tv Book Discussion on Unmanned CSPAN January 10, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EST
this is been a national debate throughout the entire course of our nation. what happened in paris today continues to raise the issues, we are going to grapple with those issues, that's what this book is about. taking people behind the scene but in a satirical way i want to develop those themes and comments on the balance between national security and civil rights. >> congressman steve israel, democrat of new york. the. the global war on morris is the name of the novel. >> we want to hear from you, post your feedback to your facebook wall, facebook.com/book tv. >> tonight we are here to welcome william who is a scholar, author, panelists, journalists, he focuses on national security issue and has been doing so for over 40 years. his expertise has been tapped by
a wide range of influential groups ranging from greenpeace international to the u.s. air force. his career is very interesting a way to like to go into. national security adviser to the new york times, military analyst for nbc news, his the author and co-author of 11 bucks and many articles for prestigious newspapers and journals. he is not want to shy away from controversy. drones are definitely controversial right now. every time you turn on the news they're talking about drones and regulations. in writing this introduction i went online and twitter feed subjects were quite interesting. post such as international police agencies, countering growing threats of ied's, another says, aren't marked air
force 757 makes emergency landing in des moines. this is what conspiracies are made of. however the one that was posted yesterday was that he's going to be here at our bookstore and we are very cited to be on his list of tweets. without further do please him a welcome william. [applause]. >> thank you very much. i am also a vermont resident. i. >> my time in new york city these days. today was an annoying day for me like most days are. it was annoying particularly because i was driving to an appointment and turned on the radio, i was listening to a story about drones on the radio.
i was thinking okay, i heard the introduction of who is going to be on the show, some guy from industry, some lobbyist, some lefty journalists, so i could have just heard the radio often told you exactly what they were all going to say. unfortunately, my drive to bedford was long enough that i had to listen to the show. they said pretty much what i expected. which is that -- pretty much what we expect. three years ago when i started working on a book on drones my publisher said to me, why don't you write a book on drones. i said i don't really care about drones and i don't i don't really know anything. he said, perfect. that is generally how i approach most of my projects. the journey that i took doing that really was an eye-opening one for me.
i hardly wrote a book about drones. i wrote a book about what drones are all about in our society and what they mean. i'm not sure concerned my on publisher was particularly happy. i see books as a very personal matter, i have written a lot of them. i see myself as a bit of an artist and a sense that they represent me in my thoughts. when i visited with people in the drone world, when when i started to talk to people in the drawn 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, okay. it has 100 pages of footnotes,
it is dance, it is typical me, big words and theory. here is what crystallizes it 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, what they take pictures of, what happens to those pictures, who looks at them and what it is for, then where do we put it all. i discovered a really unknown area to mean. if it is unknown to me it is probably unknown to most people, it is hyperspectral imaging. don't ask me to explain too much, hyper pectoral imaging is
looking at something from a granular level that is beyond the image itself but it is looking at the met electromagnetic waves that make up everything. we we are a set of electromagnetic waves and hyperspectral imaging, the amount of data that is collected from on high, from, from a drone, or even from a satellite, is able to do things like look at a field and based upon molecular breakdown of an image tell you whether or not potatoes are growing in that field or barley is going in that field. what hyperspectral imagery became important for was looking for change detection. dirt being moved and removed recently which might indicate a presence of an improvised explosive device on the road in afghanistan and iraq. so they would fly these hyperspectral imagers above the road, look for disturbed dirt, literally, then they would be places where they could pinpoint
for explosive. of course, the next step was wait a minute, we can identify people behind it. all we we need to have is a library of people. again, without getting into too much technicalities the way it works is, you have this gigantic imager but it does not really know what it is same because it is just seen thoughts and binary code. the only way i can tell what it is looking at is by pulsing its own library of signatures, hyperspectral signatures. this is what i toyota pickup truck looks like in the hyperspectral scene. this is what a volkswagen beetle looks like. there are hundreds of thousands of hyperspectral signatures which have been created.
