BS: Drones Over America

Subject: RE: BS: Lawlessness in Government
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 14 - 02:16 PM

Read the article AND the accompanying comments, from today's news!

GfS

Subject: BS: Lawlessness in Government
From: Songwronger
Date: 10 Apr 14 - 11:53 PM

Excellent clip. About 7 minutes long:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0aVD79mcwE

Should our leaders be allowed to ignore laws? To rule lawlessly?

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Apr 14 - 01:28 PM

Like everything songwronger posts, nonsense as well as being misplaced.

Read the EPA guidelines, "Human Subjects of Research (the "Common Rule")

http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/guidence/cr-require.htm
(or simply google above title)

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 14 - 12:18 AM

I wanted to post to the EPA thread. Why was it put here?

Subject: BS: EPA, NIH - WTF?
From: Songwronger
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 10:26 PM

EPA tested deadly pollutants on humans

The Environmental Protection Agency has been conducting dangerous experiments on humans over the past few years in order to justify more onerous clean air regulations.

The agency conducted tests on people with health issues and the elderly, exposing them to high levels of potentially lethal pollutants, without disclosing the risks of cancer and death, according to a newly released government report.

These experiments exposed people, including those with asthma and heart problems, to dangerously high levels of toxic pollutants, including diesel fumes, reads a EPA inspector general report obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The EPA also exposed people with health issues to levels of pollutants up to 50 times greater than the agency says is safe for humans.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/02/report-epa-tested-deadly-pollutants-on-humans-to-push-obama-admins-agenda/#!


US Licensing LIVE Rabies Based EBOLA Vaccine

Just in time for the most recent outbreak of Ebola in Africa...the National Institute for Health is licensing a Rabies based Ebola vaccine produced by Exxell Bio....

Basically, what they have done here is taken the Rabies virus and altered its exterior coating to contain Ebola proteins....

These efforts seem to tie in with recent government contracts to increase capacities at CDC Quarantine Stations located throughout the country....

http://aftertheshift.blogspot.com/2014/03/us-licensing-live-rabies-based-ebola.html

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 07:07 PM

DTM, The USAF bases in UK are busy (part of the NATO Alliance).

Some posts below the belt in mudcat could be on a DHS watch list.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:31 PM

For every drone that strikes an innocent civilian in the Mid-East there are many rebels to react and Al Quaeda recruits a new member. Once the drones become indiscriminate weaponry, targeting anyone within their range, guilty and innocent alike, the idea that drones will stop terrorism by becoming tools for terrorism is ludicrous.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 08:09 PM

There have been many UFO sightings over Bonnybridge, Scotland ... I'm at a loss to think what these 'drones' are hoping to find there.

Another section of the Antonine Wall, perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 08:04 PM

Any luck, Q, they'll get you due to "operator error".

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,DTM
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 07:37 PM

There have been many UFO sightings over Bonnybridge, Scotland (apparently). Whether they be from Washington, Moscow or Mars, I'm at a loss to think what these 'drones' are hoping to find there.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 07:08 PM

Again, I say-

Good hunting!

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 05:27 PM

Or can you attempt to take preventive measures?

When they are five to ten thousand miles from American soil? And are "plotting" and haven't done anything substantive>

You can just "take 'em out"? I don't think so, Don.

Of course Al Qaida & others can also say - with some justification - that they are only "taking preventative action" against the U.S. "War on Islam" or the "War on X-what-have-you".

Blind and toothless comes to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:46 PM

Take the case of the Boston Marathon bombers.

If the authorities have advance knowledge of what these two (presumably only two) guys are up to and at the point where, say, they are carrying the explosive laden pressure cookers to the site—do you have to wait until they actually blow one or both of them up and kill a lot of people before taking whatever action is necessary to prevent them?

Or can you attempt to take preventive measures?

The ethics seem pretty clear to me.

If you can prevent someone from killing a lot of people and do not take action to stop them, you are as morally guilty of mass murder as they are.

If the government becomes aware of a mass murder plot and does not take measures to stop it, some people—often the very same people who protest government action—would blame the government for NOT stopping the plot in its tracks.

Let's get real, folks!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:55 PM

So, Q, if assassination is an acceptable option for the U.S., why is it unacceptable when employed by so-called "terrorists"?

And if people "who plot" are legitimate targets, its OK to abandon due process and the rule of law to assasinate them before they do anything?
Can we assasinate them because they are THINKING about planning to do something?

And again, please show me a declaration of war passed by Congress.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:46 PM

"Americans" overseas who plot strikes against Americans are legitimate targets, along with Al Queda and other terrorists.

Strikes against an American warship and base, plus the devastating destruction of life on 9/11, are reason enough for the U. S. to declare war on terrorists wherever they may be found.

Now that satellite technology has developed to the point that objects as small as bears may be identified and counted (satellite counts being used to determine polar bear populations and numbers), and drones are capable of delivering missiles based on these observations, the war, for it is that, can progress as terrorists are found and identified.

Good hunting!

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 02:51 PM

Because it merits repeating, I'm quoting something that I posted up-thread a ways.

". . . drones, per se, are not immoral. Several highly beneficial--and life saving--uses for them have been mentioned in this thread, including finding lost people in wilderness areas, quickly checking the extent of forest fires, and a whole raft of other such uses.

In my brief (one year) tenure as a morning and evening rush hour traffic reporter on the radio, having a number of camera-bearing drones in the air during those times would have given much more accurate data on congested areas that commuters should avoid, and reveal quicker, little utilized routes.

I had to try to divine what was happening by listening to several police radios simultaneously (like reading the entrails of birds), while a couple of other radio stations in town had observers up in the air, one in a small plane, another in a helicopter. But Seattle is a big city with several large thoroughfare approaches including two large bridges and several smaller ones. So even the airborne reporters could only get a limited view.

A fleet of, say, half a dozen camera-equipped drones would have been able to show an immediate overall picture.

The tool is not the problem. How it is USED, is another matter."

I might add here that the idea of trying to shoot down what you suspect might be a drone is foolish and irresponsible. You fire a bullet or a load of shot into the air and, gravity being what it is, it's going to come down somewhere.

I had a friend some years ago who was living in a mobile home (large, stationary "trailer"). Before the days of remotes, he got out of his easy chair to change channels and heard a loud "BANG!" over head, as if someone hand hit his roof with a hammer. Wondering what the hell that was, he returned to his chair to discover a big rip in the cushion—and a hole in his metal roof! He probed the cushion and found a .44 caliber bullet!

If he hadn't got up to change the channel, it would have nailed him!

It happened to have been the Fourth of July. Someone was out celebrating by firing a gun in the air with no thought that what comes up must come down. Somewhere!!

Monumentally stupid and irresponsible!!

Don Firth

P. S. If the government wants to waste time and money spying on me, what the hell? Smile for the birdy!

Songwronger, why so tooted up? What do you have to hide?

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 07:01 PM

The U. S. is at war against terrorists

When did Congress pass a declatration of war, Q?

And I suppose i your world the Constitition can be violated at will by the Dept. of Hopeless Stupidity at their whim.

And their "making their own rules" in violation of said Constitution & Bill of Rights is perfectly OK.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 04:12 PM

Whether you know it or not, The U. S. is at war against terrorists; the rules no longer apply. The Department of Homeland Security will make its own rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Stringsinger
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 12:32 PM

Ebbie, you are a civilized voice in a forest of military rationalizations, a role that women are increasingly playing and should be shouting from the rooftops in their role as part of the US Government, emphasizing why the US Constitution must contain the ERA and perhaps a Madame President.                      (thread drift but not too much).

Drones are a logical extension of a bloodthirsty and paranoid country that kills without due process in a court of law. Will the real terrorist please stand up?

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 10:12 AM

With 'robot' semis (transport haulers), human error, by the truck driver, would be eliminated.

And be replaced by machine error/breakdown/failure. I'll take the humans.

Any time we allow machines to take over thinking for us, disaster is just around the corner.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 01 Mar 14 - 05:06 PM

Robot semi trucks are a likely scenario they can go 24 hours without sleep, pay or benefits.

You apparenetly are assuming that the robot semis will carry at least twice+(?) the fuel (an additional hazard) of current trucks. Five or six hours is about the limit for what's on the road now before at least a fuel stop, if the driver keeps enough reserve to allow for going around the construciton detours and rerouting around accidents and weather affected routes.

Of course on some US routes it's common to pull two (and rarely 3) trailers with a single tractor, and "robot trucks" will almost ineveitably lead to "trains" with more towed units. (The Army tested an 8-section "transport train" 50 years ago.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 14 - 01:21 PM

Songwronger does have a tendency to drone on a bit. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Mar 14 - 12:38 PM

With 'robot' semis (transport haulers), human error, by the truck driver, would be eliminated.

Similar benefits would be obtained in the case of drone automobiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Mar 14 - 09:45 AM

Robot semi trucks are a likely scenario they can go 24 hours without sleep, pay or benefits.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 01 Mar 14 - 03:18 AM

On the original subject of DRONES, it is worth noting that SAE International (formerly the Society of Automotive Engineering) has released a "glossary for terminology to be used for technology in self-controlled vehicles."

The "press release" gives little information about the content of this new document, and the price to purchase a copy (even with member discount) is out of reach for me; but an "autonomous vehicle" (automobile) is effectively a "drone," and it will soon be mixed into traffic where I drive.

While it appears that the FAA has authority to regulate the use of flying drones, via requirements for flight plans, control over flight paths and altitudes, and exclusion from "restricted airspaces, the NHTSA has no such authority to regulate where your "self-controlled auto" goes, or when, so potentially there is the prospect of "robot cars" flooding the highways, mixed in with "human driven" vehicles in which the operators are either busy with getting lost following their GPS, or occupied texting with their buddies about "what movie to download this evening." (or which bar offers the best prospects for "getting lucky" this weekend.)

It appears that many here are frightened by the prospect of aerial drones "watching them," but I find the prospect of wheeled drone "blackboxes" tracking every mile every person drives much more invasive, and traffic densities make multi-vehicle pileups when a transister lets its smoke get out is also somewhat scary.

It seems inevitable that we soon will have robot vehicles on the roads, and in my opinion this needs closer attention than flying cameras.

(My first assognment on a flying drone design, 40 years ago, was to relocate the ashtray, redisign the seat for a taller "pilot," and install a personnel oxygen system, so maybe I'm just more accustomed to what those things can - and can't - do. Little old ladies in robot autos does sort of scare me.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 12 Feb 14 - 10:19 PM

The state assassination of a US citizen foretold

...Monday's revelation that the White House is once again preparing to carry out the illegal murder of an American citizen gives an entirely new and sinister meaning to President Obama's campaign slogan, "Yes we can."

Indeed, if the government can order the state assassination of a US citizen in the name of national security, what can it not do? Concentration camps (a remedy recently justified by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia), torture, disappearances, martial law, the suspension of the Constitution—all the methods of a police state dictatorship become equally justifiable and possible.

The apparent purpose of the Obama administration's calculated leak is to blunt popular opposition to an illegal state murder by creating a phony aura of "due process," "transparency" and careful deliberation for a criminal operation that is steeped in secrecy, conspiracy and contempt for core constitutional principles....

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/12/pers-f12.html

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 09:57 PM

Obama administration considering drone killing of US citizen

A United States citizen accused of being an overseas "Al-Qaeda facilitator" could soon be killed by an American drone, the Associated Press reported on Monday, but first the US government must find a way to legally launch such a strike.

