Thursday, November 12, 2015

Drones In Hawaii - Opposition (1 of 4 pages)

o DRONES in the Hawaiian Islands: Updating article -Would You Like To Buy a DRONE? It's Actually Sold on-line.....Too bad it doesn't deliver Love Kisses....Updated 06.22.2014....

Opposition to DRONES Program in the Hawaiian Islands is hereby documented by Amelia Gora, one of Kamehameha's descendants, landowner/title owner, to U.S. President Obama, et. als. Opposition continues also for experimentation programs, GMO's, WHO - World Health Organization, etc. on our families private properties. The Hawaiian Kingdom remain a neutral, friendly, non-violent nation and weapons of War on our private properties are unacceptable, etc.
This is a legal, public notice for the records.
The following was posted under the forum: Would You Like To Buy a DRONE? It's Actually Sold on-line.....Too bad it doesn't deliver Love Kisses....Updated 03.21.2013....

Buy Your Own Drone! Now Only $300 Online

Apr 28, 2012 4:45 AM EDT

We don’t need to imagine the future anymore, writes Clive Stafford-Smith. In the dystopian reality of 2012, the drone can ruin your life in ways you never imagined.


The scene is easy enough to picture: In a dark, quiet room at Creech Air Force Base in Indian Springs, Nev., a CIA “pilot” leans back in his leather chair, sips coffee, and watches a computer screen. He manipulates the joystick of his video console as the camera provides a grainy image of a man with a beard who may just have noticed an angry-sounding buzz overhead. The bearded man—7,000 miles away, in a mountainous village of Waziristan—runs for shelter. This apparently indicates his guilt, and the pilot labels him a “squirter.” The pilot locks a $60,000 Hellfire missile onto his target and fires. Boom: the “squirter” becomes a “bugsplat.”


 


Earlier that morning, the pilot kissed his children goodbye, then drove to his job killing people the other side of the world. His fellow intelligence officers, all a safe distance from any physical peril, talk bravely about “killer apps” that are designed to put “warheads on foreheads.”


As the pilot leaves Creech at the end of his shift, he drives past a large road sign: “Drive Carefully! This Is the Most Dangerous Part of Your Day!”


If we have lived in the nuclear age for nearly seven decades—an era into which we were forced, without discussion, on Aug. 6, 1945—we are now entering the drone age, and nobody seems to be giving it a second thought.


Drone machismo is not confined to soldiers and special agents. President Obama recently joked that he’d use a Predator drone on anyone who messed with his daughters. In real life, he’s already approved the missiles that have killed more than one American—without trial, of course.


**


In the dystopian films of the 1980s, much of humanity had been displaced by robots, and privacy had dissolved into constant monitoring by Big Brother.


But we don’t need to imagine the future anymore, because it is here. In the dystopian reality of 2012, the drone, or unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), has the potential to ruin your life in ways you never imagined.

Pakistani Anti-drone Protests
Pakistanis shout anti-U.S. slogans during a protest in Islamabad against U.S. drone attacks in the Pakistani tribal region. Leon Panetta has described the drones as “the only game in town.” In 2001 the Pentagon had 50 weaponized drones; today it has more than 19,000, Aamir Qureshi, AFP / Getty Images

My own experience confirms the arbitrary nature of the drone killing. Last October I met a 16-year-old kid from Waziristan named Tariq Aziz. He wanted to know what he could do to stop the Americans from raining death on his family. Three days later the CIA announced that it had eliminated “four militants.” In truth, Tariq had been driving his 12-year-old cousin to their aunt’s house when they were both blown into very small pieces. This was just 24 hours after the CIA boasted that six other militants had been killed—it turned out that they were four chromite workers who had been minding their own business until a local informant apparently tagged their car with a GPS monitor and lied about who they were to earn his fee.


The CIA insists that it has not killed an innocent civilian in Pakistan for well over a year while eliminating hundreds of terrorists. People who know better sneer at this, including Jeffrey Addicott, a former special adviser to the U.S. Army special forces. At best, Addicott wrote, we should expect three innocent deaths for every two “bad guys. In the trade, this is called the ‘Oops’ factor.”


And even that may be overly optimistic: independent data suggest that U.S. drones have killed hundreds of women and children. That should be no surprise, since the CIA is using the same forms of intelligence that landed 779 people in Guantánamo Bay, more than 80 percent of whom were subsequently shown not to be terrible terrorists. The intel the agency relies on is purchased by offering bounties to people who would sell their own grandmothers for half the price.


**


It’s been a very fast descent into the drone age. Shortly before Sept. 11, then–CIA director George Tenet said it would be “a terrible mistake” to use a weapon like the Predator. It would be illegal, for one thing, and would lose the battle for hearts and minds. At the time, the U.S. condemned Israel’s policy of assassinating Palestinians.


But that was then, and this is now. Only eight years later, Tenet’s successor, Leon Panetta, described the drones as “the only game in town.” In 2001 the Pentagon had 50 weaponized drones; today it has more than 19,000. Assassination remains illegal under U.S. law for the time being, so it’s called “targeted killing” instead.


Drones can currently circle a target for two days, but their endurance is improving exponentially. Two weeks ago, for fear of the public-relations backlash, the U.S. government announced that it was suspending plans for a nuclear-powered drone that could circle overhead for most of the next century without refueling. Meanwhile, the CIA has acquired a thermobaric weapon that creates a pressure wave that kills humans but leaves property undamaged. Apparently, the moral debate in the 1970s over the neutron bomb passed them by.


The CIA insists that it has not killed an innocent civilian in Pakistan for well over a year while eliminating hundreds of terrorists. People who know better sneer at this.


The U.S. use of drones continues to get the most coverage, but the disease is spreading like a virus. At least 40 other countries currently maintain UAV programs, although the British names are naturally far more sophisticated: the Taranis is named after the Celtic god of thunder, and Rolls-Royce is making drone engines.


They’re not just used to kill people, either. In 2009 a SWAT team in Austin, Texas, carried out the first arrest aided by a law-enforcement drone—a surveillance WASP—taking a suspected drug dealer into custody. And last year, the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, also in Texas, dropped half a million dollars on an MK-II ShadowHawk unmanned aerial system. (Half the tab was picked up by the Department of Homeland Security.)


Of the four variants of the ShadowHawk developed by Vanguard Defense Industries, only the Mark IV is specified for nonmilitary purposes—a version that the Montgomery County sheriff pointedly did not buy. The Mark II can be fitted with a taser. Given the mistakes that police officers make with tasers when standing right in front of their suspects, we might be forgiven for worrying.


**


Of course, UAVs have many potentially positive uses: they could help provide accurate information in the wake of natural disasters, they might facilitate search-and-rescue missions, and journalists may soon find themselves reporting various difficult stories—from the Japanese tsunami to the Syrian uprising—with the help of drone photography.


But still, there are few limitations on drones’ use by others. Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, described to Congress two years ago how a 77-year-old blind man has already flown his own homemade drone across the Atlantic. Even for those who are not amateur engineers, access to drones is so easy that I have one myself: I bought it online for $300. I thought it might be fun to get one and spy on the drone makers. There’s nothing illegal about it here in Britain. Because small drones are still considered the equivalent of radio-controlled toy airplanes, I can fly it almost anywhere I want. Even when I attach a camera, I can hover over the drone makers’ offices at 150 feet and film them to my heart’s content.


