Anonymiss Express

Jun 01

To avoid counting civilian deaths, Obama re-defined "militant" to mean "all military-age males in a strike zone" -

June 1, 2012, by Glenn Greenwald

Virtually every time the U.S. fires a missile from a drone and ends the lives of Muslims, American media outlets dutifully trumpet in

headlines that the dead were ”militants” – even though those media outlets literally do not have the slightest idea of who was actually killed. They simply cite always-unnamed “officials” claiming that the dead were “militants.” It’s the most obvious and inexcusable form of rank propaganda: media outlets continuously propagating a vital claim without having the slightest idea if it’s true.

This practice continues even though key Obama officials have been caught lying, a term used advisedly, about how many civilians they’re killing. I’ve written and said many times before that in American media discourse, the definition of “militant” is any human being whose life is extinguished when an American missile or bomb detonates (that term was even used when Anwar Awlaki’s 16-year-old American son, Abdulrahman, was killed by a U.S. drone in Yemen two weeks after a drone killed his father, even though nobody claims the teenager was anything but completely innocent: “Another U.S. Drone Strike Kills Militants in Yemen”).

This morning, the New York Times has a very lengthy and detailed article about President Obama’s counter-Terrorism policies based on interviews with “three dozen of his current and former advisers.” I’m writing separately about the numerous revelations contained in that article, but want specifically to highlight this one vital passage about how the Obama administration determines who is a “militant.” The article explains that Obama’s rhetorical emphasis on avoiding civilian deaths “did not significantly change” the drone program, because Obama himself simply expanded the definition of a “militant” to ensure that it includes virtually everyone killed by his drone strikes. Just read this remarkable passage:

Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.

Counterterrorism officials insist this approach is one of simple logic: people in an area of known terrorist activity, or found with a top Qaeda operative, are probably up to no good. “Al Qaeda is an insular, paranoid organization — innocent neighbors don’t hitchhike rides in the back of trucks headed for the border with guns and bombs,” said one official, who requested anonymity to speak about what is still a classified program.

This counting method may partly explain the official claims of extraordinarily low collateral deaths. In a speech last year Mr. Brennan, Mr. Obama’s trusted adviser, said that not a single noncombatant had been killed in a year of strikes. And in a recent interview, a senior administration official said that the number of civilians killed in drone strikes in Pakistan under Mr. Obama was in the “single digits” — and that independent counts of scores or hundreds of civilian deaths unwittingly draw on false propaganda claims by militants.

But in interviews, three former senior intelligence officials expressed disbelief that the number could be so low. The C.I.A. accounting has so troubled some administration officials outside the agency that they have brought their concerns to the White House. One called it “guilt by association” that has led to “deceptive” estimates of civilian casualties.

“It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants,” the official said. “They count the corpses and they’re not really sure who they are.”

[…]

“Militants”: media propaganda

Note Anonymiss Express: WUT?

[video]

"Black Dust" in Soma City Is Also Highly #Radioactive, at 56.3 Microsievert/Hr -

May 31, 2012, by EXSKF

There’s a newspaper published by a citizen group in Soma City, Fukushima, urging the former residents, particularly mothers with children, to return to the city. Soma City is located just north of Minami Soma City where the “black dust” was first reported by Assemblyman Ooyama.

It turns out (no real surprise, but…) that Soma City also has “black dust” with very high radiation. The newspaper that urges mothers to come back has this article in its May 2012 issue:


It says:

Please be careful!

On the roads and near the side drains by the side walks in Minami Soma City and Soma City, we’ve started to see the black substance that looks like dirt. There has been some media report on this substance, and it is said to be a certain kind of bacteria that has dried out. It has been known to have very high radiation levels, and there is a possibility that it affects human bodies. Please do not go near it. We placed the survey meter on the substance in the photo. The survey meter shows 56.3 microsieverts/hour. Young children in particular should pay attention.

