Sometimes the public just does not need to know everything about war - - - personally I don't believe we needed to be in the these two major conflicts after the initial 911 "payback" - - but being a Vet - - I do not need to be "briefed" in the papers about every strike.

This is disturbing since using drones for killing is the ultimate most powerful end use of drones, and are the main weapons being used to attack terrorist targets currently. Understanding how our government is being held accountable for who they are actually attacking is critical to avoid misuse. With complaints coming in that more civilians are being hit in higher ratios to targets, it's becoming clear, without any information released for Americans to track, there is literally no accountability.And international pressure cannot be effectively engaged. Our leaders can deny,claiming terrorists are using civilians as human shields, even when drones target non-terrorist sites such as storage or meeting sites.We end up losing credibility with the world even more.

The other main concern which many folks may not realize, is that since the President placed his chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan,both expert counselor for Middle East affairs to Obama since he took office, and an architect of the drone campaign, as the new director of the CIA, with the power now to turn those drones upon anyone including Americans,I believe Pandora's box has now been opened.

Let's be honest, for more than two years the President stalled Congress who requested information on the White papers, and until Obama was finally forced to reveal to the our country, he used his authority to kill US citizens, including a 16 yr boy visiting family, with virtually no evidence they had done anything wrong, using drones. Now we have the man who helped plan it out, head of the CIA. With pressure and legal action sought to extend the current battlefield to cover the United States soil, officially.Doesn't that make you feel all nice and safe? Now add no further reports coming from the Air Force in the most important use that such drones could possibly affect people in. Their very lives.Mix in together with non-warrant, unlimited detention by executive order for anyone considered a terrorist threat here and things become surreal and ugly.

Then again, you shouldn't be too worried, just sit back and trust, because our government really does have your best interest at heart if you don't ever do or say anything that is terrorist related. Dang wait, better check out the Homeland Security list of words considered dangerous....like cloud,exercise, pork, and storm. Yep, we're all safe because if you don't do anything wrong you have nothing to fear.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-words-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html

Hummmmmmm .... Just "Government" enforcement of the new American secret "Ostrich" Policy ......

"Farewell the Freedom of Man.."

This is disturbing since using drones for killing is the ultimate most powerful end use of then.To understand how our government is being held accountable for who they're actually attacking is critical to avoid misuse. Without any information released for Americans to track, there is literally no accountability at any level in the Department of Defense, all the way up to our beloved Commander in Chief, for any decisions made. Why does the only super power in the world suddenly need to stop listing how effective its drones strike are? Many of our allies may be legitimately asking that question.

At a time just when official pressure and legal action is being sought to extend the current battlefield to cover the United States soil.Doesn't that make you feel all nice and safe? Now, take no further reports coming from the Air Force, in the most important area that such drones could possibly affect people in, their very lives.Mix together with non-warrant, unlimited detention by executive order for anyone considered a terrorist threat which the CIA covers(our lovely new Chief's specialty) and things become surreal and ugly.

Then again, you shouldn't be too worried, just sit back and trust, because our government really does have your best interest at heart if you don't ever do or say anything that is terrorist related. Dang wait, better check out the Homeland Security list of words considered dangerous....like cloud,exercise, pork, and storm. Yep, we're all safe because like so many folks on here say, if you don't do anything wrong you have nothing to fear.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150281/REVEALED-Hundreds-words-avoid-using-online-dont-want-government-spying-you.html

parkwaync, If the government elected to keep the information secret because it was truly in the vital interests of national security, fine. They're not providing the information anymore because we are paying too much attention to the drone strikes. They don't like the people looking at "their" business. That's bad, really bad.

Sorry for the double post folks, I tried editing my first post so it wouldn't be so long, but the computer froze and I didn't realize it had posted aleady twice, sorry! o..O

Perhaps, just perhaps we are seeing an escape of conscientious liberty emerging from entrapment beneath the veil of self justified brute force survivalist propaganda. Emergent Christianity has equivalence, peace then justice emergence from under the Roman Empire veil of War justice then peace scenario.

Perhaps, just perhaps we will see Greed as the aggregate of unnecessary wealth, ever expanding by fear of having less. And, we will realize how much less subsistence in reality is, and this will represent a gentile epiphany. A 'Conceptual reality' of metaphysical independence from physical wealth.

morbas(i)

"the U.S. military said on Sunday that it had removed data about air strikes carried out by unmanned planes in Afghanistan from its monthly air power summaries."

This is the way to go while battling Islamic heroin addicts.

Taliban without Pakis are nothing. So carpet bomb Paki Islamist areas.

Thank you U.S. Air Force! The media and Republican clowns like Cruz, Pat O'Bian and Rand have turned this worthwhile progran into a political circus. This program protects American lives around the world. It should not be used to score anti Obama political points or to endager this country.

It sounds like much ado about nothing to me. The Air Force had only been publishing this data for 3 months to begin with (4, if you count February), and then they stopped. They explained why they stopped, too. So why make a big deal of it? The news media seem to be trying to suggest that there was some sort of conspiracy involved here, but I seriously doubt it.

As a vet, I have long felt that the public gets way too much information about our wars. I don't like the idea of imbedded reporters because the public simply does not have the stomach for war, and that impedes our ability to win.

Kevin C-752389

As a vet, I have long felt that the public gets way too much information about our wars. I don't like the idea of imbedded reporters because the public simply does not have the stomach for war, and that impedes our ability to win.

I hear what you are saying, Kevin...but maybe if people knew even more about the things they can't stomach about war we would have fewer of them and diplomacy could solve more of our conflicts.

