One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby MinM » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:41 am

Image
Analysis: CNN expert’s civilian drone death numbers don’t add up

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

July 17th, 2012 | by Chris Woods

Following recent revelations by the New York Times that all military-aged males in Waziristan are considered fair game by the CIA in its drone strikes, many US journalists have been reassessing how they report on deaths in the attacks.

So when CNN’s national security analyst Peter Bergen produced a graph claiming that no civilians have been killed in Pakistan this year by US drones, his views were bound to attract criticism. Conor Friedersdorf, a columnist at The Atlantic, accused CNN and Bergen of running ‘bogus data‘, for example.

Bergen is also a director of the New America Foundation, which for more than three years has run a database on CIA drone strikes in Pakistan and produces estimates of numbers killed. That data is the most frequent source of statistics for the US media, including CNN itself. So the accuracy of its material is important.

Yet there are credible reports of civilian deaths in Pakistan this year. And unlike the New America Foundation the Bureau actively tracks those claims.

Up to July 16 for example, between three and 27 civilians have been reported killed in Pakistan this year, out of 148 – 220 deaths. Some were actively defined as civilians by news organisations including Reuters and AFP. But these are not necessarily the only civilian deaths. Ambivalent reports might sometimes refer only to ‘people’ or ‘local tribesmen’ killed. More research is needed. And of the remaining alleged militants killed, we have so far been able to name just 13 individuals.

Image

Bergen’s claim of zero reported civilian casualties this year is therefore factually inaccurate.

To be so categoric is also problematic. The Bureau’s own data shows that of at least 2,500 people killed by the CIA in Pakistan since 2004, we publicly only know the identities of around 500. Most of the others were reported to be alleged militants by local and international media. We can say no more than that.

It is not just in NAF’s 2012 data that credible reports of civilian deaths have been missed or ignored. NAF’s Pakistan data also contains many other inaccuracies. A number of confirmed strikes are omitted, for instance, and its overall estimates of those killed are significantly below even the CIA’s own count. The consequence is a skewed picture of drone activity which continues to inform many opinion-makers.

Subjective choices
On July 13 Peter Bergen responded to his recent critics in a CNN article which stated that reported civilian casualties in Pakistan are in decline – as the Bureau itself recently noted. He also repeated his claim of no civilian casualties in Pakistan this year. And he attacked the Bureau for its own recording work in this area:

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s high estimate of 24 civilian deaths in 2012 came in part from reports provided by an unreliable Pakistani news outlet as well as the claims of a local Taliban commander, which contradicted all other reports.

It’s worth unpicking Bergen’s claims in some detail.

His comments appear to refer to a CIA drone strike on February 9 in which local Taliban commander Badar Mansoor died. Citing just four sources, NAF’s data reports only that three to five ‘militants’, including Mansoor, died in the attack.

But this is a misrepresentation which ignores credible claims of civilian casualties, as the Bureau’s own Pakistan database makes clear...

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/20 ... nt-add-up/

Image
New and Improved Rules for Drone Warfare

Good news for people who love freedom, hate terrorism, and people who do not live in Yemen and will never visit Yemen and do not appear to be from Yemen or its surrounding areas: the U.S. government is relaxing its rules for drone strikes in Yemen. When it comes to incinerating more or less inscrutable targets with unseen missile attacks like Zeus himself, why be encumbered by a bunch of bureaucratic rules?

The new policy reportedly "includes targeting fighters whose names aren't known but who are deemed to be high-value terrorism targets or threats to the U.S." No more pesky hours of intelligence-gathering before you can vaporize that jeep from above. But do these rules go far enough in eliminating those who Hate Our Freedoms and Familes and Children, and Our Children and Families' Freedoms™? We think not. A few common sense edits for the future of warfare:

* If someone is carrying a machine gun, RPG, or shoulder-fired missile that looks like an imminent threat to any Coalition soldiers, whether from the Western world or from the Muslim world, they may be killed.
* If someone in an area known for militant activity appears to be transporting cargo with brown and grey markings consistent with databases of the graphic skin that covers the outside of missiles or rockets and moves with an intent to set up and fire those armaments at Coalition forces, they may be blown up.
* If someone is determined through confirmed intelligence of a reliable nature to be forming a terrorist group with the intent and capability of causing mass casualties in America or in any territory of an American ally in the Middle East, and they cannot be apprehended without significant risk of loss of civilian life, they may be kabazongaed to bababooey with a fucking Hellfire, bro.

A little common sense goes a long way.

http://gawker.com/5905456/new-and-impro ... ne-warfare

Image
Just Trust Us, Say Manufacturers of Killer Robots

People have been making a fuss about the domestic use of drones recently. Now the drone industry has come up with a 'code of conduct' to ensure the public's safety and privacy. [Evil robot laugh drifts through the air.] Huh? What was that?

The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, which represents thousands of drone manufacturers all over the world released the document yesterday. It includes a pledge that the industry will ‘‘respect the privacy of individuals," along with guidelines like "We will be responsive to the needs of the public," and "we will not operate [drones] in a manner that presents undue risk to persons or property on the surface or the air."*

"We understand as an industry that we've got a public relations problem," one association member told the Associated Press.

That's nice and all, but it's not going to go far toward convincing a skeptical public, which largely believes we are hurtling toward a dystopian future where drones are omnipresent in American skies, beaming live surveillance film of citizens' every move to a shadowy Director, who stitches the best bits into a reality show to entertain Chinese real estate tycoons.

A much more savvy public relations move by the drone industry would be to show the vulnerable, human side of drones. Have drones star in a series of viral YouTube videos where they're caught in hilarious awkward situations—you know, mysteriously crashing, being hijacked by hackers.

*Offer not valid in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen...


http://gawker.com/5923329/you-can-trust ... ler-robots

Image
http://gawker.com/5917690/richard-cohen ... nment-lies
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby MinM » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:51 am

...A much more savvy public relations move by the drone industry would be to show the vulnerable, human side of drones. Have drones star in a series of viral YouTube videos where they're caught in hilarious awkward situations—you know, mysteriously crashing, being hijacked by hackers.

