Dear Romi,
Tell the Washington Post to conduct a new poll asking an unbiased question on 
US drone strike policy.

Take Action
A key reason many in Congress haven't spoken up against the drone strike policy 
is that many believe the public overwhelmingly supports the policy. A key 
reason many believe the public overwhelmingly supports the drone strike policy 
is that the Washington Post said so in February 2012. 

But the question the Washington Post asked in its February 2012 poll, and the 
way the Post reported it, were highly misleading. And in the last year, a lot 
of criticism of the drone strike policy has appeared in mainstream press that 
hadn't appeared before.

As the Senate considers the nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA, where 
he will oversee CIA drone strikes, urge the Washington Post to ask the public 
an unbiased question on drone strikes.

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=zS4AvRsuMJgrMyz5Gs3Gn2IVsBhoVvN1

In February 2012, under the headline, "Poll finds broad support for Obama's 
counterterrorism policies," the Washington Post reported that "The Post-ABC 
News poll found that 83 percent of Americans approve of Obama’s drone policy." 
[1] This Post report had the effect of convincing many people that the drone 
strike policy was overwhelmingly popular. But here is the question that was 
actually asked: [2]
"… thinking about the following decisions of the Obama administration, please 
tell me whether you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or 
strongly disapprove ... c. The use of unmanned, "drone" aircraft against 
terrorist suspects overseas" 
The Post assumed there was no meaningful distinction between current policy and 
targeting "terrorist suspects." That was the "official story" the 
Administration had just put out.

On January 30, 2012, just before the Washington Post poll was conducted, in an 
unprecedented and widely reported public discussion of the policy, President 
Obama described the policy as "pinpoint strike on al Qaeda operatives." [3] But 
as the New York Times reported a few months later, [4]
In Pakistan, Mr. Obama had approved not only "personality" strikes aimed at 
named, high-value terrorists, but "signature" strikes that targeted training 
camps and suspicious compounds in areas controlled by militants.
>
>But some State Department officials have complained to the White House that 
>the criteria used by the C.I.A. for identifying a terrorist "signature" were 
>too lax. The joke was that when the C.I.A. sees "three guys doing jumping 
>jacks," the agency thinks it is a terrorist training camp, said one senior 
>official. Men loading a truck with fertilizer could be bombmakers — but they 
>might also be farmers, skeptics argued. 
If those State Department officials were right, then describing the policy as 
targeted on "terrorist suspects" was misleading, and the Washington Post poll 
question and report were biased. 

Urge the Washington Post to ask a poll question on drone strikes that takes 
account of the State Department officials' criticism that drone strikes have 
not been targeted on "terrorist suspects," as most people would understand that 
phrase.

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=%2BLN49GMkUpaSPP5WQH%2FElmIVsBhoVvN1

Thank you for all you do to help bring about a more just foreign policy,

Robert Naiman, Chelsea Mozen, Sarah Burns and Megan Iorio
Just Foreign Policy

Help us reach our January fundraising goal by donating today! With our small 
staff and minimal overhead, you know your contribution will go a long way.
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=qIrZ3GYtMKL7JfZQp808u2IVsBhoVvN1

References:

1. "Poll finds broad support for Obama’s counterterrorism policies," Scott 
Wilson and Jon Cohen, Washington Post, February 8, 2012 
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=YbWn39vuqnmhTf%2FCp%2FKBymIVsBhoVvN1
2. "Washington Post-ABC News Poll, February 1 to 4, 2012" 
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=jAiO95Jequ3t1lsggLCoTmIVsBhoVvN1
3. "Obama's drone comment was no slip-up, official says," Dan Lothian and Reza 
Sayah, CNN, January 31, 2012, 
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=rBH0ElTCGgXifk65XRMq0WIVsBhoVvN1
4. "Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will," Jo Becker 
and Scott Shane, May 29, 2012, 
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kNBG6Epy40n%2BKdYlC%2B0oqWIVsBhoVvN1

© 2013 Just Foreign Policy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
    laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to