The U.S govt and media are the biggest bullies in the world.

Drone
killings - Media: names and address of gun owners in N.Y. online.

Posted by Sherrie | Wednesday, December 26, 2012
The U.S. government is the biggest bully in the world. Not just to
other countries in the world but to the citizens of the U.S. too.
Let's stop to think about what the U.S. government does around the
world.
First the government kills women and children all the time through
drone attacks. They do this indiscriminately. The U.S. government
does this even without the approval of the countries they are killing
the people in. The U.S. doesn't care about the sovereignty of
another country. I have been researching drone attacks in Pakistan
and how many innocent men, women and children the U.S. has

killed. (I am going to include some of the research and information at

the bottom of this article)
It really is sad to see a country that was suppose to be the shining
light of humanity when it was formed with equal justice for all. Yet the
country has degraded so badly due to the morals of the
leaders/elected officials.
We were suppose to be a place that other countries and people could
look up to as an example of moral and ethical leadership and how the
people of the country were free, yet worked for the benefit of all of
mankind.
The U.S. as it stands today has become the most immoral country
with the least ethical leaders of the world.
Through torture, jailing people without any rights or justice in a
courtroom (including U.S. citizens), invading other countries, killing
the innocent people including children without thought or remorse,
poisoning it's own citizens through the air, water and food and
bullying it's own citizens to get it's way.
Now... there is that term "Like begets Like."
The government has become a bully, yet they are shocked when
citizens of the U.S. act out in a violent manner. I don't believe people
should act out in violence at all, but I also don't pretend to be "holier
than thou" either, like the U.S. government does.
How did the country come to believe that we are the ones with the
rights to all things in the world and to hell with the rest of the people
of the world?
The U.S bullies it's citizens and creates a mind set through the media
of "peer pressure." They did this with those who smoke cigarettes, to
the point of smokers hiding to smoke. In N.Y. and California, you
can't even smoke in the opened air hardly. It doesn't not matter if you
agree with smoking or not... the fact is the U.S. became a bully to
those who do. FYI - I have researched about smoking and it is not
all that it has been made to be. The facts are what causes cancer

are all the 3000 additives the big corps put in. If people smoked pure
tobacco without additives.. then it is actually good for you in many
ways. Don't just believe me... do some research yourself. Also at
the time of the big push against smokers, is when they began
chemtrails in the 80's. (Smoke coats your lungs so you don't absorb
a lot of the poisons)
Now with the gun issue, the government and media are going to
attempt to do the same thing with gun owners. Where gun owners
will hide the fact they have guns. They are using the media to go
after legal gun owners, to make them ashamed of owning a gun. It is
exactly what they did with smokers.
A media outlet decided to risk people's lives and safety by putting an
interactive map of law abiding citizens who have a legal right and
permit to own a gun. The address and names of all of those U.S.
citizens in 3 counties in New York are on the net. They are there for
any robber or desperate person to get a hold of a gun, to break in.

But what the base of this is, is to bully those who are law abiding
citizens who utilize their 2nd amendment of the constitution to have a
gun. They are trying to get people to give up their guns through
"embarrassment." [I will again say, this is exactly what they did with
smokers. Many gave up smoking due to the peer pressure and being
ostracized for smoking 1].
What that media outlet has done is one of the biggest bullying tactics
and they may have caused people to lose their lives in the future by
doing so. I can only hope that all of those people who are on the map
with their names and addresses will have their guns next to them at
night now. There may be shootings in defense of themselves in
houses around N.Y.
If people view things with a clear and honest vision, they will see that
the U.S. government and media is the bully in the school yard that
talks out of both sides of their mouth.
Children learn through their peers and parents as they are growing
up, what is right and wrong. They learn how to treat others through
their experiences and culture. Is there any wonder there is more
violence now in the world, when the U.S. kills innocent people around
the world and invades countries? All anyone has to do is look at what
they are being taught by those that are suppose to uphold the morals
and ethics of the country. Is there any wonder that kids think it is
okay to bully another, when the U.S. government does it to the rest of
the world? Is it any wonder that kids think violence is okay over all,
when the U.S. commits violent acts around the world? Is there any
wonder that people think they can get away with crimes when all the
bankers that have committed fraud are free and never prosecuted?
The media acts so outraged when someone does something in the
U.S. of a violent nature.
Isn't it time that the U.S. government and media

1 Update 12/26/12 10:10 pm - Article about ..A blogger put up an interactive map of the newpaper's staff

with their names and addresses. This includes the publisher's home address that put out the gun owners
interactive map. Here is the actual information on the bloggers site of the names and addresses of the
staff.

look in the mirror to view themselves?

