Footage from the New York Times seems to verify my assumption. The Israelis just used a US$1-6 million dollar Patriot missile to shoot down a rather large model airplane (variant of the Iranian Ababil-1… shorter than a Volkswagen Bug and capable of carrying a 45 kg [88 lb] payload) euphemistically referred to as a ‘drone’.

Not JUST Disproportionate Response, Disproportionate Cost of War:
"#Israel downs unmanned #Gaza drone" with Patriot missile (Unit cost US$1 to 6 million) (per wikipedia) (USAToday)

Sounds like ##Hamas #Gaza Drones over #Israel = RC model airplanes stuffed w explosives v Patriot missile US$1-6 mil (Middle East Monitor)

Comments

Know your rights with the Border Patrol. (ACLU pdf)

The border patrol has been harassing the Tohono O’Odham Indian nation for the better part of decade now complete with checkpoints and drones (documented by Brenda Norrell formerly of Indian Country Today, now independently reporting Native news) and not a peep from the Times, the newspaper read by rich white people. FURTHER, there have been Border Patrol internal checkpoints… fixed installation little villages, in the US for decades… and the Rich White People are just noticing?

I suspect the Times is pandering to the so-called “sovereign citizen” right wing nutjobs here.

ARIVACA, Ariz. — Every time Jack Driscoll drives the 32 miles from this remote outpost in southeastern Arizona to the closest supermarket, or to doctor’s appointments, or to a pharmacy to fill his prescriptions, he must stop at a Border Patrol checkpoint and answer the same question: “Are you a U.S. citizen?”

Sometimes, Border Patrol agents ask where he is going or coming from, the type of car he is driving, what is in that bag on the back seat or what brings him to these parts, even though he has lived here for more than a year…
Comments
"

Just Security schools us on international law and points out the US government’s rationale for the assassination-by-drone of Anwar al-Awalaki (no less his teenage son at a later date) was illegitimate for a number of reasons, including AQAP’S lack of “central command and control”:

Under International Humanitarian Law, or IHL, an armed conflict only exists if hostilities are taking place between a state and another state, or between a state and a clearly defined non-state group with a central command and control structure. To constitute an armed conflict, hostilities must reach a level of intensity that is more than sporadic acts of terrorism…
"

— Just Security, You Can’t Have an “Associated Force” with No Core

The Atlantic, from October 2012 on “How Team Obama Justifies the Killing of a 16-Year-Old American"… al-Awalaki’is teenage son… "…a senior adviser to the president’s campaign suggests he should’ve "had a more responsible father."

Comments
As Bobby Chesney recently noted over at Lawfare (based on an account in Politico’s Morning Defense), the Obama administration is reportedly open to expanding the US military role in Yemen even more. Bobby ends his post with “Stay tuned…” I agree.

But, if you stay tuned just to the New York Times reporting, you may be missing it.The news we read never changes when the New York Times is peddling disinformation about America’s Dirty Drone Wars in Yemen, a land far away, with scant global media resources (and US captive government) of it’s own.From Just Security:This weekend’s New York Times provided new details of a US special operations commando and a C.I.A. officer who killed two individuals attempting to kidnap the Americans inside a barbershop in Yemen’s capital. A part of the story that caught my attention was the Times’ description of the overall US strategy and involvement in Yemen. A lot seems to be missing from the newspaper’s account.

Here’s the key text (compared to text from the NYT in February 2012):(See Images, dates in blue are linked to articles and available onsite)Yes, the second paragraph in the May 10 story is a duplicate of the paragraph in the Times story in February 2012. Has nothing changed in more than two years?

More specifically, is the Obama administration still only “arming and advising” Yemen’s security forces — or playing a far more direct role? And is the use of lethal force by the US only for targeting “two dozen of Al Qaeda’s most dangerous operatives, who are focused on attacking America and its interests”?

Recall that just last month, news reports explained that the United States provided “extensive assistance beyond drone strikes during a massive anti-terror operation in Yemen, including flying Yemeni commandos to a site where they killed scores of suspected al Qaeda members.” That doesn’t sound like just arming and advising…More debugging of the news about what’s happening in our Yemen Dirty War @JustSecurity
As Bobby Chesney recently noted over at Lawfare (based on an account in Politico’s Morning Defense), the Obama administration is reportedly open to expanding the US military role in Yemen even more. Bobby ends his post with “Stay tuned…” I agree.

But, if you stay tuned just to the New York Times reporting, you may be missing it.
The news we read never changes when the New York Times is peddling disinformation about America’s Dirty Drone Wars in Yemen, a land far away, with scant global media resources (and US captive government) of it’s own.

From Just Security:
More debugging of the news about what’s happening in our Yemen Dirty War @JustSecurity
Comments
…even one and two-hop searches can generate tens or even hundreds of thousands of numbers … that will inevitably include the phone numbers of many people whose only connection to terrorism is that they called the same take-out joint that a suspected terrorist did.
Even beyond the frightening possibility of being accused of ordering a pizza with SARDINES (An NSA selector keyword believe it or not), metadata based information is NOT a reliable arbiter of anything (the Economist on the basic mathematical fallacy of ‘big data’), no less deciding whether you’re killing the right person.

David Cole @JustSecurity:
Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus