*
[Cheering and applause]
Welcome, welcome, welcome to "Last Week Tonight."
I'm John Oliver.
Just time for a quick recap of the week.
If you've been here in New York, it has been dominated
by the UN General Assembly, the annual event
where delegates come from all over the world
to fuck up this city's traffic.
Almost every world leader has been here,
but no one has had a bigger impact
than Indian prime minister Narendra Modi.
Just this morning, he gave a sold-out speech
at Madison Square Garden that featured everything
from dance numbers to a live-on-stage painter
creating a speed portrait of him.
I've got to say, Modi, classic out-of-towner move--
comes to New York, stays a few days,
and leaves with a slapdash caricature
done in the Times Square area.
You're a cliche, Modi. You're a cliche.
But perhaps Modi's crowning glory during the trip
was his appearance at last night's
Global Citizen concert in Central Park.
It wasn't that he gave a great speech.
It's that he had one hell of a finish.
[Cheering and applause]
What?
That--wow.
That is a power move right there--
standing next to Wolverine and throwing out "Star Wars" quotes.
Bear in mind, this guy was banned
from entering the United States up until just 4 months ago
for his role in the Gujarat riots.
That's quite a turnaround for him,
and let me say this to all other world leaders.
This is the new bar.
Do not turn up to this city again
unless you are with an A-list movie star
and throwing out quotes from films
that they were definitely not in.
For instance, Robert Mugabe is not welcome here
unless he's standing next to Billy Crystal
shouting, "To infinity and beyond!"
for no reason whatsoever,
and I do not want to see Angela Merkel
set foot on American soil unless she is with Vin Diesel
and screaming, "I will have what she's having.
I will have what she's having."
Moving on, moving on. In much less fun news,
it was another difficult week in Ferguson, Missouri,
where the protests over a tragic police shooting
are now in their seventh week.
Much of the anger is currently being focused
on police chief Tom Jackson while this week,
he went on a PR offensive with the emphasis on "offensive."
First, he issued a business-casual apology video,
and then he did an interview about it
that went wrong within just two questions.
You issued an apology video today.
I did.
Why did it take so long for that to happen?
Well, there's been so much going on.
Ooh, that is not a good answer.
"Look. It has been busy. Football season is back.
"There was the "Ninja Turtles" reboot,
crazy line for the new iPhone, just a lot going on."
In an inexplicable move, he then decided to do this.
CHARLIE ROSE: Chief Tom Jackson spoke to demonstrators.
They want criminal charges after last month's shooting
of Michael Brown.
When Jackson started to march with them, scuffles broke out.
Yeah. Of course they did.
What was he thinking, trying to march with them?
"Oh, wow, big turnout, everyone. What are we protesting?"
"Well, for one, you, asshole."
Now at this point, you might be thinking,
"Why on earth didn't the Ferguson Police Department
just get a PR expert to help them through all this?"
Well, they did. There's just one problem.
And we're learning more tonight about the man
overseeing public relations for Ferguson
after the Michael Brown shooting.
According to our partners at the "Post-Dispatch,"
32-year-old Devon Sean James
once shot and killed an unarmed man.
What the fuck, Ferguson?
How hard can it be to find a PR expert
who has not done the exact thing
that you are hiring a PR expert to deal with?
I mean, let's just say you have two applicants in front of you.
One of them shot someone, and the other one is a potato.
I don't care how qualified the other guy is.
You have to hire the potato.
Plus, if things don't work out, you have a potato.
And finally this week, the world said good-bye
to Afghanistan president Hamid Karzai,
the man that America was trusting with overseeing
the roughly $100 billion in aid that we have poured
into that country over the past 12 years.
Karzai used his farewell speech to thank everyone.
Almost everyone.
Karzai thanked 8 other countries by name
for helping Afghanistan rebuild.
He failed to mention the United States.
Whoa! Whoa there, Karzai.
Was this an Academy Awards situation
where you just ran out of time?
Because I didn't hear any music playing you off there.
"Oh, I'd like to thank, uh, China, Germany, India, Iran.
"You guys are the greatest.
Couldn't have done it without you."
*
"I'd like to thank my whole team at ICM,
"my publicist Leslee Dart.
"I'm king of the world! That's it. Thank you very much.
"Oh, shit! And America. And America.
"Did we go to commercial? Fuck! Fuck.
"I'll write them a note.
I'll write them a note. It's fine."
To be fair, Karzai did mention us during his speech,
just not in a particularly flattering way.
In his farewell speech, the Afghan leader
warned hundreds of staff and cabinet members
not to trust the U.S. government.
