Secret War on Terrorism

[Lamplighter]

link

Repeated U.S. drone strikes could spark another round of terrorist attacks in Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, Sept. 26 (Xinhua) --

At least nine people were killed and another two injured in three U.S. drone strikes
launched on Sunday evening in Pakistan's northwest tribal area of North Waziristan,
reported local media.

The third strike launched by U.S. drones on Sunday evening counts for the eighth of its kind over the past week.
Starting from last Sunday, the U.S. drones have apparently stepped up its strike
against the militants hiding in Pakistan's northwest tribal areas of North Waziristan and South Waziristan.
So far over 40 people including some important militant leaders have reportedly been killed in the strikes since last Sunday.

The so-called precision strikes of the U.S. drones against militants have also mistakenly killed many other innocent people.
There are reports saying that the death ratio of militants killed against civilians in such strikes stands at about 1 against 25,
leading to a strong anti-American sentiment in the country.

[xoxoxoBruce]

The so-called precision strikes of the U.S. drones against militants have also mistakenly killed many other innocent people.
There are reports saying that the death ratio of militants killed against civilians in such strikes stands at about 1 against 25,
leading to a strong anti-American sentiment in the country.

Who's doing the counting, the Taliban? They're probably claiming the strikes are setting Korans on fire too. Maybe the people will get the hint, don't harbor, or even hang with, Taliban leaders.

[classicman]

I'm with Bruce - LEARN PEOPLE. If you hang with, harbor, or provide for them YOU are at risk.

[Happy Monkey]

Heh, that's the Taliban strategy, too.

[xoxoxoBruce]

It certainly is, so they should understand.

[spudcon]

I thought that's been our strategy from the beginning. If you harbor terrorists, it's your fault if you wake up without an ass. If people are afraid to give comfort to the terrorists, eventually they'll have nowhere to go, except straight to hell.

[TheMercenary]

I have no problem with it. I am actually surprised that Obama has the balls to authorize it.

[classicman]

Meanwhile the GOP and some of its ranks can't friggin decide if they are for or against it. idiots

[xoxoxoBruce]

They haven't been told what to think yet.

[ZenGum]

Grab 'em by the balls, and the hearts and minds will follow - is that the plan?

Fear lasts until we turn our backs. Hatred lingers for years.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Grab 'em by the balls, and the hearts and minds will follow - is that the plan?

Their hearts and minds are a lost cause, kill them.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Seeing as this is the first time I've ever seen you be a hawk, Bruce, I have to suspect there's satire here.

BTW, I'm reading Rove now. Sets the record straight about quite a few things.

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's because you're so busy filibustering. I've never opposed killing our aggressors, I just oppose your strategy of killing everyone who might, maybe, sometime in the future, think about becoming our aggressors.

[Lamplighter]

Here's an article for all the James Bond wanna-be's.

It impresses me how Fox News and it's commentators are portrayed as conveyors
and participants in this man's activities, including:
Oliver North and Glen Beck along with bloggers Brad Thor and Andrew Breitbart

NY Times
Former Spy With Agenda Operates a Private C.I.A.
By MARK MAZZETTI
Published: January 22, 2011

WASHINGTON — Duane R. Clarridge parted company with the
Central Intelligence Agency more than two decades ago,
but from poolside at his home near San Diego, he still runs a network of spies.
<snip>
Hatching schemes that are something of a cross between a Graham Greene novel and
Mad Magazine’s “Spy vs. Spy,” Mr. Clarridge has sought to discredit Ahmed Wali Karzai,
the Kandahar power broker who has long been on the C.I.A. payroll, and planned
to set spies on his half brother, the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai,
in hopes of collecting beard trimmings or other DNA samples that might prove
Mr. Clarridge’s suspicions that the Afghan leader was a heroin addict, associates say.
<snip>

Mr. Clarridge, 78, who was indicted on charges of lying to Congress in the Iran-contra scandal
and later pardoned, is described by those who have worked with him as
driven by the conviction that Washington is bloated with bureaucrats and lawyers
who impede American troops in fighting adversaries and that leaders
are overly reliant on mercurial allies.

From his days running secret wars for the C.I.A. in Central America to his consulting work
in the 1990s on a plan to insert Special Operations troops in Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein,
Mr. Clarridge has been an unflinching cheerleader for American intervention overseas.

“Sometimes, unfortunately, things have to be changed in a rather ugly way,” said Mr. Clarridge,
his New England accent becoming more pronounced the angrier he became.
“We’ll intervene whenever we decide it’s in our national security interests to intervene.”
“Get used to it, world,” he said. “We’re not going to put up with nonsense.”

Charles E. Allen, a former top intelligence official at the Department of Homeland Security
who worked with Mr. Clarridge at the C.I.A., termed him an “extraordinary”
case officer who had operated on “the edge of his skis” in missions abroad years ago.
But he warned against Mr. Clarridge’s recent activities, saying that private spies operating in war zones
“can get both nations in trouble and themselves in trouble.”
He added, “We don’t need privateers.”
<snip>
He [Clarridge] was indicted in 1991 on charges of lying to Congress about his role
in the Iran-contra scandal; he had testified that he was unaware of arms shipments to Iran.
But he was pardoned the next year by the first President George Bush.

[Griff]

As for Mr. Clarridge, American law prohibits private citizens from actively undermining a foreign government, but prosecutions under the so-called Neutrality Act have historically been limited to people raising private armies against foreign powers. Legal experts said Mr. Clarridge’s plans against the Afghan president fell in a gray area, but would probably not violate the law.

Don't you just love super-patriots, who love our way of life so much they'll play it fast and loose with our rule of law. They always seem to think the other people are the Washington insiders.