fully approved it. i mean, you know, you talk about the assassination plotting of some of the other ones, castro, whatever the cia tried and never really accomplished. these were things that eisenhower was fixated on too, you know? he was giving the green light on it, you know? dulles had a habit of testing the edge of the envelope on his orders, you know, and he might trip over a little bit, but he was, you know, he was wildly popular in the '50s. i mean, his cover was on "time" magazine, you know, as america's super spy. >> i had read that the dulles brothers had planning that overthrow even before eisenhower was sworn in. once they found out he was elected, they figured that they would get their way. i don't know if you read anything about that yourself. >> i don't know about foster. i could see allen because he was actually a deputy director at the cia during the truman administration under general smith who had been eisenhower's

chief of staff. .. its intent was to built up have lets and villages, in south vietnam, they end ed up with 20,000 people killed. colby defended phoenix and almost all those deaths were

combat casualties. turned off a lot of phoenix deaths were assassination and torture and a lot of the operators worked with vix under the cia even though colby send out a memos to the people involved and say we don't condone expert judicial punishment. a lot of that was still going on. always defended his role in vietnam's. he thought that it was a travesty the emery brothers were overthrown in vietnam and we could have won the war and his family is still in power which nothing could have been further from the truth. thank you very much, i appreciate it, you are a good audience.

>> thank you for coming tonight. he will sign books at the table and we have them for sale at the counter, thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> is there a nonfiction author or book you would like to see featured on booktv? send us an e-mail, booktv@c-span.org. tweet us@booktv or post a comment on our wall,

facebook.com/booktv. >> tonight we are here to welcome william arkin, scholar, author, analysts, journalists who focuses on national security issues that has been doing so for over 40 years. his expertise has been tapped by a wide range of very influential books ranging from greenpeace international to the u.s. air force and his career is interesting and too long to go into the he was army intelligence during the cold war, national security adviser to the new york times, military analyst for nbc news and author or co-author of 11 books and many articles for newspapers and journals. bill is not one to shy away from controversy and drones are definitely controversial right now. every time you turn on the news, talking about drone regulations.

and in writing this introduction i went on line, the twitter feed subjects were quite interesting, posts like international police agencies countering growing threats of itts to civilians. another one says the neck air force 757 makes emergency landing in the morning. and it goes on. when it was posted yesterday in orange bookstore, we are including in his list on twitter tweets. only welcome william arkin. >> thank you very much. i am also a vermont resident, spending most of my time in new york city these days. and today it was an annoying day for me like most days are.

and it was annoying particularly because i was driving to appointment and turned on the radio and was listening to a story about drones on the radio. and i was thinking okay. i heard the introduction of who was going to be on the show. some guy from industry, some lobbyists, some lefty journalist, i couldn't just turn the radio off and told you exactly what they were going to say. and unfortunately my drive was long enough ahead to listen to the show stands they said pretty much what i expected which is pretty much what we expect. and three years ago when i started working on a book on petronis my publisher said to me why don't you write a book on drones and i said i don't really care about drones, don't really

know anything. he said perfect. that is generally how i approach most of my projects and the journey that i took in doing that really was an eye opening one for me because i hardly wrote a book about drones. i wrote a book about what drones are all about in our society and what they mean and i am not sure my publisher was particularly happy. and and guess i see books as a very personal matter. i have written a lot of them. i see myself as a bit of an artist, they represent me and my thoughts and was i visited with people in the drone world, started to talk to people in the drone world, it became clear to me that nobody understood what

the world was. it was so new that no theory or real understanding had developed yet. don't read this book. it has got 100 pages of footnotes, it is dense, it is typically, big words and theory. but here is what crystallized in my head. when i began to look into what the drone world was about and began to get into the science of understanding how drones work, how they take pictures and what they take pictures of hand what happens to those pictures and who looks at them and what it is for, where do we put it all?