The last thing that the military wants is a diplomatic solution to anything. The military are war mongers, and they don't deserve a bit of respect from decent people.

don't believe a word the military leaders or our government say their all blatant liars, their past record prove it !! DON'T be mislead by the great infidels !

Morbas - stop making sense this early in the morning, your freaking us out.

Clarence24,

"You love the military, and you know that the militarists couldn't have the wars they love so much if the civilians knew what was actually going on."

Have you ever served in the military, Clarence? I doubt it. It is governments that start wars; not the military. Military people do not love war. War is hell, and military people are the ones who have to fight it and die; not the civilians who just sit at home on their fat asses posting bull@!$%# about the military on social media.

@Clarence24

That was literally the most retarded comment I've read all week. Bravo sir. It will be hard to outdo that bit of idiocy, but I'm sure you'll try anyways.

@Clarence24, I would start by saying "Right back at you", but would add that you are clearly clueless. When the GOVERNMENT starts a war, not the military, the soldiers, seamen, and airmen should have the moral right to fight that war with every legal means necessary to win that war. When people, like you, get in the way of that, and imbedded reporters facilitate that, you tie our hands, and that is morally reprehensible. It has NOTHING to do with warmongering.

Personally, I think the drone program deserves scrutiny and public discussion. And not one that is done behind closed doors in some room in Washington determining policy for everyone. Here are a few questions I would have.

1 Does the use of drones in the US violate right to privacy?

2 Should evidence taken by spying with drones be admissible in court when a warrant is not given.

3 Should drone use be limited to counterterrorism, and if not, what can it be used for? Catching speeders?

4 In the use of drones in combat areas in countries we are not officially at war with, are they actually a weapon of terror themselves?

5 In drone wars, is there a moral argument that they should not be weaponized due to the fact that life of others is held cheap when there is no personal risk for the operator.

As this is a new type of warfare, we are setting precedents as to how they are used, and as such, are setting precedents as to how they will be used against us. As I stated earlier, these discussions should be done in public and not behind closed doors with decisions being made by crotchety old men who may have an agenda.

Just more transparency" from king Barry's court. next up...amnesty..then third term, wait for it.

Oh and Clarence24

i ssume the 24 stands for your I.Q. ...thats cool the local VFW has a cure for that, take your keybaord commando ass to the nearest one and tell them about it.

Its the most disturbing of things that get published in the early AM hours; when the average person's weekend activities are over this will be passed up by another IAEA/Iran reprint and pope gossip.

They are going to stop reporting on them because they don't want US citizens thinking any more about collateral damage, infrastructure damage, and the "oops" factor when a drone hits the wrong target.... you know, when they start employing them on US soil.

Institutions are self protecting and self perpetuating. It comes as no surprise that those controlling the use of drones, whether for reconnaissance or for offense, are putting the lid on the dissemination of information in light of the criticism they are receiving.

However, secrecy is corrosive to democracy. If unchecked, it is more damaging to to our society than any other problem we have. One of my favorite quotes is, "There's no disinfectant like daylight."

I am convinced that if we citizens knew ALL of the things that are done with our money and in our names we would be so outraged, there would be a fundamental change in our society for the better.

We don't report sniper strikes, we don't report bomber strikes, A-10 strikes, AC-130 strikes, and the other lethal ways our military has of fighting our wars which are far more powerful than drones. I can't find where we started reporting machine gun strikes in 1917 even though they were the most revolutionary killing instrument devised up to that time and would eventually become a domestic killing machine for which we have laws now banning them from civilian use.

For those who are worried about drones in America, read posse cometatis, which prohibits the military from getting involved in domestic law enforcement . If you're worried about eyes in the skies then you'll have to start banning police helicopters and surveillance cams on utility poles first.

john,

"4 In the use of drones in combat areas in countries we are not officially at war with, are they actually a weapon of terror themselves?

5 In drone wars, is there a moral argument that they should not be weaponized due to the fact that life of others is held cheap when there is no personal risk for the operator."

Those are all good questions. In response to question #4 and #5, I would just say, "Maybe." But there has always been relatively little risk to airmen dropping bombs on other people compared to the risk those in the infantry face in combat. Airmen face the risk of being shot down by AAA or surface-to-air missiles or even an enemy fighter, but it has always been less than the danger faced by ground forces. That's one of the advantages of air power, and attacking the enemy in a country we are not at war with but who are supporting the enemy we are fighting has not traditionally been classified as terrorism. If Switzerland had been supplying weapons to Hitler's Germany in WWII, and we had bombed their supply trains, that would not have been terrorism. I retired from the Air Force more than 20 years ago, before drones came into use, but even then there was a lot of talk in the Air Force among high ranking officers about using unmanned fighter aircraft because man was not really meant to fly, especially not at the speeds at which today's military aircraft fly. That involves pulling at lot of G's and is hard on the human body. The use of unmanned aircraft was still just a dream at that time because we didn't have the technology for it. But now it has become a reality, and it is inevitable that the military is going to use those aircraft in any role they deem fit, whether for combat purposes as weaponized platforms or for non-combat purposes such as reconnaissance. It's up to the American people and their elected representatives to decide upon the acceptable limits of their use, but politics is really not my thing.

airhammer

While it is presumed that the military cannot act on US soil the FBI can. And unless I am mistaken, there is nothing in place to stop them from militarizing. And they are under direct control of the AG who I have serious questions as to his ethics.