My ambitions are benign and targeted solely at getting the world’s attention, but others with more violent aims are way ahead of me. Hizbullah flew four drones in its last war with Israel. And UAVs are perfect for the distribution of germ warfare. While a ballistic missile would destroy 90 percent of the anthrax in its warhead upon impact, virtually all would survive to do untold damage if gently delivered by drone.


Even the “lawful” drones are creeping into our lives in ways we don’t realize. Already the CIA is boasting that it has a micro-UAV the size of a small pizza, invisible at night and capable of hovering soundlessly outside your window for several hours. Soon, the nano-class of drone promises to perform surveillance missions inside buildings and in confined spaces.


The current victims of drones seem to understand the future better than we do. In Pakistan, the locals refer to the drones asbangana, the Pashtun word for “wasp,” because of the buzzing sound they make, swarming overhead, seemingly beyond all human control.


Meanwhile, drone manufacturers gleefully project sales of $89 billion in the next 10 years. I paid only $300, so that leaves more than $88 billion worth of drones that will be capable of doing a lot of damage.


We need a full and open discourse on the rules that should apply to drones, or we will discover that we have sleepwalked into a nightmare.
Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Clive Stafford Smith is the director of the legal-action charity Reprieve. The International Drones Summit takes place Saturday, April 28, in Washington, DC.)
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

*******************************

Take Back Your Government Americans!

alohal.
Views: 265
▼ Reply to This
Stop Following – Don't email me when people reply

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on May 13, 2012 at 5:41pm
Delete
Twitter / Jacob Appelbaum: I think I'm going to start ...
twitter.com
I think I'm going to start building anti-surveillance drones.
3 hours ago · 
Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on June 10, 2012 at 9:34pm
Delete
A Measure of Change

Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will

Pete Souza/The White House
President Obama in the Oval Office with Thomas E. Donilon, left, the national security adviser, and John O. Brennan, his top counterterrorism adviser.
By JO BECKER and SCOTT SHANE
Published: May 29, 20121208 Comments
WASHINGTON — This was the enemy, served up in the latest chart from the intelligence agencies: 15 Qaeda suspects in Yemen with Western ties. The mug shots and brief biographies resembled a high school yearbook layout. Several were Americans. Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.

A Measure of Change

The Shadow War
This is the third article in a series assessing President Obama’s record.
Previous Articles in This Series »
Multimedia
 Graphic
Striking Al Qaeda

Assessing Obama’s Counterterrorism Record

Excerpts of remarks from some of nearly 40 current and former officials who had direct knowledge about the United States’ classified counterterrorism efforts.
Interview Excerpts »

Related

Related in Opinion

World Twitter Logo.

Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors
Enlarge This Image
Pool photo by Brennan Linsley
A picture of President George W. Bush is replaced with one of President Obama at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Readers’ Comments

"Would it be o.k. for this hit list to exist if it prevented you and your immediate loved ones from a certain terrorist attack?"
K. Yates, CT
President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces. It was Jan. 19, 2010, the end of a first year in office punctuated by terrorist plots and culminating in a brush with catastrophe over Detroit on Christmas Day, a reminder that a successful attack could derail his presidency. Yet he faced adversaries without uniforms, often indistinguishable from the civilians around them.
“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”
It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be.
Mr. Obama is the liberal law professor who campaigned against the Iraq war and torture, and then insisted on approving every new name on an expanding “kill list,” poring over terrorist suspects’ biographies on what one official calls the macabre “baseball cards” of an unconventional war. When a rare opportunity for a dronestrike at a top terrorist arises — but his family is with him — it is the president who has reserved to himself the final moral calculation.
“He is determined that he will make these decisions about how far and wide these operations will go,” said Thomas E. Donilon, his national security adviser. “His view is that he’s responsible for the position of the United States in the world.” He added, “He’s determined to keep the tether pretty short.”
Nothing else in Mr. Obama’s first term has baffled liberal supporters and confounded conservative critics alike as his aggressive counterterrorism record. His actions have often remained inscrutable, obscured by awkward secrecy rules, polarized political commentary and the president’s own deep reserve.
In interviews with The New York Times, three dozen of his current and former advisers described Mr. Obama’s evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the shadow war with Al Qaeda.
They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action without hand-wringing. While he was adamant about narrowing the fight and improving relations with the Muslim world, he has followed the metastasizing enemy into new and dangerous lands. When he applies his lawyering skills to counterterrorism, it is usually to enable, not constrain, his ferocious campaign against Al Qaeda — even when it comes to killing an American cleric in Yemen, a decision that Mr. Obama told colleagues was “an easy one.”
His first term has seen private warnings from top officials about a “Whac-A-Mole” approach to counterterrorism; the invention of a new category of aerial attack following complaints of careless targeting; and presidential acquiescence in a formula for counting civilian deaths that some officials think is skewed to produce low numbers.
The administration’s failure to forge a clear detention policy has created the impression among some members of Congress of a take-no-prisoners policy. And Mr. Obama’s ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron P. Munter, has complained to colleagues that the C.I.A.’s strikes drive American policy there, saying “he didn’t realize his main job was to kill people,” a colleague said.
Beside the president at every step is his counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan, who is variously compared by colleagues to a dogged police detective, tracking terrorists from his cavelike office in the White House basement, or a priest whose blessing has become indispensable to Mr. Obama, echoing the president’s attempt to apply the “just war” theories of Christian philosophers to a brutal modern conflict.
A version of this article appeared in print on May 29, 2012, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test Of Obama’s Principles and Will.

   Vicious, Violence, Wicked ...Beyond Wicked
Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on November 30, 2012 at 10:59pm
Delete
Reining in Obama and His Drones