i discovered a really unknown area to me so if it is unknown to me it is probably unknown to most people, hyper spectral imaging. don't ask me to explain. hyper spectral imaging is on the molecular level, granular level beyond the image itself but looking at the electromagnetic waves that make up everything. we are a set of electromagnetic waves, the amount of data collected from on high from the drone or the satellite is able to do things like look at a field and based upon molecular break down to you whether or not potatoes are growing in the field or barley growing at the field and hyper spectral imagery became important when looking for what is called change detection. dirt being moved and being moved recently which might indicate

the presence of an improvised explosive device on the road in afghanistan and iraq so they would fly these papers spectral imager is above the roads, look for disturbed dirt, literally, and there would be places they would pinpoint explosive ordnance for disposal people to go in the next step was wait a minute, we can identify people, all we need to have is a library of people. without getting into too much technicalities the way it works is you have this gigantic imager but it doesn't really know what it is seeing because it is just seeing dots and binary code. the only way it can tell what it is looking at is by pulsing its

own library of signatures called hyper spectral signature is so this is what the toyota pickup truck looks like in the hyper spectral scene. and there are hundreds of thousands of hyper spectral signature is, for the national signatures library located in tennessee and this has been going on in the world of weather forecasting for decades because you can tell there is water in the air, you can tell there's ice, how you can tell -- really the basis of modern day weather forecasts. now doing at on such a level of intensity that we can actually

if we have your signature identify you from space. there is no signature like your signature. and that is the cutting edge of where we are now. send it to a couple scientist friends of mine, and asked them to read it. sent it back with some things and said i might not explain the visual sight in the way you do engineer infrared means of this and short range infrared means it is emitting an infrared signal as opposed -- and may of the changes and was pretty happy with the chapter in the end. and sent it to a friend of mine.

and air force one star, who is literally the head of intelligence for the middle east. and interesting leading, that is what i got from a lot of people i talk to. and process the data, that is william arkin walking down the street. getting closer and closer, but how it all works and threads together and this enormous machine that is needed to do that, no idea.

when i started this book on drones, got to write a book on drones, i am going to buy a drone, fly it and learn what the mystique is and i did and i am going to give you a little reading of my experience, my drones that i bought. my first al gore flight didn't go very well. i was worried about the wind. this baby only weighs 14 ounces, less than a box of pasta. 3 meters just to be saved. the barn, two trees, house, drive way, before the batteries ran down and crashed into the mall. i couldn't get the hang of the controls and couldn't for the life of me figure out how to get the drone to come back. specks of dirt in the jeers and

propellers, my first maintenance job. my little patriot, my little paratrooper actually proved pretty high. not only that the video produced beautiful and obviously intentionally hilarious, the parent came to a wedding i went to next week. a flat space far away from the water, and on age 18, so we could fly, not going to let you fly until you watch the instructional video, two minutes later, was back, ready. not like i was teaching him to shoot a gun but as owner and commander of my own memory on a squadron i became ridiculously

efficient, carefully showing him how to connect to the iphone, how to do the self test, instructing him how to land it on my command, fretting about the wind in using words like aloft like i knew what i was talking about. then i left galen take the controls. the wind from the ocean buffeted and pushed our little apparent around. galen almost effortlessly got the hang of it right away flying to the top of the house we were staying in crossing the road between two electrical power lines, watch out, i yelled. darting joy parrot back to the front lawn, flying in it this way and that way and then lending it. he loved it, i loved it, i was humbled. when i debriefed galen, my squadron assistant said the trick for him was calibrating himself to the rhythm of the

drone, actual pilots call feeling the plane. unlike the pilot of command airplane a drone pilot doesn't actually feel the inert shot of its celebration caused by a gust of wind. a call galen's generation, his instinctive aptitudes truly says something about our society and the expansive world of the data machine drones represents. whatever happens in the wiring of a brain that allows a child to so easily pick up a second language, the digital natives have acquired a new way of absorbing and interacting with power digital world. still it drives me to distraction when i watch how galen or any of his contemporaries operate. they have multiple things going on at once on the laptops, the

ipod, the phone, the tv, they have several chat sessions open in a variety of applications, texting on the phone as well, watching the show and watching a ball game and have a usetube videos running and listening to music can sometimes have a couple homework assignments going with actual bricks and mortar books. the relentless demand to command all this data is only compounded by the speed at which music and videos are transmitted globally. not just the home wi-fi networking but through satellites and cables and fiber-optic networks needed to moved it all. galen and his generation did not conform to the machinery of the day. the machine conforms to their expectations. that is what i learned. the machine conforms to our expectations. why do we have drones?