He called the American mission there a betrayal,
saying the United States, quote, "Did not want peace."
Oh, excuse me, Karzai?
I thought we were gonna go our separate ways like adults,
specifically, polite but with an inner hate
that will eventually devour us alive,
but if you want to go out with backstabbing and low blows,
that is no problem.
For instance, your brother Quayum
apparently owns a restaurant in Baltimore.
You insult us--guess what-- we're gonna read
some of his bad Yelp reviews on national television.
For example-- For example, Amanda E.--
Amanda E. noted that her "Shornakhod included
"a number of other beans, not that it mattered
since it was way over soaked in the cilantro dressing."
Boom, Karzai! Oh, you want a little more?
You want more? Fine.
Ashu M. found the food there "Overrated, bland,
"and like it was out of a college student's
"first effort in the kitchen with spices.
Ugh."
Right?
If you ever show your face back in America, Karzai,
it better be with a peace offering and a good one.
I'm talking you standing next to Ryan Gosling
shouting, "Show me the money!"
And now this.
MALE ANNOUNCER: And now...
George was popping the tequilas.
Next thing you know, the A-word is flying.
The A-word.
The B-word is out there.
The B-word.
He called her the C-word.
The C-word.
The D-word.
The E-word-- "excommunicated."
The F-word. The G-word.
I want to see a president doesn't just say the H-word.
The I-word. The J-word.
The K-word. The L-word.
The N-word. The N-word.
The N-word, as in N-word Mountain.
The O-word.
The P-word. The Q-word.
Now we're talking about the R-word.
The R-word.
The S-word. The T-word.
It's the old U-word.
What's the V-word? "Visibility."
The "W-word."
All words that start with "X."
The Y-word.
The so-called "Z-word."
Moving on, our main story--
Our main story tonight--drones.
They're the third most annoying thing in the sky
after mosquitoes and plastic bags caught in the breeze.
They are not gorgeous, weird kid from "American Beauty."
They're trash, and they kill sea turtles.
You got turtle blood on your hands.
But all of a sudden, drones are everywhere.
We even use them to shoot romantic wedding videos,
and what could possibly go wrong with that?
[Motor whirs]
He's fine. He's fine.
He's probably fine. I don't know if he's fine.
It's funny whether he's fine or not, but look.
Overseas, drones are a slightly more serious matter.
For instance, this week, we reportedly launched
deadly drone strikes in both Waziristan and Yemen.
You probably didn't hear about them on the news
unless you were watching this.
The U.S. has carried out another drone attack
in Pakistan's wrested tribal areas,
killing at least 8 people.
That's the only footage reporting either strike
that we could find, and it's from the Iranian government's
English-language TV station.
That channel is buried deep in your cable package.
I think it's actually somewhere between C-SPAN Junior!
and KAN, the Kirstie Alley Network,
but there is something strange about the fact that we launched
deadly drone strikes in two sovereign nations
that almost no one here heard about,
but then again, why would it make the news?
We use drones all the time.
Hard numbers are very difficult to come by
for reasons that we'll get into, but by one estimate,
during the Obama administration, we've launched 8 times
the number of drone strikes than we did under his predecessor,
and while they've declined a bit recently,
drone strikes will be as much a characteristic
of the Obama presidency as Obamacare
or receiving racist e-mail forwards from distant relatives,
and it's easy to see why drones are so popular.
They cost less than manned planes,
and they kill a lot of terrorists.
Their slogan should really be
"Appealingly cheap and incredibly deadly,"
but, unfortunately, that's already been taken by Hardee's.
And they're not just popular with the White House.
Surveys consistently show, a majority of Americans
approve of our use of drone strikes
to fight extremists abroad.
In fact, we're so comfortable with them,
nobody blinked an eye when the president said this.
The Jonas Brothers are here.
They're out there somewhere.
Sasha and Malia are huge fans,
but, boys, don't get any ideas.
I have two words for you--
predator drones.
You will never see it coming.
"Ha ha ha!
"You'll lie there, your aortas riddled with shrapnel
"fired from the sky, gurgling your last blood-soaked breath.
"It's funny 'cause it's possible.
I could do that. That's something I could do."
But while our drone program is widely accepted,
we really know relatively little about it.
We spent a lot of time this week trying to find
some concrete answers to basic questions,
and it's surprisingly difficult.
For instance, how do we decide when to use a drone strike?
Now, on the surface,
the Obama administration's answer seems straightforward.
We only take these kinds of actions
when there's an imminent threat, when capture is not feasible,
and when we are confident that we're doing so in a way
that's consistent with federal and international law.