*Offer not valid in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen...


http://gawker.com/5923329/you-can-trust ... ler-robots

You can always count on nPR to help put a positive spin on the MIC...
Domestic Drones in North Dakota

Friday, July 27, 2012
Image
In Afghanistan and Yemen, armed drones have become an effective military tool. In the US, unarmed drones have become a tool of domestic law enforcement. Brooke speaks with Star Tribune military affairs reporter Mark Brunswick about the use of an unarmed drone to help end a dispute over six missing cows in North Dakota.

http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/jul/27/d ... drone-use/

User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:53 am

Image
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Tue Jul 31, 2012 12:43 pm

There are refs to this "ufo" in other threads somewhere... pics in the op


D.C. beltway ‘UFO’ up close at air base
Posted: Jul 31, 2012 9:20 AM CDT Updated: Jul 31, 2012 9:36 AM CDT

PATUXENT RIVER, Md. - Remember the ‘UFO' that motorists spotted along D.C. highways back in June?

The saucer-shaped object caused a stir in the area prompting many to call 911 and to post photos on Twitter.

We later learned the mysterious object was an experimental, unmanned aircraft called an X-47B.

The aircraft was delivered to the Patuxent Naval Air Station for testing and on Tuesday FOX 5 got its first close-up look at the drone.

According to Northrop Grumman, the saucer-like shape of the aircraft is a deliberate effort to make it harder to detect.

Remotely-piloted aircraft like the X-47B can be used for surveillance or can carry weapons.

Read more: http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/19156226/d ... z22Des1cN1

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:12 pm

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Thu Aug 02, 2012 5:40 pm

Court Upholds Domestic Drone Use in Arrest of American Citizen
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... an-citizen
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:28 pm

Alex, on his way into work this morning, saw a drone low overhead, and stopped to get footage and interviewed its pilot:


Video: Drones Arrive in Austin
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 10, 2012


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNjkI5jfCyk

Nationwide, the surveillance drone rollout is causing a stir and heads to turn as government, flush with an endless supply of taxpayer money, rapidly introduces the technology. “Some are as large and fast as commercial airplanes,” Scientific American wrote in January. “Some are blimps that sit in the sky, surveying broad swaths of territory. Others flit around imperceptibly, like birds or insects, recording videos and landing themselves.”

During his morning commute in Austin, Texas, Alex Jones noticed the kind of drone favored by police about 120 feet above the roadway. Traffic slowed, backed up and pulled off the road to see what appeared to be a UFO as the small helicopter-like machine circled overhead photographing traffic. A contract worker for the highway department stood to one side of the road maneuvering the machine with a handheld control box.

With his iPhone video camera running, Alex engaged the pilot in friendly conversation. He mentioned a number of disturbing events, including the ominous prospect of police outfitting the devices with weapons and the EPA spying on cattle ranchers in Nebraska and Iowa. Alex also mentioned the unnerving experience of journalist and publisher Joseph Farah, an outspoken Obama critic, who was the victim of drone surveillance at his remote home in northern Virginia.

The drone pilot defended the increased usage of the machines. He seemed genuinely flummoxed by the Big Brother aspects mentioned by Jones. He innocently compared the surveillance capabilities of drones to that of Google Map’s satellite imagery and said there are currently around five of the devices being used in Austin. The man explained to Alex that the drone was being used to video tape miles of roadway.

Alex’s impromptu roadside video underscores how drones originally developed for offensive military use are now finding their way into mundane domestic situations, thus lowering our natural resistance to their intrusive presence and acclimating the populace to the increased use of the devices by government and corporations alike.

Fifty years ago, the idea of militarized police driving around in armored vehicles in full battle apparel was almost unthinkable. Now it is commonplace and readily accepted as necessary, thanks to years of incessant propaganda following the 9/11 attacks.

The same process is at work as aerial drones are introduced. In a few short years, drone technology will be accepted as a normal aspect of local law enforcement and will be used without question for assorted business applications. The FAA is working behind the scenes to open our government regulated skies to their obtrusive presence.

Moreover, the headlong rush into automated technology contains a dark and menacing underside. Not only are government and military developing and implementing the technology devoid of human supervision and interaction – on the battlefield and beyond – but the prospect of “trans-humanism” and its perverted obsession with genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence and nanotechnology also poses a threat to humanity.

Alex’s roadside interaction with the drone pilot is a macrocosm view of a threat only dimly understood prior to the advent of the microchip and cheaply mass-produced electronics. In the months and years ahead – if the trend now underway continues – we will face a dystopian nightmare harrowingly foretold by George Orwell and Philip K. Dick as government employs ever more sophisticated technology to monitor, track and ultimately control our every move.

http://www.infowars.com/video-drones-arrive-in-austin/

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Tue Aug 14, 2012 2:42 pm


Unmanned version of A-10 on way
by Staff Writers
Manassas, Va. (UPI) Feb 20, 2012

Aurora Flight Sciences has been selected to work on a U.S. military project for an unmanned version of the A-10 close support aircraft.

Its selection as a team member in the Persistent Close Air Support program of the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency was made by Raytheon, which is leading the effort.

Aurora, with extensive experience in robotic aerial vehicles, will be responsible for developing the demonstrator aircraft.

"Aurora's selection by Raytheon to develop critical air vehicle technologies for the DARPA PCAS program is a major step in our relationship, which began with the Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle and Loiter Attack Missile programs in the 1990s," said John Langford, Aurora's president and chief executive officer.

"We are looking forward to working closely with Raytheon on a wide range of unmanned systems technologies in the future."

For the PCAS program, Raytheon envisages development of technologies to reduce the timeline for close air support with "improved coordination among controllers, airborne sensors and weapon systems.

Other members of the PCAS team include Rockwell Collins and GE Aviation.

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Unmanne ... y_999.html
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:31 pm

Hidden History: America’s Secret Drone War in Africa
By David AxeEmail Author August 13, 2012 | 6:30 am | Categories: Drones



An MQ-9 Reaper in Iraq in 2008. Photo: Air Force
More secret bases. More and better unmanned warplanes. More frequent and deadly robotic attacks. Some five years after a U.S. Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle flew the type’s first mission over lawless Somalia, the shadowy American-led drone campaign in the Horn of Africa is targeting Islamic militants more ruthlessly than ever.

Thanks to media accounts, indirect official statements, fragmentary crash reports and one complaint by a U.N. monitoring group, we can finally begin to define — however vaguely — the scope and scale of the secret African drone war.

The details that follow are in part conjecture, albeit informed conjecture. They outline of just one of America’s ongoing shadow wars — and one possible model for the future U.S. way of war. Along with the counterterrorism campaigns in Pakistan, Yemen and the Philippines, the Somalia drone war demonstrates how high-tech U.S. forces can inflict major damage on America’s enemies at relatively low cost … and without most U.S. citizens having any idea it’s even happening.