they are stored in the national signatures laboratory which is located in tennessee. this has been going on in the world of weather forecasting for decades. this is how you can tell there is water in the air from space. this is how you can tell there is ice, this is how you can tell -- this is really the basis of modern day weather forecasting. now, we are doing it on such a level of intensity that we can actually have your signature, identify you. there's no other signature like your signature. that is sort of the cutting edge of where we are now. so i wrote this chapter, sent it
to a couple of scientist friends of mine because i sure packet don't know anything. i asked them to read it and they sent it back with some things and said well you know i might not explain the visual site in the way you do, you're in for it means this in short range of infrared me that it is emitting an infrared signal rather than just absorbing imaging. i made the the changes and i was happy with the chapter in the end, it is really the most boring but the most important. assented to a friend of mine. an air force one star who was literally the head of intelligence for the middle east. i got a note back from him saying, interesting reading but a little too technical for me.
that's what i got. from a lot of people i talked to. we know how to look at the picture, we we know how to process the data, we know that it is saying that is bill larkin they're walking down the street, we we are getting closer and closer to being able to find the target, but how it all works and threats together, how this giant enormous machine that is needed in order to do that, i have no idea. so as i started this book on drones i thought i have to write a book on drones i'm going to buy a drone, i'm going to fly it and i'm going to learn what the mystique is. and i did. i'm going to give you a little reading my experience with my drone that i bought.
my first outdoor flight did not go very well. i was worried about the wind. this baby only weighs 14 ounces, less than a box of pasta. i set the max up in else to to e bar, bar, two trees, the house, the driveway, before the battery ran down, i crashed into the mall. i just cannot get the hang of the controls and could not for the life of me figure out how to get the drone to come back once it darted away. specks of dirt in the gears that turn the propellers were my first maintenance job, other than that, my little patriot, my little parent drone, actually proved pretty hardy. not only that, the video produced was beautiful and obviously intentionally hilarious.
the parent that came to a wedding i went to the next week. i hope to find a big enough flat space, far out enough away from the water to practice. it is very hefty i told my set stepson who badgered me to break it out so we could fly. i'm not going to let you fly until you watch the instructional video i told him. two minutes later he was back, ready. it was not like i was teaching them how to shoot a gun. but as owner and commander of my own embryonic squadron, i became ridiculously officious, carefully showing showing him how to connect it to the iphone, how to do the self tests, instructing how to landed on my command, fretting about the wind and using words like a loft, like i knew what i was talking about.
it was breezy. then then i let galen take the controls. the wind from the ocean buffeted and pushed our little parrot around, but galen almost effortlessly got the hang of it right away. flying it to the top of the house we're staying in, crossing the road between two electrical power lines, watch out a yelp. darting the parrot back to the front lawn, flying at this win that way and then landing it. he loved it, i loved it, i was humbled. when i debriefed galen, my squadron assistant after this and other missions, he said the trick for him was calibrating himself to the rhythm of the drone. what actual pilots call feeling the plane. though unlike the pilot of a manned airplane, the germ pilot does not actually feel the inertia and acceleration caused by a gust of wind. they call galen's generation,
digital natives. his instinctive aptitude truly says something about our society and about the expansive world of the data machine that drones represent. whatever happens in the wiring of a brain that allows young child to so easily pick up a second language, the digital natives have acquired a new way of absorbing and interacting with our holy digital world. still, it drives me to distraction when i watch how how galen or any of his contemporaries operates. they have multiple things going on at once on the laptop, ipod, phone, tv, they have have several chat sessions open in a variety of applications, texting on the phone as well, they will be watching the show and watching a ballgame, they'll have a youtube video running and are listening to music and
sometimes they have a few homework assignments going with actual books and mortar brooke books. the relentless command is only compound by the speed at which music and video are transmitted globally. not just at the home wi-fi network, but, but also through the satellites, cables, fiber-optic networks needed to move at all. galen and his generation didn't conform to the machinery of our day. the machine conforms to their expectations. that is what i learned. the machine conforms to our expectation. why do we have drones? 14000 today and climbing, 70000 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? they're going to be under the christmas tree under great abundance because the price has gone down. the very parrot that cost me, three years ago, 400 dollars, is now hundred dollars, is now selling for less than $200. that is the way of the world, electronically. all of these people are talking about, while the federal government will regulated because drones are being flown in bad places, bad people could be flying drones, pretty soon pretty soon where going to have drone licenses for toys. but what it represents is that it really represents a change in our society. the accumulation of this information, the capability, the capability can fire drone from my house for 30 minutes to distances as far as i can essentially create a line of sight communication with the drone, so one wireless terms it's like 160 feet.
