BS: Drones Over America

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 12:18 PM

Bruce, I haven't seen the Dem Talking points. I guess they don't let me into the meetings. But what you seem to bee says is that the Bush Administration did the same thing under a different name, the difference being that the ATF got caught doing it under Obama.

Its a silly political football. It is not as if the Mexican Cartels have no access to guns except through the ATF. I swear the GOP in Congress would mark gasoline so that Hugo Chavez could be blamed for car accidents using Citgo gas.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,999
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 12:21 PM

I think too many people here don't know what they're talking about. This article may explain.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57461204-10391695/a-primer-on-the-fast-and-furious-scandal/

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 12:30 PM

But that cannot be 9. It contradicts what BB said about his huge cut and paste!

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 12:53 PM

Can't be long before Al Quaeda and similar franchises start operating drones in America. The technology isn't that hard.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Stringsinger
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 01:10 PM

American drones are being used all over the world. Instead of computer games,
we have a more lethal pastime. Innocents are being slaughtered.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 02:45 PM

"Can't be long before Al Quaeda and similar franchises start operating drones in America. The technology isn't that hard."

Are you in some sort of a "say dumb things contest?" If you are you must be winning unless you are competing with Rush Limbaugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 03:04 PM

John Stewart on the Fast and Furious "scandal."

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 04:29 PM

Back in the day when an "enemy" was a state that was capable of surrender and used uniformed troops, the notion of the United States Government spying on its own citizens was considered grotesque and intolerable. Then the Cold War began and the Commie scare got all ramped up, largely due to the blown-up paranoia and delusory world-views of key CIA executives, and some teeth-gnashers and arm-wavers like Joseph mcCarthy. Bineby, Hoover began gathering all kinds of intel on citizens under the guidon of protecting the US from sneaky hidden Commie faggot bastard hippie spies. The CIA gradually followed suit, figgering that they couldn't do anything right in them furrin countries, like invade Cuba or undermine Argentina or protect citizens in Iran. Failure after failure. So they started taking satellite images and otherwise probing the lives of US citizens.

After we fucked up the Middle East so royally that we looked like Bozo-Satan to most anyone east of Berline, and they started blowing up various installationds of ours like the Cole, and eventually the World Trade Center, all bets were off. Since our melting pot nation could hide secret agents from anywhere, it just made common sense that the gummint should have carte blanche to spy on any of 'em. The age of political iinnocence in the US was beaten to death by its own paranoia and false perceptions.

So this is just another logical extension. We proved we could never pull of decent Hum in, because our intell boys were such piss-poor human beings that they couldn't conduct an honest conversation or make friends worth a shit. So we rely on high tech to spy for us and, now, to kill and die on our behalf. Whoopee-do for humanity.

It's understandable enough that we resort to solutions to our worst problems, such as terrorism. But it would make me feel a helluva lot better if we were trying to understand the goddam problems first, find out how they came to exist, and address the actual sources.

If we tried that, we would find out pretty q

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 04:33 PM

From A CBS link from the one, Guest,999 provided:

"In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.

On July 14, 2010 after ATF headquarters in Washington D.C. received an update on Fast and Furious, ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait emailed Bill Newell, ATF's Phoenix Special Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious:

"Bill - can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time. We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales. Thanks."

More Fast and Furious coverage:
Memos contradict Holder on Fast and Furious
Agent: I was ordered to let guns "walk" into Mexico
Gunwalking scandal uncovered at ATF

On Jan. 4, 2011, as ATF prepared a press conference to announce arrests in Fast and Furious, Newell saw it as "(A)nother time to address Multiple Sale on Long Guns issue." And a day after the press conference, Chait emailed Newell: "Bill--well done yesterday... (I)n light of our request for Demand letter 3, this case could be a strong supporting factor if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of this case."

This revelation angers gun rights advocates. Larry Keane, a spokesman for National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun industry trade group, calls the discussion of Fast and Furious to argue for Demand Letter 3 "disappointing and ironic." Keane says it's "deeply troubling" if sales made by gun dealers "voluntarily cooperating with ATF's flawed 'Operation Fast & Furious' were going to be used by some individuals within ATF to justify imposing a multiple sales reporting requirement for rifles."

