5 ms·

> Clive Stafford Smith said he had been “profoundly shocked” by the crimes committed by the US government against his clients. These included torture, kidnappin

> Clive Stafford Smith said he had been “profoundly shocked” by the crimes committed by the US government against his clients. These included torture, kidnapping, illegal detention and murder. The murder of one detainee at Baghram Airport in Afghanistan had been justified as a permissible interrogation technique to put fear into other detainees. In 2001, he would never have believed the US Government could have done such things. This is odious, and it's just one of the things in just this article. The amount of human rights violations going on seems staggering.

raxxorrax 6y ago
That the accusation is hacking is just the tip of it. People arguing for this certainly aren't looking outside the box. Always check if they have a connection to the security industry and be prepared for a lot of bullshit reasoning.
ignoramous 6y ago
> ...he would never have believed the US Government could have done such things. That's US' image worldwide too, or was. Except in the Muslim world where their atrocities were observed and reported firsthand. Wikileaks blew open that made-up image in a big way. Reminds me of: "One of the artifices of devil is, to induce men to believe that he does not exist." -Charles Baudelaire.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/03/20/devil/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/03/20/devil/ The quote is best known in the modern day in the form it took in The Usual Suspects: "the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist". Baudelaire did write the same thing, but it's not original to him either, making him an odd citation. In particular, the form you quote didn't come from Baudelaire; it came from John Wilkinson. Wilkinson (1836): "One of the artifices of Satan is, to induce men to believe that he does not exist" Baudelaire (1864): "la plus belle des ruses du Diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas!" ["the loveliest trick of the Devil is to persuade you that he doesn’t exist!"]
- focus2020 6y ago
  But it's not shocking in the Muslim world. They do it to themselves much worse in the name of Islam. That is different compared to non-Muslim countries.
  - ignoramous 6y ago
    You have a point but two wrongs don't make a right. Also, the escalating violent struggle is making someone some serious money. So the monetary incentives are just as strong too whatever the overt justification may be.
creato 6y ago
Is there any evidence of this stuff? I googled one of the examples given. This seems to be the most substantial reporting: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/06/the-newest-fight-against-the-extrajudicial-killing-of-americans/563018/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/06/the-newest... > In June 2016, Mr. Kareem was at the location of four different aerial attacks. The first and fourth incidents involved strikes to the OGN office in Idlib City when Mr. Kareem was inside the office. The second attack occurred in the town of Hariyataan while Mr. Kareem was there conducting an interview. The strike hit the exact location where Mr. Kareem was setting up for the interview, but at the time of the strike he had climbed a nearby hill to “view destroyed homes a street away.” > The third attack occurred when the vehicle in which Mr. Kareem and his staff were traveling was “struck and destroyed by a drone-launched Hellfire missile.” At the time of the strike, Mr. Kareem was sitting in a different, nearby vehicle which was “hurled into the air by the force of the blast” and “flipped upside down.” In August 2016, Mr. Kareem was again the victim of an attack when he was at the Kulliyatul Midfa‘iyyah (Artillery College) to film. He and his coworkers were in his car “when there was a huge blast only yards away from the car.” The occupants survived, but all were hit by shrapnel from the blast. > As a result of these five near-miss experiences in a three-month period, Mr. Kareem alleges upon information and belief that he was the target and that his name is included on the United States Kill List. I can see why he might think he's on a "kill list", but at the same time, maybe the people he was meeting were the targets? It sucks we even need to ask this question, but the OP's link makes it sound like all of this is simple fact. As an outsider, I don't think it's possible to come to an actual concrete conclusion here, which is basically what all the courts have said.
- polytely 6y ago
  It's really hard to get to the facts of these drone cases because every military aged male automatically gets classified as enemy combatant unless intelligence proves after the fact that they were innocent. Most news sources will blindly accept the definition of enemy combatant provided by the government so there is minimal uproar. I would trust Mr Kareem over the US government on this because it fits the pattern of how the drone wars work. For a good source on this issue I would recommend: The Assassination Complex: Inside the Government's Secret Drone Warfare Program by Jeremy Scahill or the Drone Papers from the intercept which were the basis for the book. >"The White House and Pentagon boast that the targeted killing program is precise and that civilian deaths are minimal. However, documents detailing a special operations campaign in northeastern Afghanistan, Operation Haymaker, show that between January 2012 and February 2013, U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets. In Yemen and Somalia, where the U.S. has far more limited intelligence capabilities to confirm the people killed are the intended targets, the equivalent ratios may well be much worse." https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-complex/ https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-comp...
kmlx 6y ago
we're judging things through the prism of the present. back in 2001 the US just experienced 9/11. the sense of anger and retribution was shared internationally. people were arguing for dropping A-bombs all over the middle east.
- kungato 6y ago
  Internationally where? In Europe we care more about the people US kills with their shitty healthcare and gun laws than some false flag excuse to reoccupy Iraq oil
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    Perhaps in parts of Europe where people care about the lives of people not descended from Europeans.
- probably_wrong 6y ago
  > the sense of anger and retribution was shared internationally Speaking from South America, I can asure you that the general opinion of 9/11 was that the US had asked for it and that there are only so many countries you could bomb for oil before one of them decides to fight back. Sure, our government sent a statement of solidarity and no one was happy that it happened. But I am having a hard time thinking of someone other than the US who was truly, angrily calling for retribution.
  - celticninja 6y ago
    They didn't help themselves after the fact either, by invading Afghanistan when the majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia.
  - saiya-jin 6y ago
    I can attest to that, the general emotion in my part of Europe was - well that's horrible, just like all the atrocities US is doing all around the world and that it was just a matter of time that such a thing would happen. It was clear, I mean crystal clear even to US commentators on places like CNN on that very day that this will be used as carte blanche for government to instill control, surveillance and fear among US general population, and basically get away with anything because 'terrorists'. Well, they for sure were right. Life of Manhattan-based bureaucrat is not worth to me more than some poor civilian blown to pieces on some wedding or tending his field half around the world. You know, equality of human beings and stuff. 3000 means nothing compared to millions, in fact tens of millions if we keep counting.
glaberficken 6y ago
Chomsky has been exposing this type of practice since the 70s. (and doing so based on sound logical arguments and documented evidence) Everyone should read his stuff, still as relevant today as it was 50 years ago.