14,000 today and climbing, 70,000 worldwide, why was there a radio show this morning about regulation of toys that are going to be under the christmas trees this year in great abundance and under the christmas trees in great abundance because the price has gone down so the very paris that cost me three years ago $400 is selling for less than $200, that is the way of the world of electronics. all of these people are talking about the federal government has to regulate it because drones of being flown in bad places and that people could be flying drones and trees and we will have drooled licenses for tulips

but what it represents is a sea change, i can fly a drone at put as long as i have line of sight communication with a drone. in wireless terms, 160 feet. that is $200. if you want to spend $2,000 you get the drone you pay for, if you want to spend $20,000 you get the drone you pay for it if you want to spend $2 million you get the drone we pay for and we even have now billion dollars drones, drones the steps they're over 24 hours that can serve a the entirety of the land mass of asia in one day. we get what we pay for. but like my a little parrot,

accusing where to take it this is what it is all about. when i was in the army, the ratio of intelligence analysts to soldiers was 1 to 100. that is to say for every person who carried a gun in the military there was one intelligence person behind them, at battalion level of something like 1500 people there might be a group of 10 to 15 intelligence people. today the ratio is exactly reversed. for every one soldier in the field today, there are 100

intelligence people behind them. that is the reality of the back end of doing anything. for every car on the road there are thousands upon thousands upon thousands of manufacturers, insurance people, you think of it, think of it in your head of the industry behind cars. drones are no different so, therefore, not different from manned aircraft taking pictures or satellites that are taking pictures or eavesdropping or cyberspying or all the data we are collecting today. our real problem is utilizing the information in a useful way and our real problem is that we have experienced this revolution in information so rapidly over the last 15 years of constant

war that we don't even understand what it is put we are doing. so let me give you an example that is really simple to get today. a year ago president obama announced the united states was going to take military action against isis, a new campaign. what did he say? first, he assured the american people there would be no. on the ground. what does that mean? it means we sent out the unmanned machine to do with the unmanned machines have become so perfect that doing. second, he said once we collect the intelligence that we need, we will be able to eradicate isis. fast forward a year.

i know you will be in the newspapers, you watch, you will read it, the united states has only dropped 6,900 bombs in a year. ergo we are doing a terrible job. when the russians started bombing of a couple weeks ago they were dropping 60 bombs a day. in fact we are up to about 3,000 now, less than on month, dropped half as many bonds as the united states dropped in a year. but it doesn't matter, if every bomb we are dropping is selecting an individual, it

selected command center or something important, and i am not saying it is. i am saying this is how the strategy is designed to please the economy behind it determines what the strategy is, we don't like to carpet bombing anybody any more. when the russians bomb syriac and dropped beryl bonds and drop bomb bombs, i can tell you the guys in the air force got 5 in the pentagon, how primitive it is. and yet those 6900 bombs represent this sort of culmination of an effort to be meticulous in a way that masks whether or not what we are doing is effective or even the right strategy. they represent this sort of perfection of what we demand which is that we demand that we

are not bothered by conflict in the world that our sons and daughters don't have to go to war, the we are not affected by it and as this machine has become more and more capable, we have lost sight of what it is we are fighting for and about because merely mastering the data and merely mastering the machine has become so intense. and secondly when i saw this, people that i interviewed from the top layer to the cia director, the architect of the drone war, they all said the same thing. there is efficiency associated

with the operation that makes it seem like it is all right. if i come to you and say to you i am going to bomb norwich elementary school tomorrow, and here is a 3d model of its and pictures of it and hyper spectral images of it and here is my weapon and it has a 96% reliability rating and i have two weapons on the drone just to make sure and i know exactly what the weather is going to be and i have been studying this school for three weeks and here is going to be the results and the expected civilian casualties and what the benefit is going to be, translate that to anywhere. the decisionmaker doesn't have a decision to make. a pretty good briefing. okay. go do it.

what am i supposed to say? what do we do the day after tomorrow? we have been doing this for 14 years. nobody asks what do we do the day after tomorrow? we have become so good at doing it that nobody dares ask it. that is what i ask in my book. in a respectful manner, not saying that the people who are doing it are evil, not saying that the war began because of bush, clearly this is a bipartisan war. clearly the obama administration contrary to popular belief did not invent the drone war. it inherited the drone war. it didn't inherit it because some house strategy change. it inherited it because technology advance, there is a reason why we kill the osama bin laden in 2011.

