Pakistan Reissues Its Usual Objections About Drones-- Again

There they go again. The Pakistan government bosses are once again inveighing against U.S. drone attacks on Taliban terrorists in their tribal areas. (There's a fundamental problem right there: tribal areas. Parts of an alleged nation-state actually ruled by primitive tribes. You can start fixing the problem by taking control of your own territory, Pakistan, instead of trying to grab territory from India!) [1]

Obama's specious speech at the “National Defense University” a few days ago, in which he repeated the same con man jive he used to get elected in 2008- his Kinder, Gentler Obama Act which he trots out when he's feeling political heat for his aggressive assaults on civil liberties and war by assassinations- incited the Paki Ministry of Foreign Affairs to reiterate for the umpteenth time their standard public line that the drone attacks are counterproductive and a violation of Pakistani sovereignty. (Both arguably true, up to a point. But the reality is a bit more complicated than that.)

The latest Prime Minister, newly elected billionaire Nawaz Sharif (his second time in the job, by the way, and like all Paki political bosses, corrupt to the core) has taken the opportunity of Obama's gimmicky speech about the terror war to also label drone attacks “counterproductive” (not an unreasonable point) and to call for their end.

Paki officials have been doing this for years now. Periodically, anonymous U.S. officials whisper into the ears of U.S. reporters that secretly the Pakis really approve of the attacks, and provide targeting intel. (Not too secret to be put in major U.S. media, however.) And after years of denying it, former President and General Pervez Musharraf, who seized power in a military coup, has finally come clean and admitted that he did indeed authorize U.S. drone strikes all along. (You mean... you were lying all that time, Mushy? Say it ain't so!)

Drones are propeller (prop) planes. They fly relatively slowly. They have no defensive weapons. They do not incorporate stealth technology and so are visible on radar. Even without radar, people on the ground can hear and see them. Furthermore, they sometimes loiter in place over a given location.

Pakistan has a modern military. It has jet aircraft. It has radars. It has anti-aircraft weapons.

In short, the drones should be easy for Pakistan to shoot down for “violating our sovereignty.”

So if the Pakis really don't want the drones to fly over their country, why don't they just shoot them down? You'd think if their sovereignty was so precious to them, they would. (Of course, Pakistan is not a country that shows a great deal of respect for the sovereignty of other nations, like its neighbors India and Afghanistan, as it constantly sponsors terrorist attacks against those nations, including murderous assaults on government officials and even the Indian embassy in Kabul just last year. So maybe they've forfeited their own sovereignty rights.)

Seems to me the Paki politicians (and generals too) are being cynical here. They're putting on a show of opposition to the drones for their public, since their public despises the drones. (No surprise there. Imagine if China was firing missiles from drones at targets in the U.S., like Uighur “terrorists,” say, or Tibetan exiles, or Chinese dissidents living in asylum in America. I would guess that the American public wouldn't be terribly thrilled by that.)

So Pakistan, why don't you just shoot down the drones? Hmm?

Could it be that the Paki ruling elite fears an Islamofascist takeover of their own country? Could it be that the Paki military is having trouble controlling the jihadist Frankenstein's Monster it created? Could it be that the Paki elites don't really mind overmuch if the U.S. “takes out” certain jihadists?

Could be.

And maybe they enjoy receiving billions of dollars in free U.S. money, which they use to buy arms aimed at India, a country they irrationally despise. (Big mistake by the British to create Pakistan in the first place, giving these bastards a country.)

But there is some tension over which jihadists get to enter paradise and screw 72 virgins, courtesy of U.S. killer technology. (By the way, after they use up all their virgins, then what? Are they satisfied having sex with used women after that? Or do they masturbate for the rest of eternity? What does the Koran say? The answers to everything are in there.

And how come they still have their earthly corporeal forms, complete with penises, especially if they were blown into bits of flesh by a Hellfire missile? Does Allah put the pieces back together again, like a protoplasm jigsaw puzzle?) [2]

The U.S. wants to turn into pulverized flesh some jihadists that the Pakis are sponsoring, like the grotesque and loathsome Haqqani network (the terrorists who tried to blow up the Indian embassy with ISI help) and the Afghan Taliban that Pakistan provides sanctuary, arms, and training for. [See, “Secret Pakistan: Double Cross,” a BBC documentary, at youtube.com] Pakistan just wants the U.S. to take out some Paki Taliban, apparently. (And keep the gravy train flowing.) There's already been a significant tapering off of drone strikes in Pakistan this year.