This is text from NDAA, and while it may seem straightforward, I question the exact use of language. It states that in the search for terrorists in the US that the military is not "required" to arrest, detain indefinitely, or kill suspected terrorists, but that does not preclude them from doing so. It simply means that they are not required. Which means that if the head of the military decides that it is necessary to do so, it is within their mandate, and our due process rights have been relegated to one man. No President regardless of party should have that power. So, if I am given the latitude I believe this one word renders "posse comitatus" null and void. Does this mean that any President will use it? No. I simply believe the option should not be available.

"H. R. 1540—266
SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN AL-QAEDA TERRORISTS.
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States."

As far as police helicopters and cameras, that should be part of the discussion as well. I have to question when it is a million times more likely for one of us to be robbed, raped or killed in the street than due to a terrorist attack, that terrorism should be the priority. Perhaps we should follow the money, and wonder how much some have to gain from the militarization of American streets. I see it as our obligation as citizens to question our government and to not blindly follow as if we could not understand the concepts.

@airhammer:

Our Constitution guarantees us that we won't be arrested without warrants, that we won't be incarcerated without due process, that our private lives won't be invaded without warrants (wire taps), and that has all gone away by the forming of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act.

Posse Comitatus are words in the Constitution, words on a piece of paper, and as a Native American, I can tell you they are worth the price of the ink they were written with when the government decides to ignore them.

And you, who have such faith in those words, can't even be bothered to look up the term and spell it correctly, or probably to know that it can be rescinded simply by a majority vote of Congress.

John;

Good questions. Answer technological advancement. A better question, what is the purpose of our government operating these same drones over America? I see them fairly regularly now over Southern Missouri, fully armed. I am not near an airbase, so the training exorcise refrain rings hollow, especially given they are armed. Training pilots does not require they carry Jdam's and other air to surface ordinance. Whiteman is 300 miles to the north. I am not keen on seeing them wandering around using their sensors to look things over. So what is their purpose? I am not in the flight paths into or out of Whiteman and these things aren't following any established route.

Mickey;

You still believe your elected officials actually care what you think? Really. Then why have things we the people overwhelming opposed in recent years still been done, passed, enacted? Clearly, they are not listening to the people anymore. Of course they haven't in years, seeing as they "know best", for us and all. Kinda like the damn predators I see cruising around now, I guess it's best they spy on us, huh? And since they are already armed,,,,,. If you think you can trust the government, ask a Native American. I'm Cheyenne, So yeah, I trust them implicitly,,,,,,,,,,,,, NOT!

We've already had the domestic application of military type weaponry. For example, the drone strike equivalent use of force by Philadelphia PD, 19xx, where they dropped a satchel charge from a chopper on the roof of a tenement building to burn out a bunch of revolutionaries. They wound up burning half the block down. ATF used armored vehicles in Waco. Both actions would have been considered tyrannical had they not been backed up by a warrant.

The warrant and the judge who issues it is our protection and is still in place.

We have other types of airborne surveillance in use today by lots of govt. agencies and some of them can be turned lethal with the use of a warrant very easily. A chopper can become a sniper platform very easily. My point is that weapons technology is constantly advancing and civil law enforcement will adopt it where it fits for them subject to the limitations of a warrant. If we don't like how new military technologies get used domestically then we can challenge it in the courts.

In the mean time I see no reason to limit their use by the military while at war to save soldiers lives and reduce collateral damage.

This decision smells like a political decision designed to keep the uninformed voters uninformed about collateral deaths/damage. If the decision didn't emanate from the top it is certainly being blessed from the top.

This drone mania is just another form of hysteria about something new. What's the difference between drone surveillance and manned surveillance by PD choppers, aircraft, and pole cams? Not much that I can see. It's just another platform to mount a camera on.

Yes, you can mount a weapon on it but you can do that with a chopper, too just as the military has done but I don't see any PD gunships flying around, so I doubt we're going to see any PD predators flying around with hellfires slung under their wings.

Yep, the only information the American public will get now on any drone strike will be when a "senior" Taliban, al Qaeda, or other "terrorist" organization leader is taken out.

Maybe even a "situation room" picture or two.

Good. This is the way it should be. If you want to know every aspect of what the military is doing, JOIN. What goes on in the warzone is none of the general publics business. All of this information flowing through every media outlet has given away too many tactical and planning trade secrets. People have died because of the coverage on every little piece of information during these conflicts. The smoke and mirrors started with the drones killing Americans garbage. That is illegal on US soil. If they are a terrorist on foriegn soil, kiss you backside goodbye. These news articles have done nothing but take peoples attention off what is really happening, YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE ONCE AGAIN ABOUT TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT ON 27 MARCH!!! They are still not doing their job and all you people care about is a BS story on legallities of drone strikes. Have fun when everything shuts doown at the end of the month.

airhammer;

And that's fine in a combat zone. But when they deploy these same weapon over U.S. skies in absence of any real threat, that's an end run around the constitutional protection of NOT having the military involve in domestic police activity. This technology should not be handed over to under trained police forces who have shown time and again they do not use good judgement. Think of the nine bystanders wounded by NYPD recently. The police have also lied on warrants regularly, even to gain the aid of the 82nd Airborne for a police action in Texas. A clear violation of the constitutions Posse Comitatus provision. Clearly they modify things to suit there own agenda, but what new? They broke every treaties they signed with us, did their best to exterminate us, knowingly exposed us to small pox, so why should you be any better? Perhaps, just perhaps, you will find out just how under handed and sinister your elected officials truly are. Politicians (party rhetoric is irrelevant) have only two things in common, 1) If their mouth is moving, they ARE lying to you. 2) they care only about power and money, if you want to see where they're loyalties truly lie, check their portfolios.