it was because we killed zarqawi in 2006. everything we put together to be able to find that one person in iraq and kill him from the air was the model that then became the model that killed an important person, a single individual trying to hide on the planet anywhere. all of the same techniques came into play. you have seen the movie and i won't say the movie isn't for real. but what the movie doesn't really show is that it is just the same techniques. if you map the world, meticulously enough, then unlike the days when i was in the army and we approached -- i was in berlin so we knew all the villages around berlin and lean in east berlin like the back of

our hands and we knew this building was bad and this building is bad and this is a tree and this is a road and this is maybe the line of sight for fire and this is the safe area. today it is joe blow lives in apartment 1, mary jones lives in apartment 2, henry lives in apartment 3, the building is made of reinforced concrete, that is nothing, is gee a spatial intelligence. that is what we are doing today, mapping the world to this level of meticulousness to where some day, we are already doing it in parts of the world, something is out of place, it is the kickoff

to take action. we read in the new york times this awful development that we are being sloppy, that we are conducting signature strikes that we don't really know the people we are killing, and it is exactly the opposite of all that. this is the banality of evil. this is godlike power. we are so meticulous that what we are doing that we are completely and utterly convinced of the righteousness of doing it. that is the story of drones. we are overwhelmed with the data and that is collected and the mapping of the world just in the same way that we are overwhelmed with what is on our iphones and where our music is and where our pictures are and where did i put that document, where is the

attachment? if everything we face in our day to day lives is what they face on scales of billions and not suggest that. remembers the day you use to go to an atm machine and you put your card in and chris your password as you thought i might get money? it wasn't that long ago. remembers the blue screen of death? that you probably have on your computer once a week? those things don't happen anymore. they really don't. put your money in the atm, money comes out. for your money and the money comes out. the machine has advanced. it really has. we have now talking gps in our car, back up cameras, all sorts of electronics, computers, we

don't see it necessarily with the eye but the advances made in the last 15 years are astronomical. we do it, $70,000 a year, they do it on $700 billion a year. so that. you a sense how large this machine is. the answer, i think the last red pencil on the end of my manuscripts on the last page was is there no hope? that is what my editor wrote. i guess the only hope i would give you is that they don't know what they are doing and because

they don't know what they're doing at least we have some possibility of influencing the future. if we were actually fighting a righteous war against a right to sanity and a righteous way and everyone had a consensus about that it would be very difficult to influence the political world, the fact of the matter is i am not afraid to say it. we have idiots running a system that they barely themselves and understand in a part of the world that they truly don't understand, fighting in the middle of tribal and religious battles that they don't even care about. to find individuals to kill them as if somehow that is going to make the world better place. name me one country in the middle east that is in better shape today security civilize

than in 2001 a you get a free book but there is not one. so to meet that is the bottom line. we have been warring to create security for 14 years and there is not one country in the middle east that is in better shape today than it was 14 years ago. you tell me does that make you proud? does that show that the system works? does that show that our national treasure is being wisely expended? it is true. here is the fact. in 14 years of war combining all military and civilian casualties, in afghanistan, in syria, in iraq, everyone that has died, whether they died at

our hands or taliban hands or terrorist hands or iraqis killing iraqis, every one who has died in 14 years of warfare numbers about 400,000 people. that is fewer than the number of people who died in the firebombing of tokyo in one day in world war ii. we are being spectacularly humane. the numbers prove it. you want to kill 400,000 people the day in the firebombing of the city's? or do you want this note fuss' perpetual war that lets you go about your life in a normal way. that is the meticulous quality

of it and chris efficiency associated with modern warfare that makes it seem so sensible. i will stop there, take questions, we are being filmed so there's a gentleman who has a microphone. he would like you to signal to him so that he can trust that microphone in your face and you can be heard. >> we isis spectacularly successful in using this technology what makes us think others won't be equal the spectacularly successful and return to favor? >> the question as to whether or

not this technology is not just a harbinger of what is used against us is a good one, but i also will say to you it is a bad system and a bad strategy because no one has the capacity to do it. let's just clear that because what i am about to say is important. if everybody had the ability to fly drones the way we did believe everybody had the opportunity to operate precision munitions. if everyone had a flat system of command and control and democratic military like we did. it everybody did, pakistani, north koreans, etcetera, there would be no war because in order to build those systems you have to basically have education, democracy and decentralization.