Hey Pakis, maybe you need to stop jerking people around for once and poop or get off the pot. If you really mean what you say about drones, shoot one down. Then the U.S. will have a reason to believe you.

Otherwise cut the crap. We will be thanking you kindly if you do! (Insert Pakistani accent here.)

1] Pakistan makes cynical use of its claim of not controlling its own territory. It can disclaim responsibility for harboring terrorists and sponsoring their terrorist attacks in India and Afghanistan. It gives it a ready-made excuse for not suppressing the various Taliban organizations.

2] Apparently the Koran makes sexual provisions in paradise for those who were (presumably closeted) homosexuals on earth. While looking for the number of virgins (or wives, who of course must be virgins) online (the number apparently is vague and was invented later, like a lot with Islam) I stumbled across various references to promises of comely lads awaiting those who swing that way when they float up into the sky for their reward:

Quran 52:24 “Round about them will serve, (devoted) to them, young male servants (handsome) as Pearls well-guarded.

“Also in Surah 76:19 Allah promises fresh youths to Muslim men.

And round about them shall go youths never altering in age; when you see them you will think them to be scattered pearls.”

(QURAN 76:19): "And round about them will (serve) boys of everlasting youth.”

I can't vouch for these references. Obviously they are translations (or purport to be). One came from Yahoo! Answers. You might want to do your own research on that score.

{What sort of people don't get email alerts for new essays on this site?

That's an easy question to answer.

Stone-age Amazon rain forest dwellers don't.

Neither do African subsistence farmers living miles from any road.

Nomadic tribes that exist roaming the Sahara desert forgo getting timely updates.

Also our research has shown that a very low percentage of Inuit walrus-hunters inhabiting areas north of the Arctic circle subscribe to email updates.

And, perhaps, you.

Why be a marginalized nobody? Break out of your self-imposed isolation and sign up for email alerts today!

See that little white box on top of the right hand side column? The one that says “Follow By Email”? Just type your email address in there and click that “Submit” thingy. That's all it takes to enter the 21^st century!

There! Don't you feel more modern already?}

Is the U.S. Suffocating the Syrian Rebellion?

Jim Muir, BBC correspondent, reports that the rebels are losing ground to Assad's forces and their Hezbollah allies, because of ammunition shortages. He says the supply of weapons from the Gulf Arab states to the Syrian rebels “has been drying up, perhaps from pressure from the U.S.” [5/20/13.]

At the same time, the U.S. whines that Russia is sending “advanced” missiles to the Assad regime.

So the sanguinary hereditary dictatorship is getting more weapons from its backers, while the U.S. blocks aid to the people of Syria- the vast majority- trying to free themselves from the yoke of this tyranny.

The U.S.- a force for good?

Draw your own conclusions.

{Scientists have spent countless years and untold millions of dollars searching for an answer to the question, Why don't people sign up for email alerts for new postings on this website? It's so easy to do that a child- or even a childish adult- could do it, the price is very competitive (free), and it's a great service to the reader who is thereby relieved of the onerous burden of checking the website ten or more times a day or year to see if there's something new.

Why don't you give those scientists something better to do by rendering that mystery moot. Go to the upper right side of the webpage, and add your email at Follow By Email. You'll be glad you did. Or- let's be honest- maybe sad. Hey, that's life. You just have to take chances sometimes.}

Terrorism Only Applies To Me, Not To Thee

It's the attitude of the U.S. media and government that "terrorism" is the most horrible thing there is. And to be a victim of "terrorism" is the worst, most outrageous injustice and demands retribution (called "justice," which includes assassination).

You may have been led to believe that placing car bombs in a crowded city and killed 43 or more people, for some political purpose, is "terrorism." But you'd be wrong.

It all depends on who did it to whom.

The latest two car bombings in Turkey, which hit the city of Reyhanli, killed 51 people and wrecked nearby buildings. Turkey immediately blamed the Syrian regime. Shortly thereafter they arrested some Turks who they claim were linked to the Syrian secret police. The Washington Post says they were members of a Turkish "Marxist terrorist" group, apparently quoting the Turkish foreign minister. The WP calls the members "militants," following standard U.S. media practice of downgrading terrorist bombings that don't target western targets as merely bombings, and the terrorists who perpetrate them, "militants." Of course, being a militant is not necessarily a bad thing. Terrorist has a totally negative connotation, an epithet, a term of odium.