By Ralph Nader

November 30, 2012 "Information Clearing House" - Barack Obama, former president of the Harvard Law Review and a constitutional law lecturer, should go back and review his coursework. He seems to have declined to comport his presidency to the rule of law.
Let’s focus here on his major expansion of drone warfare in defiance of international law, statutory law and the Constitution. Obama’s drones roam over multiple nations of Asia and Africa and target suspects, both known and unknown, whom the president, in his unbridled discretion, wants to evaporate for the cause of national security.
More than 2,500 people have been killed by Obama’s drones, many of them civilians and bystanders, including American citizens, irrespective of the absence of any “imminent threat” to the United States.
As Justin Elliott of ProPublica wrote: “Under Obama…only 13 percent (of those killed) could be considered militant leaders – either of the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, or Al Qaeda.” The remaining fatalities, apart from many innocent civilians, including children, were people oppressed by their own harsh regimes or dominated by U.S. occupation of their country. Aside from human rights and the laws of war, this distinction between civilian and combatant matters because it shows that Obama’s drones are becoming what Elliott calls “a counterinsurgency air force” for our collaborative regimes.
The “kill lists”  are the work of Obama and his advisors, led by John O. Brennan, and come straight from the White House, according to The New York Times.  Apparently, the president spends a good deal of time being prosecutor, judge, jury, executioner and concealer. But he does so quietly; this is no dramatic “thumbs-down” emperor.
Mr. Brennan spoke at Harvard Law School about a year ago and told a remarkably blasé audience that what he and the president were doing was perfectly legal under the law of self-defense. Self-defense that is defined, of course, by the president.
It appears from recent statements on The Daily Show that President Obama does not share the certitude boldly displayed by Mr. Brennan. On October 18, President Obama told John Stewart, and his audience, that “one of the things we’ve got to do is put a legal architecture in place, and we need Congressional help in order to do that, to make sure that not only am I reined in but any president is reined in terms of some of the decisions that we’re making.”
So in the absence of “a legal architecture” of accountability, do presidents knock off whomever they want to target (along with bystanders or family members), whether or not the targeted person is actually plotting an attack against the United States? It seems that way, in spite of what is already in place legally, called the Constitution, separation of powers and due process of law. What more legal architecture does Mr. Obama need?
Obviously what he wants is a self-contained, permanent “Office of Presidential Predator Drone Assassinations” in the White House, to use, author, scholar and litigator Bruce Fein’s nomenclature. According to The New York Times, President Obama wants “ explicit rules for targeted killing…. So that a new president would inherit clear standards and procedures.” Mr. Fein notes that “clear standards and procedures without accountability to the judiciary, Congress, or the American people” undermine the rule of law and our democracy.
Indeed, the whole deliberation process inside the Obama administration has been kept secret, a continuing process of morbid over-classification that even today contains secret internal legal opinions on targeted killings. The government refuses even to acknowledge that a drone air force operates over Pakistan – a fact that everybody knows including the hundreds of injured and displaced Pakistanis. This drone air force uses, what The New York Times called, “signature strikes against groups of suspected, unknown militants.”
Predictably, these strikes are constantly terrorizing thousands of families who fear a strike anytime day or night, and are causing a blowback that is expanding the number of Al Qaeda sympathizers and affiliates from Pakistan to Yemen. “Signature strikes,” according to the Times, “have prompted the greatest conflict inside the Obama administration.” Former CIA director under George W. Bush, Michael V. Hayden has publically questioned whether the expansion in the use of drones is counterproductive and creating more enemies and the desire for more revenge against the U.S.
Critics point out how many times in the past that departments and agencies have put forth misleading or false intelligence, from the Vietnam War to the arguments for invading Iraq, or have missed what they should have predicted such as the fall of the Soviet Union. This legacy of errors and duplicity should restrain presidents who execute, by ordering drone operators to push buttons that target people thousands of miles away, based on secret, so-called intelligence.
Mr. Obama wants, in Mr. Fein’s view, to have “his secret and unaccountable predator drone assassinations become permanent fixtures of the nation’s national security complex.” Were Obama to remember his constitutional law, such actions would have to be constitutionally authorized by Congress and subject to judicial review.
With his Attorney General Eric Holder maintaining that there is sufficient due process entirely inside the Executive Branch and without Congressional oversight or judicial review, don’t bet on anything more than a more secret, violent, imperial presidency that shreds the Constitution’s separation of powers and checks and balances.
And don’t bet that other countries of similar invasive bent won’t remember this green-light on illegal unilateralism when they catch up with our drone capabilities.


Scroll down to add / read comments 
For Email Marketing you can trust
  Support Information Clearing House
Search Information Clearing House 









 Please read our  Comment Policy before posting -
 
 
Share

Comments (16)

GMH's avatar
GMH· 3 hours ago
Some food for thought: Why is Obama all of a sudden, 3/4 years after escalating the drone attacks without Congress now dragging Congress into the picture? To keep from being impeached. That's why Bush Co involved the heads of Congress in the torture usage and why Pelosi keep impeachment off the table. By Pelosi not telling anyone what was going on she and the other that were briefed became complicit in the act of torture. This is also why Obama hasn't investigated or made Bush Co accountable. Too many Democrats were in on it from the beginning. 

When the Obama house party cheerleaders get on their high horses, ask them how many drone killings has Obama and them done today. Just watch their feathers ruffle, or the blank stare.
Share/Save/Bookmark
clovissangrail's avatar - Go to profile
clovissangrail· 3 hours ago
I wept when Ralph Nader was ousted from his presidential bid. What a better place the world would be if common sense guided voters instead of billions of advertising dollars. I dread the future.
Share/Save/Bookmark
1 reply · active 2 hours ago
 
GMH's avatar
GMH· 3 hours ago
Some food for thought: Why is Obama all of a sudden, 3/4 years after escalating the drone attacks without Congress now dragging Congress into the picture? To keep from being impeached. That's why Bush Co involved the heads of Congress in the torture usage and why Pelosi keep impeachment off the table. By Pelosi not telling anyone what was going on she and the other that were briefed became complicit in the act of torture. This is also why Obama hasn't investigated or made Bush Co accountable. Too many Democrats were in on it from the beginning. 

When the Obama house party cheerleaders get on their high horses, ask them how many drone killings has Obama and them done today. Just watch their feathers ruffle, or the blank stare.
Share/Save/Bookmark
clovissangrail's avatar - Go to profile
clovissangrail· 3 hours ago
I wept when Ralph Nader was ousted from his presidential bid. What a better place the world would be if common sense guided voters instead of billions of advertising dollars. I dread the future.
Share/Save/Bookmark

Comments (16)

GMH's avatar
GMH· 4 hours ago
Some food for thought: Why is Obama all of a sudden, 3/4 years after escalating the drone attacks without Congress now dragging Congress into the picture? To keep from being impeached. That's why Bush Co involved the heads of Congress in the torture usage and why Pelosi keep impeachment off the table. By Pelosi not telling anyone what was going on she and the other that were briefed became complicit in the act of torture. This is also why Obama hasn't investigated or made Bush Co accountable. Too many Democrats were in on it from the beginning. 

When the Obama house party cheerleaders get on their high horses, ask them how many drone killings has Obama and them done today. Just watch their feathers ruffle, or the blank stare.
Share/Save/Bookmark
clovissangrail's avatar - Go to profile
clovissangrail· 3 hours ago
I wept when Ralph Nader was ousted from his presidential bid. What a better place the world would be if common sense guided voters instead of billions of advertising dollars. I dread the future.
Share/Save/Bookmark
1 reply · active 3 hours ago
Amelia Gora's avatar
Amelia Gora· 9 minutes ago
Comment posted.
 or Close Message
In Hawaii there's a saying, "bachi" or "what comes around, goes around" or "karma".,,,,, there are many unresolved issues when it comes to the Hawaiian Islands and Obama has used the Hawaiian Kingdom Court Case regarding Landais to explain away his 'natural born citizen' to validate his Presidential job, etc. He's a Warmonger, a banker associate, and whose ancestors have done multiples of wrongs against many, and now he follows in their path as well.....as with other Warmongers, all will get the wrath of God who does exist.......Judgement day happens on the second of one's demise.....and being a mass murderer such as he (GW Bush, et. als. too) it just may be that their "bachi" will occur for every death that he caused,......the Plundering Upon Innocents is not o.k. and we can honestly say, "In God We Trust".
Share/Save/Bookmark
   
Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 3, 2013 at 1:30am
Delete
   
Had to bring this post because the one posted by the other party on this forum has posted an article that has downloads which can damage your computer.........in other words it downloads viruses to your computer, so don't download or click on the links or erase it right away......eliminate it if your computer messages show that it can damage your computer.........
This article was just received, for your information:
  NEWS & POLITICS  
BillMoyers.com / By Bill Moyers, Michael Winship
comments_image 25 COMMENTS

Barack Obama, Drone Ranger

As Zero Dark Thirty has triggered a debate over torture, hopefully John Brennan's confirmation hearings raise drone critics.
Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com/Paul Fleet
February 2, 2013  |  
 
 
 
 
If you’ve seen the movie Zero Dark Thirty, you know why it has triggered a new debate over our government’s use of torture after 9/11.
The movie’s up for an Oscar as best motion picture. We’ll know later this month if it wins. Some people leave the theater claiming the film endorses and even glorifies the use of torture to obtain information that finally led to finding and killing Osama bin Laden. Not true, say the filmmakers, but others argue the world is better off without bin Laden in it, no matter how we had to get him. What’s more, they say, there hasn’t been a major terrorist attack on American soil since 9/1 — if we have to use an otherwise immoral practice to defend ourselves against such atrocities, we’re okay with it. Or so the argument goes.
The story of bin Laden’s death is just one aspect of the international manhunt the United States has pursued, a worldwide dragnet of detention and death that has raised troubling questions and fervent debate over the fight against terrorism. What about the undermining of civil liberties here at home? The rights of suspects? The secret surveillance of American citizens? The swollen executive powers first claimed by George W. Bush and now by Barack Obama?
Soon after he succeeded Bush, President Obama announced he would not permit torture and would close down the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay. He also said:
“The orders that I sign today should send an unmistakable signal that our actions in defense of liberty will be just as our cause. And that we the people will uphold our fundamental values as vigilantly as we protect our security. Once again, America’s moral example must be the bedrock and the beacon of our global leadership”
Four years later, Guantanamo remains open. In fact, just a few days ago, the State Department announced it was eliminating the office assigned to close the prison and move its detainees.
Because of logjams in the process of military justice, alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others have yet to come to trial. And there’s continuing controversy about the lack of oversight and transparency surrounding the detention and interrogation of suspects both here and abroad.
Meanwhile, President Obama has stepped up the use of unmanned drones against suspected terrorists abroad, not only in Afghanistan but in countries where we’re not at war, including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. As the Brookings Institution’s Peter Singer wrote in The New York Times a year ago, “… A new technology is short-circuiting the decision-making process for what used to be the most important choice a democracy could make. Something that would have previously been viewed as a war is simply not being treated like a war.”
Just last week, as reports came of more deaths by drone — including three attacks in Yemen, with 13 dead — the United Nations announced an investigationinto the legality of drones and their deadly toll on the innocent. According to UN special rapporteur Ben Emmerson:
“The central objective of the investigation… is to look at the evidence that drone strikes and other forms of remote targeted killing have caused disproportionate civilian casualties in some instances… It’s both right as a matter of principle, and inevitable as a matter of political reality, that the international community should now be focusing attention on the standards applicable to this technological development.”
Since Barack Obama took office, the aerial assaults also have killed three U.S. citizens, raising additional arguments as to whether the president has the right to order the death of Americans suspected of terrorism without due process of law. One of those controversial drone attacks involved the killing of Anwar al-Awalki, an American citizen and radical Muslim cleric who had moved to Yemen with his family. He was said to be the brains behind repeated attempts to attack the U.S., including the Christmas day underwear bomber plot in 2009 that would have blown up a passenger jet over Detroit. Also dead was American citizen Samir Khan, editor of “Inspire,” al Qaeda ‘s online propaganda magazine, and two weeks later, in a separate drone attack, al-Awalki’s 16-year-old son, born in Denver.
A key player in our government’s current drone program is John Brennan, who during the Bush presidency was a senior official at the Central Intelligence Agency and head of the National Counterterrorism Center. Reportedly, Barack Obama considered offering him the top job at the CIA in 2008, but public opposition — in reaction to the charges that the Bush White House had approved torture — caused Brennan to withdraw his name from consideration. Nonetheless, Obama kept him on as an adviser, and now, despite Brennan’s past notoriety, Obama officially has chosen him to head the CIA. This time, there’s been little criticism of the decision.
We hope Brennan’s upcoming confirmation hearings on February 7 will offer Congressional critics the chance to press him on drone attacks and whether the Obama administration in its fight against terror is functioning within the rule of law — or abusing presidential power when there has been no formal declaration of war.
Veteran journalist Bill Moyers is the host of “Moyers & Company,” airing weekly on public television. Check your local listings. More at www.billmoyers.com
Michael Winship is senior writing fellow at Demos and a senior writer of the new series, Moyers & Company, airing on public television.

  • Amelia Gora • a few seconds ago

    Would You Like To Buy a DRONE? It's Actually Sold on-line.....Too bad it doesn't deliver Love Kisses....Updated 11.30.2012....
    Posted by Amelia Gora on April 28, 2012 at 9:01am in Politics
    View Discussions
    Buy Your Own Drone! Now Only $300 Online
    Apr 28, 2012 4:45 AM EDT
    We don’t need to imagine the future anymore, writes Clive Stafford-Smith. In the dystopian reality of 2012, the drone can ruin your life in ways you never imagined.
    • Avatar
      Southernfink • 7 hours ago

      The reasons for going to war were all based on lies no one was tortured it was all "imagined" , the MSM allowed itself to used as a government propaganda machine ,which it truly and willingly is.
      Yet what makes it all truly ironic to me is that since the public has proven they are not buying into the lies told to them for starting the fake war on terror , the very same group has now been using the prisoners that it bought for cash to torture, as a way to extract information to continue the war that it started in the first place.
      How very strange.... first they imagine the reasons for going to war but when the public finds out they have been lying about it they switch to torturing prisoners for whom they paid a huge ransom.
      Now they are simply using drones to kill em all , mere suspects included because after all >
      1 ) Torture does not really provide any real value information anyway.
      2) Drones make sure there are no survivors thus ensure no new prisoner arrivals.
      Then there was that small matter of whom actually controlled the planes on 911 for the supposed terrorist were simply terrible flying anything.
      I think that perhaps Rumsfelt Cheney And Bush could do with a little water boarding in order to find out what really happenend on the day before they get old and senile.(wait..is it too late?)
      http://www.theforbiddenknowled...
      • Avatar
        Bruun-olsen Ken  Southernfink • 2 hours ago

        That's where this all needs to START: With a Propper 9/11 Investigation. EVERYTHING after THAT POINT has been Fraudulent. People need to be JAILED (Bush/Cheney/Rice/Powell etc etc), and THEN you can start putting the CURRENT TERRORISTS in DC into Gitmo (Obama/Biden/etc etc).
        • Avatar
          Southernfink  Bruun-olsen Ken • an hour ago

          Apologies you are right I just had to do a quick edit ,you are totally correct there needs to be a full investigation by a independent organisation for the USA is A complete rogue state ,completely unaccountable and irresponsible for any of it's actions and consequences.
      • Avatar
        ThePurpleCrab • 12 hours ago

