OBAMA / NSA Using Cell Phone Metadata to Target US Citizens/Foreign Civilians With DRONE STRIKES

US weighs drone strike against American: reports
[link to www.ndtv.com]

Washington: The US government is debating whether to kill an American citizen abroad who is allegedly part of the Al-Qaeda network and plotting attacks against the United States, media reported on Monday.

President Barack Obama's administration is weighing the possible drone strike against the American who is in a country that refuses to allow US military action on its soil, CNN television reported, citing an unnamed US official.

...

Under new guidelines handed down by Obama last May, a decision to use lethal force against an American overseas has to be based on "a continuing, imminent threat to US persons" and only if capturing the terror suspect is "not feasible."

...

Obama approved new guidelines after coming under fire for approving the targeting of another US citizen, radical Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a drone strike in Yemen in September 2011.

Three other Americans have been killed in counter-terror strikes but were not intentionally targeted, US officials admitted last year.

...

"The public and most members of Congress are still completely in the dark about where the US claims authority to strike, the legal rules, and the identity of those already killed," Amnesty International USA's Naureen Shah said in a statement.

...

(less than 50%)


5 questions on government targeting U.S. citizens
[link to www.cnn.com]

Washington (CNN) -- When can a government kill its own people?

The straightforward question has anything but a simple answer, especially for the government of a nation founded on inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Monday's news that the Obama administration is considering a military hit on an American terrorist raises anew the issue of what justifies such a step, according to both the law and the public conscience in an era of political, social and technological evolution.

...

1) What does targeted killing mean, and how widespread is it?

After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, a traumatized nation responded with new laws that greatly expanded the government's power to fight terrorism.

Wars were launched in Afghanistan and then Iraq, and the national intelligence system expanded to new capacity disclosed in last year's classified leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

...

2) Is it legal for the government to target and kill people?

In his May 2013 speech at the National Defense University, Obama proclaimed the practice completely legal.

"Under domestic law, and international law, the United States is at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces," he said. "We are at war with an organization that right now would kill as many Americans as they could if we did not stop them first. So this is a just war -- a war waged proportionally, in last resort, and in self-defense."

...

3) Even if it is legal by the letter of the law, is it morally or politically right?

Obama has insisted his responsibility as commander in chief to protect Americans from attack justified targeted killings like the drone strike on al-Awlaki.

In his speech last May, he rejected targeting an American citizen without what he called "due process," meaning adherence to full legal procedures. Then he explained the reasoning for the al-Awlaki hit two years earlier, before the expanded policy guidelines he was announcing.

...

4) Does it work?

Ever the politician, Obama argued forcefully last year that targeted killings were a necessary tool in the expanding battle against international terrorism.

"Dozens of highly skilled al Qaeda commanders, trainers, bomb makers and operatives have been taken off the battlefield," he said. "Plots have been disrupted that would have targeted international aviation, U.S. transit systems, European cities and our troops in Afghanistan. Simply put, these strikes have saved lives."

...

5) Is it worth it?

To Obama, the need to take out war enemies supersedes the potential political fallout at home and abroad over drone strikes and other targeted killings.

He argued last year that doing nothing would invite "far more civilian casualties" by terrorists targeting U.S. cities as well as foreign strongholds in Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia and elsewhere.

...

Last Edited by Ag47 on 02/10/2014 10:10 PM

Let's not forget that Obama is using Al Qaeda as justification for these strikes. So it's ok, because he is only targeting terrorists, right?


But who admitted to arming and funding al Qaeda not long ago?


EDITORIAL: Obama arming al Qaeda
Handing guns to Syrian rebels may not be a bright idea
[link to www.washingtontimes.com]


KUHNER: How Obama arms al Qaeda
[link to www.washingtontimes.com]


Yes, we can: Obama waives anti-terrorism provisions to arm Syrian rebels
[link to rt.com]


Obama Bypasses Terrorism Rule To Give Weapons To Syrian Rebels
[link to news.firedoglake.com]


Obama’s Move to Arm Al Qaeda in Syria
[link to www.frontpagemag.com]

.






SO HOW LONG UNTIL HE CHANGES THE DEFINITION OF WHO IS A TERRORIST TO INCLUDE CITIZENS LIVING IN THE UNITED STATES WHO SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE TYRANNY TO JUSTIFY DRONE STRIKES HERE?






.

Cell phones have had GPS in them all along... at first it was hidden in service menus for older cell phones.. you could turn it on and by dialing a specific number it would give you your coordinates, time of day and current weather.

However the use of cell tower pings as a means of drone strikes is fucking insane.. Not to mention who the hell says the phone is even in the hands of the person/persons in question.

Also the use of insect spy drones could definitely be used to monitor simply by following someones cell phone GPS coordinates..

[link to www.popsci.com]


As also stated in this other GLP thread:

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

Snowden Documents: NSA Aiding Administration's Drone Strikes
[link to www.newsmax.com]


Death By Metadata: Jeremy Scahill & Glenn Greenwald Reveal NSA Role in Assassinations Overseas
[link to www.democracynow.org]

Very good points, and they even admit they don't have a clue if the actual target has the phone they are striking, yet they strike anyway with no confirmation.

From the OP article:

The NSA uses a program called Geo Cell to follow potential targets and often do not verify whether the carrier of the phone is the intended target of the strike.

“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,” Bryant told the Intercept – the nascent news site created by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar to “to hold the most powerful governmental and corporate factions accountable.”

Over the past five years the NSA “has played an increasingly central role in drone killing,” but the growing reliance on metadata to find insurgents is also targeting civilians. The analysis of the electronic surveillance leaves a lot of room for error and can kill “the wrong people.”

[link to rt.com]

They're just setting a precedent.

Drone Strike On U.S. Citizen Publicly Debate For First Time
[link to www.hngn.com]