Death By Metadata: The NSA's Secret Role In the US Drone Strike Program

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Glenn Greenwald reports at his new independent news site 'The Intercept' that according to a former drone operator for the military's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the NSA often identifies targets based on controversial metadata analysis and cell-phone tracking technologies. In one tactic, the NSA 'geolocates' the SIM card or handset of a suspected terrorist's mobile phone, enabling the CIA and U.S. military to conduct night raids and drone strikes to kill or capture the individual in possession of the device. The technology has been responsible for taking out terrorists and networks of people facilitating improvised explosive device attacks against US forces in Afghanistan. But he also states that innocent people have 'absolutely' been killed as a result of the NSA's increasing reliance on the surveillance tactic. One problem is that targets are increasingly aware of the NSA's reliance on geolocating, and have moved to thwart the tactic. Some have as many as 16 different SIM cards associated with their identity within the High Value Target system while other top Taliban leaders, knowing of the NSA's targeting method, have purposely and randomly distributed SIM cards among their units in order to elude their trackers. As a result, even when the agency correctly identifies and targets a SIM card belonging to a terror suspect, the phone may actually be carried by someone else, who is then killed in a strike. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which uses a conservative methodology to track drone strikes, estimates that at least 2,400 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia have been killed by unmanned aerial assaults under the Obama administration. Greenwald's source says he has come to believe that the drone program amounts to little more than death by unreliable metadata. 'People get hung up that there's a targeted list of people. It's really like we're targeting a cell phone. We're not going after people – we're going after their phones, in the hopes that the person on the other end of that missile is the bad guy.' Whether or not Obama is fully aware of the errors built into the program of targeted assassination, he and his top advisers have repeatedly made clear that the president himself directly oversees the drone operation and takes full responsibility for it."

Comments

TAG

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

You're it.

Re:TAG

[JoeMerchant]

Cheaper and easier than using plastic surgery to make a double that looks like you to take the bullet.

Re:TAG

[MTEK]

Hot potato!

Missed it by that much

[Anonymous Coward]

As a result, even when the agency correctly identifies and targets a SIM card belonging to a terror suspect, the phone may actually be carried by someone else, who is then killed in a strike.

Wrong bad guy, but innocent victim?

Re:Missed it by that much

[Stormy Dragon]

Do you really know if you're the first person to have used the particular SIM in your phone? Sure the vendor said it was new, but do you really know? Particularly if you live in a third world country where there's no big-name corporate retailers?

Re:Missed it by that much

[tomhath]

Yes, that could happen. But look at the number of bystanders killed by these guys. You reduce the number of innocent people killed if you go after the bad guys when you can.

Re:Missed it by that much

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really know if you're the first person to have used the particular SIM in your phone?

A totally irrelevant question, since two different SIMs can have the same identifier (IMSI). This most often happens in two different cases; when you get a replacement SIM and when a pre-paid card is made invalid by not being charged for too long. Even if you have a completely new SIM card, it may have the same internal identifier, and possibly even the same phone number, as a SIM card previously used by a terrorist leader. In which case there would be no real effective way to tell the difference in most systems which do not have access to the crypto data which is on the SIM card.

It's quite unlikely of course, but probably happened to someone.

Re:Missed it by that much

[Shaiken]

I'm getting seriously tired of the "We're not as bad as the Taliban/Russians/Chinese/Storm Troopers/..." argument.

You're supposed to be a whole lot better, not just slightly better!

Also, it's not a question of what could happen, it is happening. It's even happening to US citizens. Your government now asserts that it's allowed to arbirtarily kill its own citizens. I don't care how much worse someone else is. That's BAD.

Re:Missed it by that much

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, that could happen. But look at the number of bystanders killed by these guys. You reduce the number of innocent people killed if you go after the bad guys when you can.

Maybe if we'd focused on Afghanistan instead of switching to Iraq for no damn good reason, things would be different. The United States' policy is an abject failure. Drone strikes by the United States are making that failure worse.

Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[khasim]

Some have as many as 16 different SIM cards associated with their identity within the High Value Target system while other top Taliban leaders, knowing of the NSA's targeting method, have purposely and randomly distributed SIM cards among their units in order to elude their trackers.

So instead of killing X you kill X's friends A, B and C.

That doesn't sound like a good plan on their part.

I'd look for ways to communicate without SIM cards. Or to trash used SIM cards. They're cheap. Really cheap.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Stormy Dragon]

What makes you think A is really X's friend and not some random guy that bought what they thought was a new SIM and which turns out to be used one last owned by X?

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or hide the burner phones on vehicles carrying innocent women and children.

Now, it not only doesn't hit anyone of tactical value, but makes the strike an embarrassment in what is a PR war.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Give the phone out to some poor civilians and let the US catch hellfire for fucking up once again.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[khasim]

What makes you think A is really X's friend and not some random guy that bought what they thought was a new SIM and which turns out to be used one last owned by X?

PR-wise, it doesn't matter because we (USofA!) will still claim that we killed their #2 or #3 sub-commander.

But you do raise an interesting point. Could those SIM cards be sold/donated to the enemies of X? So we (USofA!) end up killing X's enemies for him?

Cut the speaker and display wires (no sound and no lights) and you now have a "homing beacon" for a drone attack that can be hidden just about anywhere.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Khashishi]

Ok, this women and children thing needs to stop. Not all women and children are innocent, and not all men are militants.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

you forgot one;

1) SIM-cards, GSM, and less-than-half-a-megabyte-per-second on any mobile device within 60km of a city are obsolete. (think cdma2000/w/WIMAX)

But the NSA has a hard time tracking all those packets sent on different bandwidths...... CUZ ITS PRIVATE AND ITS MODERN, unlike gsm.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

GSM and SIM cards are not "obsolete". 2G GSM may or may not be (it's still the only rock solid network type out there), but the 3G and 4G versions of GSM, UMTS and LTE, are alive and kicking. Qualcomm's even given up - they've thrown their lot in with LTE after the 4G version of cdmaOne/cdma2000, UMB, attracted zero interest.

And yes, UMTS and LTE use SIM cards.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an amazing plan if your goal is to keep the 'terror' going. Be a nebulous representative of an organization that steals everything from a person, and you've just created a new terrorist. Rather handy if your friends are in the "terrorism security" business.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[cavreader]

Israel should serve as a shining example of what happens when you try to use force and end up losing. The loser in the conflict is not entitled to a do over. People asking for a return to the 67 borders forget that the arab's attacked Israel in 73 but lost once again leading to the current borders. Why would Israel give up any land that would do nothing but give it's enemies better firing positions?

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Might makes right....how could that possibly go wrong? Nope, seems like a good philosophy to me.

In other news, rape is OK if the woman tries to fight back but isn't strong enough.

Re: Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[techsimian]

But it's only meta-data! Dial M for murder tag?

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Swave An deBwoner]

The AC is referring to the practice of "mixing in" with ordinary civilians, especially with women, children, and hospitals. The idea being that if the terrorists (they are indeed bringing terror to the neighborhoods in which they do this) are targeted, the collateral damage of women, children, sick people, etc., is a big public relations bonanza for them.

Because the best flak jacket is a crying baby after all.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said all where innocent?

I specifically said innocent to distinguish from ones who are members of the organization, and would therefor be of some tactical value.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Culture20]

I'm rating this a big fat meh: 1) this is the NSA targeting foreign enemies of the state, which is a far cry from them listening to MY cell phone.

The reason it's not a "meh" for me is because this puts the lie to the "it's only metadata" argument when applied to domestic data gathering. It proves that the "meta" data can be used to pinpoint people with relatively high accuracy, especially if they're not trying to be secretive.

Re:Does not sound like a good idea to me.

[cavreader]

Might or the threat of force has always been used when it came to really big international disputes. To pretend otherwise is wishful thinking. The entire Israeli conflict is the result of the humiliation the Arab's have had to swallow each time they have tried to use military means to eliminate Israel. Israel only had a militia in 48 with no heavy artillery using old WW2 rifles supplied by Greece and still trounced the well supplied Arab armies. In 73 the Arabs had state of the art Soviet weapon systems (first generation SAMS, wire guided anti-tank weapons, and infrared targeting scopes in their tanks) combined with total surprise and once again got their asses handed to them. That played hell with the Arab egos and created a feeling of unendurable emasculation in the male dominated Arab societies which in turn has produced the hateful rhetoric and relentless incitement of violence targeted towards Israel. What reason does Israel have to negotiate with people who espouse never ending hatred and daily threats of violence towards them? None because they possess the might. The Arab powers do not give a single shit about the people suffering on Gaza or the West Bank caught in the middle. All they care about is having a conflict they can use to distract their citizens with so they don't notice the shitty state of their own governments. The amount of money they can skim from the billions supplied by the UN and other donors is also a real good reason to prolong the conflict. And the Israeli success has been their own and contrary to popular opinion the US contributed nothing to the Israeli successes. Even in 73 the US military resupply only happened after the issue was no longer in doubt. The only thing the US has the power to do is ask Israel nicely to deescalate the conflicts. Israel has certainly never needed US approval to do anything they needed to protect themselves. In 67 and 73 Israel could have marched into both Cairo and Damascus after annihilating those countries defenses and really shown them the folly of trying to attack again. If the US was as pragmatic as Israel there would be a lot less tension in todays International relations. The Arab's have created the Palestinian conflict out of whole cloth just to annoy the Israeli's since military force was out of the question. Egypt and Jordan abandoned their citizens after the 67 war by rejecting the Israeli offer to return the land and people captured for a peace agreement. The Palestinians have as much a chance of reclaiming their land as the Mexicans have of recovering Texas. It's past time for Egypt and Jordan to reclaim ownership of the West Bank and Gaza lands they governed when they were taken. The future use of force in the world is inevitable. The most dangerous weapon systems being developed today are advanced missile defenses. These weapon systems will render the major powers nuclear missile deterrents null and void. And those missile systems have been the only thing preventing WW3.

Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

The much more significant point would seem to be that the use of military assets to bomb civilian criminals is not the sort of thing the U.S. government is supposed to have the authority to do.

These "terrorists" sound like they're criminals not soldiers, and as such they should be a matter for the Afghani police. They should be apprehended, brought to trial and if found guilty sentenced according to Afghani law.

Whether it a drone that fires the missile, or a cell phone meta-data-mining program that provides the target is rather less important than the fact that blowing up a building to kill a target is an act of war and really not an appropriate solution.

Re:Missing the point

[Ralph Wiggam]

or a cell phone meta-data-mining program that provides the target is rather less important than the fact that blowing up a building to kill a target is an act of war and really not an appropriate solution.

Every drone strike is authorized by the government of the country involved. That doesn't make it right, but it prevents it from being an act of war.

Interestingly, the only foreign operation that wasn't cleared was the raid into Pakistan to kill Bin Laden. That was an armed invasion into an allied country. If that operation had gone poorly, it would have been Obama's ass.

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

The much more significant point would seem to be that the use of military assets to bomb civilian criminals is not the sort of thing the U.S. government is supposed to have the authority to do.

The intended targets aren't civilian criminals. They're conducting military attacks.

Re:Missing the point

[cold fjord]

From what I recall reading, the US and Pakistan had long had an understanding that if the US found Bin Laden it would come after him.

If the raid to kill Bin Laden had gone badly it would have been an international incident, but that's about it... more than likely. Jimmy Carter survived his debacle at Desert One.

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you would have to treat them as military prisoners, which is exactly what your government dosn't want.

Re: Missing the point

[Nygmus]

Jimmy Carter didn't have the Koch Brothers/Faux News/GodJesusGuns media machine baying for his blood, either.

Re: Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting AC to spend some well deserved mod points.

With that out of the way, you are 2 out of 3 with the last being your own bias. There is no "GodJesusGuns" media machine, sorry. There is pro scum media that pushes Miley and Lady Gah who are anything but Religious. They push culture and message with Crowley's message, (do what though wilt, 'yolo'). There is always news about abolishing or dismantling the 2nd amendment on every national station, no pro-gun anywhere mainstream.

Your fine with the first two things you mentioned, but if you can't see your own bias nothing will ever improve.

s.petry

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

If that operation had gone poorly, it would have been Obama's ass.

Nope. Since it went well, Obama claimed full credit. But he was all set to blame everything on Admiral McRaven if it was FUBAR.

http://www.ibtimes.com/cia-memo-released-obama-relied-admiral-bill-mcraven-kill-bin-laden-transcript-693506

I will give Obama this much and no more: it does appear he didn't try to micro-manage the op.

But he absolutely would not have taken any blame if things had gone FUBAR. (If you disagree: name even one important policy point that Obama has admitted blame.) And the media would have backed him up on it to the hilt and beyond.

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

16 different SIM cards associated with their identity within the High Value Target system while other top Taliban leaders, knowing of the NSA's targeting method

They (terrorists)---knew--- of the US's spying tactics long before Snowden ever came along, everyone in the US seems to continue there arrogance about people in 3rd world countries not knowing anything, whether it be tech, and how that tech is used to track everything they do, or how the US's military complex works. I can promise you there is a lot more to this story on how terrorists can get around spying, but I seriously doubt Greenwald will print it.

And there is evidence that suggests a number far larger then 2,400 civilians killed, the authorities in those countries have covered up a number of reckless attacks from drone strikes, the number Greenwald gives is probably one he got either from the US, or from the authorities in there respective countries who were willing to acknowledge strikes that may have hit a "target". But it appears US intelligence doesn't have any hard evidence to confirm whether a person of interest is really a terrorist or just some innocent civilian, and they launch an attack anyway.

It seems the US are world dictators, and have every country eating of there hand, even the Middle East. And if you live in the Middle East and deal with its politics, you already knows this, but the Middle East authorities use propaganda to say the US is the enemy, of course those same authorities are working with or for the US. That's not to say there isn't corruption among those authorities, who have to deal with the fall out and pay the price when terrorists decide to kidnap, torture, and even buy off officers.

Re:Missing the point

[jhol13]

Every drone strike is authorized by the government of the country involved. That doesn't make it right, but it prevents it from being an act of war.

And what would be the "government" in Somalia? Not that I believe you at all.

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

Afgan police. Hahahaaha. Go watch" this is what winning looks like" to get a little perspective on the northern alliance acting as a police force. It is a vice video on YouTube and www.vice.com

Re:Missing the point

[Lehk228]

even with no understanding of how a cell phone operates, it does not take long to figure out that the guys with a cell phone are far more likely to have a JDAM dropped on their head.

Re:Missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

Carter wasn't reelected, though, and the hostage crisis played a role. So it is debatable as to whether he survived that.

World War One anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't this how wars are started? Discuss..

Ah...the poetry of it all

[djupedal]

'Death by Cop'
'Death by Intimidation'
'Death by Dieing'
'Death by Failure'
'Death by Circumstance'
'Death by Stereo'
'Death by Drowning'
'Death by Crossfit'


...the press doesn't care, as long as someone dies. 'Death by Drone' is just today's flavor, nothing more.

**If you have a domain to sell, speak up as clients are waiting** Sorry, they just left the room - never mind.

Re:Ah...the poetry of it all

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey Dicebots and corrupt admins, quit modding these posts into oblivion, BETA is going to kill this site and you self righteous idiots will be collecting your pink slips very shortly.

More than just metadata

[elbonia]

If the government has the SIM's ID to gather metadata then they have full access to tap the phone to listen to all conversations. So it's not just that A talks to B. It's that A talks to B discussing an attack.

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

eyYou really believe these kill happy clowns go to that far and don't just shoot first? With all of their wedding party attacks.

Captcha: openly

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

Or A talks to B about a surprise birthday party, their voting preferences, or, perhaps a multi-million-euro trade in *gasp* Iranian Oil Futures!
go get `em!

"it`s all Greek to me, Sir." - unlettered fool

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sir, we are getting some chatter in Hindi, it sounds a bit garbled"- Snowden JUnior
"uh, ok, water they sayin?" -NSA Boss-type
"Something about a multi-million euro Indian Oil Deal, Sri." S. JUnior
"Go GIT `EM!"

The above was copied from a log-file dating back to 9/2011

Re:More than just metadata

[elbonia]

Drone strikes have been in use for more than a decade. In that time, according to the article, 2400 people have been killed including 273 civilians. So exactly how is it that they are kill happy?

In fact reported civilian casualties in Pakistan have fallen sharply since 2010, with no confirmed reports of civilian casualties in 2013.

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

over 10% "collateral damage" is acceptable?

Re:More than just metadata

[tsqr]

10% collateral damage is remarkably low. Estimates for WWII are 40 - 60%, and that ignores the 20 million Russian civilians who died along the way. NATO's bombing campaign in Kosovo was around 80%.

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

Those numbers look really good until you find out that they have reclassified almost everyone as a "militant" so they don't count as collatoral damage. If the number was truly 10% probably not mind. When it's closer to 90% and you find out they are lying to you to claim 10% you tend to get _more_ angry.

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it makes sense. Like 9/11. How is it so bad that a few thousand die in a plane attack when hundreds of thousands have died from smoking?

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course civilian casualties are dropping, they are running out of civilians! Seriously USofA GTFO!

Re:More than just metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

10% collateral damage is remarkably low.

"Collateral damage" meaning "non-armed peaceful civilians" and that's after the U.S. propaganda denies everything it can without looking even more ridiculous and then some. If you want to increase the number of people willing to kill Americans with bombs, way to go.

This is not "fighting" terrorism, it is feeding it. The apparent goal seems to make the entire populace eager to take revenge on the U.S. at which point of time you can just carpet-bomb them without any collateral damage at all.

