of my city for being the first in Massachusetts to call for a ceasefire. Like our SHS fight song says, ‘Somerville leads the way’!”

-30-

Constituents rang her doorbell in hopes of delivering the message directly, but Clark, who was believed to be home, did not answer.  Speeches by Palestinian women were made in front of her home. 

Yafa Suliman, a Palestinian constituent, emphasized, “Representative Clark has made a career out of advocating for gun safety and being a faithful supporter of the rights of women and children. But we are here to echo the calls of thousands of Rep Clark’s constituents who say: your hypocrisy is on full display!

Over 70% of Palestinians killed by the Israeli occupation forces in Gaza are women and children. Their lives could have been saved with a ceasefire!

A Ceasefire could have saved the lives of many Palestinian children like Maria Ahmad Abu Safe who was trapped in a dark tight space under the rubble for 4 days with no food or water, Screaming, with her remaining breath, to be saved.”

Earlier today in a powerful demonstration, constituents marched through Representative & Democratic Whip Katherine Clark's neighborhood to her beach-side home, carrying representations of shrouded children to symbolize those killed by Israel's indiscriminate bombing in Gaza. pic.twitter.com/7KsJscc7xG

— The Sparrow Project (@sparrowmedia) January 10, 2024

Lea Kayali, another Palestinian constituent, directly addressed Clark’s role as Whip of the Democratic party, stating, “We are hundreds of thousands of constituents – and millions of people across the country – who are disgusted with your support of genocide and the colossal failure of your so-called leadership. We will continue to expose your alignment with war profiteers. We will demand better representatives, a better system, a better society. We are committed to a world where my people – and all people – can live in freedom and dignity.

You are a leader of the Democratic party – and you will be responsible for its downfall. Because our generation will unseat those who commit crimes against the Palestinian people.”

Background:

Representative Clark’s constituents had actively sought her intervention through various means, expressing their concerns and demanding a ceasefire to save lives.

Despite thousands of calls for action, Representative Clark remained unresponsive, causing disheartenment among constituents. Her recent statement, “If I believed a ceasefire would save lives, I would have called for one already,” calls into question her commitment to democracy, gun safety and women’s and children’s rights.

Of further concern is Representative Clark’s significant financial backing from AIPAC, with a reported contribution of $60,000 in the past year. This financial support raises questions about her prioritization of foreign lobby interests over constituents’ needs.

Media Opportunities:

Media are invited to cover the event retrospectively, with interviews available upon request. Visuals include photos and videos of constituents holding representations of shrouded children and marching to Representative Clark’s beach-side home, where they rang the doorbell, made speeches and chanted. Video, audio, b-roll and interviews can be found here

An assembly of constituents, including Palestinians, Muslims, Jews, and allies, were present, speaking and chanting while holding signs.

-30-

The complaint highlights concerns about X Corp.’s lack of transparency in disclosing advertisements, leading to potential consumer deception and providing a breeding ground for scams. After losing a significant portion of its advertising revenue, X Corp. altered its labeling practices, making it challenging for users to distinguish between paid and organic content.

“X Corp.’s lack of disclosures to consumers, misrepresentations to advertisers, and flawed access to explanations about targeted advertising constitute unfair and deceptive practices. We urge the Commission to determine the extent of these violations and address them to the full extent of its authority,” said Sarah Kay Wiley, Policy Director of Check My Ads.

The complaint argues that X Corp.’s failure to adequately disclose advertisements misleads consumers into trusting content as organic, creating an environment ripe for scams. The lack of clear disclosure also leaves users unaware of being targeted with information and advertisements, violating Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The complaint contends that X Corp.’s actions violate the terms of the 2022 Stipulated Order with the FTC, prohibiting misrepresentation of its advertising practices, a decree which saw them pay a fine of $150 million. Furthermore, Promotional materials for advertising products indicate a clear “Promoted” label, which is not consistently applied to users’ timelines. This misrepresentation not only harms advertisers’ expectations but exposes them to legal risks.

"Industry watchdog Check My Ads is petitioning the Federal Trade Commission to investigate X for unlabeled—and potentially misleading—advertisements." https://t.co/db7EfBWPnc

— Check My Ads (@CheckMyAdsHQ) November 15, 2023

The complaint also points out inconsistencies in X Corp.’s explanations of user targeting practices, hindering users from understanding the advertising targeting process. Broken hyperlinks and a lack of accessibility to information diminish transparency and hinder an informed user experience. 

