Predator drones

[Josh Blue]

Yes, they also saw a friend of mine in the scene off.
He was like you and me aka not geared up for a hard prison he also had a history of depression.

His arrest was a personal favour.

<a class="postlink" href="http://torrentfreak.com/wikileaks-police-arrested-movie-pirate-as-a-personal-favor-to-movie-official-110430/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://torrentfreak.com/wikileaks-polic ... al-110430/</a>

He overdosed 6 days after he got out.

R.I.P MaVen aka Geremi Adam.

Sorry to hear something like this has actually affected you personally. Some fucked up shit there. Well done Wikileaks for exposing the corrupted bag of bollocks. Bradley Manning gets big respect from me.

and myself.

 

[MadchesterCity]

.
.

 

[west didsblue]

It is believed that 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist.

Pakistan suffers the most from Drone attacks and the causalities are believed to be as high as 3,299 which includes 197 children.

It is believed by whom? Please could you quote your source.

 

[Skashion]

It is believed that 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist.

Pakistan suffers the most from Drone attacks and the causalities are believed to be as high as 3,299 which includes 197 children.

It is believed by whom? Please could you quote your source.

Here's a source you might believe: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... istan.html</a>

Full study, joint by Stanford and NYU: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-con ... DRONES.pdf</a>

 

[TCIB]

I feel very very bad for that chap.
I can't help feeling the charge is a warning to not mess with 'our dodgy stuff' as opposed to 'he broke the law and endangered lives'.

Ah sceners droped like flies back then, mainly through FBI based operations.
Thanks for your kind thoughts though chaps :)

Ahh happy days...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiqQaEpYG_I[/youtube]

 

[Josh Blue]

Yet how many times have you started a thread about Christians being murdered in Pakistan for being Christians?

That's the issue, no mass hysterical outcry just blind eye turned. Egypt, Pakistan, Nigeria amongst other countries where people are being massacred for their religion.

I could even tell you about Malaysia, Thailand and Philippines or issues in Russia or Europe but same again, blind silence

What are you on about!? Are you saying I am some what biased towards only sympathising over the deaths of innocent Muslims?

This isn't a trendy or popular piece of news, the mainstream media don't report it, that's why I have made a thread about it. Bloody hell some people on here even think it's justified.

I tell you what mate why don't you gather some facts and information and make a thread about the massacre of Christians in the countries you listed. Because there is a place for it and a lot of people would be really interested in it (me included). However I wouldn't come in the thread and start abusing someone and then say we shouldn't talk about this issue because there is other issues to be talked about.

Look at your location!!.

It would be ignored to some extent I'm sure as mass murder of Christians abroad somehow is less important than X factor results, the latest pop group or

Make it clear I'm not belittling the death of civilians, this is horrendous, but do understand the use of drones over soldiers and fully support that.

The United Nations need to do all we can to stop terror as we are badly failing to control this issue at present, every day I read about

The irony of my location seems to have gone way over your head. Another angry man said I just go to Iraq or Afghan to 'fight the good fight'. My location is merely a pisstake at his absurd words so don't worry too much.

Just out of interest what do you read?

 

[west didsblue]

It is believed that 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist.

Pakistan suffers the most from Drone attacks and the causalities are believed to be as high as 3,299 which includes 197 children.

It is believed by whom? Please could you quote your source.

Here's a source you might believe: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... istan.html</a>

Full study, joint by Stanford and NYU: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-con ... DRONES.pdf</a>

Having quickly scanned the Stanford report, it contradicts the Daily Mail article. The 1 in 50 figure relates to high level targets - military leaders. The vast majority of fatalities are low level fighters (still combatants though) with civilians consisting of about 15 to 20% - a bit different to the 98% claimed at the start of the thread. I'm not denying it's still far too many but can I suggest that you and Josh actually read the report rather than using the Daily Mail headline.

 

[pominoz]

What are you on about!? Are you saying I am some what biased towards only sympathising over the deaths of innocent Muslims?

This isn't a trendy or popular piece of news, the mainstream media don't report it, that's why I have made a thread about it. Bloody hell some people on here even think it's justified.

I tell you what mate why don't you gather some facts and information and make a thread about the massacre of Christians in the countries you listed. Because there is a place for it and a lot of people would be really interested in it (me included). However I wouldn't come in the thread and start abusing someone and then say we shouldn't talk about this issue because there is other issues to be talked about.

Look at your location!!.

It would be ignored to some extent I'm sure as mass murder of Christians abroad somehow is less important than X factor results, the latest pop group or

Make it clear I'm not belittling the death of civilians, this is horrendous, but do understand the use of drones over soldiers and fully support that.

The United Nations need to do all we can to stop terror as we are badly failing to control this issue at present, every day I read about

The irony of my location seems to have gone way over your head. Another angry man said I just go to Iraq or Afghan to 'fight the good fight'. My location is merely a pisstake at his absurd words so don't worry too much.