that is 200 dollars, if you want to spend $2000 to get the drone that you pay for, if you want to spend 20,000 dollars you get the drone that you pay for. if you want to for. if you want to spend $2 million you can, we even have now, billion-dollar drones. drones that stay up there for over 24 hours that can serve ale the entirety of the land mass of asia in one day. we get what we pay for. like my little parent, choosing what to do with it, how to evaluate the information that is coming in, where to put it, where to store, how to move it, how to find it then later on when you want to find it the second time. this is what it is all about. so when i was in the army as an intelligence analyst the ratio
of intelligence analyst to soldiers was about one to 100. that is that is to say for every person who carried a gun in the military there is about one intelligence person behind them. some at the battalion level of say something like 1500 people there might be a group of ten or 15 intelligence people as part of that battalion. today, the ratio is exactly reversed. for every one soldier in the field today, there are 100 intelligence people behind them. now, that is just the reality of the backend of doing anything. for every car on the road there are thousands upon thousands manufacturers, repairs, insurance people, you think of
it, think of it in your head as the industry behind cars. drones are no no different. drones are no different, so therefore on different then manned aircraft that are taking pictures of were satellites that are taking pictures, or eavesdropping, or cyber spy. all of the data that we are collecting today. our real problem is utilizing that information in a useful way. our real problem is that we have experienced this revolution and information so rapidly over the last 15 years of constant war, that we do not even understand what it is that we are doing. so, let me give you an example. it's really simple to get today. about one year ago, president
obama announced that the united states was going to take military action against isis and syria. a new campaign. what did he say? first he assured the american people that there would be no boots on the ground, while what does that mean therefore? it means that we set out the unmanned machine to do what the on man machine has become so perfect at doing. the second he said, once we we collect the intelligence that we need, we will be able to eradicate isis. fast-forward one year. i know you will read in the newspapers, you watch, you will read it, the united states has only bonds, has only dropped 6900 pounds in one year.
ergo, we are doing a terrible job. when the russian started bombing a couple of weeks ago they were dropping 60 bombs per day, in fact they're up to about 3000 now. so in less than one month, they have a drop tapas many bombs as the united states has dropped in one year. but it doesn't matter, because if every bomb we are dropping is hitting a meticulous target, a selected individual, a selected command center or something important, i'm not saying it is, i'm saying i'm saying this is how the strategy is designed. the economy behind it determines what the strategy is.
we do not like to go out and carpet bomb anymore. when the russians gone bomb and syria him drop barrel bombs, literally i can tell you the guys in the air force to fall in the pit to gone, how primitive it is. yet these 6900 bombs represent the culmination of the effort to be meticulous in a way it masks whether or not what we're doing is effective or even the right strategy. that is what drones represent. they represent this 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 do not have to go to war, that we are not affected by it. as this machine has become more
and more capable, we has lost sight of what it is we are fighting for and about. because merely mastering the data and mastering the machine has become so intense. secondly, and i saw this and people that i interviewed, from the top lawyer to the cia director, the current cia director who is the architect of the drone war when he was in the white house. they all basically said the same thing. there is an efficiency associated with the operation that makes it seem like it is right. if i come to you and say to you, i am going to bomb the elementary school tomorrow, here
is a 3-d model of it, here is pictures of it, here is the hyperspectral images of it, here's my, here's my weapon, it has a 96% reliability rating, and i will have two weapons on the drone just to make sure, and i know exactly what the weather will be, i have been studying the school for three weeks, hero be the results in the expected casualties, here is the benefit, the school will be no more. again, they will translate that to bad guy anywhere. the decision-maker does not have a decision to make. that's a pretty good briefing. okay, go do it. one of my supposed to say? what what do we do the day after tomorrow? we have been doing this for 14 years. nobody asks what are we going to do the day after tomorrow. we have been so good at doing it that no one dares haskett.
that is what i ask in my book. in a respectful manner, not saying that the people who are doing it are evil, not sane the war being gam because a 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 did not inherit it because somehow strategy change, it inherited it because technology advanced. there's a reason why we killed osama bin laden in 2011. it was because we killed another person in 2006. why, because 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 to kill an important person, single individual who is trying to hide on the planet anywhere. all of the same techniques came into play. you have seen the movie and i am not going to say that the movie is not for real. but what the movie does not really show is that it is just all the same techniques. if you map of 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 of the villages around berlin, we knew east berlin like the back of our hands. you could say this building is that, this is a tree, this is the road, this is the line of sight for fire, this is the safe area, today, it is a joe blow lives in apartment one.