The person — whose name and suspected location were both withheld by the AP — is believed by US officials to be actively plotting attacks abroad against other Americans....

http://rt.com/usa/drone-strike-possible-citizen-401/

No trial, no presumption of innocence. You're next if you don't speak out against it.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 05 May 13 - 10:17 PM

More U.S. Colleges offering Bachelor's Degrees in Drone Piloting

An increasing number of U.S. colleges have been offering bachelor degrees in drone piloting and engineering to students, while dozens more teach courses on UAVs. Starting salaries in the field are much higher than comparative jobs, like helicopter and commercial jet piloting. RT's Anastasia Churkina reports on the trend, while controversy over drone use inside the U.S. grows.

http://www.ingeniouspress.com/2013/05/04/more-u-s-colleges-offering-bachelors-degrees-in-drone-piloting/

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 03 May 13 - 08:07 PM

THE GAME OF DRONES

At last we know. The mysterious legal authority for Barack Obama's killer drone program flows from another administration with an elastic interpretation of executive power: that of Richard Nixon.

In a chilling 16-page dossier known simply as the White Paper, one of Obama's statutory brains at the Justice Department cites the 1969 secret bombing of Cambodia as a legal rationale justifying drone strikes, deep inside nations, against which the United States is not officially at war.

This startling disclosure is drafted in the antiseptic prose of an insurance adjuster announcing the denial of a claim based on a pre-existing condition. Yet, the bombing of Cambodia (aka Operation Menu), which involved more than 3,000 air strikes, was almost universally acknowledged as a war crime. Now the Obama administration has officially enshrined that atrocity as precedent for its own killing rampages.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/03/the-game-of-drones/

Excellent piece.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 11:33 PM

Abdulrahman al-Awlaki

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 08:35 PM

Just think about the Crusades... If the Crusaders had drones they would have needed them chastity belts...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 06:36 PM

I agree with what you're saying, Frank, but drones, per se, are not immoral. Several highly beneficial--and life saving--uses for them have been mentioned in this thread, including finding lost people in wilderness areas, quickly checking the extent of forest fires, and a whole raft of other such uses.

In my brief (one year) tenure as a morning and evening rush hour traffic reporter on the radio, having a number of camera-bearing drones in the air during those times would have given much more accurate data on congested areas that commuters should avoid, and reveal quicker, little utilized routes.

I had to try to divine what was happening by listening to several police radios simultaneously (like reading the entrails of birds), while a couple of other radio stations in town had observers up in the air, one in a small plane, another in a helicopter. But Seattle is a big city with several large thoroughfare approaches including two large bridges and several smaller ones. So even the airborne reporters could only get a limited view.

A fleet of, say, half a dozen camera-equipped drones would have been able to show an immediate overall picture.

The tool is not the problem. How it is USED, is another matter.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 11:50 AM

Is anyone concerned that the premise for ANY of this killing is a false one?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,999
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 11:25 AM

"Is anybody concerned that innocent people are being killed in Pakistan (women and children) and Yemen?"

Just as concerned as you were about people being killed in Mali.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Stringsinger
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 10:39 AM

Is anybody concerned that innocent people are being killed in Pakistan (women and children) and Yemen? It has to be understood that killing innocent people is not restricted to the U.S. and thereby includes a policy of killing innocent people in the U.S.

Drones are immoral.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,A Regular
Date: 11 Mar 13 - 10:24 AM

LOL: good one, Q.

I can recall several occasions on which having access to drone technology would have made some firefighting work much easier/safer. In a certain situation a person in a vehicle was setting fires along a 15 km stretch of highway, part of which was in town limits, and three threatened people-occupied structures. In an hour and a half we handled nine separate fire scenes with eight pieces of fire apparatus: a water tender, three engines (then called pumpers), a rescue vehicle, an aerial ladder with a small water reserve and one of two command vehicles that transported filled water backpacks (sometimes referred to as piss packs--fifty pounds of water and a hand-pumped nozzles). When we realized when the fourth call came in that we had an arsonist at work, we alerted forestry and they got a chopper up to relay fire locations to us. Gave new meaning to the term 'busy as a guy with two rattlesnakes in one hole.'