Why am I seeing these same drones in American air space? What is their purpose? Why are they armed? Who is at the controls, this is important in determining what they might be doing with them. Has Eric holder and Co made these available to local and state cops per department of Injustice and department of homeland insecurity policy? Clearly, they have no problem violating the very laws they are supposed to enforce. Holder and his "gun walking" fiasco is a recent clear example. The practice has been illegal since 1934. But, they know better right? "As long a the grass shall grow and the wind shall blow" They will not speak the truth and they will have an agenda. Believe it. We know this to be true first hand.

airhammer,

All this was before Homeland Security and the Patriot Act which gives the federal government leave to do anything without asking anyone and without having to answer to anyone for their actions.

Both HS and PA are a farce and a tool to control American citizens. If our government truly believed a terrorist threat existed that they could prevent or control our Southern border would not be more full of holes than a slice of Swiss cheese, since aliens from all over the world have been found coming across there, and they would not be so careless about the failure of the Immigration Dept. to adequately vet the people coming in the front door.

I will have a little trust in the first president to abolish the Patriot Act, followed by limiting the Gestapo powers of Homeland Security.

The drones over US airspace are not armed. Get the facts straight. Plus, I could give a s!@*, I am not a crook or terrorist.

Nicodemus1946,

"You still believe your elected officials actually care what you think?"

What are you advocating then as an alternative? Revolution? I don't really know why you addressed your remark to me in the first place. Didn't you read the last sentence in my post? It said: "It's up to the American people and their elected representatives to decide upon the acceptable limits of their use, but politics is really not my thing."

Paul held the Senate floor for more than 12 hours while talking mainly about drones, expressing concern that Obama's administration might use the aircraft to target U.S. citizens in the United States.

I'd be concerned about that too since the homeboy in the white house can't see the distinction between ourselves and the Taliban.

Ready for missile strikes on I-95, anybody?

@ Clarence24: "the American military hasn't actually won a war since 1945"

Well, we pretty much kicked butt in the 1st Gulf War...or had you conveniently forgotten that?

GA Scooter.

Well, we pretty much kicked butt in the 1st Gulf War...or had you conveniently forgotten that?

Yeah, against a weak nobody.

Wow a whole argument over nothing, this article has nothing to do with drones being flown in the US, all it states is the air force will no longer publicize how many missiles were shot from drones each month in AFGHANISTAN. They don't report how many missiles were launched from manned aircraft or ships. They don't report how many mortar rounds, bullets, tank rounds, artillery rounds, hand grenades, rifle launched grenades etc. are fired each month. The press sensationalizes the use of drones in the battlefield, all of the above weapons have resulted in collateral damage as well, that is part of war.

To the geniuses calling for diplomacy, it only works if the other side is prepared to talk. When diplomacy, sanctions and other peaceful means are exhausted, if we talk and they shoot, guess who dies? All the attempts at diplomacy with the Taliban and AQ has netted us a big fat 0

"Yeah, against a weak nobody."

1) Before Desert Storm (1st Gulf War) started, the Iraqi military was the 4th largest in the world. Do a little research before spewing garbage.

2) So, it doesn't count as a 'win'?

1) Before Desert Storm (1st Gulf War) started, the Iraqi military was the 4th largest in the world. Do a little research before spewing garbage.

Bullsh!t. It was a cake walk and you know it.

2) So, it doesn't count as a 'win'?

No, it doesn't. Not after almost 10 years of Bushtard atrocities there it doesn't.

I didn't cheer then and I'm not cheering now.

gunner-3867236

The drones over US airspace are not armed. Get the facts straight. Plus, I could give a s!@*, I am not a crook or terrorist

Neither were the other "collateral damage" civilians.

And with that, I withdraw from the debate. Everyone enjoy the rest of the afternoon. Be safe.

gunner-3867236

But what if your neighbor is considered one?

You may have had beers with the guy on your front patio and now you are a target because in the paranoia our government suspects us all. The Patriot Act allowed the government to accumulate data on us all. And the criteria for being placed on a list is not made public. So how do you know just because you state you are not a criminal that you are not considered a threat to national security? Is there a way you can tell?

How could you defend yourself in court when the powers that be don't recognize your right to it.

On a side note: Do you ever wonder if these things are being put in place BECAUSE the government is about to shut down. Imagine what will happen when the US can't pay its bills. How many people will be on the streets that collect welfare, SS and other government entitlements. I swear they want drones in the sky so when it falls and there is no longer police or fire because of cutbacks that they can still watch the show.

"Not after almost 10 years of Bushtard atrocities there it doesn't."

Umm, that was the 2nd Gulf War, genius.

What's the difference between drone surveillance and manned surveillance by PD choppers, aircraft, and pole cams?

Drone surveillance cannot be seen nor heard.

Umm, that was the 2nd Gulf War, genius.

It's all the same to me, Bushtard. Right wing evil no matter how you look at it.

pulse3129

Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, sending drones to fight in Somalia, Niger, giving aid to the rebels in Syria. Perhaps we should hold all Presidents to the same standard?

Just a thought.

When we, the scientific community, envisioned UAV's it was not for war but as a platform for observing forest fires and to provide a communications platform. This was a necessity to save lives and time in the most efficient manner possible. Never did we believe in 2000 that our insight and knowledge would be used for killing. Some mentally deranged person in the military decided these UAV's would sterilize the art of killing and cheapen lives hence this new application. All surgical strike missions should be televised so the American public can see firsthand the carnage a hellfire missile causes. While I support President Obama I cannot sign on to this.

