Over the top?

In a disturbing comment on "OK, so who DID they slaughter?" poster "DOESITMATTER" suggested a scenario in which a drone pilot and helicopter gunship both mis-target apparent "militants" in Los Angeles, "cut[ting] to ribbons a group of Los Angeles commuters in one location and destroy[ing] a hospital at another site."

What would that be like?

According to Mr. Obama, assassination of American citizens is now OK, so is "DOESITMATTER" really that far over-the-top?

I sure hope so. Because if not, it could get much much worse. Suppose "our" pols, following Mr. Schwarzenegger’s lead, recognize we can’t afford more prisons — or to super-size the law-and-order industry any more — and realize there’s a "mature," economic and well-rehearsed solution just waiting to be repatriated – – –

WASHINGTON: The CIA received secret permission to attack a wider range of targets, including suspected militants whose names are not known, as part of a dramatic expansion of its campaign of drone strikes in Pakistan’s border region, current and former counter-terrorism officials say.

The expanded authority, approved two years ago by the Bush administration and continued by Barack Obama, permits the agency to rely on what officials describe as "pattern-of-life" analysis… The information was used to target suspected militants, even when their full identities were not known, the officials said. Previously the CIA was restricted in most cases to killing only individuals whose names were on an approved list…

The rules had transformed the program… into a large-scale campaign of air strikes…

Instead of just a few dozen attacks a year, CIA-operated unmanned aircraft now carry out multiple missile strikes each week… [S]ome analysts said permitting the CIA to kill people whose names were unknown created a serious risk of killing innocent people. — CIA allowed to kill terrorist suspects without identification, DAVID CLOUD, http://www.smh.com.au, May 7, 2010

I know, I know. It couldn’t happen here.

After all, even though they have already begun to use drones here in the U.S., – – –

–High-Tech Drones Joining Miami Police Force, Unmanned Aircraft System Will Help SWAT Units, POSTED: Tuesday, November 27, 2007

– – – they aren’t armed.


OK, so who DID they slaughter?

[viddler id=f166caa9&w=247&h=227]"Those who would slaughter innocent men, women, and children must know that the United States will do more than simply strengthen our defenses. … Around the world and here at home there are those who would attack our citizens and who would slaughter innocent men, women, and children in pursuit of their murderous agenda." –U.S. President Barak Obama, 2009 & 2010

So from his statements here and elsewhere, it would seem that Mr. Obama is implacably opposed to those who "would slaughter innocent men, women, and children."

Yet we know that he and his Administration have stepped- up use of drone assassinations — so stories reporting successful drone assassinations shouldn’t be a surprise – – –

Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud is dead, say officials – CSMonitor.com, Kristen Chick, Correspondent / February 10, 2010

We also know that drone and air strikes are notoriously inaccurate, regularly resulting in so-called "collateral damage" — and that government officials traditionally lie.

So, it should also be no surprise that Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud is alive — also here and here.

But, if it wasn’t Hakimullah Mehusud they assassinated and otherwise droned to death, which innocent men, women and children did they slaughter — in pursuit of their murderous agenda?

We weren’t on the wrong side in Vietnam – – –

We weren’t on the wrong side [in Vietnam], we were the wrong side. —Daniel Ellsberg, The Most Dangerous Man in America, via NewsBusters.org

And were we also the wrong side in the Korean “War”, Panama (Operation Just Cause), Grenada (Operation Urgent Fury), Iraq – – – you get the idea.

Has this sort of behavior by the U.S. government — and other governments — become SOP (Standard Operating Procedure)?

And just in case you want a more complete accounting — and you have a bunch of spare time — here’s a more complete list of United States military operations.

And if you’re morbidly curious of how many lives these sorts of operations have squandered — and have a strong stomach — you can find out from the University of Hawaii’s R.J. Rummel.

And, if you’ve read this far and want to know how much you contribute to this mayhem if you consider yourself a U.S. Taxpayer, the kindly Quaker folks from the Friends Committee on National Legislation have figured that out for you. (HINT: 43% of your 2008 tax bill went to pay for “wars,” past and present.)

So maybe a donation to antiwar.com might actually be a good investment – – –

P.S. The U.S. Government hasn’t declared war according to its charter (the U.S. Constitution) since WWII. So none of those “Wars” since WWII were — or are — Constitutional. Isn’t that cute?

Jane WAS Right!

After all these years, Jane WAS Right!

British political news has been consumed for the last several weeks by a formal inquiry into the illegality and deceit behind Tony Blair’s decision to join the U.S. in invading Iraq…. A major focus of the investigation is the illegality of the war. … –Remember the illegal destruction of Iraq?, By Glenn Greenwald, Salon, Friday, Jan 29, 2010 07:30 EST

The day of accountability is at hand. The International Criminal Court at the Hague has acknowledged receipt of Prof. Francis A. Boyle’s complaint… The Hague Acknowledges Francis Boyle On His Filing Against Bush et al For War-Crime: Extraordinary Rendition, Thu, 2010-01-28 18:08.

WHICH ‘safe haven,’ Mr. Obama?

If things run on schedule, Mr. Obama will announce tomorrow that he and his organization will be sending approximately 34,000 more U.S. troops to harass and sometimes kill men, women and children (as “collateral damage”) in Afghanistan.  And then he has to sell his unpopular decision. If previous statements are any guide, his main excuse will be “We have to deny al’Qaeda ‘safe haven’.” 

Question: “If you believe the official mythology,

1. “In what country did the 911 al’Qaeda pilots get ‘safe haven‘ to train

2. “In what country did the Madrid train bombers get ‘safe haven‘ to prepare?

3. “In what country did the London bombers get ‘safe haven‘?”

HINT: It’s NOT Afghanistan.

The answers to the three questions are:

 1. U.S.A.

 2. Spain

 3. England

How many troops will Mr. Obama send to THESE terrorist states to deny al’Qaeda ‘safe haven?’

By way of context, there are approximately 193 countries in the world, each of which can supply al’Qaeda with equivalent ‘safe haven.’

According to CIA and military intelligence sources, currently there aren’t 100 al’Qaeda operatives in all of Afghanistan.  So, Mr. Obama, what are your other excuses?