Conservatives turn on drones

Will the anti-drone movement bring together the left and right in America? Are conservatives in America only against drones under a Democrat President? Do these same conservatives object to the use of drones in other countries, or only the US? Do partisan Democrats see the hypocrisy in supporting their pro-war/pro-drone President?

Opposition to the use of drones in domestic airspace is spreading from the Code Pink left to the Fox News right. While conservatives laud the use of drones against suspected militants overseas, the sudden and vehement criticism of domestic drones this week by three right-wing commentators suggests that Congress’s rush to open up U.S. airspace to unmanned aviation vehicles now faces an unusual left-right chorus of critics.

www.salon.com...

Today, in Chicago, Code Pink will be holding a protest in Chicago against the US/NATO war Machine, and focusing on the use of drones. Will the press cover it?

www.scoop.co.nz...

www.codepink.org...

www.pacificfreepress.com...

reply to post by stanguilles7
This could unite us better than Occupy.

2nd

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

This could unite us better than Occupy.

2nd

Maybe. I'm skeptical, personally. The 'conservatives' coming out in the press against drones only appear to be concerned with their use over US soil, so there is still some disconnect between that and the anti-war movement on the left. But, I guess its a start.

reply to post by beezzer


Hmmm, interesting thought.
Now that "they" have created a problem.
But it sure is nice to be united though...

the gubbers in the big house have overstepped their turf - chucked the constitution.
i can only hope it does bring splinter groups together - it should.
ok - buddy - rat-a-tat-a-tat - don't need no stinkin miranda rights or posse-comititus.
i'm neither dem nor republican ( tho i am all for RON PAUL).

If you like small government you need to work hard at having a strong national defense that is not so militant. Personal liberty is the purpose of government, to protect liberty - not to run your personal life, not to run the economy, and not to pretend that we can tell the world how they ought to live.
Ron Paul
Read more at www.brainyquote.com...

Thanks for bringing up such an important topic Stan. This appears heartening, though I hesitate to believe the big-government stalwarts in Congress are really against them or if they are just putting on a good show to make things appear as though they sympathize with public opinion.

I think this issue is of paramount importance as it will set the precedents for all future use of such technology within the CONUS. Freedom has taken a severe beating from both sides over the last decade and perhaps this may well be just the issue to unite disparate political elements.

While drones can certainly be useful and important for certain mission critical the defense of the US (not the Homeland - God, I hate that word) a dialogue needs to happen over this subject and guidelines set so that they are not used in an unconstitutional fashion as instruments of control or espionage. These are powerful weapons and intelligence gathering platforms and I feel some limits would do much to set the mind of the public at ease.

What really makes this a unique issue is that drones are the first weapons system that is unmanned and completely removes the user from risk - a very enticing reason for abuse by a mentally unstable operator. I understand there is a chain of command so that no one person could go off the deep end but are these drone pilots screened in any way? What assurance will the public have that these will not be abused?

Very difficult questions, but a dialogue is a starting point so yes, I'm very happy to see this.
S&F

Cheers,
Asktheanimals

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Thanks for bringing up such an important topic Stan. This appears heartening, though I hesitate to believe the big-government stalwarts in Congress are really against them or if they are just putting on a good show to make things appear as though they sympathize with public opinion.

Agreed. It's more than likely partisanship at play.

Nonetheless, it creates a precedent to hold them to under future administrations. Because there is no doubt that drones will be used over the US in very large numbers in the near future. And we all know the neocons in the GOP /DNC will embrace that just as they did the Patriot Act.

The creation and use of drones was ushered in by the conservatives in the Military-Industrial Complex, who championed not only drones by the privatization of the Army, now we have an army of "private contractors" (mercenaries) and unmanned drones dropping bombs on everything from wedding parties to the occasional (or so they claim) terrorist, to the private use by civilian police forces in the States. It's a bit self-serving for Fox "News" to turn on drones now, you can bet that the instant a Republican is in office they'll be singing praises over drones once again.