[…]

“Black Dust” in Soma City Is Also Highly #Radioactive, at 56.3 Microsievert/Hr | EXSKF

[video]

Large Majority of Americans Now Believe There is Conflict between Rich and Poor -

Friday, January 13, 2012, via @Glad2ShareLife

Large Majority of Americans Now Believe There is Conflict between Rich and Poor

The wealthy and the poor in U.S. society are not getting along, according to a large majority of Americans. A new Pew Research Center survey revealed that 66% of the public believes there are “very strong” or “strong” conflicts between the upper and lower classes—an increase of 19 points since 2009. This increase was particularly marked among middle class Americans earning between $40,000 and $75,000 a year, with the number growing from 47% to 71% in just two years.

Even a majority of Republicans and self-described conservatives say there are strong conflicts between rich and poor. However, Republicans were the only demographic group a majority of whom thought that the rich gained their wealth as a result of “hard work, ambition or education” rather than “because they know the right people or were born into wealthy families.”

[…]

AllGov - News - Large Majority of Americans Now Believe There is Conflict between Rich and Poor

Note Anonymiss: It’s about time, now stop the crapitallism, or is the 2nd and 3rd world supposed to keep serving the 1st world?

fivedee: #Occupy supporters are being asked to display this sign in your window if you are fortunate enough to have a home. Just print off a copy & display. #lulz

fivedee:

#Occupy supporters are being asked to display this sign in your window if you are fortunate enough to have a home. Just print off a copy & display.

#lulz

fivedee: #WeNeedToDoBoth “If your object is to secure liberty, you must learn to do without authority and compulsion. If you intend to live in peace and harmony with your fellow-men, you and they should cultivate brotherhood and respect for each other. If you want to work together with them for your mutual benefit, you must practice cooperation. The social revolution means much more than the reorganization of conditions only: it means the establishment of new human values and social relationships, a changed attitude of man to man, as of one free and independent to his equal; it means a different spirit in individual and collective life, and that spirit cannot be born overnight. It is a spirit to be cultivated, to be nurtured and reared, as the most delicate flower it is, for indeed it is the flower of a new and beautiful existence.” ~Alexander Berkman

fivedee:

#WeNeedToDoBoth

“If your object is to secure liberty, you must learn to do without authority and compulsion. If you intend to live in peace and harmony with your fellow-men, you and they should cultivate brotherhood and respect for each other. If you want to work together with them for your mutual benefit, you must practice cooperation. The social revolution means much more than the reorganization of conditions only: it means the establishment of new human values and social relationships, a changed attitude of man to man, as of one free and independent to his equal; it means a different spirit in individual and collective life, and that spirit cannot be born overnight. It is a spirit to be cultivated, to be nurtured and reared, as the most delicate flower it is, for indeed it is the flower of a new and beautiful existence.”

~Alexander Berkman

fivedee: Then Science needs to learn a lesson in good manners, especially when quantum physicists have discovered so much agreement with indigenous shamanic understandings of the universe. It’s about time scientists can stop being so badly behaved and started to learn to co-exist with other paradigms that inhabit this planet. Who do you think you are? God? Spirituality calls that hubris - look it up. It’s in the dictionary! I wonder how Science feels about being hijacked by atheists. I seem to recall that many naturalists have an active spirituality, even if they choose not to be religious. Their beliefs have a right to be respected too. If this is the kind of behaviour promoted by atheism, I’m very glad I’m spiritual and know how to behave in mixed company.

fivedee:

Then Science needs to learn a lesson in good manners, especially when quantum physicists have discovered so much agreement with indigenous shamanic understandings of the universe.

It’s about time scientists can stop being so badly behaved and started to learn to co-exist with other paradigms that inhabit this planet.

Who do you think you are? God?

Spirituality calls that hubris - look it up. It’s in the dictionary!

I wonder how Science feels about being hijacked by atheists. I seem to recall that many naturalists have an active spirituality, even if they choose not to be religious. Their beliefs have a right to be respected too.

If this is the kind of behaviour promoted by atheism, I’m very glad I’m spiritual and know how to behave in mixed company.