[Scan-DC] Unmanned

[kra2829 at aol.com]

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=downwithtyranny%2C%20unmanned&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownwithtyranny.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F02%2Funmanned.html&ei=r-M7T6eeHcO2twe7pND-Cg&usg=AFQjCNGRC-X1QsmcfEaopkYMXVns3CXsSA


-----Original Message-----
From: Henry <kk4hg at comcast.net>
To: 'Alan Henney' <alanhenney at aim.com>; 'Scan DC' <Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wed, Feb 15, 2012 12:52 am
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] Unmanned


Who wrote this?
-----Original Message-----
rom: scan-dc-bounces at mailman.qth.net
mailto:scan-dc-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Alan Henney
ent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 12:08 AM
o: Scan DC
ubject: [Scan-DC] Unmanned

ownWithTyranny
February 13, 2012 Monday 12:37 PM EST 
Unmanned
LENGTH: 1897 words
As we mentioned a few days ago, California criminal Congressman Lucky Bucky
cKeon started and chairs, the House Unmanned Systems Caucus, a polite way
f saying the Drone Caucus. This is little more than a garden variety scam
y the manufacturers of drones to ingratiate themselves to a bunch of
ilitary Industrial Complex whores in Congress... like Lucky Bucky and money
rubbing warmongers like Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX), Joe "You Lie" Wilson
R-SC), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Todd Akin (R-MO), Rick Berg (R-ND), Mike Rogers
R-MI), Brian Bilbray (R-CA), David Dreier (R-CA), Don Young (R-AK), Michael
cCaul (R-TX), Darrell Issa (R-CA), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Robert Brady
D-PA), Joe Heck (R-NV), Anne Marie Buerkle (R-NY) and, of course Dan Boren
Blue Dog-OK). 
But the problems with the drones isn't just about killing in other
ountries. There isn't enough of a market for that. And Lucky Bucky and his
and of whores stepped in to help the industry solve that by pushing to have
rones flying all over a sky near you... very soon. A bill McKeon was paid
ery well to see passed was approved by the House 2 weeks ago and by the
enate on Monday "to open U.S. skies to unmanned drone flights within four
ears."
The FAA is also required under the bill to provide military, commercial and
rivately-owned drones with expanded access to U.S. airspace currently
eserved for manned aircraft by Sept. 30, 2015. That means permitting
nmanned drones controlled by remote operators on the ground to fly in the
ame airspace as airliners, cargo planes, business jets and private
ircraft.
Currently, the FAA restricts drone use primarily to segregated blocks of
ilitary airspace, border patrols and about 300 public agencies and their
rivate partners. Those public agencies are mainly restricted to flying
mall unmanned aircraft at low altitudes away from airports and urban
enters.
Within nine months of the bill's passage, the FAA is required to submit a
lan on how to safely provide drones with expanded access.
Even if you think it's cool that American drones are bombing the hell out of
akistani civilians and causing unthinkable amounts of collateral damage--
eople's sons, daughters, moths, fathers, brothers, sisters, dreams... you
ant them spying on you here at home? The Tampa police has already ordered
ome. Thursday the Center for Democracy & Technology sent out this statement
o the press. Did you hear anything about it on TV or radio... read it
nywhere?
Congress is demanding drones in the air over the United States-- without
onsidering the civil liberties issues. Within the span of three days last
eek, the House and then the Senate passed a law-- H.R. 658-- requiring the
ederal Aviation Administration (FAA) to speed up, within 90 days, its
urrent licensing process for government use of drones domestically and to
pen the national airspace to drone aircraft for commercial and private use
y October 2015. While the law requires the FAA to develop guidance on drone
afety, the law says absolutely nothing about the privacy or transparency
mplications of filling the sky with flying robots.
As CDT and others have pointed out, drones are powerful surveillance devices
apable of being outfitted with facial recognition cameras, license plate
canners, thermal imaging cameras, open WiFi sniffers, and other sensors.
rones' unique ability to hover hundreds or thousands of feet in the air--
ndetected, for many hours-- enables constant, pervasive monitoring over a
ide area. Without clear privacy rules, public and private use of drones can
sher in an era of unparalleled physical surveillance. Without transparency
equirements, citizens will not even have the basic right to know who owns
he drone watching them from above. Congress, the FAA, industry bodies, and
he American people all should play a role in ensuring that drones are used
esponsibly.