I have never played a violent game that I see advertisements on all
the time... I am not a "gamer." I personally don't see how someone
can find killing lots of people in a game as being fun. I do have a
question, how does someone distinguish what is real or fiction when
they spend hours and hours in those role playing games of killing
others?

It is up to each of us to recognize bullying when we see it.

It is up to each of us to not be a part of it

and speak out against bullying
by an individual, government, media or peer group.
We have to stand up to bullying and it seems that the U.S.
government and media gets what they want through bully tactics.
Don't forget that the U.S. government is now using drones
insides the U.S.. I have no doubt at some point they will justify
bombing their own citizens and the media of course will have their
back in convincing people why it should be done.

Don't think that will happen? Let me ask you this... did you ever think
that owning a gun would become like smoking where you have to
hide that fact and be "ashamed" of it due to government and media
pressure?

Regarding Drones there have been studies done in regards to how

many people have been killed by drones and if drones really hit their
targets or simply kills innocent men, women and children.

Last week an article came out "Confessions of a Drone Operator." 2
The guy quit after he killed an innocent child, yet another person that
was part of the government called that child a "dog."
It makes you stop
and contemplate... 3
how did the morals
in our government go so far down
to call a child a dog?

2

Meet Brandon Bryant: The Drone Operator Who Quit After Killing a Child
Michael Krieger | Posted Monday Dec 17, 2012 at 11:00 am
Bryant saw a flash on the screen: the explosion. Parts of the building collapsed. The child had
disappeared. Bryant had a sick feeling in his stomach.
Did we just kill a kid? he asked the man sitting next to him.
Yeah, I guess that was a kid, the pilot replied.
Was that a kid? they wrote into a chat window on the monitor.
Then, someone they didnt know answered, someone sitting in a military command center somewhere in
the world who had observed their attack. No. That was a dog, the person wrote.
They reviewed the scene on video. A dog on two legs?
- From The Woes of an American Drone Operator published in Der Spiegel
The above article is a must read for every American citizen, particularly those that get up in arms about
domestic gun control, but never think twice about the horror caused by our foreign policy, which regularly
murders innocent children overseas. This story was also covered by the UKs Daily Mail and they write:
A former U.S. drone operator has opened up about the toll of killing scores of innocent people by pressing
a button from a control room in New Mexico.
But, after following orders to shoot and kill a child in Afghanistan, he knew he couldnt keep doing what
he was doing and quit the military.
The worst part about this story, other than the story itself, is that I have to go to UK and German media to
read about it. Pathetic.
In Liberty,
Mike
< http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2012/12/17/meet-brandon-bryant-the-drone-operator-who-quit-after-
killing-a-child/>
3http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F1074596%2Fthumbs
%2Fo-AFGHANISTAN-AIR-STRIKE-KILLS-CHILDREN-
facebook.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fafghanistan-war-
blog%2F5%2F&h=1022&w=1536&tbnid=rQ1ODDMOb3a-
eM%3A&zoom=1&docid=nOhsHq8ErgDw8M&ei=647lU-
_cIYLV0QXEyYGYDg&tbm=isch&ved=0CB4QMygCMAI&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=395&page=1&start=0&ndsp=
15

I began researching drones

and what the U.S has done
and how many children
have been killed last week.

