Yesterday, General Kenneth Franklin McKenzie Jr. admitted a claimed U.S. drone strike against the ever evolving and mysterious ISIS-K, actually killed 7 children and three innocent adult civilians. General McKenzie calls it a “tragic mistake.” Four days after the August 29th strike Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called the strike “righteous.”
General McKenzi says he takes “full responsibility”, yet he retains his position. No one is being held to account. No one at the Pentagon is facing discipline. Both McKenzie and Milley claim it was solid intelligence that led them to watch, follow, and eventually target and kill Zemari Ahmadi, an Afghan relief worker who arrived home. The missile struck his vehicle as his children ran out to welcome daddy home from work, killing all occupants in the car and those in the vicinity.
As noted by Politico, “The command now assesses that “it is unlikely” the man and vehicle targeted was affiliated with ISIS-K, the Afghanistan branch of ISIS, or “a direct threat to U.S. forces,” Gen. Frank McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command told reporters Friday.”
Many people suspect part of the “intelligence” they used was a tip from their Taliban “partners” at the time. Ten people killed, including three children.
The other aspect to this situation that raises MASSIVE alarm bells is McZenzie emphasizing this strike was the result of overwhelming “signals intelligence” or SIGINT. Remember, the Intelligence Apparatus, writ large, is part of Team-1, and aligned with the State Department. The White House and Pentagon are part of Team-2. At the time this took place, there was a severe battle to avoid accountability between both teams.
Two Questions:
First – Was the signals intelligence provided by Team-1, purposefully wrong in order to set up the Pentagon (Team-2) with a major crisis, and as a result, put more of the Afghanistan blame on the DoD and White House?
Second – Did the evidence of that erroneous targeting then arrive at the New York Times after an assist by the background operators of Team-1 to get it to them?
Think about it.
♦ TEAM One – The Department of State is aligned with the CIA. Their media PR firms are CNN, CNNi and the Washington Post. Their ideology is favorable to the United Nations. Their internal corruption is generally driven by relationship with foreign actors. References: Hillary Clinton, Clinton Global Initiative, John McCain, Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood, Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, Cass Sunstein, Brookings Institute, Lawfare, China-centric, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Intel Committee, Council on Foreign Relations.
♦ TEAM Two – The White House is aligned with the Pentagon (DoD) and National Security Council (NSC). Their media PR firms are domestic in nature. New York Times, Politico, etc. Their internal corruption is generally driven by domestic influence. References: Barack Obama, George Bush, Wall St, Big Banks, Multinational Corporations, Defense Contractors, FBI (state police), Judicial Branch, and community activists writ large.
[Presidential elections only affect Team Two (nationalism -v- globalism). In the modern era, Team One is independent.]
Both teams were responsible for the Afghanistan mess. However, in the aftermath of the mess; and with the situation in/around Kabul gaining massive attention, each team is positioning to avoid scrutiny. Scrutiny on either team runs the risk of identifying massive institutional corruption; so the objective is to push the spotlight onto the other team.
State Dept. blames White House/Pentagon…. Pentagon/White House looking to avoid sunlight.
Did the DoS/CIA set up the White House and DoD using their knowledge of relief worker Zemari Ahmadi and his family as useful collateral damage?