Since 2007, Predator drones and the larger, more powerful Reapers — reinforced by Ravens and Scan Eagle UAVs and Fire Scout robot helicopters plus a small number of huge, high-flying Global Hawks — have hunted Somali jihadists on scores of occasions. It’s part of a broader campaign of jet bombing runs, naval gun bombardment, cruise-missile attacks, raids by Special Operations Forces and assistance to regional armies such as Uganda’s.

In all, air raids by manned and unmanned U.S. aircraft have killed at least 112 Somali militants, according to a count by the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Fifty-seven innocent civilians also died in the raids, the nonprofit Bureau found. The dead jihadists have included several senior members of al-Qaeda or the affiliated al-Shabaab extremist group. In January, a drone launched three Hellfire missiles at a convoy near Mogadishu and killed Bilaal al-Barjawi, the mastermind of the 2010 bombing in Kampala, Uganda, that claimed the lives of 74 soccer fans.

In an escalating secret war, drones are doing an ever-greater proportion of the American fighting.


A Scan Eagle drone launches from a Navy ship in the Middle East. Photo: Navy
The Drones Are Coming
It wasn’t until relatively recently that U.S. drones were permanently stationed in East Africa. The military and CIA have operated armed versions of General Atomics’ one-ton Predator since 2001, but early on the remote-controlled warplanes were in high demand and short supply. Afghanistan and later Iraq monopolized the drones.

That was a big problem for the small U.S. force in East Africa struggling to keep tabs on increasingly radical, and dangerous, Somali militants. “The largest gap is knowledge,” Navy Rear Adm. Tony Kurta, former commander of U.S. troops in Djibouti, told Danger Room in 2009.

In 2003, Joint Special Operations Command resorted to spending six months sneaking SEALs into Somalia by submarine to painstakingly plant disguised surveillance cameras — all to capture just a fraction of the images a drone could acquire in a single mission.

“If we’re having to go to that extreme, it’s because we lack other capabilities because they’re drawn elsewhere,” a senior intelligence official told Army Times’ ace reporter Sean Naylor. ”Instead of doing it like that, you’d want to have more Predators.”

The drone shortage represented a huge risk for CIA agents attempting to build an intelligence network for tracking suspected terrorists in Somalia. The agency used cash payments to Somali warlords as a “carrot” to draw them to the American side. U.S. air power was supposed to be the “stick” that helped motivate the Somalis. But for years the intel agency didn’t actually possess any stick. So it lied, telling the warlords there were drones overhead when in fact there weren’t.

It was risky bluff. ”But it worked,” an intelligence official told Naylor.

It took a surprise — and ultimately doomed — invasion of Somalia by regional power Ethiopia to open the door for a stronger U.S. presence in East Africa. American commandos followed along behind the Ethiopian tank columns as side-firing AC-130 gunships provided lethal top cover.

Where once the small U.S. force in East Africa had relied mostly on a single large base in Djibouti, just north of Somalia, in the wake of the Ethiopian blitz American bases sprouted across the region. The CIA and American security contractors set up shop alongside a U.N.-backed peacekeeping force at the shell-crated international airport in Mogadishu. American contractors quietly carved a secret airstrip out of a forest in Arba Minch, Ethiopia. Under the guise of tracking Somali pirates, the Pentagon negotiated permission to base people and planes on the Indian Ocean island nation of the Seychelles.

Soon all these bases would support drone aircraft being churned out at an accelerating rate by the U.S. aerospace industry. In 2003 the U.S. military possessed only a handful of Pioneer, Predator and other drones. After spending around $5 billion annually, year after year, by 2012 America’s robotic arsenal had swelled to 678 large and medium drones and no fewer than 3,000 small, hand-launched Ravens.

Some of each were destined for Somalia, where the CIA and Pentagon were advancing plans for a far-reaching, but subtle, campaign to defeat militants and prop up a fledgling, U.N.-backed government. It was a campaign that, in stark contrast to the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, would not include any large, permanent American ground forces. American CIA agents, mercenaries, commandos and drones would provide intelligence, training, raiding prowess and air cover while Ethiopian, Ugandan and Kenyan troops did most of the day-to-day fighting inside Somalia.

An MQ-1 Predator armed with Hellfire missiles flies over southern Afghanistan. Photo: Air Force
Opening Salvo
On Jan. 7, 2007, a Predator took off from an American base in Africa — all evidence suggests it was Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti. Command of the aircraft was then transferred to a two-person crew, most likely sitting in a trailer in Nevada. The Predator cruised the roughly 500 miles to the southern Somali town of Ras Kamboni. Following coordinates provided by Ethiopian intelligence, the Predator used its high-fidelity video camera to track a convoy of vehicles transporting Aden Hashi Farah, one of Somalia’s top Al Qaeda operatives. Farah had trained in Afghanistan and returned to Somalia where he led the kidnapping and murder of aid workers.

The Predator was unarmed, possibly to save weight for its long-distance flight. So an AC-130 gunship fitted with cannons and machine guns opened fire, smashing the convoy. Farah was wounded but survived: he would be killed a year later in another U.S. air strike. While it failed to take out the primary target, the Ras Kamboni raid was the opening shot in the East African drone war. Subsequent robot-led attacks would be much more successful for the Americans.

The drones came by land and by sea. Besides Camp Lemonnier, Predators and Reapers operated by the Air Force (and possibly the CIA) deployed to the Seychelles and Ethiopia for flights over the Somalia. It’s been difficult to verify exactly how many drones are present at each base, but Predators and Reapers normally deploy in groups of three or four known as “orbits,” each staffed by around 75 people who launch, land, arm and repair the ‘bots. If all three major known African UAV bases have single orbits, the robot force structure in the region could include as many as 12 Predators and Reapers at a time.

At around the same time the larger drones were settling in, American agents, commandos or contractors in Mogadishu — it’s not clear who, exactly — received an unknown number of five-pound, hand-launched Ravens from manufacturer AeroVironment. The simple, camera-equipped Ravens were ideal for short-range surveillance flights during the urban battles aimed at liberating Mogadishu from militants. In 2011 Washington approved a $45-million package of arms and training to Ugandan peacekeepers in the city that included another four Ravens.

