US terrorism on foreigners. When will America stop killings innocent people? Warning Graphic Pictures!

  Just one year ago on Oct 24, 2012,  Momina Bibi, a grandmother, was out picking okra with some of her grand children.  She paid for that with her life.  Her grandchildren eye witnesses to her execution.

  The people live in constant fear of US controlled drones.  But life must go on.  They hear the drones every day, 24 hours a day.  They must still tend the fields for the food.  They must still carry about their day.  Sure, this family had never been hit by a drone strike before but it wasn't uncommon for innocent people to be killed by drones.

   The number of people killed by US drone strikes isn't easy to pin down but the best estimates range from 2,526 to 3,621.  Of which between 416 and 948 innocent civilians have been killed, depending on how you classify some of the young men aged and boys.  What is clear is that over 150 children have been killed by US controlled drone strikes.

  On Oct 24 Zubair Rehman, the 13 year old grandson of Momina, watched his grandmother literally get blown to piece.  Along with loosing his grandmother Zubair received shrapnel to his leg and had to undergo expensive surgery.  Surgery that you might think the USA paid for because they mistakenly bombed and innocent family, wounding a few children and killing a 67 year old grandmother.  But you would be wrong.  The USA government's position on this attack is vague.  They will not release any information about it.  They tried to claim 4 militants were killed in the attack but Momina was the only fatality.  When further questioned Caitlin Hayden, from the NSC, called the strike "Precise, lawful, and effective."  WTF?  Precise? Yea you blew a 67 year old lady picking Okra in a field from a drone flying high over head.  I guess that is "precise".  Lawful?  You have to be a huge scum bag of a lawyer to call killing a 67 year old grand mother "lawful".  Effective?  You have to be a huge fucking idiot to call it effective unless being a terrorist is your goal.  Because these innocent families live in constant fear.

  The kids no longer want to go to school and they come from a long line of educators.  Zubair's father is a teacher.  Zubair's grandfather, Momina's husband, is a teacher and he said "I wish God would just take my life, I can't live without her".  Zubair testified "All of a sudden things became very dark.  It was like she was exploded to pieces.". The kids don't like it when the skies are clear because that is when the drones are used the most. They live in fear because the US drones that circle over head.  They live in fear because the USA is terrorizing them. It is as plain and simple as that.

  So not only are they terrorized by the USA but the government won't even explain why the mistake happened or even acknowledge a mistake was made.  They call it "collateral damage".  The issue is the American public don't want to know about the problem.  For fuck sake the politicians don't want to know about the problem either.  Only 5 members of Congress listened to these families, and there was more then just this one family, at the briefing.  Rep Alan Grayson from Florida, Rep Jan Schakowsky from Illinois, Rep Rush Holt from New Jersey, Rep John Conyers from Michigan, and Rep Rick Nolan from Minnesota.  Why?  Because most American's don't know, or don't care, about the damage the US drone program causes.  The people killed, even if innocent, are non-people.  They aren't as important as you, your brother, your mother, your friend, your neighbor or even some guy in the next town over that you've never even met before.  The less you think about the victims of US military actions the better is the position of most Americans.  I can say that because the evidence shows it to be true.  If American's cared that we, as a nation, are responsible for hundreds and even thousands of children loosing their lives from US military actions then our politicians would know it.  They'd care because you care.  They'd know you cared because you would let them know you care.  Every time another one of these reports surfaced you'd contact your representative.  You call your senator.  You'd petition the White House to stop the terrorism perpetrated by the USA via our military and civilian combat programs.

  In the past war was out of sight but US casualties kept it in our minds.  The knock on the door of 2 men in uniform to tell the family that their son has died.  If you didn't get the knock yourself you probably knew someone that did.  So while the images of war wasn't there we had a sense that there is a price to military action taken on by the USA.  In Vietnam we got exposed to not only those knocks but we also had a lot more understanding what was going on via returning vets and journalists.  Pictures that are now timeless that show not only the ugly face of war but let the people know that the USA isn't always the good guy.

  The young people today might not really understand the image above.  Sure the kids look scared but so what?!  Well lets look at Kim Phuc, the little naked girl there today.  She was a victim of a US Napalm attack.  For those of you that don't know it is a disgusting incendiary weapon that was designed to stick to flesh as it burned.  Think of it as hand sanitizing gell that is a LOT more flammable and a lot stickier.  Back then, in 1972, using it on civilians wasn't "illegal".  The UN didn't declare it a war crime until 8 years later.  Unfortunately that didn't help Kim.  Napalm burns at temperatures of 800-1200 Celsius.  For those that are metric impaired that is 1,500-2,200 Fahrenheit or 8-12 times hotter then boiling water.  The problem is that the drones are today's Napalm.  The government calls them lawful and effective but ignore the children and innocent people that are killed by them.  Kim is actually lucky.  She survived.  She lived through the pain of almost being burned to death.  Zubair survived.  He lived through the drone attack that killed his grandmother, wounded him, his sister and a few of his cousins.

