Jeremy Scahill is very worried about the new 'Techno Wars." My words, not his. It is an important film, but, I have to temper that a bit. He is an important journalist. He chased down a war no one was willing to cover otherwise. This film was made at his and his crew's own peril. No one can turn their back on that.
There is a book he wrote accompanying this film which also includes his notes. That tells me he is sincerely earnest in his objection to this jump in Techno Wars. I wish he had brought some copies for sale when he came to the festival. I have to get a copy and look through all this information before I can provide a good review of the film. I don't want to dismiss this as a this or that film. It is far to important to not seek a complete picture.
Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield (click here)
There is something that sincerely bothered me as soon as I heard it. One of the understandings the American people have about their military is that the USA is never a battlefield. President Clinton changed that and I would like to hear from him about why he turned JSOC's focus on the citizens of the USA. JSOC was involved in Waco.
The Pentagon's elite Special Operations Command (click here) sent observers to the siege
of the Branch Davidian compound in Texas more than a month before the
final assault on the compound, suggesting that military commandos had a
far longer and closer involvement in the disastrous 1993 operation than
previously divulged, according to declassified Government documents....
Bush is no angel here. He maintained that change and even used it during the Olympics. I don't like it. It is unconstitutional. It will become an objection when Former Secretary Clinton runs for President. Count on it.
This film carries the brevity journalists feel for people and not just American citizens. The reason journalists are becoming so focused on these dynamics is because they are unable to protect the people of this country and others from a dynamic that is believed to be out of control. I congratulate them for that. In all sincerity, they are correct. This is a huge issue, hence, I need to get the book.
The film carries the subject of 'the other' in regard to this methodology of JSOC. It is not tempered with the deaths of those in Fort Hood, but, in all fairness Mr. Scahill was focusing on foreign impacts of a USA policy. The film maintains that focus throughout and has created a very intense concern for the people effected. The footage with the family of Anwar al-Awlaki is pricelist. It is necessary. The father is the primary speaker for the family and that is very Muslim, but, he is very articulate.
The methodology of JSOC is draconian when seeking to intervene with targeting from drones. Those are my words. It is what I discerned from the film and the Q&A afterward. They try and sentence the subject of the drone's intervention as guilty, but, they take it a step further and it is why there are so many civilian casualties.
The drones find the target and then a commander within the computer room of Techno Soldiers operating the drones give the order when to fire at the target. The methodology recognizes they are losing the ability to interrogate the target. Once the target is dead there is no going back. In compensation for that reality, the commanders are not giving the order to fire the weapon until the target is among other operatives, even their families and village. Those people are considered "Not Specifically Targeted." The targets to these strikes can be from the ages of 15 to 70 years old, but, "the others" are all ages including children.
Anwar al-Awlaki's son was stated to believed to be 21 years old. He was 16. Unfortunately, he was not with his father when he was killed, otherwise, the collateral damage would have been complete. But, since he was alive after his father was dead, JSOC went back to complete their planned targeting. Anwar al-Awlaki's son was listed at "Not Specifically Targeted." Bullshit. They killed him because of his POTENTIAL to continue to carry out his father's agenda.
I also did not know Anwar al-Awlaki was a detainee in an American prison without representation after September 11, 2001. That is what radicalized him. Anwar al-Awlaki had a sincere grudge with the USA military, it's capacity, scope and power of the USA military, but, he never was so radical to turn citizens against their own military as he did at Fort Hood. Anwar al-Awlaki was mistreated and considered to be a danger to the USA. He was used as an example to the American Muslim by the Bush White House. This occurred instead of another internment camp.
The methodology by JSOC is very dangerous. It is to 'handle' an American considered to be trouble to the Psyops love affair with 'the good American.' We have a problem in the USA. Combine that reality with surveillance and we have a really big problem.
This film is no joke, however, there were dead soldiers in Fort Hood. But, the argument can be made the dead soldiers was due to the radicalization by Bush of a Muslim cleric. Anwar al-Awlaki was not that radical before he was held as a detainee without legal representation for something like 18 months. He had not broken any laws and only practiced his First Amendment Rights. Bush was scared to death of that man. I mean you've got to be joking.
Anwar al-Awlaki's ranting about the USA miltiary abroad was no different than many other Americans. The difference was his religion and his status within that religion and he scared the guy in the Oval Office. Think about it. I have a book to read.
