It is not immediately clear if President Obama authorized the strike in Syria. The official said the U.S. military is authorized to conduct counter-terrorism missions against Al Qaeda anytime.
On Barack Obama’s last day, did the military carry out this strike on its own, without White House approval, or consideration of White House policy?
The US Air Force conducted a second “major strike” in consecutive days killing over 100 Al Qaeda fighters at a training camp in northern Syria, a defense official with knowledge of the strike told a handful of reporters at the Pentagon on Friday.
A single U.S. Air Force B-52 bomber and an undisclosed number of drones dropped 14 precision-guided bombs at noon eastern time Thursday on an Al Qaeda “basic training” camp in Syria west of the city of Aleppo near the border with Turkey, according to the official.
“This was core Al Qaeda” said the official describing the fighters.
Again, if you haven’t read it:
In typical Obama fashion the release is scheduled for May 17, well into Donald Trump’s reign.
William Binney, who was Technical Director at the NSA and actually designed their surveillance capabilities, has advised me by email.
…NSA would have the actual hack on record, would be able to recognise the emails themselves and tell you exactly the second the transmission or transmissions took place and how they were routed. They would be able to give you date, time and IP addresses.
…But the report gives no evidence at all of the alleged successful hack that transmitted these particular emails, nor any evidence of the connection between the hackers and the Russian government, let alone Putin.
…Obama has been a severe disappointment to all progressive thinkers in virtually every possible way. He now goes out of power with absolutely no grace and in a storm of delusion and deceit. His purpose is apparently to weaken Trump politically, but to achieve that at the expense of heightening tensions with Russia to Cold War levels, is shameful.
I’m not only referring to Trump’s tards (as Democrats would have instantly presumed) but to an equally malignant demographic: the smug, arrogant, pseudo-intellectual. These people think they know what they do not know and are thus rendered incapable of thought, incapacitated, intellectually stunted. Those types make great Nazis, in fact, and are arguably half of the voting population.
They are the Peace Laureate’s defenders and cheerleaders, Hillary’s people, corporate comedians like Samantha Bee, Zionists like Bill Maher, listeners of NPR, and readers of Alternet. These lobotomized partisans only oppose war when it is convenient, when a Republican is in office. Not when the warmonger is a Democrat, and that is disgusting hypocrisy. They have pushed the nation toward moral bankruptcy, a rampaging duopoly of blustering hypocrites talking around the crimes. They don’t notice nor even care about the bombs Barack Obama drops, nor the shiploads of arms he sells to the world’s most despicable tyrants.
How to understand such people?
They aren’t lacking in a worldview, and that’s the problem. Ideology supplants honest analysis, full stop. In this case, their only apparent ideology was revealed to be that they believe themselves to be a “lesser evil” than their opponents; that’s all. Clinton offered nothing except that her last name wasn’t Trump.
Constantly reinforced with finely streamlined propaganda that omits damning facts while pretending to investigate, this modern propaganda provides the illusion of knowledge, not the real thing. The model here is the ‘limited hangout.’ The pseudo-intellectual Democrats are permitted to know something about the topics, just enough to be brought to heel. They are manipulated at a slightly higher level than their sworn enemies, the willfully ignorant dumbasses who don’t care. A better brand of puppet is thus manufactured via top-shelf propaganda (CIA, NPR, State Department, NY Times, Washington Post, etc.). Few readers are sophisticated enough to challenge the claims of these organs, and so even nonsense can pass as factual and accurate most of the time—often all that is needed is one unnamed source.
The Putin Ate My Baby
As the alleged “Russian hacking” fiasco has shown, no credible evidence is even required to sell a new Cold War to Americans.
It’s easy to show that most of the coverage of the ‘Russians hacked the DNC’ story is propaganda and not journalism at all. Journalistic ethics require a real journalist to print the other side of the story and to present it to readers so that they can determine for themselves what to believe. Julian Assange and Wikileaks are the other side of that story, and they have been clear and consistent that the files they published weren’t “hacked” at all but leaked by a “disgusted” DNC insider. Any “news” story that omits that crucial part of the narrative is untrustworthy propaganda, the sort you’d expect living in the Soviet Union (ironically).
– Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.
– Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”
–Society of Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics
The complete collapse of journalistic ethics across the spectrum, in the rush to demonize Russia in lockstep with the government, is arguably a far more serious concern than whether some Russian hacker found his way to some emails. The complete brainwashing of a superpower is frightening no matter how it is spun. Anti-Russian hysteria has been the norm as Washington surrounds Russia with NATO bases and destabilizes Russia’s allies, including Ukraine and Syria. These are provocations with body counts. They are not in the interest of the people parroting the official propaganda. The Great Game of imperial one-upsmanship benefits the war industry, not the common people.
It may end life on earth.
Granted, most of the content that western media provides is accurate but incomplete by design. Omission is the staple technique for those who would present biased narratives. At the large daily papers, omission is a high art form.
As the old propaganda system melts down, to much commotion, everyone needs to stay on top of the story. Western media has been exposed as corrupt, untrustworthy, and in a hostile war to influence the public mind.
No one really knows whom to trust anymore. It is a paranoid age, where even your friends lie to you daily by posting nonsensical memes based on no sourcing whatsoever. Laziness is at the heart of the dissemination: convenience culture (a la Idiocracy). No one bothers to check the veracity of their claims, to take responsibility for the information they put out into the world, although this may be turning around among a few.
We must all be journalists and demand corroboration: multiple credible sources. We must all be skeptical of news organizations, all news sources, trusting nothing without a thorough analysis. The specific phrasing matters. We must stop tolerating obvious gibberish, the fake news flooding Facebook that has no redeeming value. Noise drowns out the truth.
Real journalists back up their claims with extensive sourcing. Do you?