Congress Calls for Accelerated Use of Drones in U.S.

[Cowboy]

Just one more reason to vote for Ron Paul and vote these nazi bastards out of office.

A House-Senate conference report this week called on the Administration to accelerate the use of civilian unmanned aerial systems (UAS), or “drones,” in U.S. airspace.
The pending authorization bill for the Federal Aviation Administration directs the Secretary of Transporation to develop within nine months “a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system.”
“The plan… shall provide for the safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system as soon as practicable, but not later than September 30, 2015.”
The conference bill, which still awaits final passage, also calls for establishment of UAS test ranges in cooperation with NASA and the Department of Defense, expanded use of UAS in the Arctic region, development of guidance for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems, and new safety research to assess the risk of “catastrophic failure of the unmanned aircraft that would endanger other aircraft in the national airspace system.”
The Department of Defense is pursuing its own domestic UAS activities for training purposes and “domestic operations,” according to a 2007 DoD-FAA memorandum of agreement. (“Army Foresees Expanded Use of Drones in U.S. Airspace,” Secrecy News, January 19, 2012.)
Update: In the recently enacted FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act (section 1097), Congress mandated that “the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a program to integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system at six test ranges.” This new test range program is supposed to be established within 180 days.
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2012/02/faa_drones.html

 

[joec]

Just one more reason to vote for Ron Paul and vote these nazi bastards out of office.

A House-Senate conference report this week called on the Administration to accelerate the use of civilian unmanned aerial systems (UAS), or “drones,” in U.S. airspace.
The pending authorization bill for the Federal Aviation Administration directs the Secretary of Transporation to develop within nine months “a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system.”
“The plan… shall provide for the safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system as soon as practicable, but not later than September 30, 2015.”
The conference bill, which still awaits final passage, also calls for establishment of UAS test ranges in cooperation with NASA and the Department of Defense, expanded use of UAS in the Arctic region, development of guidance for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems, and new safety research to assess the risk of “catastrophic failure of the unmanned aircraft that would endanger other aircraft in the national airspace system.”
The Department of Defense is pursuing its own domestic UAS activities for training purposes and “domestic operations,” according to a 2007 DoD-FAA memorandum of agreement. (“Army Foresees Expanded Use of Drones in U.S. Airspace,” Secrecy News, January 19, 2012.)
Update: In the recently enacted FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act (section 1097), Congress mandated that “the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a program to integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system at six test ranges.” This new test range program is supposed to be established within 180 days.
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2012/02/faa_drones.html

Ah yes, the house completely republican controlled and bet the ones calling for this in the Senate is also predominately republican also. So perhaps Nazi bastards isn't far from the truth.

 

[tiredretired]

I'm getting closer and closer to being a Ron Paul supporter. Had some nice conversations with some outside a local gun show yesterday.

Time for a house cleaning boys and girls. Get rid of them all! Vote for freedom.

 

[Cowboy]

Ah yes, the house completely republican controlled and bet the ones calling for this in the Senate is also predominately republican also. So perhaps Nazi bastards isn't far from the truth.

Joe you may very well be right, but I see no need to turn it into Repubs VS Democrats. Especially not even knowing for sure. I aint prejudice, I hate all of these crooks that are trying to take away are freedom a little at a time, that goes for both sides.

 

[joec]

Joe you may very well be right, but I see no need to turn it into Repubs VS Democrats. Especially not even knowing for sure. I aint prejudice, I hate all of these crooks that are trying to take away are freedom a little at a time, that goes for both sides.

No disagreement for me however the republican party has had control now for a long time compared to the democrats. The brought us to where we are now and that is a fact. Yet you want to give them another chance to fix what they screwed up and not give enough time for any one to fix the damage done over decades. Well if that is what people want then they will have it, plain and simple meanwhile we keep repeating the same old shit till the birds come home to roust. Well the birds are hovering now in my opinion and this country is the carrion they will feed on.

 

[300 H and H]

This is why we need Ron Paul now more than ever. I am afraid our Pres will get us tangled in war, hoping it will help his re election chances. It was a factor in jr Busch election.

I hope I am wrong.

Reguards, Kirk

 

[Cowboy]

Well it looks like it passed, go figure.


Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress

The agency projects that 30,000 drones could be in the nation’s skies by 2020.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/coming-to-a-sky-near-you/?page=all#pagebreak

 

[bczoom]

Brings a whole new meaning to duck hunting.

 

[joec]

Well it looks like it passed, go figure.


Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/coming-to-a-sky-near-you/?page=all#pagebreak

Doesn't surprise me at all. Now if they move them to the southern border to be used by border guards that would be a good use in my opinion. However for cities, I don't think so it is a good idea. And you guys think the democrats want to control you eh?

 

[tiredretired]

Doesn't surprise me at all. Now if they move them to the southern border to be used by border guards that would be a good use in my opinion. However for cities, I don't think so it is a good idea. And you guys think the democrats want to control you eh?

I don't think the Dems want to control me. I know they do! However, as it turns out, so do the Republicans. That is why Ron Paul is really the best alternative right now. Far from perfect, however.

I heard it described this morning that Romney is really a white Obama. LOL. So, as a junk food fan I guess I'd be saying we'd be trading in an Oreo Cookie for a Vanilla Creme.

 

[joec]

I guess most have heard absolute power corrupts absolutely. Another is the end justifies the means. Both are true of both parties and Paul would be no different in my opinion. Now we have a true oligarchy in that a very few with serious money have all the power to control and buy the vote through absolute lies and the majority in this country eat it up as they are convinced.

 

[thcri]

Both are true of both parties and Paul would be no different in my opinion.

Maybe, maybe not. Of all the candidates and including the all of the current administration I would trust Ron Paul way over any of them. And I think he would start clearing out some of the departments that are just rif raf where most of the abuse is being done. just my opinion.

 

[joec]

Maybe, maybe not. Of all the candidates and including the all of the current administration I would trust Ron Paul way over any of them. And I think he would start clearing out some of the departments that are just rif raf where most of the abuse is being done. just my opinion.

Well lets see then. First he would probably close most of our bases overseas bringing those troops home. About 50% would wind up out of work at that point adding to the unemployment. He would do away with more government jobs which would intern add about as many to unemployment as the military. His next move would be to give free rain to all of our businesses which would mean little to know worker protections, little consumer protections or for that matter none. At this point you will see your taxes go down but you will be completely on your own as he took away things like medicare and social security. In other words turn us into a true third world nation within his first term if he had his way. Yes we could all buy drugs, party hardy and carry a gun however what would we use to pay for those things on sub standard salaries, longer hours of work and no benefits at all. He would give us a constitutional form of anarchy. No thanks I choose not to live in his vision of the world.

 

[thcri]

I guess most have heard absolute power corrupts absolutely. Another is the end justifies the means. Both are true of both parties and Paul would be no different in my opinion. Now we have a true oligarchy in that a very few with serious money have all the power to control and buy the vote through absolute lies and the majority in this country eat it up as they are convinced.

Well lets see then.

I thought we were talking about corruption within the system.

 

[joec]

I thought we were talking about corruption within the system.

Ok we will go back to corruption. First he will be a lame duck president the second he is sworn in. He can nothing through either a democrat or republican controlled congress hence he will not be able to do much of anything including end the corruption in Washington. He if he could get elected and I seriously doubt it will be a short term president period. He has nothing to offer except trying to take us back two centuries to a time of the robber barons.

 

[thcri]

Ok we will go back to corruption. First he will be a lame duck president the second he is sworn in. He can nothing through either a democrat or republican controlled congress hence he will not be able to do much of anything including end the corruption in Washington. He if he could get elected and I seriously doubt it will be a short term president period. He has nothing to offer except trying to take us back two centuries to a time of the robber barons.

Seems to me that is about what they said about Reagan. Reagan worked from the bottom up and got more done that most other Presidents. He knew where his power was.

What you say in the quote is what we have today and will always have that until We The People Do Something About it. And the first thing is to start moving the crooks out otherwise we will have what we have forever. I am not happy with what we have right now. There is a better America out there and it is up to us,

 

[300 H and H]

Back to the drone issue...

The Iowa Gaurd is loosing it's fleet of F15's that are to be "relocated". They will how ever be replaced with fleet of UAV's or drones. Long ways from the border of Mexico. Was news a couple of days ago.

Personaly, the risk of missuse trumps any good use they may find for them. If they are so effective, lay off half of the law enforcement officers in the cities, with their implimentation. Like that will happen. And like most new toys, they soon will become standard equiptment for the merging of the police and the military that seems to be happening with recent legislation. Not good.

We need a Ron Paul now more than ever...

Regards, Kirk

 

[joec]

Back to the drone issue...

