Sen. Paul proposes bill protecting Americans from drone surveillance

reply to post by maddog99


This was exactly what I was screaming when I first heard this. You are going to act like you are fighting for us by passing a law to make an unconstitutional law... against the law? That's like me going to work and fighting for me to be able to clock in.... Senator Paul, I Said Good Day, Sir

Rand Paul can't be trusted, that turd is floating in the same bowl with Mitt Romney... The only way to protect yourself from drones is to flush these turds down....

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
reply to post by Domo1

 

Now, can we just get Rand Paul to do that for people in Canada too? I mean seriously, our patently idiotic government isn't going to stop the drones from flying over Canada. Harper is one of the biggest corporate shills on the planet. I wouldn't be surprised if Demarais has his hand shoved so far up Harpers ass that he can make his lips move. Or maybe Demarais uses a drone in there, there is a lot of vacant space in which to fly around right up to between the ears.

Cheers - Dave

sooo.....
in other words
you are saying Harper is a drone...
with a rather limited range of about three knuckles and a wrist...?

I'll buy that

edit on 14-6-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

No, Harper's not a drone, he's a meat puppet controlled by Demarais' drone just like the rest of that sad bunch called MP's. I think the lobbyists just come in to change their batteries and maybe their Depends too. LOL

Cheers - Dave

You mention red light cameras....a phenomenon which has forever altered driving styles of the rich and famous.

It used to be that if you ran a red light, you were as close to crucified as it gets, short of drunkenly crashing your motor vehicle. Cops and driver's ed teachers constantly cited red light violations as among the most dangerous, reckless, and selfish acts you could do behind the wheel. That all changed with cameras.

Now, you simply pay the bill, which is sent in the mail, as often as you feel the need for being an a hole.

If you're rich, you can simply cruise through town like every light is on permagreen. It would seem there's no limit to the fun you can have, being rich. You never lose your license, since that would quit the revenue source.

On topic, I don't think anyone can shoot down drones, on paper. We are gonna get them, and they are kinked to massive computers, scanning, matching faces with motor vehicles, storing data. the powers that were are a little fed up with non-acquiesence, especially since they have many more things to make us obey, fear, and retaliate against, in their technofascist quiver. They'll ram these things up our butt if they have to get china to attack us on our soil, as a sales pitch. Bradbury was so spot on with 451. He checked out just in time. The funny thing is, I knew people who used to understand Bradbury's genius. Since 911, some of these people have officially forgot they ever 'got' it. There's not a speck of it, in some of them, now.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

This just looks like a Public Relations stunt by Rand to try and make up for endorsing Romney. It's probably a good bill but whatever.

So what if it is a PR stunt? A good bill is a good bill.

This seems kinda of prophetic.

If the public where to intensely focus on each and every politicians history/skeletons in their closet, individually, one at a time, then we would reform the government slowly but surely from guilt ridden good legislation (kinda like the mafia extorts a business), but "we the people" extorting our rights and constitution back from each sell out politician individually.

Drones over the US and spying on Americans is here to stay and even Rand knows this. He knows this bill is going no where but it gives him points with voters who are not happy with Big Brother..

A Smart Politician.

Seems like a good bill to me.... I don't think it would stop them from continuing to use them, though. I'll tell you why:

I'm sure most people are aware of the helicopters that the DEA and other law enforcement agencies use with thermal cameras on them to locate people with grow operations in their house. Legally, they are not allowed to just fly around all day looking at random people's houses, and then finding a "hot house" for which they will investigate.

They are supposed to use the thermal cameras as a means to confirm previously held suspicion about a specific house. For instance someone tips them off that you have a grow operation in your house, THEN they use a thermal camera and check you out. They don't do this. They aren't legally allowed to, but they randomly look for grow operations with thermal cameras, without any sort of previous suspicion.

I know someone this happened to. They were raided, and their lawyer was able to check out their evidence. They claimed they were told by a confidential informant that there was a grow operation happening at his residence, THEN they got records from the power company to prove extra energy was being used in the house for a grow op, THEN checked him out with a thermal camera.

All sounds legit at first, but it wasn't. The date that they requested records from the power company was AFTER they found his house using a thermal. I'm guessing the whole CI thing was complete BS and nobody, not even me, knew he had a grow op going on. So what really happened was that they were looking at random people's homes, found his which was hot, then did a records request from the power company, then they made up a CI, got probable cause enough for a search warrant and did a raid.

His lawyer evidently figured this out and they got scared and ended up offering him a plea bargain for only 1 year probation after which his record would be expunged. This good of plea bargain after they raided his house and got enough "stuff" to put him in jail for a decade, if not more.

When he told me this story I couldn't believe it, I mean I could, nothing the government does really surprises me, but the blatant breaking of the law by the government blew my mind. They lied on documents to try to put him away, but they made a key mistake and didn't change the date on when they did a thermal on his house vs. when they got the records from the power company.

Anyway, all this story was to show is that even in the government isn't legally allowed to do something, in this case outlawing drones as Rand Paul is trying to do, they will STILL do it.

