Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts

Saturday, December 15, 2012

What Have We Become: The Suffering of An American Drone Operator

By Nicola Abé
spiegel.de/international.de

 A soldier sets out to graduate at the top of his class. He succeeds, and he becomes a drone pilot working with a special unit of the United States Air Force in New Mexico. He kills dozens of people. But then, one day, he realizes that he can't do it anymore.


For more than five years, Brandon Bryant worked in an oblong, windowless container about the size of a trailer, where the air-conditioning was kept at 17 degrees Celsius (63 degrees Fahrenheit) and, for security reasons, the door couldn't be opened. Bryant and his coworkers sat in front of 14 computer monitors and four keyboards. When Bryant pressed a button in New Mexico, someone died on the other side of the world.

The container is filled with the humming of computers. It's the brain of a drone, known as a cockpit in Air Force parlance. But the pilots in the container aren't flying through the air. They're just sitting at the controls.

Bryant was one of them, and he remembers one incident very clearly when a Predator drone was circling in a figure-eight pattern in the sky above Afghanistan, more than 10,000 kilometers (6,250 miles) away. There was a flat-roofed house made of mud, with a shed used to hold goats in the crosshairs, as Bryant recalls. When he received the order to fire, he pressed a button with his left hand and marked the roof with a laser. The pilot sitting next to him pressed the trigger on a joystick, causing the drone to launch a Hellfire missile. There were 16 seconds left until impact.

"These moments are like in slow motion," he says today. Images taken with an infrared camera attached to the drone appeared on his monitor, transmitted by satellite, with a two-to-five-second time delay.
With seven seconds left to go, there was no one to be seen on the ground. Bryant could still have diverted the missile at that point. Then it was down to three seconds. Bryant felt as if he had to count each individual pixel on the monitor. Suddenly a child walked around the corner, he says.

Second zero was the moment in which Bryant's digital world collided with the real one in a village between Baghlan and Mazar-e-Sharif.

Bryant saw a flash on the screen: the explosion. Parts of the building collapsed. The child had disappeared. Bryant had a sick feeling in his stomach.

"Did we just kill a kid?" he asked the man sitting next to him.
"Yeah, I guess that was a kid," the pilot replied.

"Was that a kid?" they wrote into a chat window on the monitor.

Then, someone they didn't know answered, someone sitting in a military command center somewhere in the world who had observed their attack. "No. That was a dog," the person wrote.

They reviewed the scene on video. A dog on two legs?

Invisible Warfare
 
When Bryant left the container that day, he stepped directly into America: dry grasslands stretching to the horizon, fields and the smell of liquid manure. Every few seconds, a light on the radar tower at the Cannon Air Force Base flashed in the twilight. There was no war going on there.

Modern warfare is as invisible as a thought, deprived of its meaning by distance. It is no unfettered war, but one that is controlled from small high-tech centers in various places in the world. The new (way of conducting) war is supposed to be more precise than the old one, which is why some call it "more humane." It's the war of an intellectual, a war United States President Barack Obama has promoted more than any of his predecessors.

In a corridor at the Pentagon where the planning for this war takes place, the walls are covered with dark wood paneling. The men from the Air Force have their offices here. A painting of a Predator, a drone on canvas, hangs next to portraits of military leaders. From the military's perspective, no other invention has been as successful in the "war on terror" in recent years as the Predator.

The US military guides its drones from seven air bases in the United States, as well as locations abroad, including one in the East African nation of Djibouti. From its headquarters in Langley, Virginia, the CIA controls operations in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen.

'We Save Lives'
 
Colonel William Tart, a man with pale eyes and a clear image of the enemy, calls the drone a "natural extension of the distance."

Until a few months ago, when he was promoted to head the US Air Force's Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) Task Force in Langley, Tart was a commander at the Creech Air Force Base in Nevada, near Las Vegas, where he headed drone operations. Whenever he flew drones himself, he kept a photo of his wife and three daughters pasted into the checklist next to the monitors.