Who was supposed to be the terrorist here?

change you can believe in!

[lophophore]

anybody think Obama is still not Bush 2.0?

Re:change you can believe in!

[Anonymous Coward]

I do. Bush didn't put my health insurance, for me being a cancer patient, in limbo with double digit costs every year. I got to actually keep my health insurance and doctor under Bush.

So, no he is not Bush 2.0, Bush 2.0 would have been much better.

Re:change you can believe in!

[Anonymous Coward]

anybody think Obama is still not Bush 2.0?

Nah.

Bush didn't unilaterally change statutory deadlines by executive order.

Bush didn't lie through his fucking teeth about his intentions regarding "terrorists". Gitmo closed yet?

Re:change you can believe in!

[Ralph Wiggam]

Gitmo closed yet?

Obama ordered Gitmo closed on literally his first day on office. Congress overruled him. Sorry that constitutional checks and balances are inconvenient.

Re:change you can believe in!

[CrimsonAvenger]

Well...

His Executive Order for closing same pretty much had all the loopholes it needed, since it required that prisoners be returned to their countries of origin if possible (and most of the countries of origin didn't want those guys back).

Plus there was the part about "The Department of Defense has determined that a number of the individuals currently detained at GuantÃnamo are eligible for such transfer or release.", which implies strongly that there are also a number NOT so eligible.

Then there's the "This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations." part, which provides plenty of cover for the DoJ to determine that any particular inmate is NOT eligible for release.

In other words, the Executive Order was written so as to cover Obama's ass first and foremost, with the actual closing of Gitmo a bonus, if it happened.

Re:change you can believe in!

[rtb61]

More like Reagan 5.0. Puppets of US corporate mass media. Now who obeys who, does corporate mass media live in abeyance to the US government or are they both just obeying the same corporate masters which is why their message aligns. Kill for resources, kill for profits, people are of no value unless they can be controlled and exploited.

Re:change you can believe in!

[Anonymous Coward]

anybody think Obama is still not Bush 2.0?

More like Bush Vista.

Re:change you can believe in!

[Anonymous Coward]

Continuing Terror Errors and a mass second degree murder of 2400. Yes, it is the American Way.

Greenwald

[Anonymous Coward]

Greenwald wrote some decent stories, but now he is just coming across as a tabloid journalist desperately clinging to to his 15 minutes of fame. Now he is pushing stories with sketchy anonymous sources, conspiratorial articles, and tabloid journalism... Seriously, one of the front page headlines is "UNSEEN PHOTOS OF GOVERNMENT AGENCY BUILDINGS" with a bunch of photos of the headquarters buildings of a few government agencies. He clearly has some sort of vendetta against the government and is no longer promoting thoughtful, intelligent discourse on these subjects.

Re:Greenwald

[Anonymous Coward]

Greenwald wrote some decent stories when BOOOOSH!!! was in office...

Awww, now that he's exposing Obama's utter hypocrisy and not attacking teh eeevil BOOOOSH!!!, your panties are in a wad.

Re:Greenwald

[Shaiken]

[SARCASM] Yeah, it's been half a year since he exposed massive abuses of power in the US government. Can't he give it a rest already! [/SARCASM]

B-b-b-but BOOOOSH!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Cue the Obama apologists who railed against mere torture.

I call BS

[Anonymous Coward]

This is BS because it's not the NSA who runs the drones, but the CIA. So, this story represents an attempt to smear the NSA instead of the CIA who is ultimately responsible for the application of the intelligence to their own drone program.

P.S. I'm not a fan of either TLA, but I can at least recognize misattribution and FUD.

Re:I call BS

[Sique]

Ok, so because John Doe was just standing guard while Ben Burglar was breaking in, it's all Ben Burglars fault and just a smear campaign against John Doe?

Re:I call BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that, but the article starts out by complaining that the NSA is only listening to radio signals and is not using human spies. That's exactly how the NSA is supposed to work. Other agencies might use human spies, but the NSA doesn't.

Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[bstarrfield]

The world is much more terrifying than you realize. The men and women at NSA, CIA, and DOD are protecting you against monsters. You sleep at night, content and happy, because good people are protecting you. This isn't a fascist plot - I've stood literally a meter a way from a man who would have no compunction murdering your entire family. And we actually did shoot him. This is life, this is the world. And please don't delude yourselves.

You Americans - you sit in safety without understanding what's happening around you. The world is full of horror, and there are people who are trying to protect you, and they do care about the Constitution. The darkness is around you, and you're oblivious to it. This is history. You have no fucking idea what the world is actually like. This is not a game. So please try to understand what the NSA is doing for you.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. They are killing people in your name to keep YOU safe
2. They will not stop killing people in your name no matter what YOU say/do
3. ???
4. Profit!!!

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually most folks on this planet are pretty nice. Unless -of course- you start randomly bombing them, or steal their resources, or invade their country. Then they stop being quite as nice. Look at New Zealand. They don't go around pissing people off in the first place, so they never get attacked :-P

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Stormy Dragon]

It sounds like you ARE a man who would have no compunction murdering an entire family.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[linuxrocks123]

If you think terrorists are scary, you should never drive or get in a car ever again, because doing that is much more likely to get you killed than the big bad oh-so-scary terrorists you're going on about.

Is the world "scary"? Well, everyone dies eventually, and I guess death is scary, so sure. What's scariest about it? Cancer and heart disease. Yup. If you're going to worry about stuff that could kill you, worry about cancer and heart disease. Because it's about 80% likely that that is what will kill you. Terrorists well let's see they're like #2000 on the list of stuff that is likely to get you killed, if that. So, no, it is not we who are not understanding what's happening around us. It is you who needs a crash course in statistics. Badly.

---linuxrocks123

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Say, did you work for the Bush white house back in the day? You could have. You'd have been an excellent "message force multiplier."

You can find people right here in the US who would murder your whole family. Yet it doesn't happen very often. The world might be scary, but I'll take my chances, thank you. The NSA can go suck rocks.

-- green led

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The world is much more terrifying than you realize.

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know, that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!

Asshole.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[linuxrocks123]

Oh, yeah, I almost forgot:

FUCK BETA!

---linuxrocks123

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[NoImNotNineVolt]

Yes, the world is a dangerous place. It was a dangerous place 200 years ago too. More dangerous, by any metric. Yet we still banded together in the name of freedom and not only shrugged off our cloak of protection (England) but actually engaged it in war, in the name of freedom. Yes, indeed, there was a day when we consciously gave up safety for freedom. How far we have come...

There was a time when people understood that safety wasn't the holy grail we should be chasing after. That no matter how much you give up, you can never be truly, totally safe. That some things are more important than safety. Cattle are safe. Their protectors guarantee this to a great extent. Not only are they protected from predators, they're also protected from disease and have all their routine needs for food and shelter met. Is that the type of existence we should be striving for?

I don't believe your claims, but let's forget about that. Let's say that your claims are all indisputably true. Why should I be any more scared of these monsters that threaten to take my life than I am of my own government, which is actually succeeding in taking my freedom?

Are you one of those people that believes that life in bondage is more valuable than death in the name of freedom? How do you reconcile your stance with the attitude that prevailed at the founding of this country, which Patrick Henry summarized in 1775 with the words: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[BoRegardless]

An old CIA hand said the only way to get REAL intelligence is to buy counterspies on the ground!

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

hey man, talking about scary stuff like cars and cancer and the terror of syphilis is likely to "cause fear or offense", as per the Public Order Act of the UK, a citable offense. Now THAT`S scary!

As a Proud All-American, I can say for sure that the NATIONAL DEBT, whether gross or broken-down-per-household (think kids, grandkids) is $oooooooooooooooooooooooo MUCH SCARIER than whatever the mass-media (/. neo-stooges included) can muster to DEFLECT the debt-issue.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, spare me the paranoid paternalistic byeline. Of how you are all doing this to protect us. Yes, protecting democracy by installing many dictatorships across four fucking in contients. Remember "we have to destroy the village in order to save it". I guess we have to save the constituion as well then. Don't worry about all of the travesties, loss of liberties, and piling up debts to pay for the military-intelligence industrial complex revolving door. I'd rather have /actual/ freedom and /actual/ control over our government than leaving "daddy" with impunity so he can go kill the bogeymen in the dark.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[The Grim Reefer]

Thank you for posting this. It's certainly the most enlightening thing I've read on /. today.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Jiro]

If you seriously think that we shouldn't worry about things that kill fewer people than cancer and heart disease, bear in mind that not only are fewer people killed by terrorists than by cancer and heart disease, but fewer people are killed by ordinary criminals and by a whole host of other things that even you think it's the proper role of government to protect us against. Unless you're an extreme libertarian who would reduce the government's rule down to almost nothing, you really have no business saying the government should stay out of it just because it kills fewer people than cancer and heart disease.

