Daniel Hale 1

“We now kill people without ever seeing them. Now you push a button thousands of miles away … Since it’s all done by remote control, there’s no remorse … and then we come home in triumph.”

—US Navy Admiral Gene LaRocque, speaking to a reporter in 1995.

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.

A US drone strike on a civilian vehicle, similar to the harrowing incident described by Fazil

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


Countercurrents is answerable only to our readers. Support honest journalism because we have no PLANET B. Subscribe to our Telegram channel


GET COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX


2 Comments

  1. Dr Vacy Vlazna says:

    Daniel, thank you for sharing your breakthrough to conscience and acting on it. We hunger for those who make and come through the hero’s journey- which is not the journey of the fighter pilot, the rifleman, the drone operator – but the man for whom trauma is the shedding of immoral mores, the brainwashing of fake patriotism, the automatic obedience, the shallow national identity, the lies of a rapacious warmongering society.

    You also turned the destructive energy, the self-pity of depression and PTSD into selfless action for Truth. Walk Tall. Thank you.

  2. samir sardana says:

    DRONES AND ROBOTS AND AI WILL MAKE CONVENTIONAL MILITARIES OBSOLETE !

    Take the example of the Swarm attack by ISIS on Russian forces,in Syria.They attacked and exited at no loss to ISIS.The principle is that,you cannot kill what you cannot see.Radars cannot see the drones – and even if the drone has a set trajectory,AI can be used to alter it,every 2 seconds,and then drop it below radar coverage.You can’t use an ADS to shoot a drone – it is the surest way to bankrupt a nation.

    With AI and multiple warheads type splitting of the drone,at the terminal phase,there is no way to stop the drones.

    The entire American ADS failed w.r.t the Yemeni Swarms on Saudi oil refineries. Y ? 1st they failed to detect,and then you cannot shoot them with missiles – as if the missile misses,the refineries are history (besides the absurd cost of this defense).Even Anti-Aircraft fire is of no use,as the drones cannot be seen (even in the day),and using AI,the drone can change height or speed or hide behind an obstacle.

    Even drone armies cannot be used to kill drones – as the drone armies cannot reach the target location IN TIME – for the simple reason,that they will not know the target before hand.Even if drones at stationed at an airbase – on perpetual mode,that will only aid in reconnaisance.

    Using EW and DEW,means that all the ICs and Communication networks of the “attacked entity” are also likely to be jammed and paralysed !

    THE INDIANS WERE DOING ONLINE YOGA AND LOOKING FOR PIA BALLOONS,AND THEREFORE – THEY HAVE BEEN ATTACKED BY 2 DRONES YESTERDAY – WHICH BOMBED THEIR IAF AIRBASES!

    https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-probes-suspected-use-drones-blast-jammu-air-base-officials-2021-06-27/

    HOW CAN THE WORLD USE INDAIN VAXES ? HOW CAN INDIA HAVE AN AIRFORCE ? HOW CAN THESE PEOPLE BE A PART OF THE QUAD ?

    This is another false flag ! A drone came from AK, 10 kms into Hindoosthan,via the IB/LC and all the pandoos of the BSF,ADS and the IAF were sleeping !

    The attack was at NIGHT – so there was NO VISUAL SIGNATURE.

    Y did the Drones miss ? Did they come to blow a hole in the roof of a building ? How could they miss the Choppers and Jets ? What about the Fuel Dumps ?

    UAVIED = IED Force Multiplier ! A small payload can cause more damage than a ICBM – as the payload can be targetted TO A SPECIFIC EXPONENTIAL TARGET (like ammo dumps,fuel dumps,jets loaded with fuel and ammo ….)

    Sat pictures of the IAF base would be known to the Mujahideen,and so,the GPS coordinates WILL GUIDE THE DRONE TO THE TARGET ! So Y did the drone miss ?

    So the Drone was NOT GPS turned,and was a basic drone ! Y will a basic drone be used, unless it be tracked to drop payload at a target ? The only STEALTH WAY to do the same – is via a camera, which transmits at set intervals (so that IAF jammers,do NOT intercept the transmission)

    The fact that the Drone entered the IAF base and was on ATC zone, means that the handler could see the target ! AND SO Y DID THE HANDLER DROP THE CHARGE AT THE WRONG TARGET ? There was no drone recovered by the Indians – SO THE DRONE DID NOT MALFUNCTION – and so,Y was the payload dropped ?

    It is simple ! It was a false flag ! Done by RAW and MOSSAD,to fund the DRONE DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY,TO BE SOLD BY ISRAEL,TO INDIA ! THE ISRAELI TECHNOLOGY IS USELESS FOR INDIA! THE DRONES USED BY THE KASHMIRI FREEDOM FIGHTERS IN INDIA,ARE SMALL DRONES, WHICH HAVE NO RCS AND NO INFRA RED OR THERMAL SIGNATURE – AND CARRY A VERY SMALL PAYLOAD

    Hamas DRONES were large with heavy payloads,and slow,with a set trajectory !

    Indian Drones are based on the “IED Force Multiplier” concept ! The key in India is TARGET SELECTION – then getting the drone to HIT the target,is easy meat – especially at Nights with cloud cover and a dark moon ! If the small drones fly even at 10000 feet – radars will
    not detect the same !Tree Top cruising is the last option,for the mujahideen !

    So the Israeli technology will not work, in India !

    The Solution to jammers used by the Indians, is saturation drones,at the same time but attacking from different coordinates.In addition,once the drones are 50 -100 meters from the target – all radio frequency and visual transmission needs to be cut off, and the handler has to use time and distance to plan the drop – by 1 last transmission, at an unknown frequency !

    Once the drone RCS is minimised,then drones at a height of even 500 feet,will be invisible to radar and the human eye – even in the day ! Then just one last visual relay from the drone is required – to release the payload – like the WW2 bombers – were bombs were manually dropped from 20000 feet – AND THIS IS 500 FEET ! And if this happens at NIGHT – then it is Gala Freedom! KAMIKAZE DRONES ARE NON-STOPPER !

    Sooner rather than later,the UAVIEDs will reach the Naxals and the North East !

    Take the example of Goa,IAF base in Dabolim Commercial Airport,Fuel Dumps for IAF,Navy and Railways – visible to the eye,Ports and Ships at Dock – visible to the eye,packed tourists in the open spaces,oil and naptha tankers docked at high seas ….

    India has TO READ THE WRITING ON THE WALL ! Give Freedom to Kashmir and partition India !

    The Indians DID NOT have the sense to have a ABR, in the form of a drone,at a height of even 1000 feet to scan all projectile movement – as a drone,has a SET TRAJECTORY AND PATH PATTERN AND A SET SPEED .Even then,the ABR MIGHT detect the drone,BUT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP THE DRONE.NO ADS WORKS AT 50 TO 300 FEET – AS IT IS TOO CLOSE TO MISS.dindooohindoo