He doesn't like the word drone, because he says it implies that the vehicle has its own will or ego. He prefers to call them "remotely piloted aircraft," and he points out that most flights are for gathering information. He talks about the use of drones on humanitarian missions after the earthquake in Haiti, and about the military successes in the war in Libya: how his team fired on a truck that was pointing rockets at Misrata, and how it chased the convoy in which former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi and his entourage were fleeing. He describes how the soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan are constantly expressing their gratitude for the assistance from the air. "We save lives," he says.

He doesn't say as much about the targeted killing. He claims that during his two years as operations commander at Creech, he never saw any noncombatants die, and that the drones only fire at buildings when women and children are not in them. When asked about the chain of command, Tart mentions a 275-page document called 3-09.3. Essentially, it states that drone attacks must be approved, like any other attacks by the Air Force. An officer in the country where the operations take place has to approve them.

The use of the term "clinical war" makes him angry. It reminds him of the Vietnam veterans who accuse him of never having waded through the mud or smelled blood, and who say that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

That isn't true, says Tart, noting that he often used the one-hour drive from work back to Las Vegas to distance himself from his job. "We watch people for months. We see them playing with their dogs or doing their laundry. We know their patterns like we know our neighbors' patterns. We even go to their funerals." It wasn't always easy, he says.

One of the paradoxes of drones is that, even as they increase the distance to the target, they also create proximity. "War somehow becomes personal," says Tart.

'I Saw Men, Women and Children Die'
 
A yellow house stands on the outskirts of the small city of Missoula, Montana, against a background of mountains, forests and patches of fog. The ground is coated with the first snow of the season. Bryant, now 27, is sitting on the couch in his mother's living room. He has since left the military and is now living back at home. He keeps his head shaved and has a three-day beard. "I haven't been dreaming in infrared for four months," he says with a smile, as if this were a minor victory for him.

Bryant completed 6,000 flight hours during his six years in the Air Force. "I saw men, women and children die during that time," says Bryant. "I never thought I would kill that many people. In fact, I thought I couldn't kill anyone at all." (CONTINUE READING)

Friday, June 22, 2012

Video Evidence: Obama Knew About Fast & Furious

Infowars.com
June 22, 2012

On March 23, 2011, Obama lied to the American people about Operation Fast and Furious. He said that neither he nor Attorney General Holder authorized the effort to arm the drug cartels in Mexico.

Several weeks later, on May 3, Holder lied to Congress. He said he did not know who approved Fast and Furious. He also lied when he said he “probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

In fact, as the video below proves, the Obama administration and the Department of Justice were deeply involved in the operation from the start.
During a news conference in March of 2009, Holder’s underling, Deputy Attorney General David Ogden said Obama ordered and Holder expanded “Project Gunrunner” in Mexico as part of the Department of Justice’s Southwest Border Initiative. The project began in 2005 under Bush. Fast and Furious became operational under Project Gunrunner in 2009. (WATCH VIDEO)

Friday, December 2, 2011

New Amendments Introduced To Halt Indefinite Detention of Americans

Obama administration reaffirms support for state sponsored assassination of U.S. citizens

Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet.com
Thursday, December 1, 2011


Two new amendments that would attempt to halt the indefinite detention of American citizens on U.S. soil under a section of the National Defense Authorization Act have been introduced and could be voted on by the end of the day, even as Obama administration lawyers reaffirmed their backing for state sponsored assassination of U.S. citizens.

Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty website has the details.
Senate Amendment (SA) 1126 would “clarify” Section 1031 to explicitly state within the section that the authority of the military to detain persons without trial until the end of hostilities does not apply to American citizens.
SA 1125 would limit the mandatory detention provision in Section 1032 to persons captured abroad, not in America.
However, given the fact that a previous amendment which merely sought to provide oversight for the egregious Section 1031 of the NDAA bill was voted down comprehensively yesterday, getting these two new amendments passed seems a tall order.
Indeed, despite some expressing confidence that Obama will veto the NDAA bill because of the indefinite detention provision, the Obama administration today reaffirmed the notion that it considers American citizens as legitimate targets for state assassination in the war on terror.
More critical voices have warned that the passage of the bill would hand the federal government unprecedented powers on the scale of Stalinist North Korea, which routinely imprisons political dissidents in concentration camps, having first declared them enemies of the state, of course. (CONTINUE READING)