The Iowa Gaurd is loosing it's fleet of F15's that are to be "relocated". They will how ever be replaced with fleet of UAV's or drones. Long ways from the border of Mexico. Was news a couple of days ago.

Personaly, the risk of missuse trumps any good use they may find for them. If they are so effective, lay off half of the law enforcement officers in the cities, with their implimentation. Like that will happen. And like most new toys, they soon will become standard equiptment for the merging of the police and the military that seems to be happening with recent legislation. Not good.

We need a Ron Paul now more than ever...

Regards, Kirk

Ron Paul would want to put troops along our border, which by the way is against the constitution he proclaims all the time.

 

[Cowboy]

Back to the drone issue...

The Iowa Gaurd is loosing it's fleet of F15's that are to be "relocated". They will how ever be replaced with fleet of UAV's or drones. Long ways from the border of Mexico. Was news a couple of days ago.

Personaly, the risk of missuse trumps any good use they may find for them. If they are so effective, lay off half of the law enforcement officers in the cities, with their implimentation. Like that will happen. And like most new toys, they soon will become standard equiptment for the merging of the police and the military that seems to be happening with recent legislation. Not good.

We need a Ron Paul now more than ever...

Regards, Kirk

Not only that but, how long will it be before Holder gives them to the drug cartels in Mexico.

 

[Cowboy]

Ron Paul would want to put troops along our border, which by the way is against the constitution he proclaims all the time.

I recon it is all in how you interpet the constitution, the last several administrations have had no problem dancing around it to fit there agenda, so my moneys on Dr Paul that he would uphold it the way it was meant to be enforced.

Myth #1 The US Constitution prohibits posting US troops on the border.
The US Constitution says no such thing. In fact, Article VI states:
Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
So the US Constitution clearly requires the federal government to protect states from invasion. Almost a million aliens illegally pouring across the border into states each year is clearly an invasion.
Myth #2 The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits US troops from guarding US borders.
This 1878 act was enacted to prevent Union troops from continuing to enforce federal laws in the defeated South after the American Civil war. Here is the text as modified by Congress in recent years:
Sec. 1385. - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Guarding US borders from foreign invasion is not "law enforcement." The US Army exists to defend the US from foreign invasion, which is expressly authorized by the US Constitution. Guarding the Mexican border was the Army's primary peacetime mission until 1940, and no one ever declared this was in violation of this 1878 act. The US Border Patrol wasn't even formed until 1924, so claiming the intent of this law was to prevent US Army troops from guarding the border is absurd. The map at left shows US Army forts in Texas in the late 1880s when the entire US Army had fewer than 40,000 soldiers; it has 500,000 today. Clearly, defending the US border was a primary mission of the US Army for decades after this act was passed.

Some may argue that Chapter 18, Section 375 of Title 10 US Code prevents military personnel from direct participation in law enforcement. However, defending US borders from foreign invaders is not law enforcement, it's the basic purpose of the US military. While defending these United States from invasion, civilian law enforcement may be called upon to assist the US military. Does anyone believe the Border Patrol must operate fighter aircraft because the US Air Force can't intercept aircraft crossing into the US because that's "law enforcement"?
When you read about proposals in Congress to put US troops on the border, those are not proposals to allow US troops on the border, but proposals to force the President to put troops back on the border. However, recent Presidents have listened to their corporate advisors and their slogans and ignored the threat of unsecured US borders.​

Myth #3 The National Guard should guard the border, not active duty troops.
The National Guard is an organized militia to deal with state and national emergencies. Guarding the US border is a full-time mission that the federal government is required to perform by Article IV of the US Constitution. The few states along the border shouldn't be expected to defend the entire country from invasion. This myth is also spread by imperial minded Generals who prefer to rule an empire overseas than to defend their own citizens. Whenever citizens demand the Army protect their nation, Generals dodge this issue by stating that it may be a mission for the National Guard, so as not to waste resources of the US Army. This is absurd; the primary mission of the US Army is to protect US citizens, and the US Constitution requires the federal government to protect states from invasion. If there is a major war and the Army would like to deploy its border troops overseas, then National Guard troops from any state can be mobilized to guard the border until the war ends.
http://www.g2mil.com/border.htm

 

[waybomb]

So we put all these drones up. How is private general aviation going to avoid them?

 

[AAUTOFAB1]

So we put all these drones up. How is private general aviation going to avoid them?

Just a guess....... more laws and regulation on general aviation

 

[Danang Sailor]

Airplanes? I thought this was a call for the reelection of all the Democratic drones in DC!