ISIS EXPOSED; Internet Support For Terrorists Provided By US State Department Via Two NGO’s

July 20, 2014 by  
Filed under Featured

2014.7.20 (AE) – The rebranded wing of Al Qaeda known as ISIS, or ISIL, has been receiving “internet anti tracking software” and “internet technical support” from the US State Department via two contracting NGO’s… the Institute For War & Peace Reporting (IWPR) and Freedom House.

This should be the biggest news story in the US, especially considering that Obama has now sent over 750 US troops back into Iraq, to supposedly “help” the Iraqi government “fight” the invading radical Sunni ISIS forces… but we now know that ISIS has been achieving their miraculously “sophisticated Social Media strategy” with direct help from the US government.

So the fact that the US State Department, headed by John Kerry, is helping the most radical Al Qaeda terrorists achieve internet anonymity, assisting them in using Social Media platforms to recruit new fighters, and assisting them in uploading radical messages, including ultra violent beheading videos to YouTube… well, this is a scandal of the highest order…

 

**WATCH AT 720P HD**

 

CAST OF CHARACTERS & TOPICS (IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER):

 

Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi
Al Qaeda
Beheading Videos
Coup Of Iraq 2014
Facebook
Freedom House
Institute For War & Peace Reporting (IWPR)
Internet Anonymity
Internet Anti Tracking Software
Internet IP Masking (Proxy Server)
Islamic State Of Iraq & Levant (ISIL)
Islamic State Of Iraq & Syria (ISIS)
John Kerry
Memes Of Terror
Non Governmental Organizations (NGO’s)
Obama
Ryan Mauro
Social Media
Terrorism
Terrorists
Terror On Twitter
Twitter
US Secretary Of State
US State Department
War On Syria
YouTube

DORNER MANHUNT; Liberal Media Suggests Drone Killing Dorner, Promotes EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING Of ‘Suspect’ Deemed ‘DOMESTIC TERRORIST’

February 11, 2013 by  
Filed under Americas, Featured, Media, Police State

Christopher Dorner has been deemed a “Domestic Terrorist”, and many in the so called “Liberal” media are calling for him to be killed by drone strike, without a trial (ie, extrajudicial killing), and they add, “why not just kill him?”

CNN first made a statement floating the idea of using a drone to kill Dorner… then the fake Liberal “Young Turks” decided to discuss this in great detail and, after acting so concerned about such an idea, they basically seem to conclude that it sounds like a good idea!!

To drone or not to drone, that is not the question… the concern here is that they are deeming Christopher Dorner a “Domestic Terrorist” and therefore they can kill him… WITH NO DUE PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!!

Being deemed a “Domestic Terrorist” theoretically means Dorner no longer has any Constitutional Rights… this is a very DANGEROUS and horrible precedent.

Today the so called “Liberal” British newspaper “The Guardian” has proven my point in spades (and only a mindless British serf (subject) could come up with this kind of judicial logic).  These people are dangerously stupid, or they’re being told to write this garbage.  Here are some choice excerpts (emphasis mine):

 

Here’s my question: if the surveillance drones detect his location, should the lives of law
enforcement agents be risked, along with other civilians, in an attempt to apprehend
this highly-trained warrior? Why shouldn’t an armed drone instead be immediately
dispatched once his location is ascertained and simply kill him?

For those of you who believe it’s possible to know someone’s guilt without a trial, there
is very little doubt about his guilt. Nobody has contested the authenticity of the
confession posted in his name, nor the threats of further killing. He admitted and
justified the killings on his Facebook entry.  [No one has ever hacked, jacked, or created a fake Facebook account!!!! – Joel]

For those of you who believe there is a clear definition of “terrorism”, Dorner meets it
easily. LAPD chief Charlie Beck today said that Dorner was engaging in “domestic
terrorism”. That’s because he has not only threatened to kill random LAPD officers but
also their children and family members in order to terrorize the department into
publicly apologizing to him. He vowed to wage what he called “unconventional and
asymmetrical warfare” in pursuit of his goal. As intended, the entire community is in
terror. If that’s not “domestic terrorism” under the conventional defintion (sic), then nothing is.

Instead, suppose the LAPD locates Dorner in a cabin in a remote area of the California
wilderness, just sitting alone watching television. Why should they possibly risk the lives
of police officers to apprehend him? Why would anyone care if this terrorist’s rights are
protected? What’s the argument for not simply killing him the moment he’s located?
Given that everyone seems certain of his guilt [Trial by media? – Joel], that he’s threatened further killings of innocents, that he declared himself at “war”, and that the risk from capturing him would be high, what danger is created by simply shooting a Hellfire missile wherever he’s
found?

Or suppose that, as feared, he makes his way into Mexico. What’s the objection to
sending an armed drone to killing him there? [Um, because it’s a different sovereign country???? – Joel]

The impetus for my asking is obviously the widespread support for killing US citizen
Anwar Awlaki without a trial or charges based on suspicions of guilt: it’s far from clear
that apprehending Awlaki would have been infeasible, and Dorner poses at least as
much risk to Americans as Awlaki did, almost certainly more so. But leave that aside:
independent of comparisons to any other case, including Awlaki, what would be wrong
or dangerous, if anything, about simply droning this domestic Terrorist to death even in
the absence of lethal resistance? What would be the harm from doing that? What are the
reasons not to, if any?

 

2013.2.11 Should An Armed Drone Be Dispatched To Kill Christopher Dorner? (guardian.co.uk):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/11/chris-dorner-drones-lapd

 

2013.2.8 CNN; Should We Use Drones In America? (CNN, TheYoungTurks, youtube.com):

 

CNN’s Erin Burnett asked whether or not law enforcement should use drones as they try to fine former cop turned revenge killer, Christopher Dorner.  Is this what it’s come to?  Are drone attacks abroad so normalized that we can honestly ask if drones would be a good idea to use domestically?  Cenk Uygur, Jimmy Dore (TYT Comedy) and Ben Mankiewicz (Turner Classic Movies) discuss Burnett’s question and its implications.

 

jbroku