In fact, I'd consider this to be one of the least objectionable things the NSA does. It's what they're *supposed* to be doing, after all..

(The single least objectionable thing the NSA does is spy on foreign governments. Since foreign governments have lots of funds and easy access to the press, they can get lots of favorable media coverage by hypocritically complaining about the USA doing things they're perfectly willing to do themselves.)

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[TheGratefulNet]

yawn.

I fear what my own government can do to me FAR more than I fear any 'terrorist'. and the chances of a US authority figure fucking us over (cops, judges, politicians, etc) is likely in our lifetimes while being hit by a terrorist is extremely unlikely.

we are tired of this 'rule by fear'. we understand you like to control us that way, but we are hip to your bullshit and one day, the tides will turn and your 'culture of fear' won't be so popular anymore.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your ideal is based upon the fact that you have to have those mens with guns... you don't, and right now you don't even try. Yes we have evil people in this world but so far the main group of people killing unarmed, innocent civilians is the US get off your damn high horse and start taking responsibility for the fact that the terrorists are you.

You are not the world police, you have done little for world stability in fact the main cause of the most of the wars is the USA, do you realise the hate alost of the world has for the USA and its justified. You have killed, raped and stolen from countries whose only crime is standing up to you stealing their resources.

I have fought for my country and have seen first hand the atrocities caused by your "patriots" you are war criminals and should be incarcerated.

Terrorist.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You Americans - you can't understand that a MASSIVE TURNKEY TOTALITARIAN MACHINE FOR MURDERING UNDESIRABLE PEOPLE IS COMPLETELY NECESSARY in today's world. Our government IS evil. Necessary Evil = EVIL. When do evil people stop being evil? When they are dead and gone. Our nation is already turning on itself with politicians from both sides calling for the death of certain groups of people.

I wonder if America will use ovens again in 2020, or if we have a better way to dispose of all the dead from the eradication of the untermensch in the 21st century. And by we, I mean the government because my participation in the oven game is gonna be from the inside no doubt.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[retroworks]

On the one hand, I would mod up your comment. I think that too many people who criticize NSA and CIA would turn to jelly in the world without them. On the other hand: Alexis de Tocqueville

“What good does it do me, after all, if an ever-watchful authority keeps an eye out to ensure that my pleasures will be tranquil and races ahead of me to ward off all danger, sparing me the need even to think about such things, if that authority, even as it removes the smallest thorns from my path, is also absolute master of my liberty and my life; if it monopolizes vitality and existence to such a degree that when it languishes, everything around it must also languish; when it sleeps, everything must also sleep; and when it dies, everything must also perish?

...

When a nation has reached this point, it must either change its laws and mores or perish, for the well of public virtue has run dry: in such a place one no longer finds citizens but only subjects.”

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL in this case being a tag for: "I'm too stupid to know what the hell is going on in the world, and how it works."

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would hate you for saying that? However, I - and I'd hope others - expect more of you and our government than tales of boogeymen. We, Americans, have little empathy for anyone that doesn't share our nationality. We have murdered entire families of our enemies for decades. We don't even care enough that news bothers reporting on it, because we care more about random starlet did blah than the world around us.

Those of us paying attention are disgusted with leaders choices, and publics apathy toward foreign policy and largely believe that we are creating the people that want to hurt us. Generally by hurting them first. Our concern is that we want to stop creating that you describe as monsters, that we should be leading the world on moral authoring and not blowing it up. This destructive behavior is made worse by frequency in which we do it with so little account for false information and collateral damage

A strategy that results in more people wanting to blow us up is not a very wise one for our safety.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

you have all ways been cattle , happily believing your own mythology about your own racial / national superiority making heroes out of killers.

The only difference was the the vast distance and lack of technology allowed this belief without cognitive dissonance.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[m00sh]

The world is much more terrifying than you realize. The men and women at NSA, CIA, and DOD are protecting you against monsters. You sleep at night, content and happy, because good people are protecting you. This isn't a fascist plot - I've stood literally a meter a way from a man who would have no compunction murdering your entire family. And we actually did shoot him. This is life, this is the world. And please don't delude yourselves.

You Americans - you sit in safety without understanding what's happening around you. The world is full of horror, and there are people who are trying to protect you, and they do care about the Constitution. The darkness is around you, and you're oblivious to it. This is history. You have no fucking idea what the world is actually like. This is not a game. So please try to understand what the NSA is doing for you.

No, the world is not terrifying. It is a beautiful place. It is people like you who make it terrifying by trying to gain from it being more terrifying.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

You don't understand the problem, it isn't about being nice, or anything wrong you might have done to them. They are ultimately going to come after New Zealand because New Zealand doesn't conform to the rules they demand you live under. Do you know anything about the age of Islamic conquest, such as when they invaded Europe or took Constantinople? That is what they are about, their goal is a Muslim world even if it takes force of arms. You don't want them to get stronger.

Al Qaeda-Trained Terrorists in New Zealand, Prime Minister Says

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be such a chicken shit and obediently repeat the words, drilled into your head for the past 12 years. Think for yourself.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

Do you see this news story?

17 Beheaded in Taliban-Controlled Afghanistan for Attending Wedding Party with Dancing

They would gladly do it to you, just like they did it to those 17, and to Daniel Pearl. Their goal is to impose that sort of rule on the entire world even if it takes 1,000 years. As of today there are people willing to put their body between you and them, putting their life and limb and risk, to prevent them from endangering you. Frankly, I'm not sure that the sacrifice of any of them is worth you. But they still do it. So it would be great if you would either grow up, or stop providing evidence you may be a moral idiot and a fool. (I realize that asking you to show some gratitude for the defense of your life is wasted breath. Some people only learn the hard way.)

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a guy that wants to keep his job. Please keep telling us about how we'll all be murdered in the night.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Mr. Slippery]

The men and women at NSA, CIA, and DOD are protecting you against monsters.

The U.S.'s brutal and stupid foreign policy, carried out by the NSA, CIA, DOD, et al., does at least as much -- possibly more -- to create monsters than protect us from them. It's a wonderful cycle for the military/industrial/security complex: the complex fscks over nation A, nation A gets angry and makes aggressive noise, the complex points at nation A and says, "See? See? Danger! Feed the complex so we can protect you!"

Of course kicking the hornet's nest and then telling people, "Hey, we need to go kick hornet's nests because look at how dangerous these hornets are!" is hardly an American invention. But we are the current masters of it for sure.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd have to be really unlucky for that bad guy to pick me out of over 300 million Americans...nowhere near a major US city. I really don't think good people are the reason for my continued existence....maybe those manning nuclear warheads as a deterrent....

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not about "monsters". It's about fairness.

When FBI tries to catch a murderer, they go after the murderer. They do not try to trace his phone, and then drop a bomb on its "current location". You know, nothing breeds extremists more than "collateral damage".

Who do you think joins extremists? Psychopaths?? Hell no! The people that get recruited, join because of overwhelming sense of unfairness. No one gives a shit if some terrorist dies, but some do care when their family is decimated because someone's "friend" happened to drive by.

You see, to the impacted people, the "monsters" you talk about are the ones sitting, pushing the buttons that drop the bombs on "cellphone location". The people that drop the bombs are no better to them then the people that throw acid in the faces of their daughters because they went to school.

So don't speak about "monsters". Monsters you speak about are not born. They are indoctrinated and nothing indoctrinates more than "collateral damage".

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

'You can have safety or you can have freedom, never count on having both at once."...with all due respect we do know of the 'horrors of the world' that you say exist, these 'monsters' as you would term them. Bad people with an ideology entirely foreign or different than our own that continue to create war and chaos have existed for EVER. We should not give up our own beliefs in an effort to protect ourselves from them, when we do we become no different than they are & we justify their existence when 'our side' kills 'innocent people'...

No one is suggested that police agencies stop trying to do their job, but if your 'job' includes killing innocent people than something went missing in that 'job description'...you are now a murderer no different than any other murderer taking an innocent life.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[PPH]

In case you didn't recognize the source of the parent post, here it is.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[shutdown -p now]

Do you know anything about the age of Islamic conquest, such as when they invaded Europe or took Constantinople?

Do you understand that the people who took Constantinople and invaded Europe further (to be stopped at Vienna) were different from the people who carried out the initial building of the Islamic Caliphate and invaded Europe several centuries prior? Different ethnicity, different nation, different language, different customs - that they had the same religion (though even that was practiced differently in many ways) is a relatively minor detail.

I mean, by your own logic, every single war of conquest by a Christian state against a non-Christian one would be "Christian conquest".

In reality, Islam didn't play any significant role as a driver of expansion other than in the very first campaigns (under Muhammad himself, and his first few successors). Ottomans took Constantinople and invaded Europe because they could, just as Europeans have invaded the Americas and subjugated the natives because they could, and in that day and age, "right of conquest" was the supreme law. In both cases religion was used as an excuse for propaganda purposes, but it was not the primary motivator.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[shutdown -p now]

For the night is dark, and full of terrors.