Just out of interest what do you read?

What is it with you people?, anyone that disagree's with your view is automatically "angry".

 

[Scottyboi]

I really hope the US Government is massacred one day, the world would be a better place.

 

[Ducado]

I really hope the US Government is massacred one day, the world would be a better place.

There are some real nut cases on this forum

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It is believed that 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist.

Pakistan suffers the most from Drone attacks and the causalities are believed to be as high as 3,299 which includes 197 children.

It is believed by whom? Please could you quote your source.

Here's a source you might believe: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... istan.html</a>

Full study, joint by Stanford and NYU: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.livingunderdrones.org/wp-con ... DRONES.pdf</a>

That report does NOT support the assertion that there are 50 civilians killed for every known terrorist.

For a start it uses the same study carried out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists that I quoted earlier which shows about 1 civilian death per 5 terrorists. The 1-in-50 (not like The Mail to sensationalise anything is it?) relates to what it describes as "high-level" figures. So if a strike takes out 1 high-profile figure who is known to the intelligence agencies and 9 of his fighters who aren't, that only counts as one terrorist death and 9 civilians instead of 10 terrorists in The Mail story.

 

[Skashion]

That report does NOT support the assertion that there are 50 civilians killed for every known terrorist.

For a start it uses the same study carried out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists that I quoted earlier which shows about 1 civilian death per 5 terrorists. The 1-in-50 (not like The Mail to sensationalise anything is it?) relates to what it describes as "high-level" figures. So if a strike takes out 1 high-profile figure who is known to the intelligence agencies and 9 of his fighters who aren't, that only counts as one terrorist death and 9 civilians instead of 10 terrorists in The Mail story.

I differ from you it seems insofar as I operate under the assumption that you don't target and kill people, with so-called precision weapons and strikes, if you don't have a clue who they are. Unless you have sufficient evidence to the contrary, they are civilians, they're not terrorists until proven innocent. As I've said, if you know who they are, send in special forces, arrest, try, sentence if found guilty. Drones, especially signature strikes, are a needlessly bloody immoral scattergun method, that prioritises the lives of the soldiers of one nation over the civilians of another nation. As I've also mentioned, the only way to defeat terrorism is to ensure that you remain in possession of the moral high ground, for if you don't, you cannot win. It's clear from the report that ordinary Pakistanis do not see drones as precision weapons ridding them of terrorists, and will create more terrorists than they purport to destroy due to outrage and psychological damage they inflict on innocent people.

 

[adrianr]

That report does NOT support the assertion that there are 50 civilians killed for every known terrorist.

For a start it uses the same study carried out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists that I quoted earlier which shows about 1 civilian death per 5 terrorists. The 1-in-50 (not like The Mail to sensationalise anything is it?) relates to what it describes as "high-level" figures. So if a strike takes out 1 high-profile figure who is known to the intelligence agencies and 9 of his fighters who aren't, that only counts as one terrorist death and 9 civilians instead of 10 terrorists in The Mail story.

I differ from you it seems insofar as I operate under the assumption that you don't target and kill people, with so-called precision weapons and strikes, if you don't have a clue who they are. Unless you have sufficient evidence to the contrary, they are civilians, they're not terrorists until proven innocent. As I've said, if you know who they are, send in special forces, arrest, try, sentence if found guilty. Drones, especially signature strikes, are a needlessly bloody immoral scattergun method, that prioritises the lives of the soldiers of one nation over the civilians of another nation. As I've also mentioned, the only way to defeat terrorism is to ensure that you remain in possession of the moral high ground, for if you don't, you cannot win. It's clear from the report that ordinary Pakistanis do not see drones as precision weapons ridding them of terrorists, and will create more terrorists than they purport to destroy due to outrage and psychological damage they inflict on innocent people.

Very good post.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

That report does NOT support the assertion that there are 50 civilians killed for every known terrorist.

For a start it uses the same study carried out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists that I quoted earlier which shows about 1 civilian death per 5 terrorists. The 1-in-50 (not like The Mail to sensationalise anything is it?) relates to what it describes as "high-level" figures. So if a strike takes out 1 high-profile figure who is known to the intelligence agencies and 9 of his fighters who aren't, that only counts as one terrorist death and 9 civilians instead of 10 terrorists in The Mail story.

I differ from you it seems insofar as I operate under the assumption that you don't target and kill people, with so-called precision weapons and strikes, if you don't have a clue who they are. Unless you have sufficient evidence to the contrary, they are civilians, they're not terrorists until proven innocent. As I've said, if you know who they are, send in special forces, arrest, try, sentence if found guilty. Drones, especially signature strikes, are a needlessly bloody immoral scattergun method, that prioritises the lives of the soldiers of one nation over the civilians of another nation. As I've also mentioned, the only way to defeat terrorism is to ensure that you remain in possession of the moral high ground, for if you don't, you cannot win. It's clear from the report that ordinary Pakistanis do not see drones as precision weapons ridding them of terrorists, and will create more terrorists than they purport to destroy due to outrage and psychological damage they inflict on innocent people.