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

White House Denies Responsibility for Confusing Everyone About Medical Marijuana


Scott Morgan
Stop The Drug War

In a long piece detailing Obama’s badly botched approach to medical marijuana, the San Francisco Chronicle has a rather ridiculous quote from the White House:
A White House spokesman said that its position on medical marijuana "has been clear and consistent." 
"While the prosecution of drug traffickers is a core priority, targeting individuals with cancer and serious illnesses is not the best allocation of federal law enforcement resources," said the spokesman, Adam Abrams.
It’s really an amazing thing to say, considering that literally nobody understands what the hell Obama’s position on medical marijuana is supposed to be anymore.(CONTINUE READING)

Thursday, November 10, 2011

An Open Letter to Rand Paul: Investigate the Killing of an American Teenager

By David Kretzmann
davidkretzmann.com
November 10th, 2011

Hello Senator Paul, My name is David Kretzmann. I am a 19 year old student at Berea College in Kentucky; I’ve lived in Kentucky since August of 2010. Today I urgently write you to investigate the death of Abdulrahman Al-alwaki.
Within the past 45 days, three U.S. citizens have been killed at the hand of U.S. drone attacks in Yemen. The most well known of these incidents was the case of Anwar Alalwaki, the U.S. citizen born in New Mexico suspected (but never officially charged) of working with Al-Qaeda. Alalwaki was on the CIA’s public hit list, signed off by President Barack Obama, for 17 months prior to his assassination on September 30, 2011. Alalwaki’s constitutional rights as a U.S. citizen were ignored by the Obama administration, despite attempts from Alalwaki’s father and the ACLU to protect Alalwaki.
What’s even more disturbing than Alalwaki’s assassination is the death of his 16 year old son, Abdulrahman Al-alwaki, just two weeks later on October 14, 2011. Abdulrahman Al-alwaki was having a Friday night barbecue with his cousin and fellow teenage friends. A U.S. drone strike took their lives that night.

Abdulrahman Al-alwaki was born in Denver, Colorado, in 1995. He was an American citizen and just 16 years old. He was no less a U.S. citizen than you and I. He had no ties whatsoever to Al-Qaeda or any other militant group.
The Obama administration has been eerily silent on this matter, not so much as acknowledging that a U.S. drone strike killed a 16 year old American citizen. This is the primary reason I am writing you this letter. We need to know why Abdulrahman Al-alwaki was killed; whether it was an intentional killing (i.e. assassination), casualty of war, or a tragic misfire incident.
On November 2, 2011, hundreds of Yemeni individuals peacefully came together to protest U.S. drone attacks in Yemen. I highly encourage you to observe some of the pictures and footage that came out of this event; it is remarkable seeing these people come together to bring about a change in their country. Innocent civilians, including children and teenagers, are losing their lives in Yemen because of U.S. drone strikes. This is the heartbreaking reality for a growing number of families in Yemen, and demonstrates the urgency of the plea I bring to you today. (CONTINUE READING)

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Obama Will Win If Republicans Pick Establishment Candidate

Gerald Celente
Trends Research
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
And the next President of the United States will be: teleprompter populist extraordinaire, Barack Obama.