The justification in the Oval Office of JSOC for it's actions lies in understanding the Muslim Cleric in Great Britain. He was just extradited to Jordan. Believe me, Bush was scared of Anwar al-Awlaki and his potential. The operations of JSOC is out of control. Just that simple. The reality is that JSOC is scared more than anyone else.
There is a book he wrote accompanying this film which also includes his notes. That tells me he is sincerely earnest in his objection to this jump in Techno Wars. I wish he had brought some copies for sale when he came to the festival. I have to get a copy and look through all this information before I can provide a good review of the film. I don't want to dismiss this as a this or that film. It is far to important to not seek a complete picture.
Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield (click here)
There is something that sincerely bothered me as soon as I heard it. One of the understandings the American people have about their military is that the USA is never a battlefield. President Clinton changed that and I would like to hear from him about why he turned JSOC's focus on the citizens of the USA. JSOC was involved in Waco.
Bush is no angel here. He maintained that change and even used it during the Olympics. I don't like it. It is unconstitutional. It will become an objection when Former Secretary Clinton runs for President. Count on it.
This film carries the brevity journalists feel for people and not just American citizens. The reason journalists are becoming so focused on these dynamics is because they are unable to protect the people of this country and others from a dynamic that is believed to be out of control. I congratulate them for that. In all sincerity, they are correct. This is a huge issue, hence, I need to get the book.
The film carries the subject of 'the other' in regard to this methodology of JSOC. It is not tempered with the deaths of those in Fort Hood, but, in all fairness Mr. Scahill was focusing on foreign impacts of a USA policy. The film maintains that focus throughout and has created a very intense concern for the people effected. The footage with the family of Anwar al-Awlaki is pricelist. It is necessary. The father is the primary speaker for the family and that is very Muslim, but, he is very articulate.
The methodology of JSOC is draconian when seeking to intervene with targeting from drones. Those are my words. It is what I discerned from the film and the Q&A afterward. They try and sentence the subject of the drone's intervention as guilty, but, they take it a step further and it is why there are so many civilian casualties.
The drones find the target and then a commander within the computer room of Techno Soldiers operating the drones give the order when to fire at the target. The methodology recognizes they are losing the ability to interrogate the target. Once the target is dead there is no going back. In compensation for that reality, the commanders are not giving the order to fire the weapon until the target is among other operatives, even their families and village. Those people are considered "Not Specifically Targeted." The targets to these strikes can be from the ages of 15 to 70 years old, but, "the others" are all ages including children.
Anwar al-Awlaki's son was stated to believed to be 21 years old. He was 16. Unfortunately, he was not with his father when he was killed, otherwise, the collateral damage would have been complete. But, since he was alive after his father was dead, JSOC went back to complete their planned targeting. Anwar al-Awlaki's son was listed at "Not Specifically Targeted." Bullshit. They killed him because of his POTENTIAL to continue to carry out his father's agenda.
I also did not know Anwar al-Awlaki was a detainee in an American prison without representation after September 11, 2001. That is what radicalized him. Anwar al-Awlaki had a sincere grudge with the USA military, it's capacity, scope and power of the USA military, but, he never was so radical to turn citizens against their own military as he did at Fort Hood. Anwar al-Awlaki was mistreated and considered to be a danger to the USA. He was used as an example to the American Muslim by the Bush White House. This occurred instead of another internment camp.
The methodology by JSOC is very dangerous. It is to 'handle' an American considered to be trouble to the Psyops love affair with 'the good American.' We have a problem in the USA. Combine that reality with surveillance and we have a really big problem.
This film is no joke, however, there were dead soldiers in Fort Hood. But, the argument can be made the dead soldiers was due to the radicalization by Bush of a Muslim cleric. Anwar al-Awlaki was not that radical before he was held as a detainee without legal representation for something like 18 months. He had not broken any laws and only practiced his First Amendment Rights. Bush was scared to death of that man. I mean you've got to be joking.
Anwar al-Awlaki's ranting about the USA miltiary abroad was no different than many other Americans. The difference was his religion and his status within that religion and he scared the guy in the Oval Office. Think about it. I have a book to read.
The justification in the Oval Office of JSOC for it's actions lies in understanding the Muslim Cleric in Great Britain. He was just extradited to Jordan. Believe me, Bush was scared of Anwar al-Awlaki and his potential. The operations of JSOC is out of control. Just that simple. The reality is that JSOC is scared more than anyone else.