mary jones lives in apartment two, henry smith lives in apartment three, the building is made out of reinforced concrete. that is mapping. it is geospatial intelligence. that is is what we are doing today. mapping the world to this level of meticulousness to wear some day, and we we are already doing it in parts of the world, when something is out of place it is the tipoff to take action. we read in the new york times that this is an awful development that we are being sloppy, we are conduct dean's signature strike that we do not really know the people we are killing, etc., etc. yet, et cetera. yet, it is exactly the opposite of all of that.
yet this is the finale of evil, this is godlike power. we are so meticulous that what we are doing we are completely and utterly convinced of the righteousness of doing it. that is the story of drones. we are overwhelmed with the data that is collected in the mapping of the world, just just in the same way that we are overwhelmed with what is on iphones, where music is, where all of our pictures are, where did i put that document, where's the attachment. everything that we face in our day to day life is what they face on scales of billions. not just that, remember the day that you used to go to the atm machine and you would put your card and impress your password.
you thought, i might get money. it was not that long ago, remember the blue screen of death that you probably had on your computer once a week? those things don't happen anymore. they really don't. put your money in your atm, money comes out, you put your card in a money comes out. the machine has advanced, it really has. we now have talking gps machines in our car we have backup cameras, all sorts of electronics. we have computers, we don't sit necessarily with ri but the advances that have been made in the last 15 years are really astronomical. we do it on $70000 per year in the state of vermont, they do it
on 700 billion per year, so that gives you a sense of how large this that machine is. the answer? i think the last red pencil in the end of my manuscript on the last page was, is there no hope? that's what my editor wrote. i guess the only hope that i would give you set they do not know what they are doing. because they don't know what they're doing, at least we have some possibility of influencing the future. if we're actually fighting a righteous war against a righteous enemy in a righteous way. >> ..
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 a national the national treasure is being wisely expanded? and yes it's true, look here's the fact. in 14 years of war, combining all military and civilian casualties, all in afghanistan and iraq come, everyone that has died, everyone, whether they died in our hands were or the television or terrorists or iraqis, everyone who's died in 14 years of warfare numbers about 400,000 people. that is fewer than the number of
people that died in the firebombing of tokyo in one day in world war ii. we are being spectacularly humane. the numbers prove it. what do you want, do you want to kill 400,000 people a day in the firebombing of a city, or do you want this no fuss perpetual war that lets you go about your life in a normal way, that is the meticulous quality into the crisp efficiencies associated with modern warfare that makes it seem so sensible. so i will stop there and take questions. we are being filmed so there is
a gentle man that has a microphone and. you can trust a microphone in your face and be heard. anyway, question? >> if we are so spectacularly successful in using this technology, what makes us think that others won't be equally successful. >> the question if the technology isn't just our harbinger of what is going to be used against us is a good one. but i also will say to you it's still a bad system and a bad
strategy. so let's just clear that up because what i'm about to say is important. if everybody had the ability to operate the emissions and if everybody had a flat system of command and control in a democratic military like we do, if everybody did, pakistanis, north koreans, etc., there would be no more because to build those systems, you have to have education, democracy and decentralization. so, autocratic systems can do what we can do. the dutch can't do what we can do. when they fly f-16s with our bombs over syria abe pilot
doesn't think i'm going to hit everything i see. these are your targets to hit. this is number one this is number two, this is number three and this is the alternate if you can't hit those. the dutch can't even do it. the germans can't even do it. so, why are the russians dropping bombs by the time in syria? because they can't do what we can do. so, part of the answer to your question is who cares? the chinese have thousands of drones, the russians have thousands of drones to you and i worry that they are going to attack us in a world there are still over 15,000 nuclear
warheads? i don't care. but the process of building this technology is ultimately positive. it's how we utilize the technology that is the challenge. so, the reason why with all of his tanks and soldiers and magnificent artillery, saddam hussein lost to the united states not once, but twice. he handcuffed the one of his soldiers because his fear of a coup d'état is the fear of the military greater than the desire to have an efficient military. so, they have all the equipment in the world, and on a ledger sheet it looks awful, the fourth-largest in the world. but they couldn't operate their own machinery effectively or maneuver and effective way because they were not allowed to
communicate. they were not allowed to decentralized the command were developed military expertise because that is a threat to the state. so if you have a world that begins to look like the united states in this equipment, my guess is that it's going to be pretty peaceful world. it's just not the world we have for the world is going to get developed either. the world 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. before then, we did the same thing with the cia overthrowing iran socialist president
overthrowing the guatemalan elected president etc.. we do things others can't do. and so, i think your question is a really good point but i don't think the danger is that someone that is going to build a drowned debate comes drowned to victor -- drone or that someone will blow themselves up or do whatever they can do to hurt us. they don't need fancy equipment. there were 19 working for this year so i don't think it's the technology issue.
