A U.S. [terror] drone on early Saturday killed 16 "al-Qaida militants" [people] and five civilians in Yemen' s southeastern province of al-Bayda, a Yemeni army officer said. ● The drone hit a pickup car which was carrying 16 "suspected militants" [people] in Hazmiah area of al-Bayda, about 268 km southeast of the capital Sanaa, local sources said. Five civilians passing by in a nearby car were also killed. Another six civilians travelling in another car on the highway of Hazmiah area were also wounded, witnesses said. It's the seventh of such drone strikes in the past two months.

Common Dreams: US Drone Obliterates Civilians in Yemen ■ A Yemen military official on Saturday says that at least fifteen people were either killed or wounded when a missile from a U.S. drone struck vehicles traveling on a road in the central province of al-Bayda. A pickup truck that was allegedly hit by a US drone in the al-Bayda province. Among the dead, according reports, are what the official claimed were targeted al-Qaeda militants traveling in two vehicles and also non-targeted passers-by traveling on the same road when the powerful U.S. bomb hit. According to Reuters, "tribal sources said a drone had been circling al-Bayda for days and on Saturday struck two cars the suspected militants were in. Three civilians who happened to be in a nearby car were also killed, they said." A security source told Reuters that the missile "targeted cars that suspected al Qaeda militants were in and killed 13 of them." The Associated Press, however, reports that a "Yemeni official" said nine of the victims in the attack were militants while at least six were "innocent civilians." The discrepancy in the early reporting does nothing to erase the fact that none of those killed in the bombing were given the opportunity to defend themselves or declare their innocence before being obliterated by what is assumed to be a U.S. Air Force drone operator controlling the aircraft from thousands of miles away. (Photograph: Stringer/EPA)

The mastermind of the US Central Intelligence Agency’s torture program has hit the headlines after seven years to defend the spy agency’s torture techniques. In an interview with the Guardian published on Friday, James Elmer Mitchell has described the CIA's “enhanced interrogation” program as a “success”. Mitchell was hired by the CIA back in 2002 to develop the so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques". Mitchell also said that he is "skeptical" about a Senate Intelligence Committee report on the controversial program. The 6,300-page report prepared by the committee provides details of torture techniques, including water-boarding, sleep deprivations for several days, confining the suspects in a box and hitting them against walls, used by the CIA under the administration of George W. Bush. The report says the “enhanced interrogation” methods, which were devised by Mitchell, were far more brutal than what was previously known.

NYT: Psychologist in Terror War Is Subject of Complaint

A seemingly routine suppression hearing in a suburban Chicago courthouse last month took an unexpected dramatic turn when video from a police car was introduced that disproved the testimony of five police officers. ● They had said Joseph Sperling was arrested after officers who pulled him over in a traffic stop smelled marijuana, searched the vehicle and found nearly a pound in a backpack lying on the back seat of his car. But the Glenview police video showed the search occurred only after Sperling was taken from his car, frisked and handcuffed, reports the Chicago Tribune . The newspaper dubbed it "a 'Perry Mason' moment rarely seen inside an actual courtroom." Castigating the officers for their "outrageous conduct," Cook County Circuit Judge Catherine Haberkorn granted a defense motion to suppress the search, which eliminated a basis for his arrest and resulted in a swift dismissal by prosecutors of the felony drug case against the 23-year-old. "All the officers lied on the stand today," said Haberkorn, who herself is a former prosecutor, at the March 31 hearing. "So there is strong evidence it was conspiracy to lie in this case, for everyone to come up with the same lie." The officers were later put on desk duty as investigations of their conduct proceed.

The U.S. and Saudi Arabia have supplied Syrian rebel terrorist groups with a small number of advanced American antitank missiles for the first time in a pilot program that could lead to larger flows of sophisticated weaponry, people briefed on the effort said. This shift is seen as a test of whether the U.S. can find a trustworthy rebel partner able to keep sophisticated weapons out of the hands of extremists, Saudi and Syrian opposition figures said. The U.S. has long feared that if it does supply advanced arms, the weapons will wind up with radical terrorist Groups - some tied to al Qaeda [al-CIAduh]--which have set up bases in opposition-held territory.

Johannes Stern ■ The Washington Post reported Friday that Poland and the United States would announce next week the deployment of US ground troops to Poland as part of an expansion of NATO military forces in Central and Eastern Europe, in response to the crisis in Ukraine. According to the Post, Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Siemoniak, visiting the newspaper after meeting with US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel at the Pentagon, said, “the decision has been made on a political level and that military planners are working out details.” The article continued: “There will also be intensified cooperation in air defense, special forces, cyberdefense and other areas. Poland will play a leading regional role, ‘under US patronage,’ he said.” The report makes clear that the US entered into the Geneva agreement with Russia, purportedly to “deescalate tensions” in Ukraine, in bad faith, intending to use Russia’s supposed breach of the deal as justification for expanded sanctions and a further aggressive buildup of US and NATO forces in Eastern Europe aimed at encircling and strangling Russia.

translate.google.no: Norwegian warships inserted in Ukraine crisis

Alexander Mercouris ■ The media refers to the document that emerged out of yesterday’s four party talks as an “agreement”. This is not strictly correct. The text of the document is here. As its text makes clear what this document is in reality is not an an agreement to settle the Ukrainian crisis or even an outline of such an agreement but rather a statement of basic principles around which an agreement should be negotiated. The real agreement (if it comes about) will emerge from negotiations based on the principles set out in this document.

Stephen Lendman ■ The ink wasn't even dry. On April 17, deal terms was struck. A previous article discussed them. Hold the cheers. They're not worth the paper they're written on. Washington negotiates duplicitously. Promises made are systematically broken. Don't expect this time to be different. Kiev's illegitimate putschists didn't surprise. They violated agreement terms. They did so straightaway. They acted with full US support.

Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.org appears on RT to discuss the recent deal struck between the US, Russia, and Ukrainian junta. Draitser explains that the US is employing a seemingly conflicted strategy, on the one hand posturing as honest peacemakers interested in negotiation, while on the other hand continuing to escalate tensions. He notes that sanctions, NATO mobilization, and other issues continue to lie at the heart of US-NATO policy vis-a-vis Russia and that, until these toxic aspects of US foreign policy are removed, the diplomatic conflict will continue.