So, who are we going to hoist onto the sacrificial pyre today?

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an idiot.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

You don't see the world they way that they do. To them there is only one Islam, without race or nationality. They are all part of the Ummah - the body of believers that constitute the Islamic nation. In Islam there are two main divisions of the world: Dar al-Islam (House of Islam - where Muslims rule) and Dar al-Harb (House of War - where Muslims do not rule which makes it subject to war). Their goal is to extend Dar al-Islam to cover the entire world, restore the Caliphate government dissolved with the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1923, make their flavor of Sharia law the law of the land, and return Islamic civilization to the glory of its former days.

It really doesn't matter what the truth is historically, they act on their beliefs.

As to conquest by "Christian nations," few of them are overtly Christian in any meaningful way anymore, and they haven't engaged in conquest expressly to spread Christianity in a very long time. Al Qaida and company is engaged in conquest expressly to spread Islam.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Man; sometimes I think people are being mean when they call you a conspiracy theorist.

Then days like today.... not so much.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

You don't get it, do you? It isn't what I believe, it is what they say. Why don't you start educating yourself?

The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants
Alarm in Spain over al-Qaeda call for its “reconquest”
HAMAS Targets Spain

I can't believe that people are still ignorant of this sort of thing after all this time. It is almost unbelievable.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[shutdown -p now]

I know about the divisions of the world in Islam etc. I also know about their practical place in the hierarchy of things. What your theory doesn't explain is why Muslims fought each other all along - not just Sunni vs Shia, but Sunni vs Sunni as well. Ottoman claims to Caliphate were, shall we say, contentious for quite a long time.

In truth, Muslim nations are like all other nations. They also have nationalism, for which Islam is, at best, a notable but not overwhelming part of their national identity. Arabs revolted against Ottoman Caliphs numerous times for these reasons, and Turks themselves always had a nationalist streak that ultimately lead them to rediscover themselves as a nation in their own right, and substitute "Turkishness" for Islam.

The only Muslims today who care about all that Dar al-Harb stuff and who actually have any specific plans for the re-establishment of the Caliphate are Salafi, but they're also the ones who don't recognize the vast majority of Caliphs since Muhammad as rightful rulers (in particular, Ottomans), because they deviated from the pure original Islam. I mean, we're talking here about people who deem Saudi Arabia to not be sufficiently Islamic, on the basis that they don't solely base their jurisprudence on Sharia, but have a few other written laws as well as the ability of the king to pardon people duly convicted by a sharia court.

However, Salafi are a minority among the Sunni. They are a dangerous minority, yes, and they will stir trouble, but the idea of enemy at the gates of the Western civilization is absurd in this context, and any parallels with the Ottoman conquests with Europe are superfluous. Salafi jihadists are a small group of fanatical rabble. By treating them as an army, and by advocating for the response on the scale that you do, you give them far too much credit and dignity. In practice, they are less dangerous to our civilization than, say, Mexican cartels.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Bite The Pillow]

The human brain does not calculate statistics to decide what it is afraid of. Even in the face of statistics, fear is not based on what is likely to kill us.

In fact, especially in the face of statistics, because we know how likely lightning is, as an example. But terrorists could be literally anywhere, and that's scary.

For the record, you are correct. But, since that's not how people work, you are also wrong.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

The darkness is around you, and you're oblivious to it.

no, the darkness is inside us. don't make us take that shit out. again.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're assuming we want the US to get stronger instead.
Who was it that decided the world should be a Christian place run by the US?

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're nothing but an NSA shill.

Cunt.

How dare you try to tell me who to be scared of. Fuck you and your apologist bullshit. What the NSA, CIA and military are doing in the name of average Americans makes them no better than the "terrorists" (who are actually just run-of-the-mill civilian criminals no matter how muich you try to paint them otherwise) they claim to be 'saving' us from.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

The NSA can go suck rocks.

I think you meant The NSA can go suck cocks.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You sound just like Bush, not even realising Sunni and Shia etc etc and any other version all hate each other and have killed far more fellow muslims than they could ever dream of killing Christians.

As to conquest by "Christian nations," few of them are overtly Christian in any meaningful way anymore, and they haven't engaged in conquest expressly to spread Christianity in a very long time

You really make it too easy

It really doesn't matter what the truth is historically, they act on their beliefs.

Christians make war in non Christian countries in order to stop the spread of non-Christian beliefs and will the (flawed) knowledge that Christianity will arise if they can only kill enough Muslims. They act on their beliefs.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you get so riled up over christian terrorists who bomb abortion clinics? Or Christians who force their equally stupid beliefs on people? Clean up your own house first. I haven't been invited to any weddings in Afghanistan recently, and I'm prety sure I'd decline in any event. So they are hardly preventing anything happening to me, rich peoples profits on the other hand they may have an influence upon.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

... it is what they say.

Ever hear the phrase 'actions speak louder than words'? Seems like that'd be a better guide here, since it's not tough to find incendiary rhetoric on just about any topic.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Christians make war in non Christian countries in order to stop the spread of non-Christian beliefs and will the (flawed) knowledge that Christianity will arise if they can only kill enough Muslims.

Check your calendar, it isn't the year 1100 anymore.

In case you didn't understand that, no, what you wrote isn't what is going on today.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

You're assuming we want the US to get stronger instead.

No, I'm not assuming that. Why would you think that?

US military strength has grown and decreased over the years, depending on what the perceived threat was. After the Cold War ended US military strength was significantly reduced. After 9/11 it was significantly increased, although not to Cold War levels overall. The US military is currently shrinking. But if al Qaida makes significant gains and grows in strength it will probably mean that the US will increase its armed forces to deal with it again.

Who was it that decided the world should be a Christian place run by the US?

Nobody, why do you think that? The US certainly doesn't run the world and it isn't forcing Christianity on anybody. The US government is secular. You may be getting some incorrect information if you believe that.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

engaged in conquest expressly to spread Christianity

Had they ever? All the conquests were about grabbing land, wealth and power, no matter what your bishop told you.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Next thing you'll be claiming that socialists and communists only want power, not to improve the life of the working classes and poor. I could agree with that.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

That is an interesting idea. Why don't you look into the news to see if there are any campaigns of terrorism and violence in the world with the aim of establishing an extremist Islamist government with strict Sharia law. That would be putting their words into action. I might have heard a rumbling or two that something like that could be going on. Maybe you'll find something if you look.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Znork]

Spending should be proportional to the danger because spending vast amounts of money on minor issues means more people die to the bigger threats.

As terrorism over the last decade killed about as many as die in freak bathtub accidents (about 300 per year), we should be spending about the same as we're spending on bathroom safety on the war on those scary terrorists.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

What? No lengthy list of links? No screeching about how we're all burying our collective heads in the sand? You're slipping, cf.

I guess fear-mongering is a lot tougher when you have to use reality as a basis instead of speculation.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, wow. cold fjord again at it.

Just because *some* islamists are assholes (and there are, mind you) doesn't mean we should throw overboard all our "rule of law" principles.

For one data point on how dangerous the "tarrist threat" is: in the last ten years there have been as many deaths by wasp and bee stings in the UK as there have been death by terrorist (islamic or not). There have been about three times as much drownings *in the bathtub*.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

The world is full of horror

In case you didn't notice, that is the central subject of this article: to point out the horrors perpetrated by US drones, in the form of extra-judicial executions.

This is not a game; this is the real world. And, in the real world, if you are deemed inconvenient, friend-of-terrorist, have the wrong religion, have the wrong skin colour or live in the wrong country, you are likely to end up like these thousands of people.

...but that's someone else's problem, right? Cuz murica.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Having been subject to "Christians" kindly wishing me death threats and mocking me for being associated with terrorists because of my looks, I say from the bottom of my heart cold fjord: fuck you and your scare mongering.

Did you ever stop to think the religious idiots this side of the globe will take out their paranoia and aggressions on their fellow American atheist citizens because of how they look or who their parents are?

Did you ever stop to think that there are consequences to your actions, and when you lump people all together there are idiots out there who will believe you and take it out on people who look the wrong way or talk with an accent or just have the wrong color of eyes or face or hair?

I assure you there are "Christians" who you are either "with or against" in their eyes. In the U.S. in other places. Everywhere.

And you know what? They are a small minority of retards who know damn well what they are doing.

People who feel they have nothing left in life don't really care if they live, surprise surpise. This isn't unique to some part of the globe, or some race, or some gender, or some age group, or some religion.

We don't need a police state to stop them. We need to stop giving in to fear.

You know how terrorists (all religions) win? When you they have you so scared of everything you strike out and lash out and destroy yourself from within.

I'm sorry you are scared of real life. Please, grow a pair.