Should the Republicans nominate one of the three current frontrunners – Mitt Romney, Rick Perry or Michelle Bachmann – Barack “Back-on-track” Obama wins (despite polls showing him with just a 41 percent approval rating) by playing the populist card he’s already begun to deal, forecasts Gerald Celente, Trends Journal publisher.
The President is already calling the bluff of his Republican foes, demanding a millionaire’s tax and daring a gridlocked Congress not to pass it.
“Warren Buffet’s secretary shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffet,” Obama moralizes. “It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher, or a nurse, or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay higher tax rates than someone pulling in $50 million.”
Obama began rehearsing his self-described role as “warrior for the middle class” some months ago. In the Summer 2011 issue of the Trends Journal, we alerted subscribers to Obama’s populist campaign strategy:
Undaunted by his string of broken promises, in the Summer of 2011, the born-again populist positioned himself to retain his core Democratic base, while wooing swelling legions of the hard-pressed, desperate for a government handout … the out of work and down and out were left with a Hobson’s Choice: either take Obama or be left out in the cold by Republicans.
So, in a classic reversal of his recent stance as “Accommodator in Chief,” Obama now vows not to cut the one program most Republicans want to either eliminate or drastically reconfigure, but which voters hold sacred: Social Security. “Obama Plan Won’t Include Changes to Social Security,” read the Sept. 15 Wall Street Journal headline. As for Medicare, Obama has promised to “fix” it sometime in the future … well after the election.
And who gets hurt if Social Security and Medicare get cut? The 78 million retirement-age baby boomers who need the entitlements most, who can afford the cuts the least – and who vote.
“Their health costs are going up; their investments are going down. They’re deep in debt, most without enough to retire on, and the Republicans want to give them less,” notes Celente incredulously. “It’s a suicidal strategy that’s stranger than fiction. It’s as though the Republican campaign has been devised by insidious Democratic infiltrators.”
This is why the new, tough-talking Obama is painting Republicans as the party that “does everything for corporate America and nothing for middle America,” says Celente.
The Presidential Reality Show
Reflecting back on the debates between Republican candidates, Celente says, “This isn’t politics as an exercise in Democracy in action, it’s politics as show business for ugly people. Anyone who saw the September 12th debate hosted by CNN witnessed an early episode of The Presidential Reality Show. It was a star-spangled, made-for-TV-spectacle appropriating the lowest common denominator elements of the World Wrestling Federation, the Miss America Pageant and American Idol. (CONTINUE READING)

Monday, April 11, 2011

A Revolution by any other Name?

A Revolution by any other Name?   Ron Paul 072907Tony Cartalucci
Infowars.com
April 10, 2011
Call it the Ron Paul Revolution

While no personality should be followed, rather the ideals they represent, the necessity to reclaim the Tea Party is apparent. By naming it the “Ron Paul Revolution” it will become virtually impossible to commandeer without conceding to the ideals of Constitutionalism, minimal government, non-interventionism, and ending the Federal Reserve. Impossible indeed would it be to slip in the disingenuous continuation of the doomed ever-convergent left/right agenda.

By battling for the leadership of the Tea Party, now thoroughly infested by Neo-Conservatives and feckless career Republicans, we are needlessly expending our energy. The very name “Tea Party” invites ambiguity amongst which vile infiltrators can peddle agendas nothing at all related to restoring and upholding the US Constitution. In fact, it has allowed the Ron Paul Revolution, from which the Tea Party was spawned, to be pushed back toward the controlled left/right paradigm.

Ron Paul has dedicated his life to his nation, a dedication one needs only to examine archival videos to observe and note its consistency over more than two decades. That is something none of the impostors infiltrating the Tea Party now can claim, including the disingenuous Glenn Beck and his feckless intellectually compromised counterpart Sarah Palin. These are the same talking heads that have been misleading the country all along, repackaged and resold under the brand “Tea Party.”

In the 2008 election, despite Ron Paul not being on the ballot, I sent in my vote all the way from Thailand with his name written in. It was not so much a vote for Ron Paul himself, as he was no longer in the race, but rather the ideals he represents. There is no sense at all voting between establishment controlled, career liars like Barack Obama or John McCain. Their servile obedience and dependency on the corporations that fund their campaigns and write their talking points within the halls of the globalist think-tanks ensures unequivocally their betrayal of their campaign promises, their betrayal of the American people, and perhaps most egregious of all, their betrayal of the US Constitution. There is no lesser of two evils, and to vote for either one is as fruitful as not voting at all.
(CONTINUE READING)

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

I Don’t Trust the Tea Party

Allan Stevo
LewRockwell.com
November 2, 2010
I don’t trust the Tea Party. I’m distrustful of new movements and remember how for eight years of Bush II, people who once had smaller government views suddenly abandoned those views in blind devotion of the president. I realize that it’s easy to believe in freedom for just a few years. My distrust is aided by the fact that the idea of freedom is a momentarily politically expedient idea to some.

trology.jpg


For right now, I simply see the Tea Party as a safety valve in our system. Photo: Fibonacci Blue.


Today it is a political expedient for some Republicans – a temporary means to an end. The banner of “freedom” is currently serving as a vague, and therefore effective, uniting statement among the opposition now that there is a Democratic president in power. One day when there is again a Republican president, it is likely that freedom, liberty, or some rhetoric having to do with the Constitution will be the vague political expedient used to unite those that oppose that president.
Each time a new president is elected, the opposition freedom movement crumbles as the party votaries step in line. The hangers-on often follow the power. To some, any president is distasteful. For those who desire to be around power, however, a powerful president from his or her own party is less distasteful than a powerful president from the other party. After eight or more years away from the teat of power, some will take any opportunity to make their way back into the presence of the most powerful people in the world.
The exodus away from ideals and towards power that follows an election is repeated almost cyclically. Having a memory is my main “impediment.” It’s the main reason that I’m not able to think highly of the Tea Party movement. I recognize a man must not be judged based on his words, but instead on his actions. Therefore, I see recent Johnny-come-latelies to “freedom” as untested. If the Tea Party movement lasts a few election cycles, I’ll start to take an interest in them.
Until then, I’m going to simply enjoy watching the political mayhem that takes place in the upcoming months. In a stable society the drama of political shifts can be amusing to watch. That the two parties believe in virtually the same ideas does not detract from the entertainment, because the media doesn’t seem willing to admit that, nor do some Americans, which will make for good manufactured drama. I’m not saying that it’s my job to test anyone and offer a stamp of approval, but it’s good for everyone involved to recognize that freedom is commonly a temporary alluring idea that is often forced to take the backseat to pursuits of power, or influence, or even just a feeling of being in the “in crowd.”
No matter how we try to avoid being pulled into a desire to be on the winning team, it’s sometimes hard to recognize changes in ourselves. I watched a good friend turn into a Bush II devotee a few years back, and who has amazingly lost all recollection of the rage he had for the former president. He was in the Army (on reserve) and angry that a moron had started a war and that that moron regularly used loose political language to talk about that war. The man was a Protestant pastor, proficient in Arabic and well-studied in Islam. He privately preached the idiocy of Bush to me for nine months. Six years later, we got together again and he told me “George Bush is the best thing since sliced bread.” Neither he nor his wife could remember any other opinion ever having come from his mouth. This story is not unique.
I’ve also watched beloved peace activists turn into Obama devotees, forgetting that they once despised anyone who would not preach and act in the most peaceful of ways. I remember specifically the weekend when Obama’s pro-war policy became news. For most of 2008, it only took about 3 clicks and 5 minutes of reading on Obama’s campaign website to see that he had officially zero interest in pulling troops out of the Middle East. They were there to stay. Maybe not 140,000 troops in Iraq for all time, but he’d keep them somewhere in the Middle East. Of course, he had many, many supporters who did not actually know what his stated policies were, nor even what his Senate voting record was like. Some of his supporters were proud peaceniks. Then, over a weekend in the fall of 2008, McCain was, as usual, saying that we must stay the course in Iraq and Obama started saying that the U.S. must stay the course in Afghanistan. His peacenik supporters had loved the man, not the policies, but they never realized that. Once the weekend was over they continued to love the man, not the policies. They were no longer peaceniks.
Sometimes we take ourselves too seriously, which is not that great of a thing when we also tend to be very forgetful of our past beliefs and behaviors. That aspect of human behavior leads me to not take the Tea Party too seriously. (READ MORE HERE)

Translate

Strategic Relocation The Film FULL VERSION HQ

Search This Blog And Links

Blog Archive