autocratic systems can't do what we can do. the dutch can't do what we can do. when the dutch fly with our bombs over syria they cannot do anything because we have to tell from what the targets are. the pilot doesn't leave on a mission thinking i am going to hit the first thing i see. every mission starts with the target back, these are your targets to hit, this is number one, this is number 2, this is number 3 and this is your alternate, the dutch can't even do it. germans can't do it. so why are the russians dropping bombs by the ton in syria? because they can't do what we can do. so part of the answer to the

question is who cares, the chinese have thousands of drones, am i worried they're going to attack us in a world in which there are still 15,000 nuclear warheads? no. i don't care. but the process of building this technology is ultimately a positive one. it is how we utilize the technology that is the challenge. so the reason why with all of his takes and all of his soldiers and all of his magnificent artillery saddam hussein loss to the united states not once but twice, he handcuffed everyone of his soldiers because his fear of a coup d'etat, fear of a military takeover, was greater than his desire to have an efficient

military. they had all the equipment in the world and on a ledger sheet it looks awful, the fourth largest army in world but they couldn't operate their own machinery effectively or maneuver because they were not allowed to communicate, they were not allowed to decentralize their command or develop military expertise because that is a threat to the state. if you have a world that begins to look like the united states, professional military with all this equipment my guess is that will be a pretty peaceful world. just not the world that we have ended is not the world that is going to get developed either. of world of drones is pretty much the world of warfare yesterday. we did the same thing with cruise missiles in the clinton

administration just not as proficiently and not as efficiently. we did the same thing with the cia, overthrowing the guatemalan elected president etc.. we do things others can't do. i think your question is for really good one but i don't think the danger is that someone bad is going to build a drone because regardless of what happens in the world someone back is going to take an airliner and fly it into the world trade center or walk into the middle of times square and blow themselves up or they're going to do whatever they can do to hurt us if they want to hurt

us and they don't need fancy equipment. 9/11 occurred, $300,000 budget, 19 guys, i don't think it is the technology itself is the issue. question? in the back. >> hyper spectral imaging is the cutting edge of technology, what are the whispers of things to come? >> the question, what i described as hyper spectral imagery was on the cutting edge, what is next? my i sense is what is next is what hyper spectral imagery suggests which is what the military is currently calling activity based intelligence. now he is fantastic hollywood

intelligence. we don't know who the enemy is. we don't know who the terrorists are. but if we collect enough information and follow their actions, follow the actions of the place, we will be able to detect and the bad people are based on activity. we can do this right now. the system is called the oregon stair. board on stair is on a particular kind of drone. and with its billion level pixel multi cameras, it takes a high definition image of a city the size of washington d.c. baghdad,

and it doesn't -- the refresh rate like on a camera that is filming me right now is 60 frames a second, 60 frames a minute. the second. the refresh rate of board on's there is two frames so they are taking spots photographs of the city, we are doing this right now. and improvised explosive device explodes, people are killed. what exploded? a truck. let's wind the tape back and see

where the truck came from. we can do it this now. and let's watch everyone who ran from the scene and see where they went to. we can do this now. so the truck came from this warehouse. that is tomorrow's target end this person ran to the corner and started taking video. that is the day after tomorrow's targets. activity based intelligence. think about what it means. we imagine the government has the ability to fiddle with the keyboard and find out the name of your dog. that is what happens on 24. we are so far from that and at the same time so close.

activity based intelligence also means let's come up with the model of a hijacker, let's come up with a model of a suicide bomber, they send 8.7 e-mail messages on the day of their typical suicide bombing to friends and family saying goodbye. so let's look for everyone who says 8.7 messages on a typical day and when we get that tipoff, those would be spots on the map of potential suicide bombs. i am not saying this is a global effort. this could literally be done in baghdad or iraq or syria. could literally be done. i am sorry i have sat for days in these commands and is

watching this work and folds and i have done it for 30 years, watching. is really impressive. is just wrong. it is not incompetent. it is wrong. we have a model of fighting warfare and countering terrorism that is just wrong who because it is not achieving the goal it purports to achieve. it is not increasing security. and that is what is to come. those skills sets will be applied locally. what did you vote on in your election in norwich? whether or not the police department should have a license plate reader of. what is a license plate reader? it is a connection to database

of suspicious people. to create a database of suspicious people, that means you have to move the data and collect the data and have the data. they are not just looking for people with traffic infractions because once police department requires a license plate readers and a find a memorandum of agreement with state police and at the national criminal intelligence center database and find an agreement with the department of homeland security and get the illegal alien database and sign an agreement with the departure of defense and get another database and another database and precip on that laptop, at the norwich police department, he can be a terrorist hunter. it is coming.

it is coming. in the front. wait for the microphone. >> the same capability that cause the bombing -- >> the question is whether or not all of this accumulation of information and social media was the key to catching the boston marathon bomber. the answer is it is a great story but it is not true. but the bigger answer is there were 3500 law enforcement officials at the boston marathon that day.