The U.S. has continually jeopardized other countries sovereignty by

using drones to kill the citizens of the country. You have to wonder
what would happen if another country felt it was there right to use
drones inside the U.S. boundaries to kill people they said were a
threat to their country? We know that a war would start as the U.S.
would scream and shout that the country that is using the drones
would be committing "acts of war." The U.S. would be the typical bully
in that they can do as they want but don't turn the tables on them...
then it is "unfair and unjust."
There is this site of the stories of the victims of U.S. drone attacks. 4
Here is the information about a village and innocent people killed
from a U.S. drone attack. 5

4

< http://www.livingunderdrones.org/victim-stories/>
From the June 2012 issue <http://harpers.org/archive/2012/06/eye-of-the-drone/>
Eye of the Drone
5


From statements made in February by the families of victims and survivors of a March 17, 2011, drone
attack in the village of Datta Khel in the Pakistani region of North Waziristan. The statements were
collected by the British human rights group Reprieve and were included in their lawsuit challenging the
legal right of the British government to aid the United States in its drone campaign. More than half of all
deaths from U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan have occurred in North Waziristan. Translated from the Pashto.

I am approximately forty-six years old, though I do not know the exact date of my birth. I am a malice of
my tribe, meaning that I am a man of responsibility among my people. One of my brothers sons, Din
Mohammed, whom I was very fond of, was killed by a drone missile on March 17, 2011. He was one of
about forty people who died in this strike. Din Mohammed was twenty-five years old when he died. These
men were gathered together for a jirga, a gathering of tribal elders to solve disputes. This particular jirga
was to solve a disagreement over chromite, a mineral mined in Waziristan. My nephew was attending the
jirga because he was involved in the transport and sale of this mineral. My brother, Din Mohammeds
father, arrived at the scene of the strike shortly following the attack. He saw death all around him, and
then he found his own son. My brother had to bring his son back home in pieces. That was all that
remained of Din Mohammed.

I saw my father about three hours before the drone strike killed him. News of the strike didnt reach me
until later, and I arrived at the location in the evening. When I got off the bus near the bazaar, I
immediately saw flames in and around the station. The fires burned for two days straight. I went to where
the jirga had been held. There were still people lying around injured. The tribal elders who had been killed
could not be identified because there were body parts strewn about. The smell was awful. I just collected
the pieces of flesh that I believed belonged to my father and placed them in a small coffin.

The sudden loss of so many elders and leaders in my community has had a tremendous impact. Everyone
is now afraid to gather together to hold jirgas and solve our problems. Even if we want to come together
to protest the illegal drone strikes, we fear that meeting to discuss how to peacefully protest will put us at
risk of being killed by drones.

The first time I saw a drone in the sky was about eight years ago, when I was thirteen. I have counted six
or seven drone strikes in my village since the beginning of 2012. There were sixty or seventy primary
schools in and around my village, but only a few remain today. Few children attend school because they
fear for their lives walking to and from their homes. I am mostly illiterate. I stopped going to school
because we were all very afraid that we would be killed. I am twenty-one years old. My time has passed. I
cannot learn how to read or write so that I can better my life. But I very much wish my children to grow
up without these killer drones hovering above, so that they may get the education and life I was denied.

The men who died in this strike were our leaders; the ones we turned to for all forms of support. We
always knew that drone strikes were wrong, that they encroached on Pakistans sovereign territory. We
knew that innocent civilians had been killed. However, we did not realize how callous and cruel it could
be. The community is now plagued with fear. The tribal elders are afraid to gather together in jirgas, as
had been our custom for more than a century. The mothers and wives plead with the men not to
congregate together. They do not want to lose any more of their husbands, sons, brothers, and nephews.
People in the same family now sleep apart because they do not want their togetherness to be viewed
suspiciously through the eye of the drone. They do not want to become the next target.

As of August 2011 an estimated 168 innocent children have been

killed by the United States government and they have not once
apologized for it. 6

Where are the morals and ethics of that?