        Obama will be remembered as the president who brought us sky-net.
      •  
      Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 3, 2013 at 1:32am
      Delete

      • Avatar
        Neo Conned • 12 hours ago

        And who plays Tonto in this horror flick?
        "...countries where we’re not at war..."
        If we are launching drone raids in those nations, we are at war.
        • Avatar
          ripuree • 9 hours ago

          When most of mankind believe in a blood thirsty God who invades countries and massacre people to give that country to his supposed Chosen, then such humans will never stop wars. When we believe that such a God and not individuals have the most ownership of individual's lives, then those with the most weapons for the mass destruction of others, will always exact wars on those they perceive to be weaker, and thus have less rights to the resources on the land on which they live.
          • Avatar
            Neko El Gato • 9 hours ago

            Yep, just keep on debating drones and torture, but never, ever, under any circumstances, debate the premise for the wars themselves. Nice alternative.
            • Avatar
              zapatatio • 10 hours ago

              Drones murders are terrorist acts, just like all of imperialist amerika's war on the World ! It will be a great day for World Peace when fascist amerikas killing machine military grinds to a halt. That day is not far off !
              • Avatar
                Moszep • 11 hours ago

                The primary reason we use drones is because it limits the potential for casualties on our side. It costs very little to replace or build a drone, while a pilot costs millions. We can build a new drone in a week, pilots take much longer to train. This is the outcome of "efficiency" thinking, technology, and a public unwilling to accept high casualties.

                The limiting of casualties sounds great, but it is the human cost that often helps end wars. If you remove this cost, we are more likely to use violence for prolonged periods.

                The situation is likely to get worse as our technology outpaces our ability to live peacefully.
                • Avatar
                  Cloudchopper  Moszep • 10 hours ago

                  What happens when other Nations develop drones and start directing them at the US? Will we then have drone interceptors etc?
                  What is frightening is that the MSM is not talking about it at all as if it did not happen. Obama is busy with guns, immigration and birth control pills and that is what the media focuses on.
                  • Avatar
                    Neko El Gato  Cloudchopper • 9 hours ago

                    Some day that might happen, but for now, it's pretty obvious that our borders that allow countless immigrants and hundreds of tons of cocaine to flow with reletive ease across the border, that there's no boggie men trying to get at us less maybe a few impressionable kids that the FBI payed some thug to trick into being terrorists.
                    • Avatar
                      Bruun-olsen Ken  Cloudchopper • 2 hours ago

                      Ya this is a point I see NO ONE taking up. If So Many Coutries can develop Very FINE Automobliles, how STUPID are we to think that those same Engineers and Factories can't start building Drones. Henry Ford refitted his factories during the war (WW 2) to build Airplanes. Pop a Cellphone with a GPS into a Homemade Drone and you have 'An Obomber Special'. Shit that's a SIMPLE Sixth Grade Science Project...but I Think the Gov is Relying on that.
                    • Avatar
                      Southernfink  Moszep • 7 hours ago

                      The other thing about drones is that there are no new prisoners.
                      • Avatar
                        Chris K.  Moszep • 9 hours ago

                        I agree that our technology is allowing us to distance ourselves from the violence we commit. However, I'm not sure that drones are as inexpensive as you think. According to http://nation.time.com/2012/11..., the 10 MQ-9 Reaper that the air force is buying costs $12,548,710.60. Just thought you might want to know.
                      •  
                    Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 3, 2013 at 1:53am
                    Delete
                      • Avatar
                        brendane  Moszep • 5 hours ago

                        Drones also allow us to make abominable moral choices without considering them as moral choices. Beyond the cost of training a pilot, if a drone gets shot down there's no sobbing mother for the news cameras to broadcast. Since none of our boys is in danger and the victims are just images on a video screen, in the American mind there is no carnage. There is no question of whether what we are doing is right and morally defensible. Very convenient for the government ... just reread your post quickly and this might be what you were saying with your second paragraph.
                      • Avatar
                        V4Vendeta • 5 hours ago

                        Obama is a cowardly chicken-hawk surrounded by cowardly chicken-hawks like John Brennan who have never fought in a war. These cowards are the ones meeting on "Terror Tuesdays" to draw up kill lists of who to murder without any oversight or accountability. They are ever eager to kill with because it creates huge profits for the Military Industrial Complex and allows them to sit comfortably in their armchairs and keep their dirty little hands "clean."
                        "[H]opefully John Brennan's confirmation hearings raise drone critics."
                        -pretty naive and wishful thinking...
                        Why would the warmongering chicken-hawk Congress object to murdering brown people for their resources in the fraudulent and corrupt "GWOT?" The Congress is fully complicit and approves of this tactic which inflicts as much if not more terror than it purports to destroy. The drone strategy creates exactly what the US government wants- more "terrorists" (peasants defending their homeland from foreign invaders).
                      • Avatar
                        trixxxus • an hour ago

                        During the decades of plane hijackings, the airlines had the opportunity to protect the cockpit with doors that were totally secure. The cost was $20,000-$40,000 per plane. They ignored the repairs, and 18 radicals used weakly protected planes to take down the Towers and, in the end, cost America from one to four trillion dollars. (So much for the blessings of the profit motive.) America won the War of Independence by using terrorist tactics. We did not play the British game of war. In the last 50 years We sent soldiers into 3 wars that were lost to terrorist tactics. To bombs made in kitchens. To dirt tunnels. To fanatics who ran when they saw us coming, and ran back when we left.
                        Drones are terrorist weapons..and they probably save lives of Americans. And because we sometimes kill innocent civilians, their small numbers touch us. (Because we can't relate to big numbers of innocent deaths...like the hundreds of thousands of dead innocent Iraqi's...that we killed) Remember Steve Martin's," Excuuuuuuuuuse me!"
                        Drones make it tougher on the terrorists because we strike them, like they strike us.
                        It's unexpected. It can't be stopped. Real terrorist tactics require much less money than drones...and we can't cover the world without going nuts. But they might save thousands of American lives (from participating in ridiculous wars). A big maybe. I have one suggestion for Afghanistan that the NRA should love. Their argument states that we have a right to arms to fight back if our country is taken over by who knows what. Using their concerns....Then instead of going into Iraq, or leaving troops Afghanistan, or Syria...why not simply ARM THE CITIZENS OF THOSE COUNTIES. All of them. Drop the weapons from planes by the tens of thousands. So if the Taliban come into a town with weapons, they also know the town in armed and their backs will make great targets. Do it in Syria. Do it in Iraq. Even the playing fields...and get out troops out. What a simple idea. Perhaps too simple for the Pentagon but the NRA should applaud it.
                        • Avatar
                          madrino • an hour ago

                          There is a breach of the golden rule: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you / love they neighbor as thyself"
                          What America is sowing around the world is an Orwellian war of attrition of entities without personally facing the enemy in combat. It eliminates any form of possible peace making while energizing hatred in what may have been a people that want peace. What the US has sown, it may reap many times over. It is clear that the US does not want peace and will perpetuate the GWOT until it's end.
                          • Avatar
                            leonbnj • 7 hours ago
                            I suspect in a few years, China and/or Russia will make their own drones to take out our drones either by shooting them down or screwing up their abilty to be controlled and sell it to Pakistan or to our other enemies. Then what will do ?

