Drone Strikes Part 2

[Grand58742]

Not very often in this life am I at a loss for words or extended commentary. However, this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/05/us-drone-strike_n_2813857.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

is causing me serious pause for thought. Here's the actual memo sent to Rand Paul:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_U.S.%20news/US-news-PDFs/BrennanHolderResponse.pdf

(on a lighter note, I feel kind of dirty using MSNBC for a reference)

But in said letter, the Attnorney General used the attacks on Pearl Harbor and 9/11 as potential justification for the use of military force inside the United States and on United States citizens in protecting America. Far be it from me, a common lowly citizen, to point out to our esteemed Attorney General, but the attack on Pearl Harbor was preceeded by a declaration of war...well almost, but a declaration was there...and was done by another nation-state. And 9/11 was completed by a foreign terrorist group using foreign individuals that happened on US soil. Neither of which were United States citizens who can and should come under the Bill of Rights to include due process. And there's that Posse Comitatus thing as well...

The Insurrection Act as ammended might cover this, but not so much:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/10/A/I/15/333

However, I got an education tonight in reading through that Title in the US Code. Didn't realize the scope of same until now.

But still, at a loss for words.

[Chief]

This is what they will be capable of. It is a very well written and scary article all at the same time.

http://www.techi.com/2013/03/cell-phone-tracking-gun-sniffing-predator-b-drones-are-flying-over-americans-today/

They will be able to see if you have a gun and track radio and cell phone signals. Even when not using cell phone. Now if say they put some weapons on drone you won't even see it coming. Use your cell phone to pin point your exact location and see ya in heaven.

[jimmycthemd]

First of all I agree that this is all VERY scary. The potential for these to be used against American citizens is virtually unthinkable. But (there's always a but) here's a what if.

What if some delusional psycopath decided that they'd gather an army and try to overthrow the government. In this hypothetical case, this person wants to replace our representative republic with a dictatorship. Let's say that this person has strong holds spread across the country and are armed to the teeth. In this case, how far should the government be allowed to go on American soil against American citizens.

I'm not proposing we ignore the negative possibilities of the use of these powers/weapons against what we could consider innocent citizens. I, for one, am against the government having this power because of probable abuse....not locally (by the individual law inforcement or soldier), but by the political powers. Even if we don't see the potential for the abuse today, who knows who will be in power a generation from now.

What do you consider the balance between being able to protect against domestic terrorism and protecting our individual freedoms. My personal opinion is that 'He who sacrifices liberty for security deserves neither'. Where do you draw that line? Please keep this civil and polite....and keep the tin foil hat as loose as possible LOL.

[Matt In Oklahoma]

Well tinfoilers full of hateraide there it is, the goose that laid the golden egg. No reasoning, excuses or anything, it's wrong, all wrong so remember who is doing it and who is not when you unload and make sure you don't laze the wrong folks

[WiseOwl]

I would like to go deer hunting with one of these babies!

[protus]

Well tinfoilers full of hateraide there it is, the goose that laid the golden egg. No reasoning, excuses or anything, it's wrong, all wrong so remember who is doing it and who is not when you unload and make sure you don't laze the wrong folks

in 4 years we'll see if they get used .....ill bet a troy oz on it. ;)

[Not_Yet_Prepped]

What if some delusional psycopath decided that they'd gather an army and try to overthrow the government. In this hypothetical case, this person wants to replace our representative republic with a dictatorship. Let's say that this person has strong holds spread across the country and are armed to the teeth. In this case, how far should the government be allowed to go on American soil against American citizens.

As you said, I believe our founding fathers had it right. Individual Rights are above all else. If an individual within a group is not secure than how can the group be secure? EVERYONE DESERVES A TRIAL BY JURY OF THEIR PEERS IN OPEN COURT. Sure it may "crack" a window to attack but the opposite is opening the flood gates to tyranny. "Terrorist" have only killed a few thousand in the last 100 years how many have been killed by GOVERNMENT? And lookup our history... the US Government has been part of that killing too!

And while we are talking about weapons used on the Americans... Many have down played the Bullet Purchases of the DHS. WARNING Tin foil hat time... These purchases now admittedly total over 1.6 Billion (That Billion with a B) of NONE target style ammo. DHS says they use about 15 million rounds a year in training. So simple math says that is 106.6 YEARS worth of training and training with the EXPENSIVE ammo not the cheap FMJ. So you should be upset:
If you believe that they are on the UP and UP and this is only for normal training then you should be very upset that they purchased enough in the last 2 years to train for the next century. And by purchasing so much they have made it expensive and hard for us to find ammo to purchase.