X Corp. primarily monetizes user information for advertising purposes. Since its acquisition by Elon Musk, the platform has undergone significant changes, including layoffs and alterations to its advertising targeting methods. The company’s revenue has suffered, losing 60% of advertising revenue, and a decline in user trust has led to a drop in valuation. 

Check My Ads Institute calls for the FTC to investigate X Corp.’s violations and seek remedies, including:

• An injunction requiring X Corp. to provide a public database detailing all advertising on the platform, including information about who paid for the advertisements, how the ads were targeted, what ad networks placed the advertisements (if not X Corp.), and how advertisements were distinguished from organic content;
• An injunction for X Corp. to clearly label all advertisements
• Financial penalties per violation under the 2022 Administrative Order;
• An injunction requiring relinquishment of ill-gotten gains from misrepresentations made to users.
• Any other relief the Commission sees fit.

You can view the full complaint here: Check My Ads Complaint and Request for FTC Investigation Into X Advertising Practices on Scribd

-30-

Check My Ads Institute is an independent watchdog reshaping the digital adtech industry from within its ranks — and building a new sustainable standard in digital advertising.

We’re holding the surveillance adtech industry accountable for abuses against advertisers and consumers, and spearheading the development of a transparent, efficient and privacy-focused digital advertising marketplace.

HAPPENING NOW: “die-in” by a Tucson pro-palestinian group. It’s outside a Raytheon plant on Hermans road and Nogales highway. pic.twitter.com/iQz5tFWyOC

— Adam Klepp (@AdamKleppAZ) November 2, 2023

Organized by the Tucson Coalition for Palestine and co-sponsored by Arizona Palestine Solidarity Alliance, Jewish Voice for Peace, and Derechos Humanos, this action came on the anniversary of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which established the British government’s support for the dispossession of Palestine as the “national home for the Jewish people.” The action also came amidst Israel’s ground invasion and continued bombardment of Gaza, including two airstrikes on the Jabalia Refugee Camp in the past two days.

The Palestinian death toll now surpasses 9,000, and the genocide continues with aid and a green light from the US government. These killings serve not only to ethnically cleanse Palestinians, but also to fill the coffers of weapon manufacturers. A recent Newsweek article reports that shares for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon have all increased since October 7.” As Tucson residents, we stand with Palestine and against the war profiteers in our community,” a protestor said. 

More than 125 people staged a die-in blocking the main entrance to Raytheon in Tucson this morning to condemn the genocide against Palestinians. #Gaza_Genocide #Gaza #FreePalestine pic.twitter.com/A42etZlvt7

— Tucson Coalition for Palestine (@TucsonPalestine) November 2, 2023

Despite governmental support for Israel, protests across the US and around the world are growing. This die-in comes as part of a wave of people taking action against the weapon manufacturers whose missiles are killing people in Gaza. In the past week, protestors in the UK and Boston shut down Elbit offices. Today, in Niles, Illinois youth organizers blocked the entrance to Woodward, Inc.. In Tucson, residents are connecting the Raytheon-manufactured surveillance equipment which hunts asylum seekers in the American Southwest to the bombs the company supplies to Israel. “We want a thriving, life-giving economy, not one that contributes to genocide and the militarization of our borders,” the Tucson Coalition for Justice in Palestine said. “We want to encourage Tucson residents and people around the world to join with us and take a moral stand against companies like Raytheon who profit off of murder.

-30-

Musk’s acknowledgment of these significant losses comes as X is also claiming — without evidence — that many major brands have returned to advertise on the platform.

The #StopToxicTwitter coalition has documented the significant missteps Musk has made since taking over the platform last October. His mismanagement began at the outset when he lied to civil-rights leaders about his content-moderation plans. Musk then laid off key staff charged with ensuring brand and user safety while granting a “general amnesty” to thousands of previously banned accounts, including those belonging to neo-Nazis, white supremacists, homophobes, transphobes, conspiracy theorists and others spouting hate and disinformation. As a result, #StopToxicTwitter coalition members, including the Center for Countering Digital Hate and Media Matters for America, have repeatedly shown that major brands’ ads are appearing next to extremist, bigoted and antisemitic content.