The Gun Dealers' Quandary

Several gun dealers who cooperated with ATF told CBS News and Congressional investigators they only went through with suspicious sales because ATF asked them to.

Sometimes it was against the gun dealer's own best judgment.

Read the email

In April, 2010 a licensed gun dealer cooperating with ATF was increasingly concerned about selling so many guns. "We just want to make sure we are cooperating with ATF and that we are not viewed as selling to the bad guys," writes the gun dealer to ATF Phoenix officials, "(W)e were hoping to put together something like a letter of understanding to alleviate concerns of some type of recourse against us down the road for selling these items."

Read the email

ATF's group supervisor on Fast and Furious David Voth assures the gun dealer there's nothing to worry about. "We (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into detail."

Two months later, the same gun dealer grew more agitated.

"I wanted to make sure that none of the firearms that were sold per our conversation with you and various ATF agents could or would ever end up south of the border or in the hands of the bad guys. I guess I am looking for a bit of reassurance that the guns are not getting south or in the wrong hands...I want to help ATF with its investigation but not at the risk of agents (sic) safety because I have some very close friends that are US Border Patrol agents in southern AZ as well as my concern for all the agents (sic) safety that protect our country."

"It's like ATF created or added to the problem so they could be the solution to it and pat themselves on the back," says one law enforcement source familiar with the facts. "It's a circular way of thinking."

The Justice Department and ATF declined to comment. ATF officials mentioned in this report did not respond to requests from CBS News to speak with them.

The "Demand Letter 3" Debate

The two sides in the gun debate have long clashed over whether gun dealers should have to report multiple rifle sales. On one side, ATF officials argue that a large number of semi-automatic, high-caliber rifles from the U.S. are being used by violent cartels in Mexico. They believe more reporting requirements would help ATF crack down. On the other side, gun rights advocates say that's unconstitutional, and would not make a difference in Mexican cartel crimes.

Two earlier Demand Letters were initiated in 2000 and affected a relatively small number of gun shops. Demand Letter 3 was to be much more sweeping, affecting 8,500 firearms dealers in four southwest border states: Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas. ATF chose those states because they "have a significant number of crime guns traced back to them from Mexico." The reporting requirements were to apply if a gun dealer sells two or more long guns to a single person within five business days, and only if the guns are semi-automatic, greater than .22 caliber and can be fitted with a detachable magazine.

On April 25, 2011, ATF announced plans to implement Demand Letter 3. The National Shooting Sports Foundation is suing the ATF to stop the new rules. It calls the regulation an illegal attempt to enforce a law Congress never passed. ATF counters that it has reasonably targeted guns used most often to "commit violent crimes in Mexico, especially by drug gangs."

Sounds to me that the gun dealers had more brains and principles that our own 'Justice(?) Department'

Makes me wonder, what other amenities came along with the deal.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 04:43 PM

None of it is new. Only the technology has a changed. For a while, in the early 1990's I worked at a a building in Ottawa Canada, that overlooked another building, which I see in Google Maps, is still there. Which was described as US government installation designed to TAP domestic phone calls within the US. I asked "Why is it here." I was told because they are not allowed to do it on US soil. I was also told that Canada had a similar facility in the USA to spy on Canadians.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 05:19 PM

Thanks, brucie for the clear and concise link that supports the facts that I laid out that beardedbruce said were "Democratic Talking Points"and "lies"...

Like JtS, I don't get "Democratic talking points"... I read lots of news, watch the national news and stay the hell away from bloggers of any stripe...

I don't know why the righties care so fascinated with mythology and conspiracy theories... I don't think there are enough psychiatrists to save this country from them...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 05:24 PM

I believe that US spy agencies have been routinely tapping US phone lines without warrants for decades. I don't really have a problem with that. I don't think that people have a right to privacy to do treasonous things.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: gnu
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 05:30 PM

Frightening indeed!

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 05:30 PM

On the other hand, not all drones are equal.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 10:58 PM

Isn't a gnu some kind of jackass? Fits.

Here you go, oh lazy one. From your beloved National Public Radio:

Anyone and everyone can now look in the journal Science and read about how to make lab-altered bird flu viruses that have been at the center of a controversy that's raged for months.

But in the eyes of some critics, the details of these experiments are effectively the recipe for a dangerous flu pandemic.