War should not be cheapened so we do not cavalierly use these weapons for death from above without seeing firsthand the destruction wrought by video gamers who would not otherwise be in the military. We must stand back, reflect and decide if this is the next nuclear arms race we want to embrace. Other countries will have the same capabilities as we do and you can make book they will do the same to American citizens at large.

Intellect-1949393

UAV's used by the military date back decades, blimps during WWII, the V-1, the V-2, we used them for surveillance in Vietnam, the Israeli's did a lot of development of surveillance drones in the 80's and 90's. Do you really believe they were developed for forest fires in 2000?

How about some real news -

Let's get to the bottom of the Benghazi lies

What did Barack, Chuckles and Hillary do or not do - when our Ambassador and citizens were pleading for help?

Knowing they were under attack - Why did they let them die - and blame the video?

Do they really want this to just go away?

Antistupidity, yes I do as the UAV's of today were developed at NASA/Ames and the US Forest Service beginning in 1999 and tested at the Mojave desert until deployment by the US Forrest Service. I know because I was there using the sensors for remote sensing in the IR and NIR bands for fire and moisture content detection. What you are talking about is remote sensing that had people onboard. Do some reading and research before engaging in something you know nothing about.

What you are talking about is remote sensing that had people onboard.

Uh who was on board the navy blimps in WWII, who was on board the V-1 and V-2, who was on board the RC drones with cameras and weapons attached to them in Israel in the 80's and 90's, why don't you do a little reading about the history you self absorbed pompous ass, here I'll help you, including NASA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAV

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spiesfly/uavs.html

http://www.draganfly.com/news/2009/03/04/a-short-history-of-unmanned-aerial-vehicles-uavs/

http://science.howstuffworks.com/reaper1.htm

http://aviationknowledge.wikidot.com/aviation:uav

http://www.airforce-technology.com/features/feature1528/

http://www.iar-gwu.org/node/144

http://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/gal104/uav.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERAST_Project

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/everydaylife/Safer_Firefighting.html

http://grvc.us.es/publica/congresosint/documentos/2006VICFFR_AOLLERO.pdf

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/civuav/civ_uav_index.html

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/civuav/civ_uav_past_workshops.html

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/history/pastprojects/index.html

http://search.nasa.gov/search/centersearch.jsp?centername=dryden&nasaInclude=fire+fighting+drones

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/Features/2007/wildfire_socal_10_07.html

You two kids knock it off, or I will have to separate you!

Intellect and screminmimi (if you're still here):

Although not to do specifically with drones, but with how our government operates to deceive it's own people, were you aware of this:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=527_1307568510

CIA’s Bin Laden Hunter Ordered to Stand Down 10 Times

Written by Alex Newman

Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA's) Osama bin Laden unit, told the U.K. Daily Telegraph in a recent interview he was prevented from capturing or killing the terrorist by his superiors on at least 10 separate occasions.

The 22-year CIA veteran-turned-whistle=blower resigned from the agency in 2004, disgusted by the government’s lies surrounding the terror war. And he’s been embarrassing the U.S. establishment ever since.

In 1995, Scheuer was selected to lead the spy agency’s bin Laden efforts. By then the militant Islamist was exiled in Sudan after angering Saudi authorities. Bin Laden was running several businesses in the African nation that Scheuer suggested disrupting. “We formulated operations and submitted them for approval but they would not approve any of them,” the ex-CIA official told the Daily Telegraph. “If we had been able to deal a serious economic blow it could have been a show-stopper.”

The next year, bin Laden declared war on the American government. And in 1997, when bin Laden was again living in Afghanistan, Scheuer said his team groomed a band of Afghans to capture the suspected terror boss. There were at least two “clear opportunities” to bring down bin Laden by the middle of 1998, according to Scheuer. But in both cases, he said, CIA bosses refused to proceed.

Then, in August of that year, bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network bombed two American embassies in Africa. Bin Laden said the embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, was targeted for serving as a U.S. intelligence hub for the CIA. The attacks killed numerous U.S. diplomats and at least two CIA agents, according to the Associated Press.

Scheuer told the Telegraph that following the missed opportunities to kill or capture bin Laden in 1998, there were at least eight other chances to get the terror mastermind. By that point, bin Laden was supposedly among the U.S. government’s most wanted criminals. But for some unknown reason, senior officials refused to authorize his capture or assassination.

“One 50-cent round could have put us all out of our agony,” Scheuer explained. But that didn’t happen, as high-level authorities consistently ordered the CIA unit not to stop bin Laden.

In 1999, Scheuer told the paper that he sent an angry letter to higher-ups demanding to know why his men were risking their lives for somebody the U.S. government did not seem to want stopped. “I don’t know what you are doing when you talk to the President but he will not get a better opportunity than this,” Scheuer explained to his superiors.

Eventually, the bin Laden-unit chief, Scheuer, was dismissed from his position before being reinstated after the September 11 attacks. A few months after that, the U.S. government and its allies had bin Laden surrounded in the mountains of Tora Bora in Afghanistan. But yet again, high-level officials let him escape.

A Senate investigation from 2009 explained some of the details in its summary. With bin Laden trapped, “calls for reinforcements to launch an assault were rejected. Requests were also turned down for U.S. troops to block the mountain paths leading to sanctuary a few miles away in Pakistan,” the document states. “The vast array of American military power … was kept on the sidelines.”

And according to the report, the decision not to capture or assassinate bin Laden, or at least cut off his escape route, was made by then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his top commander, Gen. Tommy Franks. Despite subsequent Bush administration protestations to the contrary, “the review of existing literature, unclassified government records and interviews with central participants underlying this report removes any lingering doubts and makes it clear that Osama bin Laden was within our grasp at Tora Bora,” the Senate report concluded.