Meanwhile Navy ships sailing off the Somali coast began carrying catapult-launched Scan Eagles manufactured by Boeing and Insitu as well as Northrop Grumman’s vertical-takeoff Fire Scout robo-copters. The Fire Scouts initially helped in Navy counter-piracy efforts, but by 2011 had shifted to “overland intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance … for Special Operations Forces,” according to a recent Navy story. The sailing branch also deployed one of its five RQ-4 Global Hawks — Northrop-built spy drones with the wingspan of a 737 airliner — to an unspecified Indian Ocean base to, among other duties, provide air cover for the 5th Fleet off the Somali coast. And although unmentioned in press reports, Air Force Global Hawks are also theoretically available for Somalia patrols from their forward base in the United Arab Emirates.

The Ethiopians occupied Somalia for three bloody years then retreated, leaving behind a mostly Ugandan peacekeeping force that gradually fought its way out of its Mogadishu strongholds, finally recapturing the city this year. In late 2011 the Kenyans invaded in Somalia’s south. American support steadily expanded in concert with the Ugandan-Kenyan attacks. The pace of U.S. drone flights increased commensurately.

“The number of reports concerning the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Somalia in 2011-12 has increased,” the U.N. Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea reported in late June. The group said it tracked 64 unidentified military aircraft over Somalia, including drones, in the 11 months between June 2011 and April this year. There were surely many more flights the U.N. observers did not see.

How many? It’s possible to make an educated guess.

In 2009 Air Force Gen. John Corley, then chief of Air Combat Command, said that 95 percent of his branch’s UAV sorties were focused on “Southwest Asia,” which to the Pentagon means Iraq and Afghanistan. Let’s say just half of the remaining five percent of flights occurred in the Pentagon’s other major drone battleground, Somalia. Since 2007 the Air Force’s Predators and Reapers, today numbering around 300, have flown nearly a million flight hours. By our reckoning, the percentage that may have occurred over East Africa — some 25,000 hours over five years — equates to around 12 hours of robot flight time per day. And that’s assuming the proportion of drone flights devoted to Somalia hasn’t increased lately, which in fact it most certainly has.

Conservatively speaking, it’s possible at least one Predator or Reaper drone has been airborne over Somalia half the day, every day since the first Predator took off from Camp Lemonnier in 2007. Flights by Global Hawks, Fire Scouts, Scan Eagles and Ravens adds to this persistent robot presence.

For the first four years the aerial robots played a strictly supporting role, surveilling and tracking targets for Special Operations Forces, gunship attacks, F-15 bombing runs, helicopter raids and cruise-missile strikes. When the Predators and Reapers began using their own weapons is unclear. The first verifiable drone attack occurred on June 23, 2011, after which the robotic strikes occurred in rapid-fire fashion. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism counted as many as nine confirmed drone attacks between June 2011 and today.

Again, the actual number of strikes is undoubtedly higher. If a robotic strike occurs out of sight of reporters or their sources, it remains secret.

An MQ-8 Fire Scout robot helicopter lands aboard the Navy frigate USS Simpson off the African coast this year. Photo: Navy
Telltale Signs
The military rarely confirms drone operations over Somalia — and the CIA never does. This reporter actually witnessed what appeared to be a Predator takeoff from Camp Lemonnier in 2009 while waiting to board the destroyer USS Donald Cook to cover a counter-piracy mission. The robot launch was just part of the flurry of warplane activity I observed over the bustling base. Leaving aside from that fleeting firsthand sighting, the best evidence of America’s African drone war is left by the pilotless warplanes themselves … when they crash, or nearly crash. The sheer number of flying robots tumbling out of the sky over Somalia seems to indicate much more intensive UAV operations than official and press reports imply.

Some of the first evidence of any U.S. drone activity in Somalia came in March 2008, when what appeared to be a ship-launched UAV tumbled into the sea near Merka, then a hotly-contested town in militant-dominated southern Somalia. “It’s small and can be carried by three people,” local government official Mohamed Mohamoud Helmi said of the winged object his constituents dragged from the water. The description roughly matches the 40-pound Scan Eagle that the Navy uses to shoot video just over the horizon from its ships.

After the apparent Scan Eagle incident, drones began falling from the heavens like zapped insects. On May 13, 2009, a Predator was destroyed following an incident at what Air Force investigators described as a “forward operating location.” It probably wasn’t Iraq or Afghanistan, as those countries are usually named in crash reports. Nor was the location likely to be Pakistan, as drones there are generally understood to be the CIA’s responsibility. By process of elimination, it seems the 2009 crash was in East Africa.

2010 seems to have been a pretty safe years for American UAVs over Somalia. But in 2011 Predators crashed near Camp Lemonnier on Jan. 14, March 15, May 7 and May 17. A Reaper plunged into the ground in the Seychelles on Dec. 13, 2011, and another crash-landed on the island nation on April 4 this year. Unidentified drones, possibly Ravens, lost their power of flight in Mogadishu on Aug. 19, 2011 and Feb. 3 this year.

While not crashes per se, twice drones have nearly caused serious accidents in Mogadishu, as pointed out by the U.N. monitoring group in its rather defensively-toned report. Last November 13, a Raven flew over a delicate U.N. fuel depot, alarming the world body’s personnel on the ground who were fearful of a crash, the group claimed. And on Jan. 9 a 737 carrying Ugandan peacekeepers “almost collided with an (sic) UAV” on takeoff from the Mogadishu airport.

The crash reports match the apparent pattern of America’s secret East African drone flights: sporadic in the early years, steadily increasing before reaching a fever pitch in 2011 and 2012.

The crashes also seem to corroborate our guess at the at the overall number of drone flight hours in the region. Recently Predators have crashed at a rate of just over seven per 100,000 flight hours. Reapers crash roughly twice as often. Since 2009 the Air Force alone has lost at least four and probably five Predators plus two Reapers in East Africa, indicating these ‘bots flew at least the 25,000 hours we surmise from indirect Air Force statements.

A Ugandan soldier in Mogadishu. Photo: U.N.
Robot Effect
From the evidence we can roughly outline the history of America’s secret drone war in Africa. But is the robotic campaign against Somalia’s Islamic militants working? That’s a much harder question to answer.

To be sure, the militant threat in Somalia is hard to dispute, especially with the homegrown al-Shabaab group openly aligning itself with al-Qaeda and pulling off more international attacks. “In Somalia, it is indeed worrying to witness al-Qaeda’s merger with al-Shabaab, whose ranks include foreign fighters, some with U.S. passports,” John Brennan, Pres. Barack Obama’s top counterterrorism official, said in a rare public speech in April.