But my tinfoil hat says this is not for training. Simply looking at the Drone strikes on US Citizens, the NDAA 2012, Fast and Furious and other actions by our Government it all points to another direction than training.

Setup:
Trying to take Guns by using Fast and Furious and any crime as reasons to take them.
Pass "Laws" saying they can torture, kill and indefinitely detain US citizens if they are on the "Battlefield".
Declare all of the US as the Battlefield.
Acquire Large amounts of ammo.

Notice they are already saying they are at war with Terrorist. That War is here on US soil. And that anyone who believes in "The Founding Fathers", "The Constitution", is Ron Paul supporter is a Possible Terrorist , does not trust the Federal Government and any returning Veterans are all possibly terrorist! So basically if you are reading this you are a Suspected Terrorist and you are on the battlefield... Because you are "suspected" terrorist and you are "on the battlefield" you have no rights. And they can kidnap (black bag) you, torture you, and kill you without oversight by anyone. That means they are AT WAR WITH YOU!

These things should make all of us put on a tinfoil hat.

in 4 years we'll see if they get used .....ill bet a troy oz on it. ;)

The problem is not for today or within the next 4 years... the problem is in the next 10-20 years. As these powers are acquired they have not expiration date so they just keep building... Drones in the skies today no big deal... But after we are used to them then a "need" arises and they are "armed" drones in the skies. And then once they are "armed" then the need arises that they be used. Next an innocent by standard is killed and they talk us into it was for the greater good. And then eventually several innocent by standards are killed everytime and only people complaining are the families of those innocent by standards. "but that will never happen here!". Really why?

We are already doing this in our "War on Terror". Estimates range in the 3,000 plus innocent by standards have already been killed in drone attacks with no real up roar in the media. And now that war on terror is here on US soil. And that the government needs no oversight to kill ANYONE that is part of that WAR. So soon or later someone will abuse this power. Tomorrow, next year, next president WHO CARES... REMOVE THE POWER BEFORE IT IS ABUSED!

[protus]

been interesting the last few days seeing how the admin reacted to pauls questions on this......

[Grand58742]

been interesting the last few days seeing how the admin reacted to pauls questions on this......

I think that's called "backpedaling"

[Gus14]

I guess I am confused.
Whenever anyone speaks out about the growing police state and the moves the federal government is making to seemingly make war on the civilian population you are one of the first ones to scream tin foil and tell everyone to relax.
People post about APC's in local police agencies and you say relax, they need them.
People post about desensitizing targets and you claim they are a necessary "training" tool.
People posted in the past about the UAV's and you were quick to tell them they were wrong and just spreadding conspiracies.
Now, you post this thread basically saying what many on here have been saying for a while now...that there is a reason to be concerned.

So what changed your mind? More data and you have had the oppertunity to review that data and have found this to now be a credible threat and concern for the average civillian or is it because Rand Paul says it is a problem?

[1Admin]

Gus- I can't speak for Grand but I will say that yes you watch PATTERNS and adjust your planning, preps based on those.

However their is a fine line between that and the "I can't do anything cause big brother is watching me" Walter Mitty fantasy a lot of conspiracy theorists get into. They (conspiracy theorists) are big into the latest Alex Jones video but not so much into preparing for what can be done if these eventualities come to pass. It's very very easy to get caught up in the "theory" of it all and not do anything to prepare to fight it, survive it, win, etc.

As I have said before, I'm not against the conspiracy theory posts, but again, let's NOT ALIENATE the underground element of the police and military that ARE ON OUR SIDE with the "leo's and .mil types suck!" undertones or overtones that a lot of posts have had lately. Angry? Good! Direct it at the right place. Put that emotion into getting in shape, training, learning, etc. Then you will be ready if/when that time comes versus some of these theorists that will be hiding in the closet.

And I'm afraid I missed it, but who the hell is paul and how did I react to him??? I'm lost, but that's not uncommon!