                            Amelia Gora • a few seconds ago

                            There's several videos on youtube on how to build a drone..........
                            a whole series of videos exists on building your own fleet of planes............
                            this just may be an alternate use of defense for everyone................and deliver kisses, confetti, messages, etc.
                            on the other hand.........kinda brings back memories of a cute cartoon..."bringing home a baby bumble bee" and resulting in retaliation...........interesting lessons to learn from aged cartoons. ;p
                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 7, 2013 at 6:30am
                            Delete
                            The New York Times | BREAKING NEWS ALERTNYTimes.com | Video
                            BREAKING NEWS Wednesday, February 6, 2013 8:46 PM EST
                            The White House on Wednesday directed the Justice Department to release classified documents discussing the legal justification for the use of drones in targeting American citizens abroad who are considered terrorists to the two Congressional intelligence committees, according to an administration official.
                            The White House announcement appears to refer to a long, detailed 2010 memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel justifying the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born cleric who had joined Al Qaeda in Yemen. He was killed in a C.I.A. drone strike in September 2011. Members of Congress have long demanded access to the legal memorandum.

                            READ MORE »

                            ***********************
                            additional references:
                            About 3,320,000 results

                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 7, 2013 at 6:37am
                            Delete
                            Anwar al-Awlaki
                            Anwar al-Aulaqi was an American and Yemeni imam who was an engineer and educator by training. U.S. government officials have alleged that he was a senior talent recruiter and motivator who was involved ... Wikipedia
                            Born: April 22, 1971, New Mexico
                            Died: September 30, 2011, Al Jawf Governorate
                            Education: George Washington University, More
                            People also search for
                            Ayman al-Zawahiri
                            Ayman al‑Zawahiri
                            Nidal Malik Hasan
                            Nidal Malik Hasan
                            Ali Abdullah Saleh
                            Ali Abdullah Saleh
                            ************************************************
                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2Ofg2BacIM  ' U.S. supports dictatorship governments in the Middle East'
                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XCKyNkV8Mw  "Why We Can't Ignore the Assassinations"
                            '....the kill list...........this better be a wake up call.... U.S. citizens killed without due process is extremely dangerous..."     
                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 7, 2013 at 6:44am
                            Delete
                            THE WISDOM FUND
                            — a nonprofit corporation
                            EIN # 54-1755689
                            Est. 1995
                             
                             
                            SUBSCRIBE to The Wisdom Fund — unsubscribe hawaiianhistory@yahoo.com
                            (add listserve@twf.org and staff@twf.org to your address book)
                             
                            JOIN TWF.ORG on Twitter
                            Founder's news picks on Facebook
                             
                            AMERICAN PATRIOTS: Muslims "didn't do it"
                             
                             
                            ---
                            February 7, 2013
                            Antiwar.com
                             
                             
                            By Kelley B. Vlahos
                             
                            WASHINGTON – A funny thing happened on the way to the jihadi takeover of America.
                             
                            It got lost.
                             
                            Same goes for Islamist radical attacks on American interests overseas – it’s just not happening to the degree that our favorite jihad hunters here in the U.S have been ranting about for the last 12 years. Turns out that most of the terror attacks occurring in the world today, according to 2012 Global Terrorism Index, are happening to someone else, and in many cases associated with conditions created by western military interventions.
                             
                            According to that report, the top places for terror remain Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, where their civilians are dying, not ours. In fact, Iraq is by far the worst. But no American has died there since November, while more than 200 Iraqis have been killed since Jan. 1 in violence perpetuated by Al-Qaeda in Iraq and other terrorists who are the direct outgrowth of the U.S occupation of that country in the last decade.
                             
                            Something to think about as we’re watching today’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearings, where CIA director-to-be John Brennan will no doubt be talking up an elaborate check-list of global threats against American interests (more on that later).
                             
                            Meanwhile, North America is the least likely place to be targeted for terrorism on the planet, according to the report, and if it has suffered from attacks, it is more likely to come from "environmentalists, animal activists, racists, and anti-abortion activists," according to the Global Index, which charted violent acts from 2002 to 2011.
                             
                            "It should be noted in the U.S., most terrorist attacks were aimed at buildings and businesses, with minimal attacks on private citizens," the report declared.
                             
                            Now if one is inclined for whatever reason to question the findings of the Institute of Economics and Peace, which published the 52-page paper in December, then Wired’s Spencer Ackerman brings our attention to the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, which on Feb. 1 released its own report, "Muslim-American Terrorism: Declining Further".
                             
                            That report, authored by Professor Charles Kurzman at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, finds the number of Muslim plots against domestic targets in 2012 down to 14 from 21 in 2011. That number was down from the previous year. While there have been 209 such plots since 9/11 (an average of 20 per year) the vast number involved FBI informants and undercover agents, and most..., "to encourage would-be terrorists to act on their violent desires and arresting them when they do – a practice critics say comes perilously close to entrapment."
                             
                            In that same time period, according to Kurzman’s assessments, there were 33 fatalities resulting from Muslim-American terrorism in the U.S. He includes the 13 military personnel killed by Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, and the convicted Belway Snipers, John Lee Malvo and John Allen Muhammad, who killed 11 people in the Washington, D.C metro area in 2002.
                             
                            For the second year in a row, there were no fatalities or injuries from Muslim-American terrorism. Meanwhile, the United States suffered approximately 14,000 murders in 2012. Since 9/11, Muslim-American terrorism has claimed 33 lives in the United States (Figure 3), out of more than 180,000 murders committed in the United States during this period.
                             
                            Apropos of today’s headlines, the report points out that there were 66 mass shootings in 2012 that did not involve Muslim hate. The author also points to a report recently released by West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center, which found "violent far-right" groups were responsible for 306 fatalities since 2001. While that report has been criticized for merely shifting attention from one ideological/religious-based movement to another, putting beliefs under scrutiny rather than simply focusing on criminals and their behaviors, it nevertheless weakens the narrative that the country is under siege by plotting fifth column Muslims manned with underwear bombs at every airport and flashing knives behind every potted plant.
                             
                            More strikingly, the emerging data puts the entire post-9/11 counterterrorism/national security state infrastructure, which has grown into a behemoth of irreconcilable secrecy and girth, imposing unacceptable strains on the Constitutional rights of ordinary Americans, into serious question, says Michael German, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington legislative office.
                             
                            "This is a big part of the problem," he told Antiwar in an interview.
                             
                            "Of course no amount of terrorism is acceptable or desirable, but, putting it into context with violent crime throughout our society, this (Islamic terrorism) is a small segment of that violent crime and perhaps we should not be spending such a significant amount of law enforcement resources, especially when too often these resources are being focused on innocent people who aren’t even suspected of being involved in wrongdoing. If our resources were focused on the few specific threats that are assessed based upon reasonable evidence of wrongdoing, they would probably be much more effectively spent.”
                             