More than a few other reported examples of bin Laden being deliberately allowed to escape by senior officials in the United States and other governments have surfaced over the last decade. But according to the current version of President Obama’s ever-changing narrative, the terror leader was finally shot through the head by U.S. forces after being found unarmed at a hideout in Pakistan. His body was then supposedly dumped in the ocean for unknown reasons.

But questions continue to plague the government on almost every front. Since resigning over government lies, Scheuer in particular has been a persistent thorn in the side of American officials. He has published several widely acclaimed books criticizing U.S. policies including Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror and Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam After Iraq. And he regularly makes inflammatory statements in media appearances and speeches, too.

Last month, speaking in the U.K., Scheuer said American and British officials including Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron “don’t have a clue” about the terror war or what is going on in the West. “The main recruitment sergeant for al Qaeda is Barack Obama,” he charged.

And according to Scheuer it has nothing to do with America‘s rapidly vanishing freedoms, as the government continues to claim. “We are being attacked in the West and we will continue to be attacked in the West as long as we are in Afghanistan, as long as we support the Israelis, as long as we protect the Saudi police state,” Scheuer told the crowd. “They can’t cope with the fact that it’s nothing to do with the way we live. It doesn’t have anything to do with elections or democracy or liberty.” He asserted that the West was being attacked for “supporting fascism across the Middle East,” not so-called “gender equality” or any such notions.

In the recent past, Scheuer also accused the U.S. government’s 9/11 Commission of deliberately hiding the truth about the attacks. “It was a whitewash and a lie from top to bottom,” he told Fox News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Numerous lawmakers and high-level officials have also made various allegations about why it took the government 10 years to get bin Laden. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.), for example, accused then-President George W. Bush of “intentionally” allowing bin Laden to elude capture to justify the invasion of Iraq.

As The New American reported recently, bin Laden, his al-Qaeda network and other Islamic extremists have indeed enjoyed a sort love-hate relationship with the American government for decades. Even now, the Obama administration and the United Nations are backing an insurgency in Libya against its former ally, dictator Moammar Gadhafi, where certain leadership elements are known to be affiliated directly with al-Qaeda and related groups.

Why high-ranking officials in the U.S. government would have let bin Laden escape on so many occasions is certainly a matter that should be investigated by the press and authorities. Speculation has been running rampant for years. But unfortunately for Americans, analysts don’t expect serious inquiries to happen any time soon.

The Dept of Homeland Security has been flying drones over the US Borders for YEARS. These are the same drones used by the CIA/US Military... see article - .eff.org/deeplinks/2012/12/newly-released-drone-records-reveal-extensive-military-flights-us

The difference between armed and unarmed is the installationof missiles on the wings or fuselage...

Do any of you know what a "drone aircraft" is? You know those little radio controlled airplanes kids, (and many fun loving adults,) play with in local parks? They are, technically, drones, unmanned aircraft. People have been flying them for years. A few resourceful people have attached cameras to them, for various reasons, since shortly after they figured out how to do it.

The most common drones used by the military are similar in size to these small R.C. planes, used for reconnaissance by forward patrols in dangerous areas. These drones could even be "weaponized," by some clever soldier, sailor, or airman, (and there are a lot of them involved in this conflict.)

But, there is a law in place by the Federal Aviation Adminsitration, limiting their altitude to no more than 400 feet above the ground, in the USA. No such law exists in areas of conflict, (war zones,) but, this country is rapidly becoming such a "zone." And who is to determine the boundaries of such a zone? Oh! Shoot! It's the same government promoting the use of these military style drones, inside our borders. The same government that knows what is so good for the rest of us more common citizenry, as long as it doesn't apply to them.

It is time WE, as American Citizens, stood up and actually gave OUR employees, the government, all three branches, their orders, instead of letting them blindly give out THEIR version of what is good for us, and not holding them responsible for problems arising with THEIR mandates.

Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, sending drones to fight in Somalia, Niger, giving aid to the rebels in Syria. Perhaps we should hold all Presidents to the same standard?

I do. We need to stay out of those places and start concentrating on our own borders at home. That includes the current homeboy in the White House.

Oval is spelled wrong

I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

It is not cover up! It is correction.

When we are fighting ungrateful Paki Islamists and their proxies like Taliban, let us not worry much about big words!

In Afghanistan, Pakis have backstabbed the US and NATO forces big time. Half of NATO forces deaths are due to ungrateful and backstabbing Pakis.

When the NATO forces were entering Kandahar in 2001, Pakis airlifted key al-Qaida, Taliban, ISI and others militants by back door from Kandahar.

This includes Mullah Omar, Osama and many including Paki Haqqani militant network leaders.

Hope people remember about Pakis sheltering Osama.

These Paki Islamic religious Nazis don't bother about their people and they are into reckless killing games in the name of jihad.

Drone attacks are not enough. To reduce NATO forces losses, carpet bomb Paki militant areas just like 1991 Iraqi war.

Just pointing out that "Pakis" is considered a derogatory term equivalent to "ragheads".

culheath: Everything is fair with Paki Islamic killers, who have become international liabilities wherever they are!

like culheath said, just call em ragheads...that was your point wasnt it cul?

like culheath said, just call em ragheads...that was your point wasnt it cul?

:) ...Ah... No.

IA.ScooterTramp: The words you are using may invite: "banned for week" and so on.

So I have to be careful in using words.

Right from the beginning, Afghan war and Iraqi wars were going in the wrong directions.

We should know the enemies.