On another occasion we got real lucky stopped a prairie fire that had jumped a river and threatened to take off, and had it got away from us in those dry conditions I estimate it would have taken a dozen farms and spread unchecked driven by fairly strong winds for many kilometers. When resources are limited which they often are in those types of situations, knowing the extent and potentials of what you're dealing with is very important. The world looks different from a few miles up.

That said, drones are open to abuse by authorities and I'd like to see laws that govern their uses in place before we have a sky full of the things.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 10 Mar 13 - 12:41 PM

Digressing about pot patches, a little one was made near the farm we once had, surrounded by woods. Problem- the deer ate the crop before it could be harvested.

999, are you suggesting equiping a drone with knives? If an errant mate is found, the unnecessary other could order the drone to slice and dice the offender.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Mar 13 - 07:33 AM

Knives can be used to cut people and turnips.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 09:05 PM

This is gonna be fun, Q...

Just think about the possibilities...

Jealous husband buys drone to follow wife around or vice versa and accidentally crashes drone into the mayor's house...

Barney Fife is dronin' around looking for pot patches, finds the mayor messin' with the widow lady down the road and next thing ya' know all hell breaks loose...

Billy Bob is having a BBQ for all his friends, Barney Fife flies drone over the party and Billy Bob and his buddies shoot the thing down...

I am loving this next chapter of Big Brother now that Big Brother can be yer neighbor of Barney Fife...

Bring it on!!!

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 09:02 PM

I was watching Aljazeera a while back, and a reporter fitted a camera and transmitter to one he bought. He got some good pictures of a demonstration, but then wind came up and be lost the little drone to the wild blue yonder

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 08:57 PM

I wuz thinkin', come summer (if it does), I could equip a little drone with camera and send it out looking for pretty sunbathers. And perhaps add claws that could pick up burgers from neighborhood barbecues, not have to do my own.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 08:10 PM

Well, I ain't all that impressed with Rand Paul's little filibuster other than it seemed like ol' days... He get's credit for that... Problem is that he had to invent a straw man to beat up on...

But never mind Rand's little grandstanding...

The closest half-town from us is Monroe, NC and they are buying themselves a drone... Yup, seems that they are using $44,000 of drug confiscated money to buy themselves a drone... No one really knows how to fly it but they have been assured that flying is just like riding a bike, right???

Okay, lets do a little review here about Monroe, NC... The former city manager and the mayor were spying on one another and one of their wives threatened to kill the other one's wife and here we are with someone with a bone to pick and a drone???

This is going to get a lot more fun... Yezzir... I can all but predict that this drone will be shot out of the sky and that some deputy will end up arrested...

Ya'll have at it...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 09 Mar 13 - 12:56 PM

Lots of nonsense posted here, but it made me wonder about my city's helicopter use.

Calgary has two. Between 2008-2012, they responded to 12,137 calls, resulting in 1840 arrests with 3895 criminal charges. There were 192 vehicle pursuits (ground pursuit not permitted because of the danger to the public).
The 'copters provide a quick response to life-threatening incidents, and support ground units with surveilance and quick response.

Good helicopters are expensive and require both a pilot and patrolman, both costly.

Drones could take some of these tasks, possibly at much less cost to the city coffers.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 11:28 PM

Well, at least I believe they should be tried. THEY don't believe people should be tried before killing them. If they were fairly tried for their crimes, they would be executed.

And I spoke prematurely on Holder's answer about drone assassinations of Americans. He said Americans can't be targeted ON AMERICAN SOIL. Which leaves open murdering them when they're off of American soil. I suppose this could include foreign embassies, "international" airports and so on.

And Obama's murder of 16-year-old al Awlaki is "legal" according to Holder, because Obama killed him in Yemen. Specifically targeted an American kid. Obama is an intentional and knowing child murderer.