Brennan singled out drones as one of the best weapons in the fight against these terrorists. “Remotely piloted aircraft in particular can be a wise choice because of geography, with their ability to fly hundreds of miles over the most treacherous terrain, strike their targets with astonishing precision, and then return to base,” he said. “It’s this surgical precision — the ability, with laser-like focus, to eliminate the cancerous tumor called an al-Qaeda terrorist while limiting damage to the tissue around it — that makes this counterterrorism tool so essential.”

But some skeptics point to popular backlash against drone strikes as evidence the robots are doing more harm than good. In Pakistan, especially, public resentment over American UAV attacks could fuel, rather than suppress, militant sentiment … and have the unintended effect of driving young men into the arms of extremist groups. Would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad, for instance, said the drone strikes helped motivate him to carry out his attack.

In other countries, however , attitudes might be different. This spring, University of Virginia researcher Chris Swift spent a week interviewing tribal leaders in southern Yemen, another target-rich zone for U.S. drones. Swift found that war-weary rural populations were ambivalent about robot strikes. “Nobody in my cohort [of interview subjects] drew a causal link between drones on one hand and [militant] recruiting on other,” Swift said.

Somalia is not Yemen, but it’s more similar to Yemen than it is to Pakistan. Famed war reporter Robert Young Pelton, writing for his SomaliaReport online journal, “found most of the people we interviewed in Mogadishu to be favorable to the concept” of the drone war. “Keeping in mind,” he added, “this is a city in which thousands have been killed by indiscriminate shelling and gunfire.”

To be sure, not every Somali is so supportive of American air attacks in general. During my visit to Mogadishu in late 2007, a middle-aged school teacher pulled me aside. “You Americans,” the man scolded, “you’ll destroy an entire city to get three people.”

Still, the absence so far of popular backlash against America’s shadowy robot campaign in Africa should be encouraging news for U.S. policymakers. With the war in Iraq over and major combat ops in Afghanistan rapidly drawing to a close, America is entering a new era of warfare, one in which most U.S. conflicts could be waged in the shadows by intelligence agents, commandos and high-tech robotic aircraft — some merely spies, others armed and primed to kill.

The Drones Are Coming
It wasn’t until relatively recently that U.S. drones were permanently stationed in East Africa. The military and CIA have operated armed versions of General Atomics’ one-ton Predator since 2001, but early on the remote-controlled warplanes were in high demand and short supply. Afghanistan and later Iraq monopolized the drones.

That was a big problem for the small U.S. force in East Africa struggling to keep tabs on increasingly radical, and dangerous, Somali militants. “The largest gap is knowledge,” Navy Rear Adm. Tony Kurta, former commander of U.S. troops in Djibouti, told Danger Room in 2009.

In 2003, Joint Special Operations Command resorted to spending six months sneaking SEALs into Somalia by submarine to painstakingly plant disguised surveillance cameras — all to capture just a fraction of the images a drone could acquire in a single mission.

“If we’re having to go to that extreme, it’s because we lack other capabilities because they’re drawn elsewhere,” a senior intelligence official told Army Times’ ace reporter Sean Naylor. ”Instead of doing it like that, you’d want to have more Predators.”

The drone shortage represented a huge risk for CIA agents attempting to build an intelligence network for tracking suspected terrorists in Somalia. The agency used cash payments to Somali warlords as a “carrot” to draw them to the American side. U.S. air power was supposed to be the “stick” that helped motivate the Somalis. But for years the intel agency didn’t actually possess any stick. So it lied, telling the warlords there were drones overhead when in fact there weren’t.

It was risky bluff. ”But it worked,” an intelligence official told Naylor.

It took a surprise — and ultimately doomed — invasion of Somalia by regional power Ethiopia to open the door for a stronger U.S. presence in East Africa. American commandos followed along behind the Ethiopian tank columns as side-firing AC-130 gunships provided lethal top cover.

Where once the small U.S. force in East Africa had relied mostly on a single large base in Djibouti, just north of Somalia, in the wake of the Ethiopian blitz American bases sprouted across the region. The CIA and American security contractors set up shop alongside a U.N.-backed peacekeeping force at the shell-crated international airport in Mogadishu. American contractors quietly carved a secret airstrip out of a forest in Arba Minch, Ethiopia. Under the guise of tracking Somali pirates, the Pentagon negotiated permission to base people and planes on the Indian Ocean island nation of the Seychelles.

Soon all these bases would support drone aircraft being churned out at an accelerating rate by the U.S. aerospace industry. In 2003 the U.S. military possessed only a handful of Pioneer, Predator and other drones. After spending around $5 billion annually, year after year, by 2012 America’s robotic arsenal had swelled to 678 large and medium drones and no fewer than 3,000 small, hand-launched Ravens.

Some of each were destined for Somalia, where the CIA and Pentagon were advancing plans for a far-reaching, but subtle, campaign to defeat militants and prop up a fledgling, U.N.-backed government. It was a campaign that, in stark contrast to the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, would not include any large, permanent American ground forces. American CIA agents, mercenaries, commandos and drones would provide intelligence, training, raiding prowess and air cover while Ethiopian, Ugandan and Kenyan troops did most of the day-to-day fighting inside Somalia.

Opening Salvo
On Jan. 7, 2007, a Predator took off from an American base in Africa — all evidence suggests it was Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti. Command of the aircraft was then transferred to a two-person crew, most likely sitting in a trailer in Nevada. The Predator cruised the roughly 500 miles to the southern Somali town of Ras Kamboni. Following coordinates provided by Ethiopian intelligence, the Predator used its high-fidelity video camera to track a convoy of vehicles transporting Aden Hashi Farah, one of Somalia’s top Al Qaeda operatives. Farah had trained in Afghanistan and returned to Somalia where he led the kidnapping and murder of aid workers.

The Predator was unarmed, possibly to save weight for its long-distance flight. So an AC-130 gunship fitted with cannons and machine guns opened fire, smashing the convoy. Farah was wounded but survived: he would be killed a year later in another U.S. air strike. While it failed to take out the primary target, the Ras Kamboni raid was the opening shot in the East African drone war. Subsequent robot-led attacks would be much more successful for the Americans.