OK. That sounds reassuring until you look closer at it
because our rules for drone strikes
are a little like Harvey Keitel's balls.
We've all seen them in "The Piano,"
"Bad Lieutenant," or on Snapchat,
and from a distance, you think,
"Well, I understand the contours of those,"
but if you were to really examine them,
you'd discover that they're actually lost
in a haze of fuzziness and gray areas,
much like the rules for our drone strikes.
As Eric Holder just said, drone strikes are justified
if you can show an "imminent threat."
Now, that sounds clear.
There's not much of a linguistic loophole there
unless you make one.
MALE REPORTER: NBC News has obtained this confidential,
16-page Justice Department memo.
It says, an "imminent threat... does not require
"the United States to have clear evidence
"that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests
will take place in the immediate future."
But an imminent threat does have to take place
in the immediate future because that's what
the fucking word "imminent" means.
When someone says, "I'm going to have a baby imminently,"
It doesn't mean, "I may or may not have a baby
at some point in the future."
It means, "Get your fucking car keys.
My water just broke."
And it turns out, "imminent" isn't the only word
with a surprisingly fluid definition
when it comes to drone strikes.
What defines a civilian when it comes to civilian casualties
has also, allegedly, been open to interpretation.
There's also been some dispute
over the way civilian casualties are counted.
The CIA often counts able-bodied males,
military-age males who are killed in strikes
as militants unless they have concrete evidence
to sort of prove them innocent.
Hold on.
If it's assumed you're with the terrorists
if you're in the same vicinity and around the same age as them,
then by that standard, as a British man in my 30s,
whenever I go home to London, I'm a member of Coldplay,
and that's offensive to me.
That's offensive.
I've not been in that band for years.
We consciously uncoupled a long time ago.
But perhaps the most incredible thing about our drone program--
which, again, a majority of us support--
is not how little we know about who the government is killing,
but how little they themselves seem to know.
MALE REPORTER: NBC News has examined classified documents
detailing 114 drone strikes.
They also reveal what U.S. officials don't know,
like how many killed-- between 7 and 10 in one strike,
20 to 22 in another.
It suggests U.S. officials don't always know
exactly how many or who they're killing.
That is a little disturbing because the question
how many people have you killed in drone strikes
is not one of those questions where it's OK to say,
"I don't know."
It's not like asking someone,
"Who was the voice of Disney's Aladdin?"
or, "What are Skittles made from?"
It's different.
It's different than that, and the crazy thing is,
it has literally always been like this.
The very first CIA drone strike back in 2002 killed 3 men,
reportedly because they thought one of them
"might have been Bin Laden in part"--and this is true--
"due to his height," and under that rationale,
it's kind of remarkable that we didn't take out Jeff Goldblum
at some point over the years.
Now, reports later indicated the victim was actually
an innocent man who was collecting scrap metal,
and look how the Pentagon immediately set the template
for every discussion we've had about drone strikes since.
MALE REPORTER: You said you don't know who
was killed in this attack,
whether it's civilians, Taliban, or--
I'm sorry.
We don't know exactly who it was.
We don't know the identities
of the individuals involved.
But you're convinced they're Taliban?
We're convinced that--
We're convinced it was an appropriate target
based on the observation, based on the information
that it was an appropriate target.
We do not know yet exactly who it was.
It's never a good idea to make a major decision
about someone when you can't even say exactly who they are.
"Hey, guys, I got married last night."
"Oh, really? Who is he?"
"I don't know exactly at this time,
"but I'm convinced he's an appropriate husband
based on his height."
And yet we have consistently let the government
get away with answers like that because drone strikes
are one of those things that it's really convenient
not to think about that much,
like the daily life of a circus elephant
or the fact that Beck is a Scientologist.
You really don't want people reminding you
about those kind of things,
but if you happen to live underneath drones,
not thinking about them is not an option.
Having drones hovering above you is bound to mess with your head,
especially because you might not even be able to see them.
FEMALE REPORTER: Even though I know there's a predator
directly overhead, I still can't hear a thing,
and if you look up to the exact spot
where we're being told the predator is flying right now,
there's nothing but clouds and blue sky.
Congratulations, everyone. We did it.
We managed to make one of the last remaining
universal symbols of pleasantness, blue sky,
completely fucking terrifying.
We did it. Whoo!
And look.
While we may not spend much time
thinking about our drone strikes here,
in countries like Pakistan, where they actually happen,
they have to deal with them so much,
there are even weird, satirical cartoons
featuring an American drone and his friend
a dengue-fever-carrying mosquito.
[Both laugh]
To be fair, that would be a lot funnier
if you spoke Urdu and lived in constant fear
of being murdered by a drone.