You will not only save lives, you will save your country.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[strikethree]

The world is full of horror, and there are people who are trying to protect you, and they do care about the Constitution.

They would not need to work quite so hard to protect me (and you!) if they would stop trying to prevent me (and you!) to protect myself (and yourself!).

Caring about the Constitution is great but when your care leads you to thoughts (and laws!) that justify violating the Constitution, you have lost your way. Caring is not enough. The Constitution MUST be priority #1 when evaluating the creation of any new laws. If the Constitution is inconvenient, either accept it or use the legal methods to change it.

Now about that horror stuff... Perhaps you are right and the average American is so sheltered that they could never deal with such things, but that is what enables the abuses. There are still horrible and terrible things happening daily. It might be something like cancer or it could be something like a car wreck. Dying a terrible death is NOT limited to terrorism and using terrorism to justify the abuses we have seen is the sign of a sick and predatory mind.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

yawn.

I fear what my own government can do to me FAR more than I fear any 'terrorist'. and the chances of a US authority figure fucking us over (cops, judges, politicians, etc) is likely in our lifetimes while being hit by a terrorist is extremely unlikely.

You are much more likely to get killed by law enforcement than by terrorists. Why do you think the Internet is full of "how to avoid being killed or maimed or framed for life by police officers" guides rather than "how to negotiate with terrorists"? Much more relevant if you choose living in a country with a human rights record like the U.S.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

The world is much more terrifying than you realize. The men and women at NSA, CIA, and DOD are protecting you against monsters.

Well, may be thats how they started out. But somewhere down the road, they became the very monsters we now need to protect ourselfs against

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Sabriel]

I understand the problem all too well: you think it's acceptable to fight fire with fire. That if terrorists commit torture, you can too. That if they can blow up innocents, you can too. That if they can call it jihad and sacrifice, you can call it enhanced interrogation techniques and collateral damage.

Tell me, cold fjord, when the old terrorists are all finally dead, what are you going to do with all the new ones you've trained at home?

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Eunuchswear]

So, the only informed, interesting and insightful post gets modded.... redundant.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Eunuchswear]

No, sorry, that's outside the NSAs remit.

The CIA hires the cocksuckers, the NSA just wiretaps 'em to get the gagging noises.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Endymion]

I have read the news, and while there are quite a few spots around the world - some of them islamic. None of them are particularly threatening. We have a military that drawfs the militaries of the rest of the world combined.

Or are you saying that the fine men and women in our various armed forces are so incompetent that they couldn't defend against an attack from a far smaller, far weaker enemy? (not to mention all those impressive tool and weaponss we've invented) Such a position would be rather insulting to those serving to defend this country.

To suggest that any small terrorist group is any kind of actual threat implies that either 1) you have no idea wthat you're talking about ("the fool"), 2) you are unable to tell the difference between political rhetoric and a an actual threat of attack ("the easily frightened"), or 3) you're trying to scare other people with bogeymen in an effort to push another agenda ("the shill").

Maybe you'll find something if you look.

You know what I see in the news/etc? Certain US agencies and elected officials breaking their oaths to the constitution, spreading panic to get what they want, and generally doing their best to ruing this country's reputation.

So ou're right - we should keep up with the news and learn from the real threat: the unamerican traitors that are trying to destroy the very things this country if founded upon.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[ThatsNotPudding]

we are tired of this 'rule by fear'. we understand you like to control us that way, but we are hip to your bullshit and one day, the tides will turn and your 'culture of fear' won't be so popular anymore.

Until the next general election, when the 'hip' people are again overwhelmed by the fear-addicted lemmings (soccer moms and Joe six-clueless).

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

I invite you to acquaint yourself with reality. To your distress you'll see that I'm right.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

"They are ultimately going to come after New Zealand because New Zealand doesn't conform to the rules they demand you live under."

This is exactly what america has been doing to the world, i.e. imposing bullshit intellectual proprety laws and monopoly law on the world or threatening them with sanctions. Please for the love of god, learn about how corrupt your own nation is.

http://www.truthdig.com/

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[ThatsDrDangerToYou]

We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia...

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Lehk228]

Poe's Law: can't tell if excellent satire or bootlicking chode

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[LaughingVulcan]

No, I most sincerely would like to think I am an heir of Patrick Henry. And John Paul Jones.

However, I am also just anal, nitpicky, and realistic enough to know that the War of Independence was also (and quite likely primarlily) fought over economic terms. Ye rich landholders doth determined yonder far land wast cutting into the most sacred profits of landholders, and without ye rich landholders having the influence so desired and required in the halls of Parliament.

Now that we havest our Independence, such as it be for a land incredibly more crowded than in 1775 and so different economically as to have been on a different planet.... has not the flavor of that freedom changed? Must it not be so that today's current equivalent to the landholders interests are like protected? Such that we peons who pullest the 9 to 5 or equivalent continue to enjoy our ability to own iPads and freely expend our resources on high speed Internet and frozen yoghurts?

Truly, I'm not saying you're wrong. But first show me a better method to prosecute those who would perpetuate suicide bombings than going up to people and asking, "Are you Taliban?" and arresting those who say Yes. Show us a way to be both secure and free, for there are those who desire to eat their cake and have it too.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because they're ALSO wrong doesn't make us right.
Besides, we brought these guys to power for our interests way back.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[NoImNotNineVolt]

But first show me a better method to prosecute those who would perpetuate suicide bombings than going up to people and asking, "Are you Taliban?" and arresting those who say Yes. Show us a way to be both secure and free, for there are those who desire to eat their cake and have it too.

Why? Will you show me a better method to protect people against lightning strikes? To prevent people from falling and hitting their heads in the bathtub? Because as far as I know, both of these issues pose a considerably more grave threat to the lives of Americans.

I'm saying that we don't particularly need to prosecute those who would perpetuate [sic] suicide bombings. Not only do they not pose any material threat to the safety of these United States, but they're already imposing the death sentence on themselves. We can't really do any better than that, unless you mean to suggest that we start prosecuting thought crime to arrest people not for breaking the law, but for wanting to break the law.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You see enemies where there are none. I feel sorry for you cold fjord, as that is a sad way to live life.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[sociocapitalist]

You don't understand the problem, it isn't about being nice, or anything wrong you might have done to them. They are ultimately going to come after New Zealand because New Zealand doesn't conform to the rules they demand you live under. Do you know anything about the age of Islamic conquest, such as when they invaded Europe or took Constantinople? That is what they are about, their goal is a Muslim world even if it takes force of arms. You don't want them to get stronger.

Al Qaeda-Trained Terrorists in New Zealand, Prime Minister Says

Because Europeans have never invaded other countries...

Oh sorry, I forgot that's okay when we do it.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[sociocapitalist]

"Cattle are safe."

I just want to say how much I appreciate this part of your comment. :-)

I'm with you on all the rest as well by the way.

Re:Slashdot will hate me for saying this.

[cold fjord]

That's actually funny. I only see what is in the news. You apparently can't be bothered.

Innocence

[Anonymous Coward]

"he also states that innocent people have 'absolutely' been killed as a result of the NSA's increasing reliance on the surveillance tactic."

Piss Poor Pathos.

So what.

Terrorists kill large numbers of innocent people all the time. And now we have the NSA / CIA killing a very small number of innocent people and thereby preventing the deaths of a very large number of innocent people.

At what level do we agree that sometimes the brutality justifies the prevention.

Re:Innocence

[Anonymous Coward]

and that is what people in the those countries say about 9/11

Simple statistics

[Anonymous Coward]

I s'pose if we kill enough of them, we'll get at least a few bad guys, too. /snark

-- green led

Hmm

[The Grim Reefer]

and targets a SIM card belonging to a terror suspect,

So someone could take a box with a dozen or so of the SIM cards and place it in a mosque, wedding, or other gathering of completely innocent people. Suddenly it's a meeting place with many "high value" targets and a bunch of innocents die, known SIM cards get destroyed and the bad guys need to get new phones. Or SIM card anyhow. So this harmless metadata, or so the NSA says, is enough information to fire missiles at people. But it's not something that I should be concerned with being tracked if it's from my phone?

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which uses a conservative methodology to track drone strikes, estimates that at least 2,400 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia have been killed by unmanned aerial assaults under the Obama administration.

That's considerably more than I would have thought the total of all drone strikes ever. As scary as the cold war was, this "war on terror", or what ever it's called these days, is far creepier to me.

takes full responsibility for it.

That phrase doesn't seem to mean what it used to.

Re:Hmm

[uffe_nordholm]

One thing I wonder about the "takes full responsibility" bit is this: if it is proven in the future (and I'm sure it will) that some drone strike has killed only innocent people and no 'legitimate target', would the friends and families of the killed people be allowed to kill Obama? If yes, then he is indeed taking full responsibility. If not, then he is not taking full responsibility. Settling the matter with money does not count.