The H5N1 bird flu virus isn't normally contagious between people, but these mutants most likely are. They were created with the best of intentions by a lab that's trying to understand how flu viruses might change in the wild and start spreading in humans.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/06/21/155504336/journal-publishes-details-on-controversial-bird-flu-experiments

Oh yeah, they were just FULL of good intentions when they made a flu that could wipe out 90% of humanity. And then it was all a big accident that the recipe got published.

What's really spooky is that now the big banks are setting up "living wills" in case they fail. Corporations have been granted personhood, so naturally those businesses will set up living wills, as any person should do.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-banks-bailouts-wills-idUSBRE85Q0AZ20120627?feedType=RSS&dlvrit=56943

This is coming at a time when 200,000 body bags have been ordered for the London Olympics:

http://investmentwatchblog.com/breaking-news-just-in-case-there-happens-to-be-a-terrorist-nuke-200k-body-bags-are-on-stand-by-at

And don't forget that Iran shot down a drone. More likely it was landed in their backyard so that later NATO would be able to say those dirty Ay-rabs backward engineered the thing to send a fleet of flu-bearing drones out to attack the infidel. Could the attack come during the Olympics? Who knows? But the City of London is the center of western banking, and it looks like they're getting ready for something. Fortunately the banks will have their wills in place so they can hold onto their wealth and continue to rule over the 10% of us that are left after those Ay-rabs bombed us with drone flu.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 11:06 PM

Man... Very bizarre post... Jim Jones stuff... My hat is off to the wronger for stringing together the most incoherent conspiracy theory ever...

Keep up the good work, wronger...

You make Tin Foil Nation proud!!!

More, por favor...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 11:11 PM

>>>What's really spooky is that now the big banks are setting up "living wills" in case they fail. Corporations have been granted personhood, so naturally those businesses will set up living wills, as any person should do.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-banks-bailouts-wills-idUSBRE85Q0AZ20120627?feedType=RSS&dlvrit=56943 <<<

You do know that this was a Government requirement because the banks were considered "too big to fail." The "living wills" are in the event of another crisis the banks would have a plan for winding them down instead of bailing them out.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jun 12 - 11:17 PM

Instead of the people of the USA bailing them out.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 02:39 PM

What's biting you Jack the Sailor, with your "Are you in some sort of a "say dumb things contest?" There's nothing that difficult about building and deploying unmanned flying bombs, especially if you don't worry too much about precise targetting.

And I suspect it could be possible in time to buy them more or less off the peg, if you've got the right contacts and enough money.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 03:26 PM

"There's nothing that difficult about building and deploying unmanned flying bombs, especially if you don't worry too much about precise targetting."

That is not a drone. That is called a "cruise missile." They have been around since WWII, called the V1. If it is so easy why has no non-government actor never deployed one?

It is hard for a terrorist to get their hand on high explosives. It is hard to get their hands on a remote controlled vehicle large enough to carry enough high explosives to do real damage.

It is so far, impossible for them to get their hands on a non-line of site control device that is secure from jamming or detection with enough bandwidth for a video signal to be transmitted back to the operator to allow for the piloting of the vehicle. Certainly not. not by a long shot. Is that day coming? Maybe. Probably. But it is not here now. It is far from easy.

As far as "Al Qaeda" franchises using it in America. Suicide Vests and trucks full of fertilizer are far cheaper and easier. And Al Qaeda has yet. (knock on wood) to pull off even one of those attacks in America. But already they are graduating into science fiction.

It was a dumb thing to say. Just like the rest of the alarmist superstitious unwarranted associations on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: gnu
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 07:08 PM

Songwronger... "Isn't a gnu some kind of jackass? Fits."

Nope. It's a big dumb docile bovine that kills lions. Your post is there for all to read. Unprovoked and inane... nasty and just plain stunned as me arse. Jackass? I think everybody knows who the jackass is... except maybe you, ya stunned, rude, ignorant arsehole.