If you did, that's basically "Who's On First?"
In fact, drone strikes are such a routine feature
of life in Pakistan,
this is how news networks present statistics about them.
[Speaking Urdu]
Drones have their own graphics package.
You do not invest in top-quality graphics like those
unless you know you're gonna get a lot of use out of them.
It's like Las Vegas local news
having white tiger mauling graphics.
They're going to get their money's worth.
But to really understand the psychological impact
of living underneath drones, listen to this Yemeni man,
a man who loves America, addressing Congress last year
only a week after his village was struck by a drone.
I spent a year living with an American family
and attended an American high school.
That was one of the best years of my life.
The friendships and values I experienced
and described to the villagers helped them understand
the America that I know and that I love.
Now, however, when they think of America,
they think of the terror they feel from the drones
that hover over their heads
ready to fire missiles at any time.
The drone strikes are the face of America to many Yemenis.
And that kind of makes sense because think about it this way.
If there were Italian armed drones
hanging over your head right now,
it would probably affect the way you think about Italy.
In word association, your first answer for "Italy"
would not be "lasagna."
It would be "specter of imminent death"
or, more likely, "specter of-a imminent-a death-a"
followed by "lasagna,"
but if you grow up underneath drones,
it's going to affect the way you see the world.
Listen to this 13-year-old Pakistani boy
whose grandmother was killed in a drone strike.
FEMALE INTERPRETER: I no longer love blue skies.
In fact, I now prefer gray skies.
The drones do not fly when the skies are gray,
and for a short period of time,
the mental tension and fear eases.
Look. It is completely natural for us not to want to think
about the consequences of our drone program,
but when children from other countries are telling us
that we've made them fear the sky,
it might be time to ask some hard questions.
The problem is, after a week of looking at this,
it seems there are shockingly few available answers.
In fact, the best summation we could find of the framework
we use to authorize and justify drone strikes
is from this former Defense Department advisor.
Right now, we have the executive branch
making a claim that it has the right to kill anyone
anywhere on Earth at any time for secret reasons
based on secret evidence in a secret process
undertaken by unidentified officials.
That frightens me.
Yeah.
It probably does frighten you because what you just described
sounds fucking terrifying, and look.
Any counterterrorism effort will always require
an element of secrecy, but with our drone program,
not only do we not know who we've killed.
The legal guidelines have loopholes large enough
to drive a flying death robot through,
and after a week spent trying to comprehend
the rationales, legality,
and broader consequences of our drone policy,
I'm starting to understand how this guy feels.
[Motor whirs]
Exactly. And now this.
MALE ANNOUNCER: And now "Last Week Tonight" asks...
This week--Ayn Rand, how is she still a thing?
3 decades after her death, the writer Ayn Rand
is still the subject of serious debate,
and not just over how to pronounce her name.
Ann Rand or Ahn Rond
or however the moderns pronounce it...
Ayn Rand, not Ann Rand...
Ain Rand, Ayn Rand--
JOHN STOSSEL: I'm told it's Ayn Rand.
MALE ANNOUNCER: Ayn Rand became famous
for her philosophy of objectivism,
which is a nice way of saying being a selfish asshole.
Rand illustrated her beliefs in novels like "Atlas Shrugged"
and "The Fountainhead,"
stories of rapey heroes complaining
about how no one appreciates their true genius.
My work done my way.
Nothing else matters to me.
MALE ANNOUNCER: And if that reminds you of anyone,
it's probably someone like this.
*
Until I'm done with my Lamborghini entrance,
no one is allowed in.
Make sure they know that because if they
start running it, I'm gonna start pissing.
What about my entry?
MALE ANNOUNCER: Ayn Rand has always been popular
with teenagers, but she's something
you're supposed to grow out of, like ska music or handjobs.
Curiously, though, Rand's popularity persists
among a certain type of adult.
BRIAN LAMB: Mark Cuban,
how many times have you read "Fountainhead"?
3 complete times.
You know, it's funny because I'll pick it up
when I need motivation,
but then if I read too far, I get too much motivation,
and I get too jittery, so I have to put it down.
MALE ANNOUNCER: Yes.
Unbelievably, Mark Cuban's favorite book
is about a misunderstood visionary
who blows things up when he doesn't get his way.
Cuban even named his 287-foot yacht Fountainhead
because sometimes having a 287-foot yacht
just isn't enough to warn people you're a douchebag.
And Rand's influence extends even further.
Ayn Rand, more than anyone else, did a fantastic job
of explaining the morality of capitalism.