Personally I could settle for having Obama (or the president of the day) put on trial for premeditated murder if/when it is proven that a drone strike only killed innocent people, but it's a more interesting discussion taken to the limit.

Re:Hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if they'd be incompetent enough to bomb themselves if you put a sim card above their operators. There is nothing more karmic than killing yourself while attempting to murder by the very method you intend to use.

American Teenager Droned

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The story of al-Awalaki's 16 year old son doesn't get enough coverage. Presumably, he's one of the 4 americans that have been (officially) killed by drone strikes.

Obama's campaign staff said that the boy should've "had a more responsible father."

http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

Re:American Teenager Droned

[Anonymous Coward]

He should have. Were his father not who he was, his kid wouldn't have gone off to follow in his footsteps and been in Yemen around targeted people and ended up getting hit with them.

Pretty simple.

Re:American Teenager Droned

[ffkom]

Let's just assume that was successful practicing for the day when computer evaluated meta data will determine whether citizens are allowed to live on in the USofA. Such data will one day be used to predict whether your upcoming life will be profitable to those in command of the drones. If it's not, better run for cover.

Re:American Teenager Droned

[Anonymous Coward]

He should have. Were his father not who he was, his kid wouldn't have gone off to follow in his footsteps and been in Yemen around targeted people and ended up getting hit with them.

Pretty simple.

Guilt by proximity.

Yep, you are right. That is a pretty simple world view.

It does make diplomacy by high explosives more practical, as high explosives have this thing about proximity.

Re:American Teenager Droned

[Anonymous Coward]

The story of al-Awalaki's 16 year old son doesn't get enough coverage. Presumably, he's one of the 4 americans that have been (officially) killed by drone strikes.

Obama's campaign staff said that the boy should've "had a more responsible father."

http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

I dont ubnderstand why you blame Obama. He promised change, and he changed. Today, is is probably the most dedicated child-killer ouside the middle east or mental institutions.

Re:American Teenager Droned

[Agent0013]

Ok, if that's how you feel. Don't feel bad if you get blown up. You should have had a better president and government. If you get killed by some terrorist organization, then you must have deserved it due to the country you live in and president you have.

It's satire, you're writing, right?

[ffkom]

If you honestly think that the "world out there" is "full of horror" and "monsters", you've got serious mental issues. Maybe you can help yourself by travelling the world - not in an army uniform, and not just to places where you are sent to shoot people your employer dislikes.

Maybe you would realize then that people all around the world have much better things to do then to conspire against people living in some remote country. Unless of course, they are being approached by you dropping bombs on their houses.

If you want to be scared about dangers to you life, why not calculate the probabilities of dying early from car accidents, lack of health insurance, being shot randomly by some disgruntled gunman on a rampage at home - all in relation to the risk of becoming the victim of some sinister terror plan?

And BTW: You might have noticed that there are many developed countries in the world that run nothing remotely similar to the NSA, CIA and DOD that have not seen any significant amount of attacks from foreign "monsters".

Re:It's satire, you're writing, right?

[Bite The Pillow]

I believe it's not satire, and although you might have traveled the world, you didn't go where bstarrfield did.

I can guarantee that, because peoples' opinions are colored by where they have been and what they have seen. A church missionary might say they saw all walks of life and they were kind, generous, and beautiful people. A soldier may see a few of these people, but have their opinions made from a line of people who would, if possible, behead them and their children. A CEO's wife may see foreigners as subservient, since they are rarely seen outside the role of hotel or wait staff.

They visit the same places, possibly see the same people, but spend more time with certain members of society. Depending where I live in New York City, I could form an infinite number of opinions about the geography and people, just by selecting the right square mile.

Your opinion of what "facts" are is highly biased by your experience. If bstarrfield was not sincere, there are enough people who do believe exactly that so we can assume it is sincere. And that opinion is just as much biased as yours, and for the same reasons. And it remains "fact", just not to you.

It's just a glitch

[Anonymous Coward]

The tracking system is actually in its beta phase. They'll get it sorted in a few decades, I'm sure.

Re:It's just a glitch

[shentino]

+1 Funny

Wow

[mozumder]

There are people that think the two parties are equivalent.

They do not know that actual policy differences occur between parties. A good example of policy differences between parties is health care.

We call these people "idiots", because they do not understand the full system. They make equivalence based on one or two data points. They are incapable of analyzing large data sets, and mistakenly form conclusions based on limited data.

Now, are there anybody that still thinks Obama and Bush are the same, given their enormous differences in health-care and environmental and labor policy?

What OTHER data points would you like to point out that show the differences between the two parties?

Re: Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Lookup wedge issue then you might start to understand....

rule of thumb

[Anonymous Coward]

if it's enough information to kill you, then it's surveillance.

I can't recommend commenting on this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Chances are soon that Slashdot use in an unapproved manner will earn you a drone st ----carrier lost----

Flank Operation

[Anonymous Coward]

A targeted SIM gets into one of Obama's daughters android phone.

Obama issues kill order on the SIM card.

Predator overflights DC, launches attack on WH, SIM and phone and significant portion of WH are destroyed, daughter dead.

This would be a great Catch-22 to nail Obama with his own toy.

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

So...what...?

Game of ovens?

[Anonymous Coward]

Game of ovens?

Faking your death

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot that disposing of the burner phone by dropping it on an un knowing person also leaves the morons doing the drone strike to think that they killed their target and are no longer a threat. There isn't really a good way to confirm who you actually killed after a strike it's basically a shot in the dark and and you hope you get the right person.

Geolocating is more reliable than you think.

[strstr]

They really don't use your cellphone to track you. They use your unique brain signature, and as you move around (even in buildings/under cover), they can watch you and see where you go. This allows them to track you 24/7 wherever you are, without use of cellphone or other tracking device.

The only problem with this method, is, it's covert, and therefore cannot be used in a court of law. But it can be used everywhere else. If a target happens to get killed when the person wasn't the true target, it's all a lie; they intended for that person to die.

Look up their massive radar and satellite system. This is 90% of what Signals Intelligence is, and it has been equipped with brain reading technology since 1976 (according to Dr. Robert Duncan, DOD/CIA/US DOJ whistleblower): http://www.oregonstatehospital...

Other things they do with their satellite technology: track heart rate, breathe, vitals, and license plates.

Yeah your body is like a lightbulb from space in the 0-100Hz realm, and it travels through walls pretty easily (billions upon billions of neurons lights you and the inside of buildings up pretty good). ;)

Re:Geolocating is more reliable than you think.

[adri]

... do you have any other references besides the above? A FOIA document or two would be nice.

Re:Geolocating is more reliable than you think.

[Eunuchswear]

References! You're asking for references from someone claiming:

Yeah your body is like a lightbulb from space in the 0-100Hz realm, and it travels through walls pretty easily (billions upon billions of neurons lights you and the inside of buildings up pretty good). ;)

FFS.

Re:Geolocating is more reliable than you think.

[strstr]

References are on the page man, to verifiable sources. News articles, patents, interviews by whistleblowers, 24 videos, books, Wikipedia, copies of lawsuits over it, etc.

I like the Dr. Duncan interviews on coast to coast and Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory for example. Mark Philips also backs him up, a CIA operative who worked in MKULTRA.

MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, NSA PROJECT MINARET/SHAMROCK, and Church Committee are the best references to when these abuses began. Which Duncan says never ended, merely moved into new programs ith new names after the 1970s.

Re:Geolocating is more reliable than you think.

[strstr]

The mentioned progams have FOIA backed info, but modern stuff is too well protected .. sources come from reports, media tracking/news sources, and the whistleblowers including Russell Tice of the NSA/Dr. Duncan who designed these systems. The porblem is, the government is not admitting to spying on anyone, they lie and cover it up at every turn, and there are no protections in place to fight them. The only way we can do shit about it is to create our own Army, and go kill the President.

Its a game of raping and abusing Americans, spying on us to control us, feeding us misinformation to deceive us. They commit spy games on us, and hide behind cover stories that these are all official programs for national security.

Also, NSA denies all FOIA attempts as they do not comply with that law. So does the DOD. For liability reasons, why do you think it would be info handed out by the government?

Why is this suddenly discussed in public?

[Anonymous Coward]

This story being given to the press seems self-serving. First, the timing (post-Snowden and an unconvincing speech by Obama to try to wipe the egg off his face). Now, we have a sensitive (para)military operation being discussed and debated in full view of the public, tipping off the suspect, or more likely, every potential suspect with an ounce of paranoia. For what purpose? I think the Obama administration is floating this story just so that they can later tell everyone they've called off the strike for humanitarian reasons and Obama gets to look like less of a powermonger. If they were seriously contemplating another strike on an American citizen, after the political fallout from the last, pre-Snowden strike, they would not be talking about it so openly. This is Obama trying to win back some points by conceding to something he knows that he can no longer brush off as "for national security reasons". He's ridden that phrase into the ground, albeit with the Hand of Snowden securely pressing down on it. The public isn't buying it anymore and this debate is nothing more than ethics theater.

