Topic: Drone Air strike kills 15 civilians (on their way to a wedding) in Yemen - page 4. (Read 7728 times)

The problem with that video is that the current Ukraine government is also a puppet government. But it is Russia's puppet not the US'. Don't think the Americans are the only ones playing this geopolitical game of puppet master.

How Drone attacks actually go down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew-SrlQ9tlI

I couldn't find that link. People who aren't being targeted can see drones fly by. You can see some military drones being tested in the desert in the Western US if you know where to look. They are loud and don't fly extremely high. However, they can easily see and target a person long before the person sees or hears it.

There was a case in the UK where some British pleb soldier shot some guy on the side of the road because he thought he was planting an IED. Turned out he was just some grandad trying to fix the pavement or something. It's shoot first, don't ask questions later.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/drones-us-military


"What the public needs to understand is that the video provided by a drone is a far cry from clear enough to detect someone carrying a weapon, even on a crystal-clear day with limited clouds and perfect light. This makes it incredibly difficult for the best analysts to identify if someone has weapons for sure. One example comes to mind: "The feed is so pixelated, what if it's a shovel, and not a weapon?" I felt this confusion constantly, as did my fellow UAV analysts. We always wonder if we killed the right people, if we endangered the wrong people, if we destroyed an innocent civilian's life all because of a bad image or angle".

I saw an interesting video on Russia Today earlier that details all the puppet governments the US have helped instal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLE7Bswz9G8

The US has never cared about the International Criminal Court, although they have forced the Serbians to deport their leaders to face trial there. People who have killed a few hundreds like Milošević were tried there and the US agents unlawfully killed him inside the prison in 2006. On the other hand, George Bush who has killed millions of innocent people was never put on trial.

No, but hopefully other countries care or the United Nations should, but we all know that's a joke too.

Has the US ever cared about international law except when it applies to its own interests?

[...]

The UN has already criticized the US drone program in the October interim report “on the use of remotely piloted aircraft in counter-terrorism operations,” authored by Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson.

The report, the final version of which is due in 2014, argues the number of civilians killed in anti-terrorist drone operations is higher than publicly acknowledged, and condemns the US for lack of transparency over the issue.

"The Special Rapporteur does not accept that considerations of national security justify withholding statistical and basic methodological data of this kind," Emmerson wrote in the report.

Also in October, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International simultaneously released reports on the use of drones in Yemen and Pakistan, both questioning the legitimacy of the strikes.

“Amnesty International is seriously concerned that these and other strikes have resulted in unlawful killings that may constitute extrajudicial executions or war crimes,” the AI report reads.

“President Obama says the US is doing its utmost to protect civilians from harm in these strikes. Yet in the six cases we examined, at least two were a clear violation of the laws of war,” said Humans Rights Watch Senior Researcher, Letta Tayler.

The US then reacted by saying it did nothing illegal.

"To the extent these reports claim that the US has acted contrary to international law, we would strongly disagree,” said White House spokesman, Jay Carney. "The administration has repeatedly emphasized the extraordinary care that we take to make sure counterterrorism actions are in accordance with all applicable law."

The United States has stepped up drone strikes in Yemen, as part of its crackdown on Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), believed to be the terrorist network’s main stronghold.

What would you've been interrupting? The talk in here is of the US drone strike.

I've started a new topic about why this drone strike occurred the way it did, I think it'll get some of you fired up and I didn't want to interrupt ongoing conversation here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/recent-yemeni-drone-strike-on-wedding-party-of-15-is-not-cias-fault-377435

The message is clear, don't be "up to no good" and mess with the US military industrial complex. Now, are you listening America?

They did say something like this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/29/drone-attacks-innocent-civilians_n_1554380.html

"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," the Times reports. "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."

I agree that simply using and proselytizing (ie. teaching people about) Bitcoin is doing a lot more than simply not voting for murderers. It is one step in the direction of taking away the real power that the murderers hold over our heads - more so than choosing how to vote in the charade of a modern "democracy" at least.

Furthermore, drawing the line at committing a crime against another person is paramount. The ends do not justify the means.

When it comes to doing one what one feels comfortable doing to change the circumstances (I think most people here agree that we need to do this), it is a very good point. It is interesting how easy it is to start using Bitcoin, and how powerful that act can be. Personally, I don't think cajoling people into changing is the best way of achieving said change. Rather making it easy and comfortable for people to achieve positive change is a much better way. Taking away other government monopolies using easy-to-use technology is hence a great way to achieve positive change. 

I do still feel that I'm coming to short in helping get rid of the stranglehold that is held on the common man. Does anyone have ideas about how to further resist the powers that be?

That could be quite an effective anti-war campaign: send out postal campaign letters in the form of receipts for the weapons used in war, and invoices itemising the dead and injured. "x1 dead Somali man , x3 dead Sudanese teenagers, x2 disfigured Iraqi babies"

Dissent is democracy, bitcoin is something I'm invested in for the long haul, I could do more but I take on what I feel comfortable doing and support anyone who feels the need to do more. I draw the line only at committing crime against the person. All the problems discussed in this thread are only possible because of the money monopoly which captures populations and preserves the power and fear that perpetuates itself, making everything else possible, including the MSM filter applied to western illegal wars and extra judicial murder in foreign lands. I wonder how many illegal drone strikes there would be if the bill for it all came directly out of the wages of those ordering and committing the atrocities.

I can see the logic of your argument. But what I'm proposing is not refusing to pay taxes and go to jail, I'm saying to avoid them. One could engineer one's life according to tax rules, ie. one could move to another country or one could minimize one's taxes by going on wealthfare, etc.

And what about the voluntary acts of using electricity from the grid, using a regular bank or buying anything that carries taxes?

Look, I'm not trying to guilt trip any one into doing anything. But the same argument can be made in any regime that commits or aids in committing atrocities. I'm merely trying to point out the moral cost of accepting a more or less "regular life" in the West today. True, one cannot be held directly responsible for the atrocities, I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that subversiveness is critical to making the change that is needed.

Also, I'm saying that it is difficult to find a good balance between living according to one's moral ideals and  just living. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a moralist - but there might still be away to combine one's moral ideals with other life goals, and that is something one is definitely obliged to pursue.

I believe there is no reason for me to feel guilty about crimes committed by someone else that I didn't willingly assist in.  If handing money over to those committing these atrocities was a completely voluntary action, the way voting for them is, then that would be a different matter.

Becoming a dissident by refusing to pay taxes is taking things to another level.  I admire and respect those who have defied unjust laws throughout history.  That's how the USA started.  I don't believe paying taxes is a moral duty, but we shouldn't be trying to make people feel like they are complicit in the crimes because they aren't willing or able to accept the consequences that result when they refuse to pay their taxes.