Since Musk took over the platform, #StopToxicTwitter members have doggedly tracked the impact of Musk’s reckless abandonment of content-moderation standards. More than 600 advertisers had abandoned X by the start of 2023, fearing that their brands wouldn’t be safe under Musk’s erratic leadership. Their departure contributed to a 70-percent drop in platform revenue over the previous year, according to Standard Media Index. By midyear, Fidelity Investments reported that the platform was worth just one-third of the $44 billion Musk paid for it.

#StopToxicTwitter member ADL is among Musk’s chief critics, repeatedly calling out his amplification of antisemitic voices and memes. While X CEO Linda Yaccarino met with ADL to hear their concerns, Musk lashed out, amplifying antisemitic attacks on the organization and vowing to sue. X has already attempted to silence a critic by suing the Center for Countering Digital Hate, another #StopToxicTwitter member that has documented the explosion of hate speech on the platform since Musk took over.

“The #StopToxicTwitter coalition exists to shine a light on Musk’s mismanagement of X, and on how Musk’s decisions to replatform white supremacists and conspiracy theorists have harmed people and the brands that advertise on the platform,” said Free Press Co-CEO Jessica J. González. “That the wealthiest man on the planet is using his money, influence and even legal action to threaten and silence critics, including our coalition partners, is reprehensible. Musk bought an advertising platform and advertisers have made themselves clear: They want no part of the toxic stew of hate and lies that Musk has enabled. The only one Musk has to blame for X’s declining fortunes is himself.” 

“Elon Musk’s professed commitment to free speech is nothing more than fig leaf flapping in the wind,” said Media Matters Chairman and CEO Angelo Carusone. “For Musk, it’s always been about morphing Twitter into a free for all that enables extremists and promotes his red-pilled worldview. Rarely does a day go by where Musk does not further expose himself as a volatile and petty hypocrite. “We know that Musk is going to continue to ratchet up the temperature on the simmering cauldron of deceit and hate that Twitter has become. Accordingly, the most important question isn’t what Musk will do next, it’s what will Twitter’s few remaining big-name advertisers and business partners do now? Continuing to support Twitter in its current state is akin to actively financing hate. It’s also a truly bizarre decision given that it’s only a matter of time before they inevitably get scorched by the noxious stew that Musk is cooking.”

“Advertisers have fled Twitter because Musk’s takeover cost the company its legitimacy by welcoming hate, extremism and disinformation, which no respectable brand wants to be associated with,” said Accountable Tech Policy and Advocacy Director Kaili Lambe. “Twitter’s downward spiral is due to Musk’s complete contempt for community standards and the safeguards that both users and advertisers demand. It’s the ultimate hypocrisy that Musk still masquerades as a free-speech absolutist when he’s made it clear he will pull every lever at his disposal to silence his critics. It should go without saying that his tactics are bad for business as well as an internet that allows for true democratic engagement and community conversations.”

-30-

Read the full text of the letter here, which includes the full list of signatories

CCDH has previously said it views the lawsuit as a move “straight out of the authoritarian playbook.” Musk is now showing that he will stop at nothing to silence anyone who criticizes him for his own decisions and actions, the group added. 

The letter, published today and signed by 64 organizations and individuals – including Amnesty International, GLAAD, and Friends of the Earth – describes the legal action as a “threat to the right to the freedom of expression, resulting in a dangerous chilling effect on civil society, experts, and advocates – and ultimately the public, which deserves to know how X and similar platforms are spreading hate and disinformation.”

Instead of using scare tactics to shut down independent research and evade accountability, the letter calls on X — and all major social media platforms — to embrace independent researcher access, transparency and accountability.

“Civil society organizations have joined together and shown that they will not be intimidated from undertaking or supporting independent research that is clearly in the public interest. CCDH and these groups and leaders are sending a message to Elon Musk and every social media company that we will not be bullied into silence,” said Imran Ahmed, founder and chief executive officer of CCDH.

Organizations and leaders who signed the open letter include: Amnesty International, Friends of the Earth; GLAAD; Union of Concerned Scientists; Free Press; Center for Digital Democracy; Ekō (formerly SumOfUs); Fairplay; Fight for the Future; Institute for Strategic Dialogue; News Media Association; HateAid; Coalition for Independent Tech Research Board; Reset; Accountable Tech; The Tech Oversight Project; Mozilla; MediaJustice; Global Project Against Hate and Extremism; ‘NEVER AGAIN’ Association; PFLAG National; Reproaction; Antisemitism Policy Trust; Public Interest News Foundation; Roger McNamee; Sander van der Linden, University of Cambridge; Stephan Lewandowsky, University of Bristol.

