U.S. Not Allowing Pakistani Drone Lawyer Into Country
A lawyer from Pakistan who has been representing victims of U.S. drone strikes in the country has still not been granted a visa by the U.S. government, which he needs to attend an International Drone Summit at the end of the month. The lawyer, Shahzad Akbar, is no stranger to the United States. Antiwar.com describes Akbar:
He has traveled to the United States in the past and has even worked for the U.S. government. He was a consultant with the U.S. Agency for International Development, and he helped the FBI investigate a terrorism case involving a Pakistani diplomat.
But his relationship with the U.S. government changed in 2010 when he took on the case of Karim Khan, a resident of a small town in North Waziristan who claimed that his 18-year-old son and 35-year-old brother were killed when a CIA-operated drone struck his family home.
Akbar, in fact, co-founded the Foundation for Fundamental Rights, a Pakistani human rights organization that has taken up advocacy on behalf of victims of U.S. drone strikes.
The U.S. drone campaign in Pakistan began in 2004, and was ramped up by the Obama administration, with at least 200 strikes in the last two years. As Reason's Mike Riggs pointed out last month, the media's numbers often grossly underestimate the civilian casualty in the drone war in Pakistan, an American activity just barely acknowledged officially earlier this year.
Akbar most recently requested a visa in May 2011 to speak at Columbia University about America's drone wars, but did not receive a response. This non-response denial of an entry visa continues nearly a year later. The International Drone Summit begins on April 28, so there's still time for the feds to grant a visa.
A three year old girl who CNN says was mutilated by a drone strike in Pakistan was allowed into the country last year, though she came for medical treatment, not advocacy.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Perhaps he could be represented in absentia by some sort of robotic device...
Now that Tim has finally said something funny, does that mean he's going to leave us?
Like Jerry told George, always leave on a high note.
"And I...am...OUTTA HERE!"
Oh, I was just being mean. The Imp of the Perverse, and all that. I like Tim far more than I like you. You're worse than a chainsaw orchiectomy.
No, you are.
"Don't make me rue the day I raped your mother."
We already have enough drone lawyers, TYVM.
Smart.
Diplomacy.
Hope.
Change.
Schmuck
Dickhead
Haughty
Chump
Why doesn't Pakistan declare him a diplomat and tell the US Government to go fuck themselves?
Defying us in this thing would be. . .unwise. We're known to use robots to blow shit up, not always for a clear reason.
an American activity just barely acknowledged officially earlier this year.
I'm sure as soon as Romneybot takes the oath of office (if he wins) the media and the "antiwar movement" will suddenly grow very concerned about the use of drones in Pakistan.
a silver lining to a romney presidency...
If he wins? He'd be the first drone president, of course they're going to turn out at the polls for him in record numbers.