3500 local, state, federal, rent a guards, 3500. the fbi already had information. the cia had information. all of the preventive measures that we should expect, the we should have been enraged about, that such an incident occur after we spent this billions upon billions of dollars to feed the system of collection they still failed even when they were in possession of information, 3500 godson this scene, what are they doing? what are they doing? i say to you may be some people tweeted i saw the guy under the boat in the suburbs and that was

the one victorious end point but it was just the man hunched. but the first thing i thought when the boston marathon bombing occurred and i saw the same shrugs from people in the government saying how could we have known? how could we stop it? wait a minute. you are there! 3500 rise on the ground, you have all the intelligence in the world and you even now, we know you have the intelligence, you can't knock on the doors of the 35 people on your watch list before the boston marathon to make sure they are safe? you can knock on the doors? i see that incisions and i say to myself where is the accountability for our system in america. we are just going to put up with

having 3500 law enforcement officers at every big event and not ask whether they can do their jobs? and that is 9/11 in a nut shell. next question. that was fun. you must have a question. >> the bombing, a united states hospital in afghanistan, the united states does not recognize the national court of law. this was the war crime. all evidence points to the fact that it was indeed a war crime

and the united states response to it is it is being investigated by the united states military and it was actually a mistake. i don't know exactly what the question i am asking is, but this is a war crime. >> okay. the question is about the bombing of the hospital in afghanistan and what really happened. i won't tell you i have any magical information but i know how things happen. could be 3500 guys on the scene with all the intelligence in the world and things still go wrong so my first assumption is something went wrong because the

united states as a matter of fact, not the people lino in the military or the intelligence community, gets up in the morning and says i want to obama hospital today. that is not the country i live in. that is not my military or my intelligence capability. that i know. that is my first answer. my second answer is there are some people hole in the intelligence community and the aha the rules don't apply to them. they're all special operators, covert operators, and i know them too and they really missing the rules don't apply to them. so there's a possibility that they could have done it. so you can't hurt his miss right away and that this isn't intentional. in fact there was an article in the new york times yesterday that basically said it was

intentional. now comes the tricky question. have your lawyer call my lawyer. you want to label it a war crime? we are going to have to start talking about what the law is. if the law of war states clearly you can strike a civilian target when its immunity has been removed by the presence of combatants and it is the responsibility of the commander to make a decision, to weigh the benefits and deficits, i know i am going to kill civilians in hitting this target but the military utility of doing so is necessary. the law of war is not you can't hit hospitals. take that from your mind because nothing has been written down,

no one believes that. not even the dutch. you have to mark hospitals so that it warrants the military this is hospital end you are not -- you have to be real about the marking of hospitals and not shielding military in nature to give them immunity. 7 now we have all effect on the table. and i still say i don't really care whether or not it is a war crime but who is so important last tuesday that we want to risk killing civilians to bomb a hospital? so ipso facto there is no military utility associated with this because the devil was not in the hospital. we never heard of who was in the

hospital, whoever it was that was killed that was justified in the mind of that demented commander who said go ahead and bomb hospital. but war crime? this is the war crime. not a very good book, but i have reviewed it so i have read it. about the killing of al waki who was killed in a drone strike in september of 2010. when we start assassinating people without due process american citizens without due process, that is the war crime. i am truly sorry that this hospital, this wedding party, this border posts, this civilian structure was destroyed in

warfare, but you of all people, you hate the whole war. you don't like a good strike. so why waste your time with the bad ones? >> there is an enemy. >> but if you want to play by the rules of war, if you want to use the terminology of war crime, if you want to speak about the international criminal court, to know they have better lawyers than you do and so i am saying to you bring the discussion back to human beings, human terms. could we have possibly gained anything from bombing a hospital

emergency in afghanistan? when you bring it back to that point you don't open yourself up to the government saying you really interested the law and understand the circumstances and capabilities and decisions made at the time -- >> shoot 12-year-olds in parks for no reason at all and police get off -- i see it very much the same thing. if you are armed and you can do it, you do it and there is no consequence of that. nobody did a series not going to be -- it doesn't matter. ..