raxxorrax 6y ago

That the accusation is hacking is just the tip of it. People arguing for this certainly aren't looking outside the box. Always check if they have a connection to the security industry and be prepared for a lot of bullshit reasoning.

ignoramous 6y ago

> ...he would never have believed the US Government could have done such things. That's US' image worldwide too, or was. Except in the Muslim world where their atrocities were observed and reported firsthand. Wikileaks blew open that made-up image in a big way. Reminds me of: "One of the artifices of devil is, to induce men to believe that he does not exist." -Charles Baudelaire.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/03/20/devil/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/03/20/devil/ The quote is best known in the modern day in the form it took in The Usual Suspects: "the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist". Baudelaire did write the same thing, but it's not original to him either, making him an odd citation. In particular, the form you quote didn't come from Baudelaire; it came from John Wilkinson. Wilkinson (1836): "One of the artifices of Satan is, to induce men to believe that he does not exist" Baudelaire (1864): "la plus belle des ruses du Diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas!" ["the loveliest trick of the Devil is to persuade you that he doesn’t exist!"]
focus2020 6y ago
But it's not shocking in the Muslim world. They do it to themselves much worse in the name of Islam. That is different compared to non-Muslim countries.
- ignoramous 6y ago
  You have a point but two wrongs don't make a right. Also, the escalating violent struggle is making someone some serious money. So the monetary incentives are just as strong too whatever the overt justification may be.