The drones came by land and by sea. Besides Camp Lemonnier, Predators and Reapers operated by the Air Force (and possibly the CIA) deployed to the Seychelles and Ethiopia for flights over the Somalia. It’s been difficult to verify exactly how many drones are present at each base, but Predators and Reapers normally deploy in groups of three or four known as “orbits,” each staffed by around 75 people who launch, land, arm and repair the ‘bots. If all three major known African UAV bases have single orbits, the robot force structure in the region could include as many as 12 Predators and Reapers at a time.

At around the same time the larger drones were settling in, American agents, commandos or contractors in Mogadishu — it’s not clear who, exactly — received an unknown number of five-pound, hand-launched Ravens from manufacturer AeroVironment. The simple, camera-equipped Ravens were ideal for short-range surveillance flights during the urban battles aimed at liberating Mogadishu from militants. In 2011 Washington approved a $45-million package of arms and training to Ugandan peacekeepers in the city that included another four Ravens.

Meanwhile Navy ships sailing off the Somali coast began carrying catapult-launched Scan Eagles manufactured by Boeing and Insitu as well as Northrop Grumman’s vertical-takeoff Fire Scout robo-copters. The Fire Scouts initially helped in Navy counter-piracy efforts, but by 2011 had shifted to “overland intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance … for Special Operations Forces,” according to a recent Navy story. The sailing branch also deployed one of its five RQ-4 Global Hawks — Northrop-built spy drones with the wingspan of a 737 airliner — to an unspecified Indian Ocean base to, among other duties, provide air cover for the 5th Fleet off the Somali coast. And although unmentioned in press reports, Air Force Global Hawks are also theoretically available for Somalia patrols from their forward base in the United Arab Emirates.

The Ethiopians occupied Somalia for three bloody years then retreated, leaving behind a mostly Ugandan peacekeeping force that gradually fought its way out of its Mogadishu strongholds, finally recapturing the city this year. In late 2011 the Kenyans invaded in Somalia’s south. American support steadily expanded in concert with the Ugandan-Kenyan attacks. The pace of U.S. drone flights increased commensurately.

“The number of reports concerning the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Somalia in 2011-12 has increased,” the U.N. Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea reported in late June. The group said it tracked 64 unidentified military aircraft over Somalia, including drones, in the 11 months between June 2011 and April this year. There were surely many more flights the U.N. observers did not see.

How many? It’s possible to make an educated guess.

In 2009 Air Force Gen. John Corley, then chief of Air Combat Command, said that 95 percent of his branch’s UAV sorties were focused on “Southwest Asia,” which to the Pentagon means Iraq and Afghanistan. Let’s say just half of the remaining five percent of flights occurred in the Pentagon’s other major drone battleground, Somalia. Since 2007 the Air Force’s Predators and Reapers, today numbering around 300, have flown nearly a million flight hours. By our reckoning, the percentage that may have occurred over East Africa — some 25,000 hours over five years — equates to around 12 hours of robot flight time per day. And that’s assuming the proportion of drone flights devoted to Somalia hasn’t increased lately, which in fact it most certainly has.

Conservatively speaking, it’s possible at least one Predator or Reaper drone has been airborne over Somalia half the day, every day since the first Predator took off from Camp Lemonnier in 2007. Flights by Global Hawks, Fire Scouts, Scan Eagles and Ravens adds to this persistent robot presence.

For the first four years the aerial robots played a strictly supporting role, surveilling and tracking targets for Special Operations Forces, gunship attacks, F-15 bombing runs, helicopter raids and cruise-missile strikes. When the Predators and Reapers began using their own weapons is unclear. The first verifiable drone attack occurred on June 23, 2011, after which the robotic strikes occurred in rapid-fire fashion. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism counted as many as nine confirmed drone attacks between June 2011 and today.

Again, the actual number of strikes is undoubtedly higher. If a robotic strike occurs out of sight of reporters or their sources, it remains secret.

Telltale Signs
The military rarely confirms drone operations over Somalia — and the CIA never does. This reporter actually witnessed what appeared to be a Predator takeoff from Camp Lemonnier in 2009 while waiting to board the destroyer USS Donald Cook to cover a counter-piracy mission. The robot launch was just part of the flurry of warplane activity I observed over the bustling base. Leaving aside from that fleeting firsthand sighting, the best evidence of America’s African drone war is left by the pilotless warplanes themselves … when they crash, or nearly crash. The sheer number of flying robots tumbling out of the sky over Somalia seems to indicate much more intensive UAV operations than official and press reports imply.

Some of the first evidence of any U.S. drone activity in Somalia came in March 2008, when what appeared to be a ship-launched UAV tumbled into the sea near Merka, then a hotly-contested town in militant-dominated southern Somalia. “It’s small and can be carried by three people,” local government official Mohamed Mohamoud Helmi said of the winged object his constituents dragged from the water. The description roughly matches the 40-pound Scan Eagle that the Navy uses to shoot video just over the horizon from its ships.

After the apparent Scan Eagle incident, drones began falling from the heavens like zapped insects. On May 13, 2009, a Predator was destroyed following an incident at what Air Force investigators described as a “forward operating location.” It probably wasn’t Iraq or Afghanistan, as those countries are usually named in crash reports. Nor was the location likely to be Pakistan, as drones there are generally understood to be the CIA’s responsibility. By process of elimination, it seems the 2009 crash was in East Africa.

2010 seems to have been a pretty safe years for American UAVs over Somalia. But in 2011 Predators crashed near Camp Lemonnier on Jan. 14, March 15, May 7 and May 17. A Reaper plunged into the ground in the Seychelles on Dec. 13, 2011, and another crash-landed on the island nation on April 4 this year. Unidentified drones, possibly Ravens, lost their power of flight in Mogadishu on Aug. 19, 2011 and Feb. 3 this year.

While not crashes per se, twice drones have nearly caused serious accidents in Mogadishu, as pointed out by the U.N. monitoring group in its rather defensively-toned report. Last November 13, a Raven flew over a delicate U.N. fuel depot, alarming the world body’s personnel on the ground who were fearful of a crash, the group claimed. And on Jan. 9 a 737 carrying Ugandan peacekeepers “almost collided with an (sic) UAV” on takeoff from the Mogadishu airport.

The crash reports match the apparent pattern of America’s secret East African drone flights: sporadic in the early years, steadily increasing before reaching a fever pitch in 2011 and 2012.

The crashes also seem to corroborate our guess at the at the overall number of drone flight hours in the region. Recently Predators have crashed at a rate of just over seven per 100,000 flight hours. Reapers crash roughly twice as often. Since 2009 the Air Force alone has lost at least four and probably five Predators plus two Reapers in East Africa, indicating these ‘bots flew at least the 25,000 hours we surmise from indirect Air Force statements.