No such innocence

[Anonymous Coward]

he also states that innocent people have 'absolutely' been killed as a result of the NSA's increasing reliance on the surveillance tactic

top Taliban leaders, knowing of the NSA's targeting method, have purposely and randomly distributed SIM cards among their units in order to elude their trackers

Not one innocent person here getting handed a random phone from top talibanned.

Re:No such innocence

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're saying that 2400 people were directly targeted by drone strikes? Perhaps you should do some math and figure out that among the many lies that the CIA has told to the American people, there is one about how "surgical" it is to throw a missile at an apartment building.

"Secret" role?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to break it to you all but... the NSA is part of the Dept of Defense, so the NSA providing intelligence to the military is hardly a secret. Sorry to ruin your outrage narrative.

So its like IP addresses

[Anonymous Coward]

So the SIM card targeting is like big media going after IP addresses. Your ISP spins out a new one every time you log on, but but big media forgets that and says "your IP address downloaded our moveees last week". Your retort "I just got internet this morning, and you produce the bill". They miss the obvious and their blood sucking lawyers cry out "you owe us a hundred bazillion dollars, but for a mere $500,000 we will go away". They then claim all and sundry. Here is sim cards, missiles instead of lawyers, and hospitals and orphanages instead of you, but the end result is the same; your life is over.

The money quote

[bayankaran]

From the TFA...
Obama once reportedly told his aides that it âoeturns out Iâ(TM)m really good at killing people.â The president added, âoeDidnâ(TM)t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.â
I don't think even Mitt Romney will be this callous and arrogant.

Re:The money quote

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that quote is of one piece with what else we know about Obama. He thinks he is the best there is at everything. He has said that he wishes he could do everything, because he's a better speech writer than his speech writers, a better political director than his political directors, etc.

Source: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/17/081117fa_fact_lizza?printable=true

I think he is a narcissist. One of the signs of a narcissist is lack of empathy.

http://samvak.tripod.com/obama.html

I'm embarrassed

[nicoleb_x]

"...Whether or not Obama is fully aware of the errors built into the program of targeted assassination, he and his top advisers have repeatedly made clear that the president himself directly oversees the drone operation and takes full responsibility for it." The press making up excuses for all that tee time? Fuck That!

Fight (or Create?) Terrorism

[Anonymous Coward]

This sounds like a great way to win the hearts and minds of (potential) terrorists, and really end the war on terror. These kinds of strikes shouldn't have any unintended consequences (blow back) on us at all, right? Having our government kill people, without any kind of a Congressionally declared war, always works out well in the past for us.

I'm glad we are making the world a safer place, and using our position of the world's leader in technology in such a responsible way.

In WW2 the British could triangulate

[Anonymous Coward]

Could track and triangulate signals, send in a team, capture the baddie, and in 24 hours have a trial then free or hang said baddie.
Inserted spies have very short life expectancies, but most blabbed their hearts out. Better intel.

Moving on to 2014, why can't the ANA or whatever be trusted to a raid .. no not even one! So the stupid ones get hellfired, and the smart ones keep on recruiting phone decoys.

Talent and tradecraft has sure gone down the toilet.

What it comes down to is:

[fredrated]

the President of the United States is nothing but a murdering sack of dripping human waste.
I say this as an ashamed life time Democrat that will never vote for the Democratic party of murdering scum as long as I live. Which may be just until the next drone strike. Fuck you you vile evil scum-sucking bastard.

uncertainty about OBL?

[Anonymous Coward]

not that I believe this but for argument's sake if they do have this capability why was there any doubt about OBL being in the Abbottabad compound?

Re:uncertainty about OBL?

[strstr]

I am somewhat of a prophet here. I can tell you that there was no uncertainty, and what we were told by the CIA and Obama and Bush was a lie. They do not fill us in, they do not disclose their operations; they create cover stories, things that make sense to the public but do not reflect the actual events or methods of operation.

It's simple. The fact is our government is crazy, probably let him live as long as they needed him, then they killed him. Our government is so powerful, they control all information, and what they let us do is for their benefit. They find a way to use every event for a strategic outcome, and no one really knows what these outcomes are except for them.

When they finally went after Osama, for his death, it was purely for publicity. For the story that they would then be able to seed to the public. Nothing else.

Responsibility - not what you think it means

[CmdrTamale]

' Whether or not Obama is fully aware of the errors built into the program of targeted assassination, he and his top advisers have repeatedly made clear that the president himself directly oversees the drone operation and takes full responsibility for it."

You have got to be joking. He is 1%. That is not how it works

How NSA can become unknowing mob executioners

[ivi]

So, there could arise a market for "[recently] used terrorists' 9tSIM cards"
(Terrorists might see 2 incentives for selling their old SIMs into it - at
least if they're very mobile: reduce chance of being killed & some easy $$).

Who'd buy?

Well, anyone wanting soneone -else- dead; instead of paying a high-priced
professional killer, all that person would need to do (theoretically) is to:

1. buy such a SIM & a cheap phone [equipped with GPS]
2. plant phone (with the SIM installed) into target's briefcase, etc.
3. await news of target's "death by CIA"

This is yet another reason to -stop- these pre-trial killings by CIA, et al.
We have enough geniune "collateral damage" already, without the above.

Re:Killing Americans

[bruceslog]

Well, During earlier wars, traitors would be hung. Or face a firing squad. American citizens or not. If these are in deed traitors, they decided their own fate.

Re:Killing Americans

[Shaiken]

Pretty sure these traitors usually got a quaint little thing called a 'trial' where the prosecution used an outmoded idea called 'evidence' before the execution. (And if they didn't they were certainly supposed to.)

Amusingly, this is also just another restatement of the argument I was complaining about. "We used to be worse, so this is OK!". No it's bloody not!

Re:Killing Americans

[bruceslog]

My mistake.
I called the people being targeted traitors, when they are enemy fighters trying to kill people from afar, in their own self declared war on the country of their citizenship. ( Which also makes them a traitor ).
But enemy fighters above all. On their own field of battle.
So no, no trial.

From what I understand, there are many, many 'American citizens' scheming against the American government.
Those people are Not on a 'hit list' that I am aware of. Though I am sure that they are being watched.

So I must disagree with your statement of the U.S. government asserting that it's allowed to 'arbirtarily' (sic) kill its own citizens.

These people of various citizenships are at war with America. Making themselves the enemy.
And this field of battle is almost worldwide.

All of which is leading this administration to publicly determine whether this enemy soldier/warrior/traitor should be hunted down across borders into his own battlefield and eliminated.

I know, the last administration, as well as this one at first, just went ahead and blew these enemies up by drone wherever they were hiding, without any kind of public notice or oversight. We the People reacted to that strongly and negatively, and apparently they've learned that lesson, at least. They are at least making the public aware that there is a debate going on. Which should lead to many mixed feelings and input about the situation.
My feeling ?
Someone just accused of being a traitor, then yes, a trial to decide if that is fact or not.
An enemy soldier trying to kill Americans, then yeah, they are fair game. No matter how widespread the battlefield, no matter what country the enemy has his citizenship. No trial needed.
When the American south went to war against the American government in the civil war, no soldier on the battlefield expected a trial before he was allowed to be shot in battle.
Same deal here. Attack us, then it is war. And you will be a target. No matter what country you came from.

So, I apologize.
That was where I went wrong in my first reply to you. I simply called these 'targeted Americans' traitors. But they are more than that, they are enemy fighters actively trying to kill Americans in a war they started.

As for having to drone bomb them from afar, well, I don't like the idea because of the uncertainty, and the risk of bombing civilians or even the wrong people, as this article points out.
I also see how the situation can leave not a lot of choice here, without invading a lot of other countries just find all the enemy soldiers.
In the case of the last few conflicts, there are no clearly drawn battle lines.

In times past, an army marched across land and sea and air and met in battle with usually clearly drawn lines of battle, under their banners, or in their uniforms, and fighting it out, with the winners moving the battleline forward.
Now, this enemy is hiding in homes and caves, holes or basements, across vast areas of several other countries, persuading, or forcing, other men and women to blow up groups of unarmed American civilians at work or at play, thousands of miles away, and sacrificing their own lives in the process ( since the bombs are strapped to them, or they are wearing the thing ).
They do this Not to claim land or to free the people, but apparently just to make a statement, since they can't possibly hope to take over the United States by doing this.
There is no real battlefield. No battlelines. No front. The enemy is not with his army marching across the field of battle. He can't be shot, wounded or killed in the battle, because he is no where near the battle.

He has to be hunted down in his hidey hole.

So, as enemy soldiers, I think that these people have forfeited any right to a trial, regardless of their citizenship.
I see that the U.S. government is trying to target the most dangerous enemy soldiers in their hidey holes, and not just any American with a grudge and