Note how the body of the dead brother who was blamed for the Boston Marathon "terrorist" bombing had to be snuck into a cemetery all the way south in Virginia for a secret burial, and local officials immediately squawked when they learned of it. "Terrorists" are reviled in America. That's why right wing terrorists are never called terrorists here. It would cause hostility towards right wingers. Timothy McVeigh, for example, is usually not referred to as a "terrorist," whereas that epithet is routinely applied to "Carlos the Jackal," for example, to FARC, to Hamas and Hezbollah, to black American militants, to leftist revolutionaries who committed robberies, etc.)

See a deeper and more details political and media analysis at "New York Times Confers Legitimacy On Taliban Terrorists."

{Need to know when there's new commentary and analysis here that digs down to deeper truths? Get alerts for new essays via bricks with notes attached thrown through your window (metaphorically speaking). Use the “Follow By Email” box on the upper right side of the page. Or request notification by actual brick, if you prefer. It's your choice!

Freedom to Choose. Another great thing about taboo-truths.blogspot.com}

Latest Hypocritical U.S. Double-Standard

Israeli air attacks on Syrian warehouses, allegedly to stop the transfer of ground-to-ground and anti-aircraft (i.e. defensive) missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon are endorsed by Obama in the usual terms, “Israel has the right to defend itself.” (“Self-defense” includes the “right” to bomb Lebanon without fear of its planes being shot down.) [1]

Meanwhile, one of the Cuban intelligence agents the U.S. imprisoned who was out on parole and was allowed to return to Cuba for his father's funeral, won't be coming back to “serve out” his “parole.” Those five agents (whose cover was blown by Fidel Castro, in a bone-headed move) were sent to the U.S. to infiltrate U.S.-backed terrorist groups in Florida to provide advance intelligence on terrorist attacks against Cuba. The U.S. convicted them of espionage and imprisoned them.

So Cuba has no right to self-defense. Notice that Cuba didn't spy on the U.S. or infiltrate the U.S. government, much less BOMB targets in the U.S.

And speaking of calling an infiltration of a private organization “espionage,” when American Zionist agents were caught infiltrating American progressive organizations in California and sharing the intelligence with U.S. secret police organizations, no one was prosecuted for anything, much less for “espionage.”

So there's two hypocritical double-standards for ya! Some nations have the right of “self-defense,” and some don't. Some infiltrations of private groups is “espionage,” and some isn't.

1) I don't particularly care if Israel blows up weapons Iran and Syria are giving to Hezbollah. Assad is one of the more loathsome dictators in the world. Iran is a repressive theocracy. And Hezbollah is currently fighting the Syrian rebels on Assad's side. Hezbollah is one of those disgusting religious fanatic organizations. Hezbollah aids and abets the murder of Lebanese citizens by Syrian secret police goons. There's plenty not to like.

Israel is a quasi-theocracy dedicated to ethnically cleansing Jerusalem and the West Bank of Palestinians to complete Jewish colonization there. Religious fanatics control government ministries. It should not be at all controversial to call Israel an apartheid regime. Palestinian citizens of Israel are an oppressed minority who are taxed and deprived of government services and development.

So Israel bombs Syrian arms depots? A pox on both their houses.

FBI Used Facial Recognition Software To Identify Boston Bombers (SHH! Don't Tell Anyone!)

The lies and coverups started immediately after the Boston Marathon bombing of April 15^th, it seems. I have been keeping notes, but the deceptions, contradictions, and falsehoods come so fast and furious, and on a daily basis, that I haven't been able to summarize effectively with sufficient detail to prove the points. So I will put aside most of the misinformation, disinformation, and omissions for now and just focus on one glaring deception- the fact that the FBI used facial recognition software to match the photos from the bombing to databases of drivers' licenses, visa and passport and other photo banks to ID the suspects has been covered up, and the corporate propaganda system (aka “the media) has instead sought to mislead the public.

I assumed from the start, since there was immediate media chatter about how “the authorities” would be collecting surveillance video from cameras installed in the area as well as cellphone and camera pictures and videos taken by bystanders, that the FBI would seek to identify who placed the bombs by picking suspects and using facial recognition software run against photo databases to identify the culprits.