Instead of battling Taliban and others on their own terms, our poor soldiers had too many human rights manuals than arms on their back.

Why go to wars at all, if one has to follow all norms, laws, rights and big words?

Oh yeah, lets just inform the big mouths in Congress about every time we fire a weapon of any kind. Maybe that will keep them busy.

Just more fugged up government BS. First, the White House wanted to brag and show their stuff as being tough and doing battle anyway they could and brought out anything that was perceived to make the current "transparent" administration look better than they are. Now they want a veil over the "transparent" part of the strikes and as usual, treat us all like mushrooms and keep us in the dark covered in sh_t! All to make the dumbazz in charge, Odumbo, look better than he is. This entire government, everyone in the house and senate and everybody in the executive branch, (especially), should all be stuffed into a bunker where they can't control anything that has any importance. You may wonder, "how would the country be led then?" And I say, better than it is now.

Bonebreaker...you had me until you blamed Obama...EVERYBODY in power seeks to control information. Not just the people you don't like.

I agree.

This is not enough.

To reduce NATO forces losses, just carpet bomb Paki militant areas!

Why waste poor soldiers' lives for Paki Islamic barbarians?

Families of the innocents killed by mistake or as collateral damage might disagree with your assessment.

Think those families would feel better if we used a cruise missile or a F18 instead?

And one of the worst things is letting a president have the power to use them here.

Wes, I did not know you lived in Afghanistan.

Dave-1593080,

In the early 1980s the USMC was standing-up their RPV program in Camp Lejeune. Many of my Avi Techs joined the program...

As the program matured, flights of these RPV became common over; Jacksonville, Hoffman forest, Croatan National Forest & Cherry point, NC. They also assisted the local POLICE in tracking 'Biker Gangs' and the locating of stolen Military Property...

I concur that they are a very important tool, if used in accordance with the EXISTING; Laws of War, International Agreements and US Constitution...

Accidents do happen - Ask the US Marine & Navy Medic that were KILLED by one. Or the reported thousands of INNOCENTS, around the World...

The US Citizens should EXPECT - ACCOUNTABILITY with the use of ANY weapons system, controlled by our Military or other US Government agencies...

Currently the UN and other organizations are preparing Legal CHALLENGES and charges are pending...

BTY - The current CIA policy - Is to use a armed drone strike and then return when the 'First Responders' are on site. Then firing another missile, the kill ratio has been reported to be; One terrorist and 50-INNOCENTS/Medical personnel - KILLED/injured...

Remember your Articles of War and the Geneva Convention - Concerning the targeting of medical facilities &/or personnel???

Sounds like you have a shoot the messenger mentality.

The military is more than happy to report when they have killed another "Al-Qaida operative" who is in the "#2" position.

That got old fast.

By saying the #2 position they meant he was taking a dump!

The US Military is held accountable, when their drones kill INNOCENTS...

They do not want to be painted with the same brush as the POTUS's CIA. And its record of UNACCOUNTABILITY and DENIAL...

Where was you Happy butt when the country went crazy about water boarding during the Bush administration. The enemy at that time was 50% of the country; it was terrible to extract information, but now it is OK to kill them and others, and you don't want to know.

I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

people with problems keep repeating themselves and post the same thing over and over. Chris is a major troll

Well, Chris is right on that issue. The Obama administration is nothing more than a continuation of what Bush did from 2000-2008, only worse.

We should have left when Karzai asked us to vacate his country.He's now made a statement that the U.S. is in cahoots with the Taliban causing car bombs so that we will have an excuse to stay in his country.I think that Karzai is sampling the poppy product and wants us gone so that he can help their drug trade grow.Drones or no drones it is time to leave the Afghans to their own devices.

Get over your media issues. Someone has to do it before anyone can report it.

In a war zone, we should put a bounty on reporters and hunt them like coyotes.

What war zone? The US has attempted to make the entire planet a terrorist war zone.

Time to bring them home.....all of them.......

A strong Democracy depends on a FREE PRESS/Media reporting on what their Government does...

When the Media is restricted or provides biased reports. The Citizens of their Country are the ultimate LOSERS...

NO ONE should depend on ONE source or geographical location for their World/Local News...

100

D.....you have me laughing on that one!!!!

Sure stinky

You are so important they will get right to you with an answer.

Most drone flights are for reconnaissance not lethal strikes.

culheath,

Dependent on the type of drone, many do not have the capability of being armed...

Analysts warn that even a less-sophisticated drone can be dangerous. Such drones can be equipped with chemical or biological weapons or be used to provide intelligence about the location of American forces.

Armed drones generally do not leave the ground unless they have the capability of firing a weapon...

Israel has sold drone equipment to India, Russia and Georgia, according to the GAO. China is also supplying equipment to Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, etc, according to IHS Jane's, a security research firm...

BTY - 1/8/2013 · The number of countries with drones has expanded to more than 75...

AC Robertson-2414093

Analysts warn that even a less-sophisticated drone can be dangerous. Such drones can be equipped with chemical or biological weapons or be used to provide intelligence about the location of American forces.

Wow. Never really considered the aerosol dispersal aspect. Now there some serious lethality. Imagine instead of being armed with explosive missiles the drone(s) fly over a city at 20,000 feet undetected and drop altitude sensitive dispersal bombs that spread a biological agent over an American city. Even blowing them out of the air might not be helpful in that case.

Jack, the democrats wanted to try Bush and Cheney as war criminals for water boarding terrorist. Now democrats kill them, and the government has decided we should not even know about drone attacks;is this also crapagenda.

Bdave

And of course you know the reason why there is a difference, don't you?