The Columbia Law school did an extensive study about U.S. drone
attacks and their impact on the countries and citizens that were
attacked.
It is 83 pages long but I have taken segments out of it that I believe
are important to this discussion and understanding of what the U.S.
has and is doing.
You will find that it is the CIA and the JSOC that do not have to admit
what they do nor is there oversight to their killing anyone they
want. They don't answer to the military nor anyone else, except to
the President.
Oh another thing, I did not realize how extensively the U.S. using
drones around the world and in many countries. It is not just Pakistan
and Afghanistan that drones are used.
Here are excerpts from the article:
In locations such as northern Pakistan, where drones often buzz
overhead 24 hours a day, people live in constant fear of being
hit.125 Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars notes:
I have heard Pakistanis speak about children in the tribal
areas who become hysterical when they hear the characteristic
buzz of a drone. [] Imagine the effect this has on psyches, and

6 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8695679/168-children-killed-in-drone-

strikes-in-Pakistan-since-start-of-campaign.html

particularly on young ones already scarred by war and

displacement.126
Unlike deaths and property loss, which may affect one or more
families, the fear associated with covert drone strikes affects nearly
everyone in a community.

3D Democracy or 'Democracy Delivered by Drone' [Obama's dream] by Dr

<http://civiliansinconflict.org/uploads/files/publications/The_Civilian_Im
pact_of_Drones_w_cover.pdf>

The information included here is not comprehensive, as despite public

and repeated allusions to covert drone strikes by Obama
Administration officials in 2011 and 2012, most official materials
related to the drone program are classified. Even the existence of a
CIA drone program remains classified, although government officials
have repeatedly leaked information to the media.2
In our interviews with government officials, most were unwilling to
speak about drone operations outside of Afghanistan. The persistent
government secrecy on this issue, particularly surrounding the
involvement of the CIA and JSOC, leads us to term drone strikes
outside of Afghanistan as covert. In this report, we use covert in
the colloquial, rather than legal sense.3
Until 2006, the US reportedly notified the Pakistani government
before launching strikes.62
Since that time, the Pakistani government has publicly signaled its
rejection of drone strikes as a violation of sovereignty, but there are
numerous reports of its consent to continuing strikes.63
In spring 2012, the US increased the frequency of drone strikes,
reportedly out of concern that the CIA would soon need to halt
operations due to the opposition of the Pakistani government.64
The degree of Pakistani government cooperation, including
intelligence and surveillance support, may be diminished at present.65
US strikes in Yemen increased in spring 2012, with between 15 and
62 reported strikes, more than in the previous ten years combined.75
Media reports suggest that JSOC personnel are on the ground in
Yemen, coordinating the drone strikes. US officials state that current
drone strikes are only carried out with Yemeni government
approval.76
However, in 2011, during a period of political turmoil and
government transition in Yemen, the United States reportedly
conducted strikes without approval.77

It remains unclear which agency takes operational lead or under which

agencys legal authority the operations are conducted.78
In 2011, unnamed Obama Administration officials described JSOC
and CIA operations as closely coordinated but separate
campaigns.79
Some 2011 media accounts described US operations as run by JSOC,
but with CIA assistance.80
According to one account
CIA and JSOC alternate Predator missions in Yemen
and borrow each others resources.81
JSOC commanders
appear on videoconference calls
alongside CIA station chiefs.82
The scale of drone strikes in Somalia is still unknown, but appears to
be increasing. A Bureau of Investigative Journalism study estimated
between ten and 21 US airstrikes in Somalia as of publicationthree
to 12 of which may have been drone strikes. According to the Bureau,
the strikes resulted in between 58 and 169 deaths.89
The UN Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea stated in late June
2012 that
the number of reports concerning the use of
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Somalia
in 2011-12 has increased.90
As a sampling of figures:
In Somalia, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that since
2007, US covert actionsincluding operations other than drone
strikeshave resulted in the death of 58 to 169 individuals as of
September 2012, of which 11 to 57 were civilians.101

In Yemen, the New America Foundation reports that drone strikes

killed 531 to 779 people, with a civilian casualty rate between 4% and
8.5%, as of June 2012.102
In Pakistan, statistics are compiled by both Pakistan-based
organizations and foreign organizations, and they vary.103 The
Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports a total of 2,562 to 3,325
total killed in drone strikes, including 474 to 881 civilian deaths as of
September 2012.