For me confirmation came from the sole media admission I'm aware of that facial recognition technology identified the bombers. On NPR, four days after the bombing on Friday, 4/19/12, 9 am EST, Tom Gjelten mentioned in passing that a picture from the marathon was matched with a driver's license photo of one of the bombers. He doesn't even say which bomber, or how it was “matched.” But there would only be one way to do it so quickly- facial recognition software.

Yet except for that, “the” media has not only kept this fact a secret, it has deliberately sought to mislead. It keeps throwing out red herrings, for example saying that surveillance footage in a store led to an ID. When you check out the details, there is nothing there; no assertion that someone recognized the bombers and came forward. We are also misled to believe that the FBI released photos of the suspects in order to ID them, when it fact this was done to aid their capture and to shake up the bombers. (Which succeeded, since they evidently panicked.)

I don't know what the Big Secret is. The FBI itself has publicly revealed its plans to expand its use of this technology. In fact, as long ago as October 2009 the AP put out a story about its use by the FBI in cahoots with the North Carolina State drivers' license photo bank. [1]

Another hidden fact: the New York City Police (NYPD) is using facial recognition technology with its system of thousands of surveillance cameras (mostly installed by businesses and corporations) that feed live time video to a CIA-veteran-run spy center at NYPD headquarters in lower Manhattan. Officially the NYPD denies using this software- it only admits to license plate reading technology. It also claims it only saves the video for 30 days- unless it's needed for an investigation.

Yet soon after the killing and capture of the Tsarnaev brothers, the NYPD announced that the brothers had visited Times Square last year- it identified them from cameras. Well, that's more than 30 days. Furthermore, millions of people pass through Times Square every year, including large numbers of tourists and commuters coming and going to work. So facial recognition software had to be used.

“The” media helpfully didn't point any of this out.

All this has relevance for political dissidents, who are the main target for this surveillance state (there are very few actual terrorists, or “terrorists,” unless you include all us dissidents, whom the FBI- and CIA and all the rest of the massive secret police state- consider to be terrorists). We are subjected to ever-increasing levels of repression. After the fall of Nixon, the level of repression waned a bit, only to resurge with a vengeance under Reagan, with significant further increases under Clinton, Bush II, and now Obama. Now, not only can they track your movements through your cellphone, which constantly broadcasts its (and your) location, or through tracking devices surreptitiously planted on your mode of transportation or even on your clothes [2], they can follow your movements via the thousands of surveillance cameras that feed into police spy centers in cities like New York, and with facial recognition software they can track your movements. (They already have your face from that mugshot they took when they arrested you, or from a surveillance shot they took when they were staking you out, or when a “tourist” on the street snapped your pic.) From this, they can learn your habits, places you habitually go, make a social network map of people you know, and know when it's safe to do a black bag job on your home to search, plant and service bugs and hidden cameras, plant drugs or explosives, etc. Currently, the publicly available information indicates that wearing sunglasses foils the face recognition technology. (Make them big and dark, or wraparound and dark.) The technology works by measuring the distance between certain points on the face. Supposedly a front shot is needed, but some companies claim to have software that works on angle shots or even profiles. But software pushers often exaggerate their products' capabilities. (Vendors to the secret police and military exaggerate a lot at times.) Also, showing teeth confounds the software. This is why when you get your photo taken for a driver's license now, if your mouth is open they tell you to close it. The Motor Vehicle Departments are adjuncts of the secret police. (Just like in any totalitarian state.)

1) Here are excerpts from that 2009 AP report, with my comments in brackets:

“In its search for fugitives, the FBI has begun using facial-recognition technology on millions of motorists, comparing driver's license photos with pictures of convicts in a high-tech analysis of chin widths and nose sizes .

“The project in North Carolina has already helped nab at least one suspect. Agents are eager to look for more criminals and possibly to expand the effort nationwide. But privacy advocates worry that the method allows authorities to track people who have done nothing wrong. [Like political dissidents.]

"'Everybody's participating, essentially, in a virtual lineup by getting a driver's license,' said Christopher Calabrese, an attorney who focuses on privacy issues at the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Earlier this year, investigators learned that a double-homicide suspect named Rodolfo Corrales had moved to North Carolina. The FBI took a 1991 booking photo from California and compared it with 30 million photos stored by the motor vehicle agency in Raleigh.