                            Consider that in direct response to the 2001 terror attacks, the federal budget has grown by billions a year in homeland security funding, sprinkled most generously among an alphabet soup of 31 federal agencies and departments, with the most going to the Department of Defense ($17.3 billion) and the Department of Homeland Security ($35 billion). Other agencies that enjoy Uncle Sam’s post-9/11 fear funds include the State Department ($2.2 billion), the Department of Agriculture ($570 million), Department of Energy ($1.9 billion), Health and Human Services ($4.1 billion), the Department of Justice ($4 billion), Commerce ($289 million) and the Department of Labor ($46 million).
                             
                            States and municipalities have taken billions of these federal dollars to keep up with the "War on Jihad," too. In the case of New York City, police there actually created an entire surveillance division to spy on Muslim organizations and communities, forcing them to live in fear as second-class citizens while the rest of us are supposed to sleep more easily knowing a threat that does not really exist is being kept under 24/7 scrutiny.
                             
                            "Hopefully we can start to calibrate our efforts a little better," German said, encouraged that the recent data, as well as new reports underscoring some of the serious waste and abuse of homeland security dollars, may put future funding into perspective. Nice thought, but German easily admits this is one house of cards that’ll be hard to tear down.
                             
                            "It’s not just the bureaucracy, but private companies receiving the largesse … there is definitely a big gravy train to be found in this new security work."
                             
                            You bet. So even when the numbers don’t live up to the hyperbole, politicians and self-interested Islamophobes disguised as national security experts and advocates continue to whip up the domestic paranoia in order to stay professionally relevant, and of course, fully funded.
                             
                            That’s why they cherish congressional leaders like (now retired) Senator Joe Lieberman, I-CT., who as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee for five years was able to hold hearings and produce nearly 20 reports on radical Islamic extremism "in the homeland," while his cohort in the House, Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., convened scores of similar productions, ginning up the specter of domestic radicalization as the most critical threat facing the country today.
                             
                            Off the Hill, shrewd jihad hunters sense the statistics on actual violence aren’t jibing, so they turn toward ideological "infiltration" as the next domestic bugaboo. This quiet attack, or "civilization jihad," as dean Frank Gaffney puts it in his 10-part online course, "Muslim Brotherhood in America: the Enemy Within," is hardly known to us at all, but as Gaffney insists, it’s everywhere.
                             
                            "The threat," the stern professor charges, "is a totalitarian supremacist, Islamic doctrine," otherwise known as sharia. It is spread, he contends apocalyptically, through subversive "information dominance," "lawfare," "manipulative financial techniques," and infiltration of our U.S government institutions.
                             
                            Whatever Gaffney talking about it is not terrorism, not in any way we can grasp legally. What he’s really suggesting, however, usually ends with blacklists and loyalty oaths, which the majority of thinking Americans want no part of. But he’s not without his acolytes in congress. For example, Rep. Michele Bachman, R-MN., said last year that there is a "deep penetration" of radical groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, which she suspects of "influence operations" in the federal government – (though she was admonished by the meanest senator on the Hill, John McCain, and barely won her congressional re-election in November).
                             
                            As for domestic money laundering or material support for terrorism or other non-violent crimes tied to terror, those incidents are way down too: 27 Muslims indicted on such charges in 2010, eight in 2011 and six in 2012, according to the Kurzman study. Hardly an infestation.
                             
                            But true virtuosos of fear like Pamela Geller could care less about numbers and are all about the lizard brain – that’s why her big shtick right now is spending the cold hard cash her donors give her (through Stop Islamization of America and the Freedom Defense Initiative) to splash subways and buses with anti-Muslim provocations like the new #MyJihad campaign in Chicago and this one in New York in December:
                             
                            Meanwhile, Geller zipped down to Washington this week to launch a public invective against Al-Jazeera for being "sympathetic to the global jihad and … complicit in those jihadist activities," and insisting the network, which just bought Current TV to gain greater reach in the U.S cable market, should be registered as a terrorist organization. She forever fails to see the irony that one of the scariest mass murderers of the decade, Anders Breivik, who killed 69 people, mostly teenagers, during a shooting and bombing rampage in Norway in 2011, cited Geller’s Islamophobic writings in his own manifesto.
                             
                            But she and Gaffney will not cease. Like the government, they have too much invested to turn back now.
                             
                            Which brings us back to global terrorism and U.S policy. What is clear from former Senator Chuck Hagel’s testimony last week is that rethinking our strategy is not likely in the cards:
                             
                            As Secretary of Defense I will ensure we stay vigilant and keep up the pressure on terrorist organizations as they try to expand their affiliates around the world, in places like Yemen, Somalia, and North Africa. At the Pentagon, that means continuing to invest in and build the tools to assist in that fight, such as special operations forces and new intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance technologies.
                             
                            What is not so clear is what the threat actually is, or if it even warrants the war-hammer approach quickly hardening as standard operating procedure for overseas military and law enforcement operations. The Washington Post clearly demonstrates the lack of clarity here in its piece entitled, "Al-Qaeda divided, but still a danger," published February 3.
                             
                            The headline says it all, but what follows is one of the most confusing narratives ever printed. On one hand, al Qaeda in Pakistan is "all but demolished," and movements in Somalia, Indonesia as well as al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)are deflated, but attacks on western interests by loosely connected new al Qaeda groups in Libya, Mali and Algeria draw attention to their "lethal potential." However, it is not clear whether those groups are more regional than international in nature and whether, ultimately, "the scale of the counterterrorism campaign is still warranted" when the original goal – destroying those responsible for 9/11 – "has largely been accomplished."
                             
                            Take home message: all those invested in keeping the machinery oiled and churning will eventually find a way to connect new upstart Islamist groups to the authorized Global War on Terror. Like The Washington Post suggests, acknowledging these groups as threats provides "new justification" for the president’s counterterrorism policies. But the jury is out on the critical, so far unanswered questions: whether these new groups are threats to us, and if so, would they be so effective if we hadn’t been meddling and killing over there already?
                             
                            For people like Frank Gaffney, there is only one answer. He has already ripped Brennan – the man who has authorized the killing of thousands of people by drone strikes in the last four years – as "the very person who has epitomized and enforced a policy of willful blindness towards the central threat of our time: the supremacist Islamic ideology of shariah and the holy war, or jihad."
                             
                            Gaffney’s blindness is not only willful, but blissful, and it should have no part in policy, especially when the reality – that his brand of terror is infinitesimal here in the United States – is staring him right in the face.
                             