Increasing Violence & Instability

Some commentators are concerned that drones may actually be
contributing to an increase in violence in Pakistan and Yemen,
although studies are not conclusive and some observers disagree.
Since the drone program in Pakistan began, there has been an increase
in deaths due to terrorist incidents, peaking at 2,500 civilians killed in
2011, according to the US State Departments National
Counterterrorism Center.113
This increase appears to predate the escalation of drone strikes in
2008; we are not aware of a study that conclusively demonstrates a
causal link between drone strikes and increased violence. To the
contrary, some commentators argue that drone strikes have correlated
with a slight decrease in violence.114
The conflicting evidence illustrates the confusion over the
effectiveness of the US counterterrorism strategy, and the imperative
for US policymakers to questionand fully and adequately clarify
the impact of covert drone operations on the ground, including the
changing impact over time.
Drone strikes have also hit many homes in Yemen.133
Strikes have contributed to ongoing violence, which has led to
the displacement of over 100,000 people.134

Displacement impacts every layer of civilian life and threatens the

stability of the community.
An airstrike in Jaar, a town in southern Yemen, reduced an entire
block to rubble in two consecutive explosions; however, whetherthe
strike was by the US or Yemeni government is unknown.135
According to media reports, the threat or prevalence of drone strikes
in Yemen and Pakistan mean some parents are unwilling to send their
children to school out of fear.138
In Pakistan, there have been several reports of drone strikes that have
damaged or destroyed local schools.139
Usman Wazir was at his job selling fruits when a drone hit his house,
killing his younger brother, his wife, their 15-year-old son, and 13year-old daughter. He told the Center
I demand compensation for each member of my family
and demand that my house is rebuilt. 143
For civilians who demand justice for such losses, there is no known
process in Pakistan, Yemen, or Somalia by which they can apply for
compensation or file a claim of personal loss. This is compounded by
the fact that the existence of the drone program has for so long been
officially denied by the US government.
Events following one particular drone strike illustrate the complexities
of deciphering an accurate story of civilian harm. On August 23,
2010, a CIA strike reportedly killed at least seven civilians in
Pakistan. Unnamed US officials repeatedly told media for a year after
this incident that there were no civilian deaths from drone strikes:
Demand for drone pilots and other personnel will only increase as the
US continues to rely on this technology; indeed, in 2011 the demand
reportedly prompted the Air Force to consider having pilots control
four planes at once.249

We are not aware of any cases in Pakistan or Yemen where drone

strike civilians have received apologies, explanations or monetary
payments as amends from the US Government.
With limited information, we cannot conclude that either the CIA or
JSOC is inherently unsuitable to conduct drone strikes, although we
have concerns based on their past practices.
It is incumbent upon policymakers with access to more information
particularly members of Congressto scrutinize and inform public
debate on the suitability of the CIA and JSOC.
International lawparticularly the laws of warwould require the
CIA to take steps to reduce civilian harm in using force, but observers
debate whether the CIA sees itself as bound by it. The statements of
government officials have been ambiguous.308
In a major address, Preston described the CIAs compliance with
international law principlesas opposed to rules or treaty
provisions.
[To be fair, the same can be said of remarks
by his counterparts at other agencies.309]
Some observers speculate that the CIA interprets statutory provision
50 USC section 413b[a][5]which prohibits the president from
authorizing any action that would violate the Constitution or any
statute of the United Statesas freeing the CIA from international
law obligations, since it omits mention of them.310
A US Army colonel notes that the Department of Defense
is legally bound to execute its military operations in
accordance with the laws of armed conflict; the CIA,
however, is under no similar requirement regarding
international law.311
Accounts of the CIAs lawyering practices describe adherence to US
law, but seldom mention international law. According to Goldsmith:

These operators spend their days and nights on deceptive and deceitful
tasks that violate foreign and some international laws as well as
everyday ethics. They are constantly reminded that whatever other
rules and laws they must violate in their work, they must not violate
US law.312
International lawparticularly the laws of warwould require the
CIA to take steps to reduce civilian harm in using force, but observers
debate whether the CIA sees itself as bound by it. The statements of
government officials have been ambiguous.308
In a major address, Preston described the CIAs compliance with
international law principlesas opposed to rules or treaty
provisions. [To be fair, the same can be said of remarks by his
counterparts at other agencies.309] Some observers speculate that the
CIA interprets statutory provision 50 USC section 413b[a][5]
which prohibits the president from authorizing any action that would
violate the Constitution or any statute of the United Statesas
freeing the CIA from international law obligations, since it omits
mention of them.310
A US Army colonel notes that
the Department of Defense is legally bound to execute its
military operations in accordance
with the laws of armed conflict;
the CIA, however, is under no similar requirement
regarding international law.311
As watchdogs in the form of journalists and human rights
organizations struggle to garner factual information in the relatively
inaccessible areas where covert drones strikes occur, the public is
especially reliant on Congress to take the lead in scrutinizing the
CIAs actions.
Yet Congresss obligation extends further: to contribute to public
debate. As former CIA lawyer and minority staff director for the

House intelligence committee Suzanne Spaulding emphasizes,

Congress has the responsibility
to inform and lead public discussion and debate
particularly about how best to address the long term threat
of terrorism. 339
There are established procedures for Congress to declassify and
publicize previously secret information, but these procedures have
reportedly never been employed, and certainly not with regard to
covert drone strikes.340
JSOC camouflages itself with cover names, black budget
mechanisms, and bureaucratic parlor tricks to maintain its
secrecy.342
Indeed, the official description of JSOC is confusing, mentioning a
host of roles:
to study Special Operations requirements, ensure...
interoperability and equipment standardization, develop... joint
Special Operations plans and tactics, and conduct... joint
Special Operations exercises and training
These descriptions make no mention of JSOCs targeting or drone
operations.343
The entirety of JSOCs relationship to the conventional military forces
and its rules is unknown. As a general matter, US Special Operations
Command [SOCOM] provides special forces units to geographic
commands.
Once those forces are in a geographic combatant
commanders area of responsibility, they work for that
commanderunder the same rules as other forces,
a SOCOM officer told the Columbia Human Rights Clinic by
email.344

However, there are indications that JSOC operates independently of

the conventional military forces geographic combatant commands
and that it has its own rules of engagement.345
Unfortunately, there is so much secrecy about JSOCs operations that
it is difficult to evaluate whether, and to what extent, JSOCs
relationship to the law and mechanisms to reduce civilian harm
continues to be problematic. This lack of transparency is compounded
by JSOCs relative freedom from congressional scrutiny. As journalist
March Ambinder notes
many in Congress whod be very sensitive to CIA operations
almost treat JSOC as an entity that doesnt have to submit to
oversight.361
Covert drone strikes enjoy wide political support as an attractive
alternative to counterinsurgency strategies that cost significant US
blood and treasure in Iraq and Afghanistan.383
As the Administration seeks to counter a growing number of groups it
describes as al-Qaeda affiliates in a growing number of places around
the globe, it may view strikes as an alternative to adding multiple new
land-war fronts in the Middle East and Africa.
Policymakers appear comfortable and confident that surgical drone
strikes conducted by the CIA and JSOC will disrupt militant groups
and prevent terrorist plots, and increasingly favor this strategy over
alternative means to establish security or set conditions for peace.384
In February 2012, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported that
at least 50 individuals were killed in follow-up drone strikes in
Pakistan when they had gone to help victims killed in initial
strikes.416
There are also reports of strikes killing rescuers in Yemen.417
There is a lot more in the site linked. The above shows there is not
accountability for the U.S. and they kill as they please.

We the people, in the United States are moral people on a whole.

We need to start demanding our government become moral and
ethical as it was meant for them to be. We need to show the world
that we do not support killing innocent men, women and children of
the world.
If we keep allowing it without saying something.... then how can we
raise our voices when they start doing it to their own citizens on U.S.
soil if we did not raise our voices about them doing it elsewhere?
How do we change what is happening?
That is one big question... because how do we each try and make
that difference? How do we each stand up and show the correct
morals and ethics to the bully and hope that the example becomes
the norm?
We need to demand morals and ethics once more as part of our
foundation of the United States. We need to demand the elected
officials stop bullying the world and their own citizens through the
TSA, police states and drone spying.
I know that is asking a lot but in having compassion for the rest of the
world's people, we will begin to have compassion for ourselves and
others around us once more.