I hate Obama and Holder as much as I did Bush and Cheney. I hope I live to see them all guillotined.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 10:54 PM

"They need to be fairly tried and executed."

If that is the end result, why burden yourself with a trial?

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 10:50 PM

Rand Paul's filibuster is over. 13 hours. 9th longest is U.S. history. But he got an answer. Finally, the Attorney General of the U.S. told him that no, the president can't kill Americans without due process.

Holder and Obama were arguing that they could kill anyone anytime anywhere with drones. Our chief legal guy and our chief executive were claiming this power, despite the fact that our constitution points out we have the right to trial. I'm no lawyer, but the discrepancy is obvious even to me.

So anyway, Obama killed a 16-year old American with a drone. The son of Anwar al-Awlaki. So, since our Atty General now says that the president can't kill Americans with drones, that makes Obama a murderer. An official murderer, according to the words of the Atty General.

I can't believe it takes a U.S. senator stopping business for 13 hours to get a simple fucking answer to such a simple fucking question. Holder and Obama are scum. Subhuman, lying, conniving murderers. They need to be fairly tried and executed.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Mar 13 - 10:40 AM

"I think that the first time that someone gets busted as a result of such, where there was no probable cause, that the courts will strike down any convictions and therefore set a precedence that that ain't a proper use of the drone..."

The time for that kind of law is BEFORE they are used for domestic surveillance. You're buttering the bread on two sides, Bobert. Besides, when the laws are upheld the goal post will be moved and judges who are maybe a bit more under the "I'll trade liberty for security" umbrella will rule that that's the price of a 'safe society'.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 06 Mar 13 - 10:41 PM

Couple of stories/links:

Attorney General Eric Holder can imagine a scenario in which it would be constitutional to carry out a drone strike against an American on American soil, he wrote in a letter to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

"It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder replied in a letter yesterday to Paul's question about whether Obama "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial."

Paul condemned the idea. "The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening – it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," he said in a statement.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-drone-strikes-against-americans-on-u.s.-soil-are-legal/article/2523319

Sen. Rand Paul has taken to the floor of the U.S. Senate and is vowing to stay there "at length" in order to filibuster John O. Brennan, President Obama's nominee to be the next CIA director.

The freshman Kentucky Republican has said he will hold up the nomination until he gets more information about the U.S. drone execution program, which has become a major sore point for many lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

"I will speak today until the president responds and says, 'No, we won't kill Americans in cafes. No, we won't kill you at home at night,'" Mr. Paul said.

Just hours earlier, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. testified to a Senate committee that he believed it would be illegal for the government to kill an American who did not pose an imminent threat to security.

But he could not rule out the use of drones on American soil altogether, saying only that he doubted it would happen because it's easier to capture people here.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/6/rand-paul-filibusters-brennan-nomination-cia-direc/#ixzz2MmaX1IVe

So, Obama nominates this monster Brennan to head the CIA, and Brennan waffles on killing Americans, and Rand Paul writes to U.S. Attorney General Holder asking for clarification. Holder indicates a willingness to kill Americans.

Paul is filibustering on the floor of the Senate right now, as I type. While John McCain has dinner with Obama. No kidding. This is happening right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: bobad
Date: 27 Jan 13 - 04:48 PM

Paranoid now, hah!.......check this out: Watch the World's Highest Resolution Drone-Mounted Camera in Action

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Jan 13 - 05:56 AM

I can see areas in which use of drones would be hugely helpful. For example, catching deer poachers in the UK, who can see the lights of approaching police cars for miles, and be somewhere else by the time they arrive. Small drones would spot them easily, take car reg. Nos, and direct police to intercept them.

They could even cover vehicles and men with indelible dye.

There are hundreds of peaceful and useful jobs which would be better done by use of drones.

But, of course, Mr Paranoid Songwronger only sees the military use of Predator drones and his tinfoil hat lights up and produces showers of random synapse discharges.

Don T.