The "Predator" drone attacks, like those used in Pakistan, began in earnest in 2008 under the CIA. Fox "News" never had any complaints then of their use, or the CIA program running it:

CIA officials became concerned in 2008 that targets in Pakistan were being tipped off to pending U.S. drone strikes by Pakistani intelligence, when the U.S. requested Pakistani permission prior to launching targeted killing attacks.[45] The Bush administration therefore decided in August 2008 to abandon the practice of obtaining Pakistani government permission before launching missiles from drones, and in the next six months the CIA carried out at least 38 Predator targeted killing strikes in northwest Pakistan, compared with 10 in 2006 and 2007 combined. (*)

What's incongruous is that the very same M-I-C and police state mentality that gave rise to the use of drones are the strongholds of conservatives. It's politics as usual for Fox "News". Fox "News" has long been a champion of police-state tactics and authoritarianism - so long as it came from the right-wing. Fox "News" tirades against the OSW protests has consistently demanded a more militarized and authoritarian response, especially from the likes of Beck and Hannity.

GOP authoritarianism and repressive police-state tactics

The use of drones for civilian police forces was an inevitable extension of the programs put in place and championed by the conservatives. It's a genie let out of the bottle - just as are all those domestic spy programs like carnivore, NSA warrantless surveillance (remember Bush AG Alberto Gonzales?), SWIFT database snooping, Einstein, Tempest, Echelon - most of these programs expanded heavily in the mid-2000's, but not a peep against them by our friends at Fox "News". The reason for that? Not a democrat was sitting in the oval office.

BTW this doesn't absolve blame from Democrats or liberals, but the idea of shifting blame from the conservatives over something they ushered in, with all their fear-mongering over "teh global war on terror", is repugnant.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

This could unite us better than Occupy.

2nd

Maybe. I'm skeptical, personally. The 'conservatives' coming out in the press against drones only appear to be concerned with their use over US soil, so there is still some disconnect between that and the anti-war movement on the left. But, I guess its a start.

I guess the proof will be if Romney gets elected and the sentiment remains.

The Romney administration will be under close scrutiny.

reply to post by stanguilles7


I would like to think that opposition to these drones would exist regardless of who is sitting in the White House. We are treading on a very slippery slope right now. The door has been left wide open!!

In situations such as this I often look to Judge Napolitano for some wisdom.

If the drone operator sees you doing anything of interest (Is your fertilizer for the roses or to fuel a bomb? Is that Sudafed for your cold or your meth habit? Are you smoking in front of your kids?), the feds say they may take a picture of you and keep it. The feds predict that they will dispatch or authorize about 30,000 of these unmanned aerial vehicles across America in the next 10 years. Meanwhile, more than 300 local and state police departments are awaiting federal permission to use the drones they already have purchased -- usually with federal stimulus funds.

The government is out of control.

If the police use a drone without a warrant to see who or what is in your backyard or your bedroom, or if while looking for a missing child the drone takes a picture of you in your backyard or bedroom and the government keeps the picture, its use is unnatural and unconstitutional.

I say "unnatural" because we all have a natural right to privacy; it is a fundamental right that is inherent in our humanity. All of us have times of the day and moments in our behavior when we expect that no one -- least of all the government -- will be watching. When the government watches us during those times, it violates our natural right to privacy. It also violates our constitutional right to privacy. The Supreme Court has held consistently that numerous clauses in the Bill of Rights keep the government at bay without a warrant.

townhall.com...

Good thread!! on a topic that may very well bridge the gap as noted by Beezzer.

Seems kind of stupid that flying robots would be the thing that "goes too far" and unites the bickering idiots considering the hyper-militarization of police, the massive data centers skimming everything and everyone in every city across the country and the Orwellian neo-fascist nonsense of the Patriot Act and Homeland Security havent gotten any bipartisan attention.

Every time I hear some news jerk mention the "homeland" I puke in my mouth. What are we, Spartans?

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


brilliantly stated.

The idiots that make up the voting majority notwithstanding, the constant expansion of the war machine is having the effect of uniting once disparate groups.

Then again, maybe thats fantasy.