Back in December 2011, a US RQ-170 Sentinel drone was either brought down or crash landed smack in the middle of Iran, allowing the local military and scientists to reverse engineer it furthering their own understanding of possible countermeasures, as well as selling the underlying technology to China and other countries eager to peek inside America's remote-controlled "oppression liberators." All this happened because someone during the drone design phase forgot to add a self-destruct option. Now, over a year later, we will see if someone finally thought of adding this simple feature following news that Iran has just brought down another (just modestly antagonizing) foreign spy drone over its territory.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards have brought down a foreign surveillance drone during a military exercise, the official Islamic Republic News Agency said on Saturday.
"We have managed to bring down a drone of the enemy. This has happened before in our country," the agency quoted war games spokesman General Hamid Sarkheli as saying in Kerman, southeast Iran, where the military exercise is taking place.
The agency gave no details on who the drone belonged to.
In Washington, a Pentagon spokesman said he had seen the reports. He noted that the Iranians did not specifically claim that the drone was American.
In the past, there have been incidents of Iran claiming to have seized U.S. drones.
In early January Iranian media said Iran had captured two miniature U.S.-made surveillance drones over the past 17 months.
Several drone incidents over the past year or so have highlighted tension in the Gulf as Iran and the United States flex their military capabilities in a standoff over Iran's disputed nuclear program.
In other disturbing drone-related news, Michael Krieger reports that when it comes to targeted killings...
It's OK if Obama does it"
In a YouGov poll of 1,000 voters last August, Tesler found significantly more support for targeted killing of suspected terrorists among white “racial liberals” (i.e., those liberal on issues of race) and African-Americans when they were told that Obama supported such a policy than when they were not told it was the president’s policy. Only 27 percent of white racial liberals in a control group supported the targeted killing policy, but that jumped to 48 percent among such voters who were told Obama had conducted such targeted killings.
- Joan Walsh’s recent article at Salon: Targeted killings: OK if Obama does it?
Think about how troubling the above passage is. Basically, a reasonably large percentage of the population of America will simply allow Barrack Obama to do whatever he wants because he is black and a member of their “Democrat” football team. The irony is incredible, but believe me this fact is not lost upon the elites that want to perpetuate the warfare state indefinitely. They fully understand that Obama essentially neutralizes a large part of the “liberal” resistance simply because he is black and ostensibly “liberal.”
I came across the above information while reading Glenn Greenwald’s article about how MSNBC has finally make the total transformation into official government propaganda arm by hiring Robert Gibbs and David Axelrod. His article is a scathing must-read. Here are my favorite excerpts:
Last month, MSNBC’s Al Sharpton conducted a spirited debate about whether Obama belongs on Mount Rushmore or instead deserves a separate monument to his greatness (just weeks before replacing frequent Obama critic Cenk Uygur as MSNBC host, Sharpton publicly vowed never to criticize Barack Obama under any circumstances: a vow he has faithfully maintained).
A Pew poll found that in the week leading up to the 2012 election, MSNBC did not air a single story critical of the President or a single positive story about Romney – not a single one – even as Fox aired a few negative ones about Romney and a few positive ones about Obama.
“Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has become a contributor for MSNBC. Rachel Maddow introduced Gibbs as a new member of her network’s stable in the final minutes before President Obama’s State of the Union address on Tuesday night. . . . Gibbs was White House press secretary from 2009 to early 2011, when he left to become a senior campaign adviser for Obama’s re-election.”“David Axelrod, the former White House senior advisor and senior strategist for President Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, has joined NBC News and MSNBC as a senior political analyst, the networks announced today. . . . Like Gibbs, Axelrod will appear across the networks’ programming.”Finally, American citizens will now be able to hear what journalism has for too long so vindictively denied them: a vibrant debate between Gibbs and Axelrod on how great Obama really is.
That you can cover what political officials do more effectively when you act adversarially and without their “cooperation” doesn’t seem to occur to them. Moreover, getting to sit for personal interviews with the president usually produces anything but adversarial questioning. As even Politico admits: “some reporters inevitably worry access or the chance of a presidential interview will decrease if they get in the face of this White House.”
Well looking at the bright side, the more the mainstream media continues to screw up, the greater the opportunity they are creating for people like me.
Full article here.