  The issue now is that journalists in the USA refuse to publish images that the American people NEED to see.  Images that should outrage all American's.  Images that should stir you to act.  To contact your politicians.  To stop the USA's terrorism program.  We as a nation can not hold the moral high ground and complain when some "evil dictator" kills a few kids when our nation has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of children in Afghanistan alone.  We can not complain about Assad killing a few hundred kids with chemical weapons if we, as a nation, allowed our government to kill hundreds of innocent children with unmanned aerial vehicles.  Just because we are using weapons that have yet to be declared as a war crime if used against civilians doesn't give us the moral high ground over some dictator killing children with chemical weapons.  A dead child is a dead child.  The method of killing them isn't what should outrage you it is their death in the first place that should make you scream.

You should look at these and jump into action.  Remember when the Boston marathon bombing happened?  How outraged where you?  Sure the journalist showed the images over and over but those are images of American's being terrorized, injured and killed.  What about these kids?  Where is your outrage for them?  Where is your posts on Facebook showing support for their families?  Where is your insistence that those responsible for their deaths are brought to justice.  Sadly those you have elected are often the closest you'll get to seeing who is directly responsible.  Look in a mirror and you'll probably see someone that is indirectly responsible.  Someone who, through inaction, allows this to happen.

  The dynamic has changed though.  We no longer have lots of knocking on doors.  Most of you may not know someone that has either died or lost a love one to the current military conflicts going on.  The US "news" outlets seem to weak to expose the public to the ugly side of war.  To many people would look away in disgust.  To many people would call the journalist unpatriotic.  Both these types people disgust me in one way or another.  Every adult should have some understanding of the cost of war.  Right now to many American's call others terrorists because they strap a bomb to themselves and kill themselves and others in an attempt to change things.  But when American's pay lots of money to have foreigners killed without getting their hands dirty at all it they think it is right and just.  It isn't because the policies that control these strikes are flawed.  The people executing these strikes are flawed.  The intelligence gathered that these strikes are based on are flawed and to many innocent people are getting killed.  If you have a program where you know at least 25% of the people you kill are not guilty then there is a major fucking problem. If you don't do anything to stop this program then you are part of the problem.

  Right now the majority of American's support the drone program.  But how many people support the use of a strategy that kills the wrong target at least 25% of the time?  Who supports a program where over 5% of the people killed are innocent children?  Who in their right mind thinks this is "lawful and effective".

  If that all doesn't stir you then think of it this way.  The "interpretation" of the laws that is being used right in the US drone program allows the government to execute you, with out any trial or even oversight from any judge if you are overseas.  There is even grey areas about there use on, or rather above, American soil.

  Take back control of your government.  Let them know you aren't going to let them do what ever they want any more. That it isn't in the best interest of the USA and it's citizens to be terrorizing people half way around the world just because we have more expensive military toys.

Your government held hostage by republicans!

It is crazy.  Our government is being held hostage by Americans voted for to run our government.  There is blame going both ways and there is normally 2 sides to every story and this one does too.  The difference here is that one side is very definitely lying about the situation which involves the Debt Ceiling and the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

So if you live in a cave here is what is being said by both sides.

Many republicans including the leadership:
"We want to fund the government and we want to give the American people what they want with regards to the ACA."

What a few republicans and all democrats are saying:
"We want to fund the government and will not let a few republicans hold the entire nation hostage in a attempt to kill the ACA."

Now what is the situation?

Well there are 2 parts to this.  One is funding the government by raising the debt ceiling.  This involves allowing the government to get the funding they need to pay bills they have ALREADY incurred.  This has happened, automatically many times. The only times it hasn't is when the republicans try to hold the country hostage over some legislation that they don't like but still passed.  This isn't new spending.  This isn't money for new stuff.  It is paying the bills you already have.

  It would be like going and getting a mobile phone that isn't pre paid.  Signing a contract saying you'll pay $25 a month for a certain plan.  Using your phone for that entire month using all the benefits of the plan you signed up for.  At the end of the month when you get your bill you then refuse to pay and tell the phone company that you won't pay unless they provide you electricity in the Antarctic.

  Sadly this is what to many American's think ...that not raising the debt ceiling now is the way you stop spending later.  This is like thinking by not paying your bills now that you won't buy that new toy tomorrow.  How about pay the bills we've incurred, stop fighting wars we can't afford, stop buying tanks our military doesn't want, start asking the extremely wealth to actually pay their fair share!

The second demand has nothing to do with your phone plan.  The second part being the affordable health care act which the republicans claim most people don't want.  What is the reality tho?  The fact is that Obama was re-elected on a platform that was clear that the ACA was going to be implemented.  Citizens voted and he was placed back in office.  The law was legislated and even challenged as unconstitutional but the highest court of the land ruled that it is constitutional.  It has been challenged over 40 times in congress, costing the American tax payer about $2.5 million each time it has been, and won every single time.  The president is willing to talk about sensible changes to the ACA but will not have the government held hostage over it.

