BLOOD ON HIS HANDS OBAMA: KILLING SUSPECTS “JUST IN CASE THEY’RE GUILTY”

CIA Drone Attacks: Killing Suspects “Just in Case” They are Guilty

20130312-085514.jpg

There is a new trend in the ‘war on terror’ by the real world terror of the US, Israeli and Western governments, and it is called ‘bomb them just in case’.

By Jason Liosatos, GlobalResearch.ca

With the looming threat of an attack on ‘innocent’ Iran, it is the same premise of ‘bomb them just in case’. This tactic is no different than shooting someone ‘just in case’ they get a gun and kill you, even though they have never exhibited any aggression or threat of aggression towards you, or indeed never possessed a gun in the past.

A similar analogy is that of a bully in a school yard, terrorizing and beating up the younger kids ‘just in case’ they grow bigger and tougher and ‘just might’ become a threat to you later on, so get them anyway ‘just in case’. It is the same as the horrific, unprovoked murders taking place in Pakistan by the Drone strikes, which is murder without a trial for the victims or the perpetrators. Again we see the same pattern of ‘kill them just in case’ they might be guilty, with no evidence, no proof, and no trial. Simply suspects, possible criminals, like dogs being punished ‘just in case’ they might bite someone, or hitting a child ‘just in case’ they are naughty.

20130312-085559.jpg
The Drone operators murder the suspects via a screen in a live reality video show from thousands of miles away, and are now suffering terrible traumatic stress, as the Drone operators often watch a house and its family and children coming and going for sometimes weeks before the order is given to blow the house up, with all its inhabitants and suspects at home, children and all. This has proved to be more traumatizing to the Drone operators than it would be for a fighter jet pilot who does the same, though from a cowardly 2,000 feet and who cannot see the beautiful little children who live inside the property he bombs.

Continue reading

Obama’s ‘kill list’ critic suicided in New York City

20130114-093239.jpg
PressTV

Prominent American blogger and computer prodigy Aaron Swartz, who spoke against US President Barack Obama’s “kill list” and cyber attacks against Iran, has been found dead in New York.

Police found the body of the 26-year-old in his apartment in New York City borough of Brooklyn on Friday, said a spokeswoman for the city’s chief medical examiner.

Brooklyn’s chief medical examiner ruled the death a suicide by hanging, but no further detail is available about the mysterious death.

Last year, Swartz openly criticized the US and the Israeli regime for launching joint cyber attacks against Iran.

The blogger was also vocal in criticizing Obama’s so-called kill list and other policies.

Obama has been reportedly approving the names put on the “kill lists” used in the targeted killing operations carried out by US assassination drones.

Every week or so, more than 100 members of the US national security team gather via secure video teleconference run by the Pentagon and go over the biographies of suspects in Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan, and “nominate” those who should be targeted in the attacks.

Obama is then provided with the identities of those put on the “kill list” and signs off on every strike in Yemen and Somalia as well as the risky strikes in Pakistan.

Continue reading

US Military and Black Operations: Where Is the Line?

20121214-172409.jpg
By Luis MIRANDA, The Real Agenda for The Intel Hub

Just as public and corporate partnerships have merged over the past two decades, so has the connection between the worlds most corrupt terrorist agency – the CIA – and the United States Department of Defense.

Given the unsuccessful operations in Iraq and Afghanistan after declaring war on both nations to hunt those who ghost organizations that the United States itself created and managed, the White House agreed to give the CIA even more power to carry out so-called anti-terrorist operations abroad, which are terrorist operations against non-aligned regimes.

Recent examples of these terror operations are the actions taken by the CIA previous and during the Arab Spring in Egypt, Libya and now in Syria, where western forces including NATO and CIA operatives launched attacks from Turkey into the kingdom of Bashar al-Assad.

The new powers given to the CIA include enhancing its operations with the latest surveillance technology, for example unmanned armed remotely controlled drones which are operated by the Pentagon under CIA direction.

It is not a surprise that the U.S. Government decided to switch the head of the CIA and the commander of military operations in the Middle East last year in an attempt to homogenize the operations of both government organizations.

The White House has also increased the spy network that works directly with the Pentagon to exercise a greater control over terrorist plots in the Arab Peninsula, Africa and Asia.

The move to inadvertently combine the power of both the CIA and the Pentagon began more actively under the George W. Bush administration, but rapidly accelerated under the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.

The CIA has grown its operations over territories supposedly taken over jihadists, but not to combat their operations.

The U.S. Government managed to buy off terrorists groups as it did in Afghanistan back in the 1970s with a group known today as al-Qaeda.

The flow of drug money and other funds laundered by large banking corporations fuel the bribery system that allows the CIA to keep certain key terrorist groups working for them, as supposed to against U.S. Interest in some of the most volatile regions of the planet.

The merge of the CIA and the Pentagon was completed after the 2011 summer directive issued by Barack H. Obama to have the then CIA Director, Leon Panetta, take over the United States Department of Defense, while David Petraeus, the most influential ground operations commander in Iraq and Afghanistan was named the head of the Central Intelligence Agency.

General David Petraeus left the CIA last november after he allegedly admitted to have had an extramarital affair with his biographer. Of course, it is unlikely such an affair was the real reason Petraeus left the spy agency. Former intelligence insiders believe it was Petraeus opposition to America’s way of conducting military and intelligence operations what made him leave his post as the top spy chief.

Petraeus is not the first top General to exit U.S. military entities. Two or three other strong men inside the military were fired or asked to be relieved of their duties due to their disagreements with the way combat missions were being conducted.

Continue reading