Since Musk completed his takeover of X/Twitter in October 2022, CCDH has monitored the increase of hate speech and disinformation on the platform.

CCDH’s research has shown that the volume of tweets containing the n-word rose by up to 202% in the month after Musk’s takeover; shown that tweets mentioning LGBTQ+ people in connection with “child grooming” more than doubled in the four months after the takeover. We also found that the platform failed to act on 99 out of 100 hateful tweets posted by Twitter Blue subscribers.

“I have completed my gender confirmation surgery, and am now in the post-operative recovery phase. I want to thank all of the people who helped me reach this life changing event,” said Ms. Langan.

Ms. Langan spent the first decades of her life alternately seeking gender affirmation and attempting to conceal her gender beneath a mask of regrettably violent masculinity. In 1996, Ms. Langan was arrested and placed into federal custody, where she is currently serving a sentence of life without parole. Upon her confinement, Ms. Langan started to reckon with the harm caused by developing a violent persona rather than making peace with her femininity.

She renounced her previously held beliefs and began assiduously requesting access to gender affirming care from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP).

“Ms. Langan’s long unmet need for gender affirming care has shaped every part of her life, from her chaotic past to her moral transformation and prisoner advocacy. Now that FBOP has satisfied its constitutional obligations to Ms. Langan, she can finally move forward as her truest and best self,” said attorney Moira Meltzer-Cohen, who has represented Ms. Langan since 2015.  

Under the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution, prisons are responsible for providing medically necessary care to prisoners. Nevertheless, when it came to gender-affirming surgeries, this right was universally denied to  the many transgender people in federal custody until the end of 2022. 

While being transgender is not a mental disorder, transgender people may experience gender dysphoria (GD). GD derives from the external conditions that contravene a person’s gender, and is thus treated by alleviating the medical, psychological, and social barriers to living fully within the individual’s gender identity. Gender dysphoria is a serious medical condition, but it is highly treatable. For decades, the medical community has been aware of safe, effective treatments for GD. If untreated or mistreated, gender dysphoria can lead to serious risks and harms, including both physical and mental health effects. 

Every major medical and psychological organization in the United States, including the National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC), has unambiguously endorsed the articulated World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care for the treatment of transgender individuals. According to the WPATH standards, GCS is the obvious and necessary treatment for individuals suffering from GD who desire to alter their bodies to relieve symptoms. “Medical procedures attendant to gender affirming/confirming surgeries are not optional in any meaningful sense, but are understood to be medically necessary for the treatment of the diagnosed condition. In some cases, such surgery is the only effective treatment for the condition, and for some people genital surgery is essential and life-saving.”

“Ms. Langan is not alone in enduring decades of anguish resulting from the Federal Bureau of Prisons functionally blanket denial of this medically necessary, life-saving care,” said Attorney Meltzer-Cohen. “We are thrilled that FBOP has meaningfully altered its practice to comply with the Eight Amendment, starting with providing Ms. Langan with the care she needs and deserves. We hope that her persistence will benefit others in her position. We also want to acknowledge the tremendous work recently done by ACLU and other attorneys on behalf of former prisoner Cristina Iglesias, which undoubtedly paved the way for this critical victory.” 

In 2012, sixteen years after her first requests for gender affirming care, FBOP approved Ms. Langan to begin Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT). In 2016, she was moved to a women’s facility. She continued to request GCS, but over more than four years, her requests were either denied or simply left unresolved. Although FBOP has articulated policies that acknowledge the medical necessity of gender affirming care, including surgery, for prisoners suffering from gender dysphoria, no trans prisoner had previously been approved for such surgeries by the Transgender Executive Council (TEC), a body of prison administrators and medical staff that oversees decisions about medical treatment for trans prisoners. 

In September, 2020, an action filed in the D.C. Circuit Court on Ms. Langan’s behalf set forth claims for relief under the 8th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, and other statutory law. Shortly thereafter, the TEC approved one of Ms. Langan’s many previously disregarded requests for GCS. Ms. Langan’s case remains stayed pending resolution of her final request for gender affirming permanent facial hair removal. 