Robot Effect
From the evidence we can roughly outline the history of America’s secret drone war in Africa. But is the robotic campaign against Somalia’s Islamic militants working? That’s a much harder question to answer.

To be sure, the militant threat in Somalia is hard to dispute, especially with the homegrown al-Shabaab group openly aligning itself with al-Qaeda and pulling off more international attacks. “In Somalia, it is indeed worrying to witness al-Qaeda’s merger with al-Shabaab, whose ranks include foreign fighters, some with U.S. passports,” John Brennan, Pres. Barack Obama’s top counterterrorism official, said in a rare public speech in April.

Brennan singled out drones as one of the best weapons in the fight against these terrorists. “Remotely piloted aircraft in particular can be a wise choice because of geography, with their ability to fly hundreds of miles over the most treacherous terrain, strike their targets with astonishing precision, and then return to base,” he said. “It’s this surgical precision — the ability, with laser-like focus, to eliminate the cancerous tumor called an al-Qaeda terrorist while limiting damage to the tissue around it — that makes this counterterrorism tool so essential.”

But some skeptics point to popular backlash against drone strikes as evidence the robots are doing more harm than good. In Pakistan, especially, public resentment over American UAV attacks could fuel, rather than suppress, militant sentiment … and have the unintended effect of driving young men into the arms of extremist groups. Would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad, for instance, said the drone strikes helped motivate him to carry out his attack.

In other countries, however , attitudes might be different. This spring, University of Virginia researcher Chris Swift spent a week interviewing tribal leaders in southern Yemen, another target-rich zone for U.S. drones. Swift found that war-weary rural populations were ambivalent about robot strikes. “Nobody in my cohort [of interview subjects] drew a causal link between drones on one hand and [militant] recruiting on other,” Swift said.

Somalia is not Yemen, but it’s more similar to Yemen than it is to Pakistan. Famed war reporter Robert Young Pelton, writing for his SomaliaReport online journal, “found most of the people we interviewed in Mogadishu to be favorable to the concept” of the drone war. “Keeping in mind,” he added, “this is a city in which thousands have been killed by indiscriminate shelling and gunfire.”

To be sure, not every Somali is so supportive of American air attacks in general. During my visit to Mogadishu in late 2007, a middle-aged school teacher pulled me aside. “You Americans,” the man scolded, “you’ll destroy an entire city to get three people.”

Still, the absence so far of popular backlash against America’s shadowy robot campaign in Africa should be encouraging news for U.S. policymakers. With the war in Iraq over and major combat ops in Afghanistan rapidly drawing to a close, America is entering a new era of warfare, one in which most U.S. conflicts could be waged in the shadows by intelligence agents, commandos and high-tech robotic aircraft — some merely spies, others armed and primed to kill.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:14 pm

US drone strikes target rescuers in Pakistan – and the west stays silent
Attacking rescuers – a tactic long deemed by the US a hallmark of terrorism – is now routinely used by the Obama administration

Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Monday 20 August 2012 10.33 EDT

A US air force pilot controls a Predator drone from the command centre in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Photograph: David Bathgate/Corbis
The US government has long maintained, reasonably enough, that a defining tactic of terrorism is to launch a follow-up attack aimed at those who go to the scene of the original attack to rescue the wounded and remove the dead. Morally, such methods have also been widely condemned by the west as a hallmark of savagery. Yet, as was demonstrated yet again this weekend in Pakistan, this has become one of the favorite tactics of the very same US government.

A 2004 official alert from the FBI warned that "terrorists may use secondary explosive devices to kill and injure emergency personnel responding to an initial attack"; the bulletin advised that such terror devices "are generally detonated less than one hour after initial attack, targeting first responders as well as the general population". Security experts have long noted that the evil of this tactic lies in its exploitation of the natural human tendency to go to the scene of an attack to provide aid to those who are injured, and is specifically potent for sowing terror by instilling in the population an expectation that attacks can, and likely will, occur again at any time and place:

"'The problem is that once the initial explosion goes off, many people will believe that's it, and will respond accordingly,' [the Heritage Foundation's Jack] Spencer said … The goal is to 'incite more terror. If there's an initial explosion and a second explosion, then we're thinking about a third explosion,' Spencer said."

A 2007 report from the US department of homeland security christened the term "double tap" to refer to what it said was "a favorite tactic of Hamas: a device is set off, and when police and other first responders arrive, a second, larger device is set off to inflict more casualties and spread panic." Similarly, the US justice department has highlighted this tactic in its prosecutions of some of the nation's most notorious domestic terrorists. Eric Rudolph, convicted of bombing gay nightclubs and abortion clinics, was said to have "targeted federal agents by placing second bombs nearby set to detonate after police arrived to investigate the first explosion".

In 2010, when WikiLeaks published a video of the incident in which an Apache helicopter in Baghdad killed two Reuters journalists, what sparked the greatest outrage was not the initial attack, which the US army claimed was aimed at armed insurgents, but rather the follow-up attack on those who arrived at the scene to rescue the wounded. From the Guardian's initial report on the WikiLeaks video:

"A van draws up next to the wounded man and Iraqis climb out. They are unarmed and start to carry the victim to the vehicle in what would appear to be an attempt to get him to hospital. One of the helicopters opens fire with armour-piercing shells. 'Look at that. Right through the windshield,' says one of the crew. Another responds with a laugh.

"Sitting behind the windscreen were two children who were wounded.

"After ground forces arrive and the children are discovered, the American air crew blame the Iraqis. 'Well it's their fault for bringing kids in to a battle,' says one. 'That's right,' says another.

"Initially the US military said that all the dead were insurgents."

In the wake of that video's release, international condemnation focused on the shooting of the rescuers who subsequently arrived at the scene of the initial attack. The New Yorker's Raffi Khatchadourian explained:

"On several occasions, the Apache gunner appears to fire rounds into people after there is evidence that they have either died or are suffering from debilitating wounds. The rules of engagement and the law of armed combat do not permit combatants to shoot at people who are surrendering or who no longer pose a threat because of their injuries. What about the people in the van who had come to assist the struggling man on the ground? The Geneva conventions state that protections must be afforded to people who 'collect and care for the wounded, whether friend or foe.'"