So on the same basis you presumably accept that the completely indiscriminate rocket strikes on Israeli civilians create a justifiably greater desire to attack the "enemy" among the victims?

 

[BlueMo']

No surprise really.
America is the world leader in terrorism.
Wannabe terror states can only aspire to be so efficient.
Although Israel are no slouches when it comes to the crunch.

 

[Skashion]

[
So on the same basis you presumably accept that the completely indiscriminate rocket strikes on Israeli civilians create a justifiably greater desire to attack the "enemy" among the victims?

Of course. It would be stupid to suggest otherwise.

 

[Josh Blue]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBnvajSfWU[/youtube]

A bit of music to finish the thread off.

The end bit is probably the most hard hitting.

 

[whp.blue]

It is believed that 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist.

Pakistan suffers the most from Drone attacks and the causalities are believed to be as high as 3,299 which includes 197 children.

The list of countries that are subject to regular drone attacks are Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia.

The aim is to kill suspected terrorists with precision drone strikes. If the suspected terrorist is in a school then so be it, collateral damage. However to be suspected of being a terrorist you only have to be a Muslim man of military age.

Obama signs every drone strike off personally.

The mainstream media will rarely mention these tragedies and our cowardly government supports the program. People should be up in arms about the tragic loss of human life but nobody seems to care?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWKG6ZmgAX4[/youtube]

Chilling evilness.

I would like to point out that 100% of terrorist bombings are normally innocent civilians

also time and time again Pakistan has shown to be a safe haven for terrorists and islamic extremists and whilst the death of any innocent is shocking we cannot allow terrorists in Pakistan to carry on waging a terror war unabated

 

[mindmyp's_n_q's]

Do we in the west have the right to impose our culture all over the world? Are we not doing to "them" the exact same thing that a lot of people who are of the view that "All Islam is bad" would suggest that they are doing to us?

I will try to give an example that asks the question.

Imagine that it was announced that a country (any country) had gone over to the amazon and discovered two tribes of about 100,000 people each that had lived undiscovered the same way as their ancestors had for the last 3,000 years. Everything about them was a perfect photo of the past.

Once this had been announced one of the first things that people would say is "Leave them alone, we cannot disturb them it will destroy their culture that has survived for so long unblemished and perfect" We would probably agree with this and then send a National geographic camera crew in anyway because they are "experts" and "experts" can interact with a tribe that should not be touched just fine (apparently) ;)

I am betting that not many people would disagree with this as to preserve a culture so pure that it has survived the same must make sense.

Now imagine that one tribe has human sacrifices and also canabilism and some child abuse. But the tribe and the culture survives and has had no impact on our lives up until the point that they were discovered.

Would we have the right to go in and say "you are so far bang out of order it is untrue. Do this or you're fucked" or do they have the right to be left alone.

People say places like China have bad human rights. But are they bad if you are Chinese? What if the culture of China is that the rights that they have are great? Should we impose our way of thinking on anyone and not expect some pushback.

I am very pissed and stoned so apologies if it makes no sense.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

That report does NOT support the assertion that there are 50 civilians killed for every known terrorist.

For a start it uses the same study carried out by the Bureau of Investigative Journalists that I quoted earlier which shows about 1 civilian death per 5 terrorists. The 1-in-50 (not like The Mail to sensationalise anything is it?) relates to what it describes as "high-level" figures. So if a strike takes out 1 high-profile figure who is known to the intelligence agencies and 9 of his fighters who aren't, that only counts as one terrorist death and 9 civilians instead of 10 terrorists in The Mail story.

I differ from you it seems insofar as I operate under the assumption that you don't target and kill people, with so-called precision weapons and strikes, if you don't have a clue who they are. Unless you have sufficient evidence to the contrary, they are civilians, they're not terrorists until proven innocent. As I've said, if you know who they are, send in special forces, arrest, try, sentence if found guilty. Drones, especially signature strikes, are a needlessly bloody immoral scattergun method, that prioritises the lives of the soldiers of one nation over the civilians of another nation. As I've also mentioned, the only way to defeat terrorism is to ensure that you remain in possession of the moral high ground, for if you don't, you cannot win. It's clear from the report that ordinary Pakistanis do not see drones as precision weapons ridding them of terrorists, and will create more terrorists than they purport to destroy due to outrage and psychological damage they inflict on innocent people.

Yeah but you have to kill them all in order to make sure you kill the few who are the baddies. Women and children need to be exploded to death in order for us to sleep safe at night.

You're so naive sometimes, Skashion.