“In seconds, the search returned dozens of drivers who resembled Corrales, and an FBI analyst reviewed a gallery of images before zeroing in on a man who called himself Jose Solis.

“Now states have quality photo machines and rules that prohibit drivers from smiling during the snapshot to improve the accuracy of computer comparisons. [Emphasis added.]

“North Carolina's lab scans an image and, within 10 seconds, compares the likeness with other photos based on an algorithm of factors such as the width of a chin or the structure of cheekbones. The search returns several hundred photos ranked by the similarities.”

But ah, someday, someone's going to be falsely convicted of being a “terrorist.” Check out this part of the article:

“The system is not always right. Investigators used one DMV photo of an Associated Press reporter to search for a second DMV photo, but the system first returned dozens of other people, including a North Carolina terrorism suspect who had some similar facial features.

“The images from the reporter and terror suspect scored a likeness of 72 percent, below the mid-80s that officials consider a solid hit.” 

 

You might not be so lucky! And we know how credulous jurors are when it comes to swallowing “forensic science” and “expert testimony.” For example, bite marks have been used to fraudulenly convict people of murder, based on “expert testimony” claiming “matches” between bite marks in human flesh and someone's teeth. A preposterous assertion just based on common sense, you'd think. But not to ignorant jurors. So what if they say your face “matches” a picture of a “terrorist”? They already use falsified fingerprint evidence to frame up innocent people. (Cases where the state itself admitted this has happened have occurred in at least California and New York.)

2) Not at all farfetched. Planting tracking devices inside the heel of your shoe, for example, during a black bag job on your home, is easy for them. In fact, some reactionary wrote a book years ago (I forget the names of the hack and the title) giddily sharing the story of how during the Vietnam war a transmitter was hidden in a button of a shirt of a Vietcong “suspect,” with thread that doubles as antenna wire, which was used to track and kill him. Neat! was the attitude of this loathsome propagandist. Anyway, imagine how far technology has progressed since then.Hitachi announced in February 2007 the development of an RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) chip that is so tiny it can fit between the ridges of your fingerprint. RFID chips emit a unique numerical code. So embedding it to any object, a piece of paper, whatever, can be used to trace the source of an object. (RFID transmitters are currently attached to products for inventory control and tracking.)

The tiny Hitachi chips are narrower than a human hair- so tiny that Hitachi calls them “dust.” [See “Hitachi develops RFID powder” at pinktentacle.com]

                               

                                                               Left photo shows a hair and the new police state “dust.”

In the words of Defense Review: “NSA, CIA and FBI personnel must all be licking their chops over the intelligence and surveillance applications that such a small micro RFID chip makes possible. Got someone or something you want to track? Just toss some 'Powder'/'Dust' chips onto them/it and track them/it at your leisure. How would they know?” [“Hitachi'Powder'/'Dust' µ-Chip Ultra-Small Micro RFID Chip with EmbeddedAntenna for Military and (Clandestine) Intelligence/SurveillanceApplications: U.S. Military, Law Enforcement and IntelligenceAgencies Licking their Chops?”]

And no doubt you've heard the news, on Wired magazine's website, about the giant new NSA spy center in Utah to collect and store every phone call, text message, email, fax, and whatever else they can grab, in the world, including in the U.S. Don't worry, they have supercomputers that can search it all for keywords, for people, names, places, even voices using voice print recognition technology. (This isn't even new. Ford Rowan wrote a book way back in the 1970s, Technospies, describing how the NSA back then used voice prints to hunt for people making phone calls. So using a payphone will enable them to locate you. You have to alter your voice print, with a dental retainer, or stuff some tissue or something in the roof of your mouth. Merely disguising your voice by imitating Bugs Bunny or Donald Duck or an Englishman does not do the trick.) And contrary to their lies, they are sweeping up ALL domestic communications, as they started doing right after 9/11/01, as we know from NSA whistleblowers, who were then targeted for persecution by the Obama regime, including FBI terror raids on their homes and indictments under the “Espionage” Act, the World War I repressive legislation Woodrow Wilson got Congress to pass to repress opposition to U.S. involvement in that war. (Funny how they never repeal any of their repressive legislation. Guess they figure it might come in handy someday. As indeed it does! Oh, and that “temporary” Patriot Act? They just keep renewing it.)