According to the following article from the BBC, the US government has been using drones to spy on people in the USA as well as to spy on and kill people overseas.
What I found to be shocking and unacceptable is that there will soon be about 30,000 drones being used around the world in the next few years.
The article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22976598
Vocabulary to help you understand the article:
surveillance - the process of watching or monitoring someone or some group.
a US Senate committee - the US Congress makes laws. The Congress is divided into two parts: 1) The House and 2) The Senate. A Senate committee is a group of Senators who can investigate situations they think might be wrong.
a minimal way - a minor way; not in an important way.
initial stages - beginning stages.
amid a debate - during a debate (about how the US government has been violating the privacy rights of citizens of the USA by claiming that stolen information is necessary to protect US citizens).
emerged - was revealed, was shown
harvesting phone records - gathering, collecting phone records.
testimony - statements made in a formal proceeding (like a court or before Congress).
judiciary committee - a committee dealing with laws.
our footprint is very small - they haven't done a lot of spying, yet, using the drones.
a stand off - a situation in which a man was holding a child as a hostage and threatening to kill him. The police couldn't do anything because he had the boy in an underground area and could have killed the boy if the police attacked him. Finally the police figured out a way to get into his underground room and kill him. Since the guy was underground, I do not know how drones could have helped the police.
to deploy drones - to put drones into action.
a pledge - a promise.
a filibuster - this is difficult to explain. If a Senator wants to waste time so that a vote cannot be taken in the Senate, he can keep talking and talking and talking. By doing this, the Senate could not vote on an issue.
to curtail the use - to decrease the use of something.
overt - obvious, clear.
Welcome to an excellent, FREE resource to improve your English! I'm Daniel Gauss - MA Teachers College at Columbia University - at danielgauss31@gmail.com. If you add me at https://www.facebook.com/dgauss3 you'll get updates to this blog. (Google + works too.)
Showing posts with label drones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drones. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
A South African company will begin selling 'drones' world-wide
A 'drone' is a type of aircraft that does not have a pilot and that can be guided to kill a person.
I thought this article was interesting. Because President Obama has been using drones to kill people around the world, and because the international community has not condemned this practice (has not said it is wrong), a South African company will sell drones to any country that also wants to safely kill people.
Why should the international community condemn 'drone-killing'? Basically people are being targeted by the Obama administration, they are not being given any trials or court proceedings and they are being killed. Basically Obama is saying, "I want this person in Afghanistan to be killed" and then drones are being sent out to kill the person - with no trial and no evidence being presented to anyone that the person being killed deserves to die.
The article:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/28/18472665-the-race-is-on-manufacturer-sets-sights-on-market-for-armed-drones?lite
Conversation/discussion:
Do you think the Obama administration has the right to kill various people around the world with drones?
Do you think that selling drones around the world will help to create or maintain world peace?
It looks to me as if a 'hierarchy' is being created. Wealthy countries create or buy drones and they are able to kill people in poorer countries. Would you agree or disagree?
I thought this article was interesting. Because President Obama has been using drones to kill people around the world, and because the international community has not condemned this practice (has not said it is wrong), a South African company will sell drones to any country that also wants to safely kill people.
Why should the international community condemn 'drone-killing'? Basically people are being targeted by the Obama administration, they are not being given any trials or court proceedings and they are being killed. Basically Obama is saying, "I want this person in Afghanistan to be killed" and then drones are being sent out to kill the person - with no trial and no evidence being presented to anyone that the person being killed deserves to die.
The article:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/28/18472665-the-race-is-on-manufacturer-sets-sights-on-market-for-armed-drones?lite
Conversation/discussion:
Do you think the Obama administration has the right to kill various people around the world with drones?
Do you think that selling drones around the world will help to create or maintain world peace?
It looks to me as if a 'hierarchy' is being created. Wealthy countries create or buy drones and they are able to kill people in poorer countries. Would you agree or disagree?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)