Ms. Langan credits her attorneys, the community of LGBTQ advocacy groups, her family, friends (especially her “BFF, Sugar Dumpling”), the previous medical director of FMC, Carswell, and her fellow prisoners with helping her to remain strong enough to see this outcome. While she appreciates that the TEC approved her request for clinical gender confirmation, she hopes that the many other trans people confined in federal penal institutions are also able to access medically necessary gender affirming care without having to suffer years-long delays. “I hope that many others who need gender confirmation can get it too,” said Ms. Langan. “While I do want to continue to live my life with some level of privacy, I am sure I will have to speak out and be an advocate for trans prisoners and the LGBTQ+ community in general.”

-30-

“On September 14th I tested positive for Coronavirus after accompanying a friend who had cold-like symptoms to get tested. I immediately quarantined, consulted a doctor, and have since developed symptoms. Sadly, I will need to cancel some public engagements, and participate remotely in others, while I remain under quarantine until October 1st, 2021. I’m fine and thankfully due to the benefits of the vaccine my symptoms are very mild. My heart goes out to everyone who is suffering and grieving as a result of this horrible virus and I look forward to a day when we can put all of this behind us.

“While I may not share the same influence as a multi-platinum recording artist, I recognize the importance of transparency, and recognize the threat misinformation poses to the health and wellbeing of diverse communities both online and off.  So I’ll just say this… vaccines work, masks work, testing works, healthcare is a right, and we all need to support each other.

“See you soon, Chelsea.”

-30-

Dear Judge O’Grady,

It is not a secret that I struggle to live with depression and post traumatic stress disorder. Both stem from my childhood experience growing up in a rural mountain community and were compounded by exposure to combat during military service. Depression is a constant. Though stress, particularly stress caused by war, can manifest itself at different times and in different ways. The tell-tale signs of a person afflicted by PTSD and depression can often be outwardly observed and are practically universally recognizable. Hard lines about the face and jaw. Eyes, once bright and wide, now deepset and fearful. And an inexplicably sudden loss of interest in things that used to spark joy. These are the noticeable changes in my demeanor marked by those who knew me before and after military service. To say that the period of my life spent serving in the United States Air Force had an impression on me would be an understatement. It is more accurate to say that it irreversibly transformed my identity as an American. Having forever altered the thread of my life’s story, weaved into the fabric of our nation’s history. To better appreciate the significance of how this came to pass, I would like to explain my experience deployed to Afghanistan as it was in 2012 and how it is I came to violate the Espionage Act, as a result.

In my capacity as a signals intelligence analyst stationed at Bagram Airbase, I was made to track down the geographic location of handset cellphone devices believed to be in the possession of so-called enemy combatants. To accomplish this mission required access to a complex chain of globe-spanning satellites capable of maintaining an unbroken connection with remotely piloted aircraft, commonly referred to as drones. Once a steady connection is made and a targeted cell phone device is acquired, an imagery analyst in the U.S., in coordination with a drone pilot and camera operator, would take over using information I provided to surveil everything that occurred within the drone’s field of vision. This was done, most often, to document the day-to-day lives of suspected militants. Sometimes, under the right conditions, an attempt at capture would be made. Other times, a decision to strike and kill them where they stood would be weighed.

The first time that I witnessed a drone strike came within days of my arrival to Afghanistan. Early that morning, before dawn, a group of men had gathered together in the mountain ranges of Patika provence around a campfire carrying weapons and brewing tea. That they carried weapons with them would not have been considered out of the ordinary in the place I grew up, muchless within the virtually lawless tribal territories outside the control of the Afghan authorities. Except that among them was a suspected member of the Taliban, given away by the targeted cell phone device in his pocket. As for the remaining individuals, to be armed, of military age, and sitting in the presence of an alleged enemy combatant was enough evidence to place them under suspicion as well. Despite having peacefully assembled, posing no threat, the fate of the now tea drinking men had all but been fulfilled. I could only look on as I sat by and watched through a computer monitor when a sudden, terrifying flurry of hellfire missiles came crashing down, splattering purple-colored crystal guts on the side of the morning mountain. 