  The talking heads in the republican party would have you think they are willing to "compromise" but this is like a hostage taker saying they'll compromise on how many millions of dollars they'll get while they hold a gun to your child's head.  All of the "compromises" equate to the same thing.  Death of the ACA.

  The republicans are lying when they say they say they will compromise and the democrats are unwilling.

  Too many American's don't understand even the basic premise of the ACA.  Many American's don't even know that "Obamacare" and the ACA are one and the same.  No wonder with the smear campaign using misinformation against the ACA.  One can argue that the ACA is complicated and you would be right.  But the issue is complicated.  How can you unfuck a broken health care system that leaves out so many Americans with a "simple" system.  It is like complaining that you can't cure a genetic disorder by taking an aspirin.  The executive branch hasn't explained the program very well either.  Some of the confusion arises from introduced bits as "compromises" that republicans asked for.

  Here is the ideal ACA premiss.

• Health care should be attainable by all American.
• Most American should be able to pay for private health insurance.
• Insurance companies should not be able to deny health insurance to those that need it most.
• Insurance companies should not be able to stop providing insurance to those that need to use the insurance they supposedly have.
• The government should subsidise health care for those that are of lower income status.
• Women shouldn't have to pay more for health care then men.
• Health care should not have their costs artificially and arbitrarily inflated.

  For those that want specifics and more detail then go here.  Just don't complain that it is to complicated.  If you want to know the mysteries of the universe then you can't complain that you have to understand things like quantum physics, general and special relativity. 

This is achievable because insurance companies that previously denied benefits to individuals either for pre-existing conditions or cut off benefits to individuals that end up needed said benefits now can offset that risk by knowing that everyone will be covered.  

  Many people complain that they shouldn't have to be covered medically.  But we require people who drive to have insurance.  Some might say that people can choose not to drive and thus not pay car insurance so some people should be able to choose not to receive health care and not pay insurance.  The difference is somebody that doesn't drive doesn't all of a sudden find themselves behind the wheel of a car.  People who are healthy DO find themselves faced with an unexpected illness or injury.  People don't often just agree to lay down and die but will seek medical attention. 

  The biggest cause of bankruptcy is from medical bills.  This means that the bills remain unpaid.  People without insurance also end up using forms of care that are inherently more expensive like emergency rooms.  Going to a general practitioner to get looked at is much less expensive then going to the emergency room and taking up a spot that is geared up for situations that are more life threatening.  

  Another part is getting the cost of health care down.  Right now in the USA health care is the free market gone crazy.  Do you know you can pay 20x or more for medication in the USA then you would in other countries.  Same medication! Why is this?  Well in places like Australia, England and Canada the government says "Hey we'll put medication x on our pharmaceutical benefits scheme but you have to make the cost reasonable!"  The government then will subsidise the cost of the medication a bit.  People still have the choice to use medication that is not on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme if they choose.  So what happens is the pharmaceutical companies still make money and the people don't get ripped off unless they choose to be.  

  This doesn't just happen with drugs.  It happens all over the place.  Sure this does mean that you might end up paying more if you choose to use something that isn't on some government benefit scheme but that is your choice.  For example the government goes to companies and says "We want product x with these specifications" and those companies come back with their solutions and a the cheapest ones that meet the specifications are chosen to go on a benefits scheme.  Those companies know that they'll sell more so their margins can be lower.  This doesn't stop other companies from making more expensive products and does not stop you, the consumer, from using those companies.  What it does do allow most American's to access that product at a reasonable price.  In health care this is especially important because if you are told "You need medication x to stay alive." you shouldn't be held to ransom to pay 20x the reasonable cost of that medication.  Really what are you going to say?  "No I refuse to pay!" which in reality many people are forced to do when they can't afford to access the health care they need.  Others access that health care but end up going bankrupt and the rich just pay the costs and move on.

  Health care shouldn't be a luxury.  If governments can say that "Internet access" is a basic human right I'm sure that basic health care should be one too!

Watch this video.  There is a lot of humour in it but it is very informative too.  You'll find yourself laughing then a bit disgusted when you realise that while some of it sounds ridiculous it is actually all true.

  What the republicans need to do is let the government be funded no strings attached because it is a bill the government has already incurred.  Then if they want to make changes to the ACA then that is another matter that can be handled separately.  Note almost every other time they've done this they've just tried to kill the entire thing not make it better.  Also note that the basic plan is THEIR PLAN!  The individual mandate is a republican idea.  Many people might not like it but, at present, it is the most logical plan on the table.  The government is all about doing what is best for the citizens as a whole even if they don't understand it.  Ask all Americans if they would like medical care if they are injured.  See how many people say "no".  That should be the same number of people that support reform in the health care sector.