I am a big fan of Ayn Rand. I've read all of her novels.
Let me encourage any of you who have not read "Atlas Shrugged"
to go tomorrow, buy "Atlas Shrugged," and read it.
MALE ANNOUNCER: However, Ayn Rand is an unlikely hero
for conservatives because she was also pro-choice...
and anti-God.
No, no that one, the real God...
and in case that's making you start to fall for her,
take a listen to her views on Native Americans.
Why would conservatives hold up as their idol
someone who says things like that,
especially when there are so many other advocates
for selfishness they could choose,
like Donald Trump...
TRUMP: Part of the beauty of me is that I'm very rich.
MALE ANNOUNCER: or Drake...
* I'm'a worry 'bout me, give a fuck about you *
MALE ANNOUNCER: to basically anyone on Bravo...
I want to [beep] kill you.
MALE ANNOUNCER: all of which is enough to make you wonder,
"Ayn Rand, how is she still a thing?"
And finally--
Finally tonight, Kansas.
It's a land synonymous with me Googling "Kansas" 20 minutes ago
to see if it's synonymous with anything.
Turns out, mainly wheat
and tornados that blow away their wheat.
Anyway, Kansas is in a bit of trouble these days budgetwise.
The State of Kansas is broke, extremely broke.
Job growth in Kansas lags behind the rest of the country.
Moody's has downgraded the state's credit rating,
and the state supreme court recently ruled that Kansas
had been unconstitutionally underfunding its schools.
OK. That's horrible.
Children in Kansas should not be deprived
of a quality education because of budget shortfalls.
They should be deprived because of the strict, unyielding
religious beliefs of their school boards.
That's the Kansas way.
But luckily--
Luckily, the State of Kansas may actually have
a little cash coming its way from an unexpected source.
The State of Kansas soon going
to start profiting from porn.
Yes, Kansas porn. Finally.
I've got so many ideas for the titles--
"Little Fuckhouse on the Prairie,"
"Cornfields Cornholing,"
"Cream of Wheat," or maybe you go
the whole "Wizard of Oz" thing
and "Swallow the Yellow Dick's Load."
Yes. I'm good at this. I'm good at this.
Now, just out of interest,
how, exactly, is Kansas in the porn business?
MALE REPORTER: Hundreds of adult toys
are sitting in this Kansas City warehouse.
They are up for auction online.
The owner of a string of adult stores
in that state didn't pay his taxes.
He owes the state about $160,000.
The state said he could still sell his merchandise
to pay off his debt.
OK. So Kansas is only in the porn business
because the owner of this chain of sex toy stores,
the Bang chain, didn't pay his taxes,
and I've got to say, even by sex toy store standards,
that is one seedy-looking establishment,
and also, there are some incredible bargains
for sale at this auction,
like this Icicles brand transparent penis,
described as not just "elegant, upscale, and hand-crafted,"
but also "hand-blown," which is, incidentally,
the single classiest euphemism I can possibly think of
for masturbation.
Or you could also get this pair of "Fifty Shades of Grey"
"You are mine" metal handcuffs,
which you are, frankly, going to need
to resuscitate your love life
after the "Fifty Shades" movie kills your sex drive.
Jamie Dornan is not my Christian,
#notmychristian.
Now, in fact--
In fact, if I may address our viewers in Kansas right now,
there is only one problem with this auction,
and that is that the current bids
only total $38,000, and yet you are owed
over 160,000 in taxes.
So you need to start thinking about this
like a charity auction and overpay for things that
you clearly do not really need, and do not give me the whole,
"But, John, I don't need a Dr. Laura Berman brand
"remote control panty pleaser.
I already have 3."
That's not the point, Kansas.
You're not buying it for yourself.
You're buying it to cover your state's
gigantic projected budget shortfall.
Bidding is open until Tuesday night
at this website, Kansas, and you need to raise
around $160,000, and, crucially, absolutely no more than that
because any excess will, unfortunately, go straight back
to the tax-delinquent owner of the sketchiest
sex toy business on the planet.
So let's do this, Kansas.
I want you to go and comically overspend
on this Raging Hard-On 18-inch double dong,
and I want you to put this on your shelf,
and I want you to look at it every day,
and I want you to feel good about yourself when you do it
because you inadvertently just helped fund
K-through-12 education all across the state,
all across the state.
In fact, every time someone comes over to your house,
I want you to take this off the shelf
and frantically wave it around and tell them what you did.
Do it, Kansas, because while your state legislature
has fucked you into this mess, this is your chance
to go online and fuck yourselves out of it.
That's our show. Have a great week.
Join us again next Sunday. Good night.
*