I shant ask you to apologize for your personal attack and I surely hope it's not deleted by a moderator. I hope it remains in print forever so that anyone who reads it knows what a jackass you are. I make a joke and you make a slur. Do the arithmetic, if you can.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 07:20 PM

gnu
   [noo, nyoo] Show IPA
noun, plural gnus, ( especially collectively ) gnu.
either of two stocky, oxlike antelopes of the genus Connochaetes, the silver-gray, white-bearded C. taurinus of the eastern African plain and the black, white-tailed C. gnou of central South Africa: recently near extinction, the South African gnu is now protected.
GNU Snowboards On Sale www.rei.com/Gnu-Boards REI Clearance On Now. All GNU Snowboards— 20–30% Off!
Ad
Also called wildebeest.

Origin:
1770–80; < Khoikhoi, first recorded as t'gnu; probably to be identified with ǂnû black, as applying orig. to the black wildebeest

Jackass

See Songwronger

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 07:55 PM

"Drone" is i use as a general term which covers all unmanned flying bombs. Which have of course been around since World War II. I can remember them overhead as a child.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 08:40 PM

Uh . . . maybe this will help:

CLICKY.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jun 12 - 08:51 PM

McGrath of Harlow, That is pretty much the problem I have with this thread. The because they are both called a "drone" It doesn't mean that the unmanned vehicle that the USDA uses to see if ranchers are letting their cows shit in the water supply are the same as the ones firing hellfire missiles at "suspected militants." Wronger deliberately tried to spread fear based on that confusion.

As far as I know a drone is a remotely operated or robot vehicle. Multi-use. A cruise missile is a single use flying bomb(rather than rocket or artillery) But my point stands that the technology has been around for a long time and that no non-state actor has ever deployed that technology and it is not likely to happen soon.


>>>Is anyone here concerned about this? Obama already has his secret "kill list" that he reviews daily, and he's already set the precedent of killing Americans with drones overseas, so do you really want Obamney adding YOUR NAME to the kill list? <<<

wronger

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 29 Jun 12 - 12:33 AM

A statement quite a bit back attracted by attention, and subsequent comment furthered what is perhaps worth a look as how an almost trivial misrepresentation can provoke invalid understanding.

The government made public the plans for weaponizing Bird Flu.

What actually happened, is that researchers in two different places were able to find fairly simple ways of modifying the genetic code of H1N1 viruses. The prevalent forms of H1N1 "bird flu" are relatively benign for humans, but a few "variants" have been found "in the wild" that are more infective. For humans infected with H1N1 in its currently common form is more lethal than (most) other flu viruses. The modifications made by these researchers made the modified virus "slightly more transmissible" to a selected variety of genetically altered laboratory mice bred for easy infection with "things similar to things that infect humans."

The researchers made arrangements to publish the results of their experiments, since it would be of critical interest and aid to medical researchers looking for how the exisitng H1N1 might, by natural genetic changes, become more highly contagious to humans.

The US Government (one agency in particular) asked them to withhold the information, since the "method" steps described might also aid "someone" attempting to develop H1N1 as a weapon. The genetic modifications described produced no changes in any way directly suitable for production of any weapon.

After a few months of discussion, mainly among researchers and scientists, and with very sparse objection from any government agency, the researchers decided that the information should be published for it's use by other medical researchers, the publishers agreed, and the reports were released.

As conducted, the methods and testing reported revealed a "weapon" that might be considered if one wants the mass destruction of a specific exceedingly rare genetically altered laboratory mouse, but is of no direct use for much of anything else.

One might be more concerned about the success of Soviet scientists who reported the manufacture of "live smallpox virus" from "raw, nongenetic materials" about 30 years ago, or the similar report of a similar "creation" of the same virus by two independent US laboratories within the past couple of years. (But I'm not particularly worried about those, and see no reason for others to worry too much thus far.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jan 13 - 08:45 PM

List of children killed by drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen

PAKISTAN
Name | Age | Gender
Noor Aziz | 8 | male
Abdul Wasit | 17 | male
Noor Syed | 8 | male
Wajid Noor | 9 | male
Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male
Ayeesha | 3 | female
Qari Alamzeb | 14| male
Shoaib | 8 | male
Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male
Tariq Aziz | 16 | male
Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male
Maezol Khan | 8 | female
Nasir Khan | male
Naeem Khan | male
Naeemullah | male
Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male
Azizul Wahab | 15 | male
Fazal Wahab | 16 | male
Ziauddin | 16 | male
Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male
Fazal Hakim | 19 | male
Ilyas | 13 | male
Sohail | 7 | male
Asadullah | 9 | male
khalilullah | 9 | male
Noor Mohammad | 8 | male
Khalid | 12 | male
Saifullah | 9 | male
Mashooq Jan | 15 | male
Nawab | 17 | male
Sultanat Khan | 16 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male
Noor Mohammad | 15 | male
Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male
Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male
Abdullah | 18 | male
Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male
Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male
Shahbuddin | 15 | male
Yahya Khan | 16 |male
Rahatullah |17 | male
Mohammad Salim | 11 | male
Shahjehan | 15 | male
Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male
Bakht Muneer | 14 | male
Numair | 14 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Taseel Khan | 18 | male
Zaheeruddin | 16 | male
Qari Ishaq | 19 | male
Jamshed Khan | 14 | male
Alam Nabi | 11 | male
Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male
Rahmatullah | 14 | male
Abdus Samad | 17 | male
Siraj | 16 | male
Saeedullah | 17 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Salman | 12 | male
Fazal Wahab | 18 | male
Baacha Rahman | 13 | male
Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male
Iftikhar | 17 | male
Inayatullah | 15 | male
Mashooq Khan | 16 | male
Ihsanullah | 16 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Abdul Waris | 16 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male
Adnan | 16 | male
Najibullah | 13 | male
Naeemullah | 17 | male
Hizbullah | 10 | male
Kitab Gul | 12 | male
Wilayat Khan | 11 | male
Zabihullah | 16 | male
Shehzad Gul | 11 | male
Shabir | 15 | male
Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male
Shafiullah | 16 | male
Nimatullah | 14 | male
Shakirullah | 16 | male
Talha | 8 | male

YEMEN
Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female
Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female
Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female
Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female
Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male
Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male
Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female
Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female
Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female
Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female
Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male
Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female
Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female
Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female
Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female
Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male
Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female
Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female
Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male
Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male
Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female
AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male
Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male
Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male
Nasser Salim | 19

The third from the end was an American. President Buzzkill established the precedent of offing Americans with that one. And this is just Pakistan and Yemen. He's using drones in 9 countries, at last count. Mass murderer of children.

http://droneswatch.org/2013/01/20/list-of-children-killed-by-drone-strikes-in-pakistan-and-yemen/

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Songwronger
Date: 25 Jan 13 - 08:57 PM

That was my post. Cookie thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 04:48 AM

We've gone very, very wrong in the way we treat each other. Assassinating people without trial or a chance of defence - I would never have believed this of America.

I would never have believed this of America, once.

In relation to immigrants and jobs, I agree with the "but where's the jobs" point - but this interesting piece from The Atlantic seems to prove me wrong: If You Want More Jobs, You Should Want More Immigrants

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 08:14 AM

"It is impossible for journalists, human rights groups, or outside investigators to definitively determine the ratio of civilians to militants killed by American drones."

"The strikes kill senior leaders and weaken Al Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban, and the Afghan Taliban, but militants use exaggerated reports of civilian deaths to recruit volunteers and stoke anti-Americanism."

Reuters Magazine: The drone wars

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 08:20 AM

If your little sister or favourite cousin - a seven-year-old whose teeth had that appealing gap that makes a kid lisp for a year; an engineering student who was the pride of the family; a young mother, adored centre of her new family - was 'collateral damage' in an assassination by another state, how many of your friends and relatives do you think would begin to hate that assassin state?

It doesn't take a propaganda machine's exaggeration to make people hate; only murder from the air.

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 08:52 AM

Drones over the UK - Guardian article

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 09:24 AM

Seems to be some slight of hand going on here...

This thread ***isn't*** about drones being used in military operations overseas... That is a separate discussion...

This thread ***is*** about drones being used over America...

We are going to be seein' more and more uses of drones over the US in the coming years... As JtS pointed out they will be used to monitor farm animals to keep them from polluting fresh water sources... They will be used to look for missing people in national parks, for traffic monitoring, for security of large complexes...

I don't have any particular problem with drones over America as long as they are not used to conduct fishing expedition, warrant-less searches of private peoples property... 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...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Drones Over America
From: Stringsinger
Date: 26 Jan 13 - 09:32 AM

Songwronger, Obama's merely continuing Bush's failed policies. Drone warfare is not new on the books.

You don't think Romney wouldn't have use it?

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.

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: 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: 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: 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 - 10:54 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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,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: 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.