question in the back. it is at the cutting edge of technology what are the whispers of things to come? >> the question is what i described as the imagery on the cutting-edge. what's next? my sense is that what's next is that imagery he said just which is what the military is currently calling activity-based intelligence. so, now here is a fantastic hollywood intelligence. okay? 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, then we will be able to detect who the bad people are based on the activities. we can do this right now. the system is called koran's stare -- gorgon's stare that is on the drone. and with it's billion-dollar cameras it is able to take a high-definition image of a city the size of washington, d.c., baghdad, and it doesn't -- the refresh rate on that like a camera filming the right now is 60 frames a second over a minute, and second.
and the police rushing rate of gorgon's is to frames a second so they are taking stock photographs of the city. we are doing this right now. so, and improvised explosive device explodes. what exploded? a truck. let's wind the tape back and see where it came from. >> we can do this now. let's watch every one that ran from the scene and see where they went. we can do this now.
and so it came from this warehouse. this person ran to the corner and started taking video. that's the day after tomorrow's target. activity-based intelligence. and think about what it means. we imagine the government has the ability to fiddle with the keyboard and find out. we are so far from that and yet at the same time, so close. so, activity-based intelligence also means let's come up with the model of a hijacker. let's come up with the motto of a suicide bomber. they spent 8.7 e-mail messages on the day of their typical
suicide bombing to friends and family saying that i. so, let's look for everyone who sends 8.7 messages on a typical day. and when we get that, those will be the spots on the map of potential suicide bombers. i am not saying this is a global effort but i am saying it could literally be done in kabul or baghdad or syria. so i'm sorry i sat for days and these command centers watching this work unfold. and i've done it for 30 years watching it. it's really impressive. it's just wrong.
it's not incompetent. it's wrong. we have a model of fighting warfare and that's just wrong because it's not achieving the goal that it purports to achieve. it's not increasing our security and that is what's to come. and those skill sets will be applied locally. what did you vote on this year whether or not the police department of norwich vermont should have a license plate reader. what is a license plate reader ask if a connection to a database of suspicious people and to create a database of suspicious people that means you have to move and collect the data so they are not just looking for people that have traffic infractions because once
the police department requires a license plate reader then they find a memorandum of agreement in the state police and get the national criminal intelligence database and then he signed an agreement in the department of homeland security and get to the illegal alien database in the department of defense and they get another database and pretty soon on that laptop and in that car in the norwich police department, he can be a terrorist hunter. it's coming. >> here in the front. >> the capability that you're talking about speech [inaudible]
>> the question is whether or not all of this accumulation of social media will send the key to catching the boston marathon bombers. so, the answer is it is a great story but it's not true. but the bigger answer is there were 3500 law-enforcement officials that the boston marathon that they 3500 local, state, federal rent-a-guards. the fbi already had information about these brothers. the cia had information about an. all of the preventive measures
that we should expect and we should have been enraged about that such an incident could occur after we've spent this billions upon billions upon billions of dollars to feed this system of collection. even though there were 3500 guards on the scene what were they doing. what were they doing? so again i say to you yes maybe some people said i sold the guy under the boat and the suburb and that was the one victorious endpoint but i remember the days. the first thing i thought when i heard the boston marathon have occurred and i saw the same from people in the government saying we have no income how could we
stop it? it's like wait a minute. you're there. 3500 on the ground, you're the fbi and have all of the intelligence in the world and we know now you have the intelligence you can't knock on the doors of the 3500 people on your watch list before the boston marathon to make sure they aren't safe? you can't knock on the doors? i don't see that as he tried and social media. i see that and i think to myself where is the accountability for the system in america. we are just going to put up with having 3500 law-enforcement officers at every big event and not ask whether or not they can do their jobs? that is 9/11 in a nutshell as well. next question.