creato 6y ago

Is there any evidence of this stuff? I googled one of the examples given. This seems to be the most substantial reporting: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/06/the-newest-fight-against-the-extrajudicial-killing-of-americans/563018/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/06/the-newest... > In June 2016, Mr. Kareem was at the location of four different aerial attacks. The first and fourth incidents involved strikes to the OGN office in Idlib City when Mr. Kareem was inside the office. The second attack occurred in the town of Hariyataan while Mr. Kareem was there conducting an interview. The strike hit the exact location where Mr. Kareem was setting up for the interview, but at the time of the strike he had climbed a nearby hill to “view destroyed homes a street away.” > The third attack occurred when the vehicle in which Mr. Kareem and his staff were traveling was “struck and destroyed by a drone-launched Hellfire missile.” At the time of the strike, Mr. Kareem was sitting in a different, nearby vehicle which was “hurled into the air by the force of the blast” and “flipped upside down.” In August 2016, Mr. Kareem was again the victim of an attack when he was at the Kulliyatul Midfa‘iyyah (Artillery College) to film. He and his coworkers were in his car “when there was a huge blast only yards away from the car.” The occupants survived, but all were hit by shrapnel from the blast. > As a result of these five near-miss experiences in a three-month period, Mr. Kareem alleges upon information and belief that he was the target and that his name is included on the United States Kill List. I can see why he might think he's on a "kill list", but at the same time, maybe the people he was meeting were the targets? It sucks we even need to ask this question, but the OP's link makes it sound like all of this is simple fact. As an outsider, I don't think it's possible to come to an actual concrete conclusion here, which is basically what all the courts have said.

polytely 6y ago
It's really hard to get to the facts of these drone cases because every military aged male automatically gets classified as enemy combatant unless intelligence proves after the fact that they were innocent. Most news sources will blindly accept the definition of enemy combatant provided by the government so there is minimal uproar. I would trust Mr Kareem over the US government on this because it fits the pattern of how the drone wars work. For a good source on this issue I would recommend: The Assassination Complex: Inside the Government's Secret Drone Warfare Program by Jeremy Scahill or the Drone Papers from the intercept which were the basis for the book. >"The White House and Pentagon boast that the targeted killing program is precise and that civilian deaths are minimal. However, documents detailing a special operations campaign in northeastern Afghanistan, Operation Haymaker, show that between January 2012 and February 2013, U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets. In Yemen and Somalia, where the U.S. has far more limited intelligence capabilities to confirm the people killed are the intended targets, the equivalent ratios may well be much worse." https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-complex/ https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-comp...

kmlx 6y ago

we're judging things through the prism of the present. back in 2001 the US just experienced 9/11. the sense of anger and retribution was shared internationally. people were arguing for dropping A-bombs all over the middle east.

kungato 6y ago
Internationally where? In Europe we care more about the people US kills with their shitty healthcare and gun laws than some false flag excuse to reoccupy Iraq oil
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Perhaps in parts of Europe where people care about the lives of people not descended from Europeans.
probably_wrong 6y ago
> the sense of anger and retribution was shared internationally Speaking from South America, I can asure you that the general opinion of 9/11 was that the US had asked for it and that there are only so many countries you could bomb for oil before one of them decides to fight back. Sure, our government sent a statement of solidarity and no one was happy that it happened. But I am having a hard time thinking of someone other than the US who was truly, angrily calling for retribution.
- celticninja 6y ago
  They didn't help themselves after the fact either, by invading Afghanistan when the majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  I can attest to that, the general emotion in my part of Europe was - well that's horrible, just like all the atrocities US is doing all around the world and that it was just a matter of time that such a thing would happen. It was clear, I mean crystal clear even to US commentators on places like CNN on that very day that this will be used as carte blanche for government to instill control, surveillance and fear among US general population, and basically get away with anything because 'terrorists'. Well, they for sure were right. Life of Manhattan-based bureaucrat is not worth to me more than some poor civilian blown to pieces on some wedding or tending his field half around the world. You know, equality of human beings and stuff. 3000 means nothing compared to millions, in fact tens of millions if we keep counting.

glaberficken 6y ago

Chomsky has been exposing this type of practice since the 70s. (and doing so based on sound logical arguments and documented evidence) Everyone should read his stuff, still as relevant today as it was 50 years ago.