Since that time and to this day, I continue to recall several such scenes of graphic violence carried out from the cold comfort of a computer chair. Not a day goes by that I don’t question the justification for my actions. By the rules of engagement, it may have been permissible for me to have helped to kill those men—whose language I did not speak, customs I did not understand, and crimes I could not identify—in the gruesome manner that I did. Watch them die. But how could it be considered honorable of me to continuously have laid in wait for the next opportunity to kill unsuspecting persons, who, more often than not, are posing no danger to me or any other person at the time. Nevermind honorable, how could it be that any thinking person continued to believe that it was necessary for the protection of the United States of America to be in Afghanistan and killing people, not one of whom present was responsible for the September 11th attacks on our nation. Notwithstanding, in 2012, a full year after the demise of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, I was a part of killing misguided young men who were but mere children on the day of 9/11.

Nevertheless, in spite of my better instincts, I continued to follow orders and obey my command for fear of repercussion. Yet, all the while, becoming increasingly aware that the war had very little to do with preventing terror from coming into the United States and a lot more to do with protecting the profits of weapons manufacturers and so-called defense contractors. The evidence of this fact was laid bare all around me. In the longest or most technologically advanced war in American history, contract mercenaries outnumbered uniform wearing soldiers 2 to 1 and earned as much as 10 times their salary. Meanwhile, it did not matter whether it was, as I had seen, an Afghan farmer blown in half, yet miraculously conscious and pointlessly trying to scoop his insides off the ground, or whether it was an American flag-draped coffin lowered into Arlington National Cemetery to the sound of a 21-gun salute. Bang, bang, bang. Both served to justify the easy flow of capital at the cost of blood—theirs and ours. When I think about this I am grief-stricken and ashamed of myself for the things I’ve done to support it.

The most harrowing day of my life came months into my deployment to Afghanistan when a routine surveillance mission turned into disaster. For weeks we had been tracking the movements of a ring of car bomb manufacturers living around Jalalabad. Car bombs directed at US bases had become an increasingly frequent and deadly problem that summer, so much effort was put into stopping them. It was a windy and clouded afternoon when one of the suspects had been discovered headed eastbound, driving at a high rate of speed. This alarmed my superiors who believe he might be attempting to escape across the border into Pakistan. 

A drone strike was our only chance and already it began lining up to take the shot. But the less advanced predator drone found it difficult to see through clouds and compete against strong headwinds. The single payload MQ-1 failed to connect with its target, instead missing by a few meters. The vehicle, damaged, but still driveable, continued on ahead after narrowly avoiding destruction. Eventually, once the concern of another incoming missile subsided, the driver stopped, got out of the car, and checked himself as though he could not believe he was still alive. Out of the passenger side came a woman wearing an unmistakable burka. As astounding as it was to have just learned there had been a woman, possibly his wife, there with the man we intended to kill moments ago, I did not have the chance to see what happened next before the drone diverted its camera when she began frantically to pull out something from the back of the car.   

A couple of days passed before I finally learned from a briefing by my commanding officer about what took place. There indeed had been the suspect’s wife with him in the car. And in the back were their two young daughters, ages 5 and 3 years old. A cadre of Afghan soldiers were sent to investigate where the car had stopped the following day. It was there they found them placed in the dumpster nearby. The eldest was found dead due to unspecified wounds caused by shrapnel that pierced her body. Her younger sister was alive but severely dehydrated. As my commanding officer relayed this information to us she seemed to express disgust, not for the fact that we had errantly fired on a man and his family, having killed one of his daughters; but for the suspected bomb maker having ordered his wife to dump the bodies of their daughters in the trash, so that the two of them could more quickly escape across the border. Now, whenever I encounter an individual who thinks that drone warfare is justified and reliably keeps America safe, I remember that time and ask myself how could I possibly continue to believe that I am a good person, deserving of my life and the right to pursue happiness.

One year later, at a farewell gathering for those of us who would soon be leaving military service, I sat alone, transfixed by the television, while others reminisced together. On television was breaking news of the president giving his first public remarks about the policy surrounding the use of drone technology in warfare. His remarks were made to reassure the public of reports scrutinizing the death of civilians in drone strikes and the targeting of American citizens. The president said that a high standard of “near certainty” needed to be met in order to ensure that no civilians were present. But from what I knew, of the instances where civilians plausibly could have been present, those killed were nearly always designated enemies killed in action unless proven otherwise. Nonetheless, I continued to heed his words as the president went on to explain how a drone could be used to eliminate someone who posed an “imminent threat” to the United States. Using the analogy of taking out a sniper, with his sights set on an unassuming crowd of people, the president likened the use of drones to prevent a would-be terrorist from carrying out his evil plot. But, as I understood it to be, the unassuming crowd had been those who lived in fear and the terror of drones in their skies and the sniper in this scenario had been me. I came to believe that the policy of drone assasiniation was being used to mislead the public that it keeps us safe, and when I finally left the military, still processing what I’d been a part of, I began to speak out, believing my participation in the drone program to have been deeply wrong. 