>> you must have a question. >> the united states bombed a hospital in afghanistan. the united states doesn't recognize the international court of law. they said this was a war crime and all evidence points to the fact it was indeed a war crime and the responses that it was being investigated by the united states military. and that was actually a mistake. so i don't know exactly what the question is i'm asking. this is a war crime.
>> so the question is about the bombing of the hospital in afghanistan and what really happened. i'm not going to tell you i have any magical information but i do know how things happen. and i do know things go wrong. there can be 3500 on the scene with all of the intelligence of in the world and things don't get wrong. so my first assumption is that something went wrong because the united states as a willy-nilly matter-of-fact, not the people i know in the military or the intelligence community gets up in the morning ... i want to bomb a house in copenhagen. that's not the country i live in area that's not my military or
intelligence community. without i know. that's my first answer. my second answer is there are some people in the united states military and in the intelligence community that think that the rules don't apply to them. they are called special operators, they are called black special operators, and i know them and they do think the rules don't apply to them so there is a possibility that they could have done it and soak you can't dismiss right away this isn't intentional and i think there was an article 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, then we have to start talking about the law of war,
and if it states clearly that you can strike a civilian target when it's in the unity has been removed by the presence of combatants and that the responsibility of the commander to make a decision to weigh out the benefits and the deficits. i know i'm going to kill civilians in hitting this target, but i p6 the military utility of doing so is necessary. that is what the wall of the war is. it's not that you can't hate hospitals. take that from your mind because there is nothing but are written down. no one believes that. you have to mark them so that warns the military this is a hospital and you're not allowed to be perfidious about the market of hospitals. you have to be real about the
marketing suits were not shielding things that are military of nature to give them immunity. so now we have all the facts on the table. and i still say i don't care whether or not it is a war crime but it's so important last tuesday we want to risk killing civilians to bomb a hospital. so if there is no military utility associated with this because the devil was not in the hospital. we've never heard of who was in the hospital and was killed and justified in the mind of that demented commander who said go ahead and bomb the hospital. but war crime -- not a very good
book, but i've reviewed it so i've read it about the killing of the american citizen killed by a drone strike back in september of 2010. that is the war crime. 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 order post, this civilian structure was destroyed in warfare but you of all people come to you hate the whole war. you don't like a good strike so why waste time with the bad
ones? >> but if you want to play by the rules of the war and use the terminology's war crime, if you want to speak at the international criminal court, then know that they have better lawyers than you do. and so i am saying to you bring the discussion back to human terms. could we have possibly gained anything from bombing the hospital in afghanistan? that's the question. and when you bring it back to that point, you don't open yourself up to the government saying if you understood the law and the circumstances and the capabilities.
>> who shoots 12-year-olds in parks for no reason at all? i see it as the same thing if you are armed and you can do it and nobody is -- is no consequence of that. >> there is consequence. so, i think that it may be true there are policemen killed civilians and do so without cause. i don't doubt it. but many of them them, the utter majority of them go to jail and it points to the need for greater training and greater oversight for more accountability. so, everything that is happening in the police world is
synonymous with the world of warfare. better training, better oversight, better sense of the point. if the point in ferguson is to reduce the level of violence and protect life and property, then it's sort of a fundamental role of policing. we could apply the same rules of warfare. so i think what's missing, and it's missing because it is unmanned, is that we don't have a dog in the fight. so, we don't have a reason to say to them you're not making the world a better place. and until we do, or until we are willing to say it regardless of the fact we don't have a dog in the fight, we are not going to
be effective in our own political and getting our own political well understood by our own government. and i think that this is across the board from tea party to occupy everybody believes the same thing. we are not a safer country today as a result of the war of the last 14 years. in washington is in a bubble that doesn't hear it or see it. >> [inaudible] >> the first person to buy a book and bring it back for me to sign, would you bring me a copy, please. thank you for coming tonight and please, buy a book and i will sign it for you. thanks, c-span for being here