The New York Times seems to suggest that the ongoing wars in Yemen and Pakistan are limited to attacks on "leaders." That is "a totally false statement," one analyst notes.
A headline is sometimes worth a thousand words, and this was definitely the case after a deadly drone strike occurred in Yemen last week. "Drone Strike Kills Six Suspected Militants in Yemen,” a Reuters headline (8/7/13) declared. "More Suspected Al-Qaeda Militants Killed as Drone Strikes Intensify in Yemen," a CNN.com headline (8/8/13) offered. Whatever the language, one message was clear: "Suspected terrorists" or "militants" had been killed. But with several drone strikes over the past week in Yemen, how can anyone actually know who is being killed? The deceptive way the Obama administration defines "militants" has already been well-established–as the New […]
In a moment when media are fixated on terrorism and the possibility that some people might be motivated to carry out acts of violence against the United States in part because of the effects of U.S. wars, a Yemeni writer's account of the effects of drone strikes on his village would be well worth covering.
The Washington Post reported some news that it's known for years, but had decided not tell us until now: The CIA has a drone base in Saudi Arabia. Their rationale for withholding this information was simple: The government didn't want them to. And from what the Post is telling us today, they weren't the only ones.
The use of cluster bombs against civilians is newsworthy depending on who is using them. If it's an enemy state, like Syria or Qaddafi's Libya, you can expect to read about it, and in clear language on the front page. And an article like this will mention, almost in passing, that our own government does the same.