[Gus14]

I guess my issue (if you want to call it that) is that we all try to look for patterns. Depending on what a persons career is or past experiences are, some of us may get data before others. When you take that real data (not conspiracy stuff) and match it up with what you see in other cases, a scary picture begins to emerge.
Many on this forum have voiced their concerns while a couple seem to spend a lot of their reposts on defending the governments actions as "training" or needed assets to do their job. I know in the past threads about UAV's in American airspace have been quickly dismissed by some contributors as being conspiracy theory nonsense but now it is a big deal and it seems to coincide with the recent actions of Rep. Rand Paul. So I was more curious than anything if the change of heart was based on data or a politician. That part was directed at the OP more than anything, I am just trying to raise the question and be respectful at the same time.
I dont think it is a theory that we are losing rights faster than they were written and that there is just cause for concern by every red blooded true American citizen from coast to coast.
As far as the "ALIENATE the underground element of the police and military that ARE ON OUR SIDE" goes, I am very aware of that. Being a NY resident and in Emergency Services in multiple capacities, I am on the FRONT LINES of that battle as are many of my friends in the Sheriff's dept and State Troopers who have said they will not enforce illegal laws on the civilian population. These guys and gals are putting their careers on the line because the reason they joined the force was to uphold their oath to the Constitution and help the civilian population, not a politician's agenda. You folks are just starting to feel the pain of government control. We have been living with it and fighting it for years now and it gets emotional when we speak out to who we think are like minded people only to get the same response you would get from a politician.

[1Admin]

Alright I get it.

Let's just keep in mind that attacking or calling out a moderator isn't a way to have a long history here. The staff here is doing a job here for free or very close to that. Even I don't agree with all of them at times but their is a way to disagree and not be disagreeable. I mean hell their are two staff members here that still like AR's for crying out loud :)

Everyone disagrees on certain things, that's called life. Sometimes people change their opinions, outlooks, etc. That also is part of the game of life.

[Grand58742]

The major difference being...

Verifiable links and facts. Take the whole armored vehicle one for example. Did DHS buy them? Yes, saw the video and provided a link myself. Did they buy 2700 like the article who referenced a blog who referenced a blog who pulled that number from something entirely different and slapped a "men in black are coming to get you" spin on it? No. They have them but not in the numbers some like to use to put fear into the public. The difference in what I posted here is the fact it is:

In the mainstream news and not someone making huge assumptions based on facts that don't fit the story. Now not all news will be on the mainstream, I understand and agree, but the major difference is this is the fact the US Government provided direct proof this time. And this time even your typical apologetic liberal leaning leftists news had it as a link. To me that's way more serious than a made up story that doesn't fit the facts.

Furthermore, it was the rationalization of using said drones for reasons that really aren't that clear. I outlined those concerns in my initial post. The reasons given were a poor example of "well, I interpret using them in these cases to be okay but as long as these conditions aren't met, it's probably not going to happen" and ended up being about as clear as mud. I can guarantee you nobody went away from that letter feeling comfortable with the AG answer and saw little more than government doublespeak. Hence what we saw in the Senate by Senator Paul. And further backpedaling by the AG in making the answer crystal clear.

But the point the idea had been mulled over by senior members of the administration was in itself a point of concern. And further answering the question in a way that was designed to justify their actions based on conditions that didn't meet the facts of any given situation. Pearl Harbor and 9/11? Foreign government or agents attacking the United States (which coincidentally would/should fall under the Department of Defense) that didn't answer the question of American citizens being targeted.

Overall, I have no issues when someone brings up a tin foil story. I have no issues if someone believes said story. I do have an issue when they attempt to pass it off as gospel without doing their homework and spreading fear in the process. Or assuming it is entirely correct without at least checking the veracity of same. Do all "news" articles need to have footnotes and links to be true? No. Do I expect someone to at least do the background and cite something other than Infowars before saying "it's completely reliable" like that Canadian article supposedly interviewing a DHS Agent? Absolutely.

We have enough problems going on right now in plain view without having to worried about what is not and people scared of their shadows. We have Senators grinding the Constitution under their high heels. We have politicians in NY and CO ignoring the will of the People and getting paid off to pass bills. We have massive debt that is only getting worse. We have individuals, some of which are members here, getting 22 days of unpaid leave from the federal government as part of sequestration that have bills to pay and families to feed. Close to 50% of the country is on some form of assistance. We have senior government workers giving out unclear answers on whether the government would use drone strikes on US Citizens. These things are real and should be on our minds more than people overreacting to made up facts and fear mongering articles. We should be picking up the sledgehammer to swing at the 400 pound gorilla attempting to punch us in the face rather than ignoring it and concentrating on the shadows that don't exist.

[Grand58742]

And for the record, I never dismissed any posts about drones in US airspace.