Inaugural Address

President Obama's inaugural speech – in its lofty tone reminiscent of John F. Kennedy's 1960 inaugural address – has reminded us of why we liked him so much in 2008 and why we still have a soft spot in our hearts for him. He musters enormous eloquence in defense of the best American progressive tradition.

But his speech is marred by serious omissions. There is no mention of the drone war or of any covert assassination programs.

Now you might say, the man can't talk about everything in 20 minutes. Give him a break.

The inaugural is beguiling because it repeats Abraham Lincoln's formula of democracy as government of, by and for the people and cites the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence that all human beings have the right to life, liberty, and happiness. In the US the right to life means, at least, that you cannot be killed without a trial, without a chance to defend yourself, to examine the evidence the government has against you and to try to refute that evidence.

The drone war is so serious because it has killed American citizens without benefit of trial or a chance to defend themselves.

The list of people to be killed by drones and their missiles is made up by some officials high in the hierarchy in the White House, including President Obama. The list is secret, the deliberations are secret, the criteria for getting on that list are secret. The whole drone war is hidden away. Should major policies be hidden in a democracy?

One American citizen victim to the drones was a Muslim Iman Anwar Al-Awlaki. Another person killed by drones was Al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son. Al-Awlaki was a bad actor but he never got the trial he was entitled to as an American citizen. Since the whole project is shrouded in secrecy we don't know what his son had done to deserve being murdered at age 16.

This whole project of killing people selected secretly by people we don't know who they are, of depriving American citizens of their constitutional rights is not consistent with President. Obama's praise and endorsement of American democracy. The government that murders people from the air – frequently innocent people – in Afghanistan, in Yemen, in Sudan and we don't know where next, is contemptuous of democracy, and contemptuous of the Constitution.

But terrorism is a serious threat. 9/11 taught us that. So perhaps we should ignore the lofty questions raised by the rhetoric of the Inaugural Address. Perhaps we should not think about the right to life, or constitutional protections. We should just be pragmatic and ask: is this really making us safe?

Suppose you are a Taliban in Afghanistan and you believe that it is okay for you to murder people for the sake of your tribe and for the sake of Islam. And now the Americans with their fabulous modern technology come and do the same thing with airplanes flown by someone in Nebraska. Would you not think that the Americans are doing just what you are doing? The weapons used are different. Yours are guns; their's are drones with missiles. But you are doing the same thing namely trying to undermine the other by killing their leaders.

By using the drones, we are telling the Taliban, we are telling al Quaida and connected groups: "we're just like you – we're terrorists too."

That is not going to win the hearts and minds of people in the Mideast, and now more and more in Africa also. Instead, the drone war has made us more hated and has recruited many new persons to the ranks of various groups the government would describe as "terrorists."

Senior military leaders at home have insisted for years that “we can't kill our way out of these conflicts.” Negotiations are essential. But they become more difficult and less likely with every new drone strike.

The drone war is counterproductive. It gives the lie to all the high-minded rhetoric we've heard in the inaugural address. It is profoundly immoral.

It should stop today. 

Yes, it's a relief but…

Like so many other Americans I was very afraid of four years under the leadership of a cynical, callous capitalist like Mitt Romney whose only real interest is piling up more money at the expense of American working people.

Yes I'm glad that Obama got elected. I'm glad that enough white Americans were ready to resist racist pressures to vote for him. (Romney voters were 88% white.) I'm glad that women made a strong showing in a campaign where women were assigned the traditional role of smiling wives in the background of the two great men.

Yes, I am glad that money cannot completely buy elections yet.

But as citizens of the United States we must also look this fact very clearly in the face: In re-electing Barack Obama president of the United States, we all continue to be guilty of mass murder of innocents around the globe.

According to reliable estimates, American unmanned aircraft – the so-called “drones” – have killed about 3500 people in the last year among whom as many as 25% may have been noncombatants. One in four of the victims of our drone attacks have been innocent bystanders, about 900 people or so.

According to some estimates, as few as 6% of the remaining 2500 victims of drone attacks were high profile terrorist enemies of the United States. The others are what observers describe as “foot soldiers,” who are no more a threat to the security of the United States than ordinary soldiers in the military of other countries. But they were Muslims.

Four of those killed were American citizens. One of them work for Al-Qaeda; one of them was his 16-year-old son who was not accused of anything except being his father's son. Al Awlaki was not a good US citizen, for sure. But constitutional guarantees of a trial by your peers are not reserved for the innocent. It is a constitutional right for everyone. The constitutional lawyer in the White House has limited respect for our Constitution.

In voting for Obama, we have unfortunately also voted for the drone war and other infringements on our constitutional liberties. If the president can kill al Awlaki without arresting or trying him in a legitimate court of law, he can do the same to you and me.

We must be clear how bizarre this situation is. After 9/11 our government has repeatedly violated our Constitution. The security in the war against terror that our government promises us is not security for us as free American citizens because we are being asked to give up those freedoms. The security they promise us is the security of the all powerful state – of totalitarianism.

In line with this disregard of American liberties, and of the entire issue of clearly illegal assassinations of American citizens and citizens of other countries, this whole issue was not mentioned but once in the entire campaign. For a year or two Romney and Obama battled it out and tried to sell themselves to the American electorate but our program of illegal assassination was not mentioned. Neither candidate pointed out that one of the many things we voted for was a continuation of America as mass murderer.

When it comes to matters of security the government is extremely close lipped. Not much is known about the drone war. Not much is known about how the government selects its victims. Not much is known about whether there is any way of getting off the presidents kill list.

Democracy is impossible if citizens do not know what the government is doing they are asked to vote for. Our government once again asked us to vote for it, but they asked us to vote for it blindly. They are not telling us what they do.

So, yes, this election made some space for democracy over lies, over obscene amounts of money, over racism and gender prejudice, and religious intolerance. But it was also a vote for secret, illegal mass murder, of violations of our constitutional liberties.

I am relieved, but…