I dedicated myself to anti-war activism, and was asked to partake in a peace conference in Washington, DC late November, 2013. People had come together from around the world to share experiences about what it is like living in the age of drones. Fazil bin Ali Jaber had journeyed from Yemen to tell us of what happened to his brother Salem bin Ali Jaber and their cousin Waleed. Waleed had been a policeman and Salem was a well-respected firebrand Imam, known for giving sermons to young men about the path towards destruction should they choose to take up violent jihad.

One day in August 2012, local members of Al Qaeda traveling through Fazil’s village in a car spotted Salem in the shade, pulled up towards him, and beckoned him to come over and speak to them. Not one to miss an opportunity to evangelize to the youth, Salem proceeded cautiously with Waleed by his side. Fazil and other villagers began looking on from afar. Farther still was an ever present reaper drone looking too. 

As Fazil recounted what happened next, I felt myself transported back in time to where I had been on that day, 2012. Unbeknownst to Fazil and those of his village at the time was that they had not been the only watching Salem approach the jihadist in the car. From Afghanistan, I and everyone on duty paused their work to witness the carnage that was about to unfold. At the press of a button from thousands of miles away, two hellfire missiles screeched out of the sky, followed by two more. Showing no signs of remorse, I, and those around me, clapped and cheered triumphantly. In front of a speechless auditorium, Fazil wept.

About a week after the peace conference I received a lucrative job offer if I were to come back to work as a government contractor. I felt uneasy about the idea. Up to that point, my only plan post military separation had been to enroll in college to complete my degree. But the money I could make was by far more than I had ever made before; in fact, it was more than any of my college-educated friends were making. So, after giving it careful consideration, I delayed going to school for a semester and took the job. 

For a long time I was uncomfortable with myself over the thought of taking advantage of my military background to land a cushy desk job. During that time I was still processing what I had been through and I was starting to wonder if I was contributing again to the problem of money and war by accepting to return as a defense contractor. Worse was my growing apprehension that everyone around me was also taking part in a collective delusion and denial that was used to justify our exorbitant salaries, for comparatively easy labor. The thing I feared most at the time was the temptation not to question it. 

Then it came to be that one day after work I stuck around to socialize with a pair of co-workers whose talented work I had come to greatly admire. They made me feel welcomed, and I was happy to have earned their approval. But then, to my dismay, our brand-new friendship took an unexpectedly dark turn. They elected that we should take a moment and view together some archived footage of past drone strikes. Such bonding ceremonies around a computer to watch so-called “war porn” had not been new to me. I partook in them all the time while deployed to Afghanistan. But on that day, years after the fact, my new friends gaped and sneered, just as my old one’s had, at the sight of faceless men in the final moments of their lives. I sat by watching too; said nothing and felt my heart breaking into pieces. 

Your Honor, the truest truism that I’ve come to understand about the nature of war is that war is trauma. I believe that any person either called-upon or coerced to participate in war against their fellow man is promised to be exposed to some form of trauma. In that way, no soldier blessed to have returned home from war does so uninjured. The crux of PTSD is that it is a moral conundrum that afflicts invisible wounds on the psyche of a person made to burden the weight of experience after surviving a traumatic event. How PTSD manifests depends on the circumstances of the event. So how is the drone operator to process this? The victorious rifleman, unquestioningly remorseful, at least keeps his honor intact by having faced off against his enemy on the battlefield. The determined fighter pilot has the luxury of not having to witness the gruesome aftermath. But what possibly could I have done to cope with the undeniable cruelties that I perpetuated? 

My conscience, once held at bay, came roaring back to life. At first, I tried to ignore it. Wishing instead that someone, better placed than I, should come along to take this cup from me. But this too was folly. Left to decide whether to act, I only could do that which I ought to do before God and my own conscience. The answer came to me, that to stop the cycle of violence, I ought to sacrifice my own life and not that of another person.

So, I contacted an investigative reporter, with whom I had had an established prior relationship, and told him that I had something the American people needed to know.

Respectfully,
Daniel Hale