He added that "A 'positively identified' combatant who provides medical aid to someone amid fighting does not automatically lose his status as a combatant, and may still be legally killed," but – as is true for drone attacks – there is, manifestly, no way to know who is showing up at the scene of the initial attack, certainly not with "positive identification" (by official policy, the US targets people in Pakistan and elsewhere for death even without knowing who they are). Even commentators who defended the initial round of shooting by the Apache helicopter by claiming there was evidence that one of the targets was armed typically noted, "the shooting of the rescuers, however, is highly disturbing."

But attacking rescuers (and arguably worse, bombing funerals of America's drone victims) is now a tactic routinely used by the US in Pakistan. In February, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism documented that "the CIA's drone campaign in Pakistan has killed dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or were attending funerals." Specifically: "at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims." That initial TBIJ report detailed numerous civilians killed by such follow-up strikes on rescuers, and established precisely the terror effect which the US government has long warned are sown by such attacks:

"Yusufzai, who reported on the attack, says those killed in the follow-up strike 'were trying to pull out the bodies, to help clear the rubble, and take people to hospital.' The impact of drone attacks on rescuers has been to scare people off, he says: 'They've learnt that something will happen. No one wants to go close to these damaged building anymore.'"

Since that first bureau report, there have been numerous other documented cases of the use by the US of this tactic: "On [4 June], US drones attacked rescuers in Waziristan in western Pakistan minutes after an initial strike, killing 16 people in total according to the BBC. On 28 May, drones were also reported to have returned to the attack in Khassokhel near Mir Ali." Moreover, "between May 2009 and June 2011, at least 15 attacks on rescuers were reported by credible news media, including the New York Times, CNN, ABC News and Al Jazeera."

In June, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, said that if "there have been secondary drone strikes on rescuers who are helping (the injured) after an initial drone attack, those further attacks are a war crime." There is no doubt that there have been.

(A different UN official, the UN special rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism, Ben Emmerson, this weekend demanded that the US "must open itself to an independent investigation into its use of drone strikes or the United Nations will be forced to step in", and warned that the demand "will remain at the top of the UN political agenda until some consensus and transparency has been achieved". For many American progressives, caring about what the UN thinks is so very 2003.)

The frequency with which the US uses this tactic is reflected by this December 2011 report from ABC News on the drone killing of 16-year-old Tariq Khan and his 12-year-old cousin Waheed, just days after the older boy attended a meeting to protest US drones:

"Asked for documentation of Tariq and Waheed's deaths, Akbar did not provide pictures of the missile strike scene. Virtually none exist, since drones often target people who show up at the scene of an attack."

Not only does that tactic intimidate rescuers from helping the wounded and removing the dead, but it also ensures that journalists will be unwilling to go to the scene of a drone attack out of fear of a follow-up attack.

This has now happened yet again this weekend in Pakistan, which witnessed what Reuters calls "a flurry of drone attacks" that "pounded northern Pakistan over the weekend", "killing 13 people in three separate attacks". The attacks "came as Pakistanis celebrate the end of the holy month of Ramadan with the festival of Eid al-Fitr." At least one of these weekend strikes was the type of "double tap" explosion aimed at rescuers which, the US government says, is the hallmark of Hamas:

"At least six militants were killed when US drones fired missiles twice on Sunday in North Waziristan Agency.

"In the first strike, four missiles were fired on two vehicles in the Mana Gurbaz area of district Shawal in North Waziristan Agency, while two missiles were fired in the second strike at the same site where militants were removing the wreckage of their destroyed vehicles."

An unnamed Pakistani official identically told Agence France-Presse that a second US drone "fired two missiles at the site of this morning's attack, where militants were removing the wreckage of their two destroyed vehicles". (Those killed by US drone attacks in Pakistan are more or less automatically deemed "militants" by unnamed "officials", and then uncritically called such by most of the western press – a practice that inexcusably continues despite revelations that the Obama administration has redefined "militants" to mean "all military-age males in a strike zone".)

It is telling indeed that the Obama administration now routinely uses tactics in Pakistan long denounced as terrorism when used by others, and does so with so little controversy. Just in the past several months, attacks on funerals of victims have taken place in Yemen (purportedly by al-Qaida) and in Syria (purportedly, though without evidence, by the Assad regime), and such attacks – understandably – sparked outrage. Yet, in the west, the silence about the Obama administration's attacks on funerals and rescuers is deafening.

But in the areas targeted by the US with these tactics, there is anything but silence. Pakistan's most popular politician, Imran Khan, has generated intense public support with his scathing denunciations of US drone attacks, and tweeted the following on Sunday:
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby 8bitagent » Mon Aug 20, 2012 6:25 pm

seemslikeadream wrote:Image



D'oh! Who needs "kenyan born commie socialist secret muslim" when you have "baby killer corporate whore wall street puppet liar".
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:30 pm

Image
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:00 pm

Brit brother: Drones to watch over UK streets — RT

http://rt.com/news/uk-drone-spy-citizens-471/
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Mon Aug 27, 2012 6:53 pm

Wraiths
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=35368


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lotSNFIYDwc

(Wraith) Drones to patrol skies over Republican convention
http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2012/ ... ar-472636/

Drones won't patrol Tampa during RNC, federal authorities say
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafe ... ay/1247703

The Hardcore Security Gear Protecting the Conventions
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national ... ons/56174/
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: One Drone Thread to Rule them ALL

Postby elfismiles » Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:21 pm

Apple Rejects App That Tracks U.S. Drone Strikes (Video)
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/drone-app/
https://vimeo.com/user8747603/drones





Apple rejects Drones+, app to track U.S. drone strikes
By Hayley Tsukayama, Updated: Thursday, August 30, 3:03 PM The Washington Post

Apple confirmed Thursday that it has rejected Drones+ from its App Store. The app is designed to alert users whenever someone has been killed in a U.S. drone strike.

Wired’s Danger Room reported that the app, developed by New York-based developer Josh Begley, has been turned down three times.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/drone-app/

Begley told Wired that he doesn’t understand why the app should be rejected, saying that it’s simply aggregates news that’s already posted elsewhere.

When asked for comment, Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr said the app was turned down because it runs afoul of an App Store guideline against apps that have “objectionable content.”

While the app is focused on a narrow subset of news that could be found elsewhere, Begley said that he wanted to use the program to raise awareness about U.S. drone activity. He told Wired that he’s “back to the drawing board” on his idea, though he’s considering trying the app on the Android Market.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html

User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 155 guests