                            In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

                            ******************************************
                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 7, 2013 at 7:18am
                            Delete
                            editorial:
                            It's very disturbing to see how the American people fail to question the legitimacy of Obama who was not born in the U.S., and follows the path of George Bush Sr., William Clinton, George W. Bush who criminally charged innocents as terrorists and Criminally Plundered Upon Innocents since the planned, premeditated destruction of the Twin Towers owned by the Rockefellers who are the permanent CEO's of the EXXON Corporation which evolved from the Standard Oil Company, a monopoly which is an umbrella over the banks, the General Electric Companies, the multiples of oil companies, etc. who benefit from the secondary sales of oil from the middle east.
                            The Rockefellers are the ones who gave the land that the United Nations sits on.........
                            see my article on the History of Oil, Golman Sachs, etc.  http://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/connect-the-dots-occupy-wall-str... and others.....google my name for articles.
                            United Nations evolved from the League of Nations which was created by the United States, England, and the bankers/CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations.
                            If you want to know more about the criminal activities over time, pick up books on the CFR....I have and am disgusted with what I've read......truthfully............there's a list of planned Wars against specific nations which I have posted over and over again...............what's the list?  google it, I'll let you do the searches now.............and the copy that I have was probably given away because the recipient was disgusted about the whole thing too...............
                            Are you listening to what I'm saying?  the U.S., England, the bankers/CFR are the planners of War Against Innocents and they are the supporters of the One World Order/New World Order which moves to steal the wealth from Nations that they love calling "barbaric", they did want to take apart the Middle East, etc...................they are party to the crimes against humanity disregarding life and are War Criminals............even the Queen of England!  Read, read, read, because if you don't already know it.........the dumbing down of America and the Free World is ongoing...............take back your governments Americans!
                            Know that plans have been made over time...call it Premeditation..against many Nations over time.....includes the Hawaiian Islands/Hawaiian Kingdom/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/Hawaiian archipelago.............even the Premeditation of nuclear bombing Japan, testing on the Micronesian Islands....and yes, they even tested Nuclear bombs on Kahoolawe as well...........wicked.........War criminals documented............who's the terrorists btw.......
                            Read, read, read..........if you care about your families, your friends, the future descendants....
                            Suggested readings,,,,aside from my posts, publications:  
                            google Leuren Moret;
                            google Truthout;
                            google OpedNews;
                            google Wisdom Fund;
                            google TomDispatch;
                            google the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk;
                            google David Icke; etc.
                            discover and know everything about the Council on Foreign Relations, etc.:
                            Image
                            Council On Foreign Relations
                            Feedback
                               
                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 7, 2013 at 7:53am
                            Delete
                            facebook:
                            • Amelia Gora editorial:
                              It's very disturbing to see how the American people fail to question the legitimacy of Obama who was not born in the U.S., and follows the path of George Bush Sr., William Clinton, George W. Bush who criminally charged innocents as terrorists and Criminally Plundered Upon Innocents since the planned, premeditated destruction of the Twin Towers owned by the Rockefellers who are the permanent CEO's of the EXXON Corporation which evolved from the Standard Oil Company, a monopoly which is an umbrella over the banks, the General Electric Companies, the multiples of oil companies, etc. who benefit from the secondary sales of oil from the middle east.
                              The Rockefellers are the ones who gave the land that the United Nations sits on.........
                              see my article on the History of Oil, Golman Sachs, etc.http://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/connect-the-dots-occupy-wall-str... and others.....google my name for articles.
                              United Nations evolved from the League of Nations which was created by the United States, England, and the bankers/CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations.
                              If you want to know more about the criminal activities over time, pick up books on the CFR....I have and am disgusted with what I've read......truthfully............there's a list of planned Wars against specific nations which I have posted over and over again...............what's the list? google it, I'll let you do the searches now.............and the copy that I have was probably given away because the recipient was disgusted about the whole thing too...............
                              Are you listening to what I'm saying? the U.S., England, the bankers/CFR are the planners of War Against Innocents and they are the supporters of the One World Order/New World Order which moves to steal the wealth from Nations that they love calling "barbaric", they did want to take apart the Middle East, etc...................they are party to the crimes against humanity disregarding life and are War Criminals............even the Queen of England! Read, read, read, because if you don't already know it.........the dumbing down of America and the Free World is ongoing...............take back your governments Americans!
                              Know that plans have been made over time...call it Premeditation..against many Nations over time.....includes the Hawaiian Islands/Hawaiian Kingdom/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/Hawaiian archipelago.............even the Premeditation of nuclear bombing Japan, testing on the Micronesian Islands....and yes, they even tested Nuclear bombs on Kahoolawe as well...........wicked.........War criminals documented............who's the terrorists btw.......
                              Read, read, read..........if you care about your families, your friends, the future descendants....
                              Suggested readings,,,,aside from my posts, publications: 
                              example: http://maoliworld.com/forum/topics/connect-the-dots-occupy-wall-str...
                              google Leuren Moret;
                              google Truthout;
                              google OpedNews;
                              google Wisdom Fund;
                              google TomDispatch;
                              google the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk;
                              google David Icke; etc.
                              discover and know everything about the Council on Foreign Relations, etc.:
                              By Publication Type - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org/publication/
                              Current political and economic issues succinctly explained. Blogs. CFR fellows and the CFR website editorial staff provide up-to-date commentary and analysis ...
                              Council Special Reports - Podcasts - Task Force Reports - Analysis Brief
                              Foreign Affairs - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › About CFR
                              Published by the Council on Foreign Relations since 1922, just a year after the ... be one of the most influential publications on international affairs or any topic.
                              Podcasts - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              CFR.org offers audio downloads on foreign policy and national security topics. The CFR.org Podcast features audio interviews with CFR fellows and other ...
                              Books - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              Through an in-depth analysis of modern Mexico, Shannon O'Neil provides a roadmap for the United States' greatest overlooked foreign policy challenge of our ...
                              Backgrounders - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              Despite changes in both U.S. and Cuban leadership since early 2008, experts do not anticipate any normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations in the near to medium ...
                              Other Reports - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              Other reports include Center for Preventive Action Contingency Planning Memoranda,Policy Innovation Memoranda, Working Papers, and reports that have ...
                              Task Force Reports - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              Independent Task Force reports offer comprehensive policy prescriptions for majorforeign policy issues facing the U.S. government, developed through the ...
                              Foreign Affairs - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              Republicans need to start taking foreign policy more seriously, thinking hard about the thorny task of managing a superpower and not leaving it as a plaything for ...
                              Interactives - Council on Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org › By Publication Type
                              This interactive map visually plots diseases that are easily preventable by inexpensive and effective vaccines. The Global Health Program at the Council on ...
                              Council On Foreign Relations
                              www.cfr.org/
                              The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher. CFR.org provides daily analysis of ...
                              2 Google reviews - Write a review
                              58 E 68th St New York, NY 10065
                              Council on Foreign Relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
                              en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations
                              The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an American nonprofit, nonpartisan ....Crisis Guides and timelines, Foreign Affairs, and many other publications, ...
                              Searches related to council on foreign relations publications
                              publications foreign policy
                              council special report
                              european council on foreign relation
                              german council on foreign relation

                              Council On Foreign Relations
                              DirectionsWrite a review
                              Reviews
                              2 Google reviews
                              Feedback
                              1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGKx2LNbF5M
                            • Amelia Gora The War on Terror was based on EXXON Corporation, the owners of the 911 Twin Towers are the Rockefellers......WAR for OIL...and to top that off, the Oil Nations were told to utilize certain banks and receive notes ---they were instructed by the U.S. Government....when it was time to cash in their notes, the banks had shut down ...in other words, they were not paid their monies due and the U.S./Corporations/bankers ran with the OIL without paying them...........beyond wicked............
                                
                                 
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzcv5TJkJBA  Pirates in Hawaii and the World!
                            Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on February 26, 2013 at 10:27pm
                            Delete
                            Posted by at

                            No comments:

                            Post a Comment

                            Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)