3 ms·
You didn't answer my question. Why would the US kill these people if they are not a threat? What would the motive be? As for your request: http://en.wikiped
by clavalle 12y ago
You didn't answer my question.
Why would the US kill these people if they are not a threat? What would the motive be?
As for your request:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nek_Muhammad_Wazir http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nek_Muhammad_Wazir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitham_al-Yemeni http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitham_al-Yemeni
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saleh_al-Somali http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saleh_al-Somali
and on and on and on...these are not harmless children.
>You are simply saying that the officials should be taken on trust alone?
No, not alone. There needs to be oversight (and I believe there is) it just doesn't need to be public.
- watwut 12y agoBecause they "think" those people are threat based on metadata. http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-people-based-metadata/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-peo... Or because some analyst needed to prove he is fast worker and decided to check "terrorist" box in some internal software. Or because boss decided give bonuses for catch terrorists and someone wanted a new car. The system with no independent oversight will end up abused in millions of ways, most often by people not caring about doing it right. Heck, even real world cops make tons of mistakes or arrest people just to fill arrested bodies quotas and they do have judges to check upon them, at least in theory. Or, most dangerously, because that person is outspoken politically dangerous person, not a terrorists and not planning anything, but did actually met with some terrorist twice. Say, muslim active in politics just about to do something uncomfortable for administration.