Biggy davey..........you forgot about the other war crimes for bush/Cheney and his cabinet...lying the nation and world into war in Iraq for war profits and for Bush to be "known as a war president because war presidents are remembered." Thousands of our troops killed, thousands more wounded and still dying, record number of vets committing suicide everyday, over 725 billion dollars spent in Iraq........don't short change your republicon war crimnal's success!

Jack, the democrats wanted to try Bush and Cheney as war criminals for water boarding terrorist. Now democrats kill them, and the government has decided we should not even know about drone attacks;is this also crapagenda.

Speak for yourself. I find it an outrage that children in other countries are being killed by drone strikes while Obama cries on TV about the children that died at Sandy Hook. The problem is you jackasses only see things through the small parameters of your political veils.

starsailing,

Which political party EXPANDED the Vietnam and Afghanistan Conflicts???

Remember what POTUS Carter's CIA through the ISI did in Afghanistan???

Remember the 1998 bombing campaign on Baghdad by POTUS Clinton & the UK???

What was Clinton'sjustification for 'Regime Change' in Iraq??? BTY - It was referenced by the AUMF that Congress & George Bush used in 2003...

We will not talk about 'Chinagate' and how POTUS Clinton's inaction after the bombings of; Kobal Towers, WTC, USS Cole, US Embassies, etc. Empowered OBL and directly let to the events on 9-11. Or the actions during Bosnia and Clintons attempt on building a Muslim Nation, by transfering thousands of Afghanistan Militants...

You ask Why? Well because the more lies your leaders tell you and get away with the more they will lie. When it comes to money and power very few people will be honest when their lively hood is on the line. Freedom has many prices to pay.

Spencer, good question. However, I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

You want transparency tell the members of Congress to stop meeting in private. No more caucuses when Congress is in session. If they need to meet it should be a Public meeting. Sunshine Law needs to be passed.

Why must we, America, announce everything to the world?

It's called living in an open society and not being afraid. Secrecy is all too frequently a weakness of those obsessed with maintaining their power.

Of course there are critical pieces of momentary strategic information that should not be divulged, but on the whole the need for a Freedom of Information just to get information from our bureaucracies about even relatively petty aspects of their operations indicates how over used secrecy has become.

chris I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

Dude your beating that "transparency" horse to death. There is the government & there is the military. Thats 2 different monsters. I myself I don't want the military to be publishing everything it does. During WW2 should the military have given reports on the Manhattan Project?

I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

We don't need a drone strike count like the Viet Nam body count.

Why not? Are you saying that we should not be aware of what the military is doing in our name?

I thought about it and it's something the extreme right will want to scare people with and you have fallen for it.

News flash Max, NBCNEWS is not a right leaning organization. They found a story and in an attempt to report news this left leaning organization has said something you don't like; put on your big girl panties and have a good day.

The reporting is retrospective not prospective.

Exactly...excellent point.

I like the drone strikes better than sending my son into battle. I still think it is the most intelegent thing our government has done in my life time.

Dave -

I so totally agree with that.

Shouldn't be sending your sons either.

This "war" is about controlling the worlds poppy fields, NOT terrorists. That's why they have troops guarding the fields all across the country.

Did you know the Taliban had almost wiped out the poppy fields when we declared war on them?

BTW they are not the terrorists either. They are the citizens of Afghanistan, who took the country away from the drug warlords. And were systematically destroying the entire heroin industry there. They almost wiped it out, when the world suddenly decided they are the terrorists. Now we have our troops guarding the fields. You can go look at video of them doing it on Youtube.

People are so naive... When are people going to figure out how corrupt everything is?

More, that's absolute nonsense. Prior to the era of drones these type situations were handled by air strikes which would just flatten an entire area. There were many, many more casualties then the drones have ever created. War is a dirty business plain and simple.

Your notion that war should be sterile and exact is just living in a dream world.

This isn't a war. There is no enemy country that is being fought. This is systematic political murder. Terrorism is political extremism, and what partisans do in occupied countries. And the entire middle east is occupied, and not by the people who actually live there.

Air strikes or drones, its still murder and assassination. Against civilians. You may want to be a country of murderers, I do not.

If we need to rule by force WE ARE THE BADGUYS.

MoreJustice, we are not "ruling" these countries. We, initially, were there to assist the general population meet OUR definition of democracy for all, (basically, nation building.)

As with all of the present problems we are visiting on ourselves, initially, it started out, basically, with what WE consider a noble enterprise, or effort, of helping the general population of a foreign nation attain a level of comfort and ease we have come to expect in THIS country. Until we realize not everyone believes in the same cultural goals we do, this will continue.

There is much more to this problem we now have than just the use of weaponized drones being used around the world, and at home. We need to start holding our entire government responsible for US, instead of the entire world.

It is only international muders of the Islamists, who did international and internal genocides by suicide bombings, massive killings and more.

What the NATO forces are are doing are not enough.

I thought President Obama promised "transparency" in government.

TRANSPARENCY when it suits him, that is.

So take a look at the last story coming out of Afgan.....Big chief accusing USA of helping the Taliban so more troops will have to stay...so much for correct news from the crazy country!

What a less then knowledgable comment. Military drills have been going on for decades. There is nothing new about them.

Sanctions have been in effect for years and were just increased last week.

Dialog? How do you have dialog with a government that isn't interested?

After all we do have a War on Drugs, nip it in the Bud,

@OnePatriot-

Maybe we have to have Chuck Hagel confirm we're still at war on that one.

Way to much money involved for politics not to be involved, what a shame

Good point, Les. However, my guess it was Brennan. The fix was already in.