ongress missed a major opportunity to build civil liberties protections
nto H.R. 658. Instead, Congress fast-tracked the bill, ordering the FAA to
nleash drones without even requesting a study or holding a hearing on the
ivil liberties implications of domestic drone deployment. Perhaps indignant
earings are inevitable, however, once hours of embarrassing drone footage
its YouTube. Ideally, privacy rules for civilian and government use of
rones would be an explicit part of the baseline privacy legislation, though
ongress should consider giving the FAA authority to build privacy into the
rone licensure process.
As CDT argued in a previous blog post, the FAA should build transparency
tandards into its drone certification process. First, applicants for a
icense to use a drone should be required to submit a statement disclosing
he surveillance capabilities of the drone and the intended use of
nformation the drone might collect. Second, the FAA should make the drone
icense and accompanying privacy statement publicly available online. There
hould not be an exception for law enforcement, although there may be a
ational security exception. Transparency requirements alone will certainly
ot provide adequate civil liberties protections to the American people, but
hey would generally prevent the secret use of drones.
The transparency requirements CDT proposes are well within the FAA's mandate
o ensure the airways are used safely. There are many realistic scenarios in
hich knowledge of drone ownership can affect public safety, such as if an
ndividual seeks to learn whether her abusive ex-husband possesses a drone
icense, as well as numerous legal precedents alleging a risk of harm to the
ublic in divulging travels patterns, political views, or sensitive
ffiliations-- all of which drone surveillance can reveal. The FAA already
akes many aircraft licenses searchable online, enabling the public to
earch for license-holders by name, craft tail number, or craft make and
odel - it would be illogical not to establish a similar process for drone
icenses. Unfortunately, the FAA has steadfastly refused to identify current
rone license-holders.
The drone industry has a big image problem. A glance through the comments
ection of any online news article on drones reveals an outpouring of strong
pinions that alternate between alarm, fatalism, and-- very often--
antasies of shooting drones out of the sky as a means to protect privacy.
o counter this widespread negative sentiment, the drone industry has
nnounced a major public relations effort to make Americans more comfortable
ith drones. (I sincerely hope this PR push will include drones dropping ice
ream sandwiches and confetti on you on your birthday.) To be sure, drones
an do many positive things and can spark broad technological innovation.
owever, the industry's goodwill gesture will not mask continued use of
nmanned aircraft to watch over political rallies, monitor traffic, or levy
axes. The industry needs to do something a lot more substantial than PR.
The drone industry has a strong interest in supporting-- at minimum--
ransparency requirements for drone licenses. Secret use of drones magnifies
he perception of privacy invasion, sensationalizes the industry, and
rovides cover for those who would use drones for unethical or harmful
urposes. The transparency requirements CDT proposes would subject the
ndustry to almost no extra burden while providing the public with an
wareness that could foster greater comfort with the technology. The drone
ndustry should think seriously about a set of best practices for drone
perators that include not identifying individuals over space and time
ithout permission. CDT made similar arguments with regard to facial
ecognition.
The FAA is widely expected to propose rules for domestic drones this coming
pring, at which time the FAA will solicit public comments. All Americans
an submit their concerns to the FAA and demand, at a minimum, that all
rone licenses be made publicly available. There is a lot at stake here. The
act that Congress, the FAA, and the drone industry appear to be ignoring
he issue portends a big mess on the horizon. But by the time they get
round to establishing the needed civil liberties protections, the horizon
ay already be filled with softly whirring black dots.
The bill passed the House 248-169, 24 Blue Dogs and Business-Dems joining
ll but 12 Republicans to take another giant step into Big Brother Land--
ourtesy of Buck McKeon. All the usual suspects-- corporate whores like
antor, Ryan, Upton, et al-- joined McKeon to push this through.
nterestingly enough so did several Tea party-supported Republicans who were
lected by people who aren't interested in drones snooping into their lives.
 good example of a well-compensated corporate whore who took lots of money
rom the drone industry lobbyists and then voted to sell out his
onstituents on their behalf was John Mica (R-FL). Florida progressive
emocrat Nick Ruiz isn't sure which drone supporter he'll be facing in
ovember, crony-capitalist John Mica or lunatic fringe teabagger Sandy
dams. The two of them are in a life-and-death cage match for who will face
ick in the general. Mica voted for the drones because he was paid to. Adams
as too stupid to figure out that her Tea Pa  rty base would be unhappy with
 piece of legislation that impinges so directly on individual liberties.
She's also a member of McKeon's hopelessly corrupt Drone Caucus.)
"All the way from the Left to the Right of the political spectrum-- voters,
rivacy advocates and everyone against unwarranted surveillance of citizens
y corporations or government-- are stunned by Congress' decision to
ssentially underwrite drone flights over American skies. But that's what
appens when you elect people like Sandy Adams (R-FL) and John Mica (R-FL),
oth of whom voted to OK the use of drones, domestically, this week. And
hat's one more reason, why I'm running against them in the new FL District
.
Rather than obsessing over the greater good of defense contractors that want
o sell America surveillance drones, let's focus instead on the greater
ood, livelihood and socioeconomic improvement of our people. We don't need
ore unwarranted surveillance and invasions of our privacy-- what Americans
ant and need are higher wages, more jobs, greener energy, a cleaner
nvironment and a better education for our children. It's just that simple."
UPDATE: Is This What Tea Party Activists Want-- 30,000 Drones Spying On Us?
Led by Buck McKeon, conservatives voted overwhelmingly to approve 30,000
rones flying over the American skies. Is this what the foolish Tea Party
ctivists gave us by giving the Republican Party the majority in Congress?
ere they just kidding about personal privacy?
Do not feel bad for not knowing about this, because, similar to the
nti-Constitutional NDAA legislation, they purposefully tried to hide this
rom the American public. The corporate controlled mainstream media was once
gain complicit and was an integral accessory in this crime against "We the
eople." The corporate mainstream media failed us all miserably once again.
Sure, the corporate media did fail us. And these guys are paid by the same
ociopaths who have bankrolled the careers of politicians like Buck McKeon,
andy Adams, John Mica, Eric Cantor, John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Fred Upton and
he rest of the gang that pushed this outrage through.
______________________________________________________________
can-DC mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
can-DC mailing list
ome: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
elp: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
ost: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
lease help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html