But if you see that a large group of the public showed dissatisfaction in his actions and then out pops a good bill......

We the people should start shaking down all these politician for our rights back.

I am so disgusted this thread even exists. There should be no Fuc%$ng drones over American soil, period. This is a gross and disgusting display of government bloat that needs to be irradiated like a roach infestation. As it were, that is what the government has become, no matter where you go even in your own home, you turn the light on and there is the grimy hand of the government as it try's to scurry out of sight.

Pathetic and weak we have become, as a nation, as a people. We have the strength to world police the entire globe but lack the endurance, the heart and the will to even reign in our own speck of the globe to stop people who hate us, our constitution and our freedom from doing things we despise because it is not convenient to do so.

Wake up America, say no. Say no today, say no tomorrow, this can not go on any longer.......

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by satron

 

They they could overturn it if they had a 2/3 vote, and they probably would.

Like they over turned the warrantless wiretapping we are already subjected to? Let's not kid ourselves.... can anyone name one single bill, which has passed in the name of our security, that has been over turned? Name just one?

Warrantless wiretapping is a perfect example. Anyone remember how that term came into the public consciousness? Well here is an article that does a great job of breaking it down for you, and shows you not only the faults of Bush, but how Obama (after speaking out against it on the campaign trial), did a complete 180 on the issue of warrantless wiretapping and not only helped pass the bills which brought this to us, but also continued the same policy and (big shock), just like the Patriot Act the Obama Administration is demanding a full scale renewal of the policy with NO reforms, not a single change, and no scaling back of any kind.
The warrantless spying fight

This all started with the Patriot Act. As a Society, we allowed our rights to be trampled on in the name of "security". That was expanded to warrantless wiretapping. Which was then expanded to the NDAA which is now being expanded even further with Drones... all in the name of our "security". And mark my words... once drones hit the skies openly, they will not simply stop. Once a society allows a Government to infringe upon it's rights- you NEVER get those rights back later. Never. It doesn't happen, at least not without a fight and some bloodshed. But no one should worry because this too, if permitted to happen, will also be expanded on. So I would not hold my breath waiting on that 2/3 vote to over turn anything.

This just looks like a Public Relations stunt by Rand to try and make up for endorsing Romney. It's probably a good bill but whatever.

edit on 13-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)

I don't think it is any kind of public relations stunt. This is a typical Paul bill. These are the types of Bills that Rand Paul has been introducing and speaking out about since before he ever took Office. He may be a fool for endorsing Romney and towing the party line- but that does not change his history and voting record.

Originally posted by Common Good
Saving face is right.

I am really disappointed with Rand Paul.

I dont think he did enough to back his father this election cycle.

I dont think his dad did enough to back himself

Seemed to me, he was more worried about his own political career.

Seems to me, the whole Paul family (Ron included) is more worried about Rand's political career

reply to post by JacKatMtn


Great point. I guess at best it can be seen as a "second chance to reconsider."

It's be best to overthrow the entire government. Clean out the entire lot of them. We certainly wouldn't be losing anyone we knew we could trust 100%. We need a completely new system, one where a select few cannot be bought off.

They are creating chaos that benefits them. So what if removing all of them would create some chaos if it benefits us for once. Screw these fat old men and whores of the rich.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

This just looks like a Public Relations stunt by Rand to try and make up for endorsing Romney. It's probably a good bill but whatever.

So what if it is a PR stunt? A good bill is a good bill.

A good bill is not going to get passed, this is nothing more than a sweetener to tempt back those people who are rightfully thinking rand is a turncoat.
Do people have their sense of cynicism removed everytime they see something they want?.
Yes they do, some of them anyway, Protect it at all costs, and stop being so willing to give the benefit of the doubt,especially when the object of your desires is being presented by someone of onerous and dubious character, Just when they need you to see them in a different light.
Id trust a 10$ hookers word more than ANY current politician.
Rand Paul, Friend of Israel, IS NOT, his father, he has his own agenda, and the ron paul supporter base must look mighty tempting.
Stay away from this forked tongued desperado, whereas his father has the voting record of a libertarian saint, rand has it all to prove, and has already shown, he cannot be trusted.

Originally posted by jam321
Drones over the US and spying on Americans is here to stay and even Rand knows this. He knows this bill is going no where but it gives him points with voters who are not happy with Big Brother..

A Smart Politician.

In your book, in mine just another asshole.

.

Oh The sell out want to show you he is on your side ....

What a PHONY PIECE OF CRAP !




Gary Johnson 2012


.

I had a thought after reading this. Does anybody remember the AT&T/NSA spying case from 2005? Where the NSA setup a system to capture AT&T's network traffic and store it. Well it seems that a drone can do the same with wireless & mobile phone data.

This one was done by some hobbiest, so I can only imagine what the government it capable of.

Flying Drone Can Crack Wi-Fi Networks, Snoop On Cell Phones

At the Black Hat and Defcon security conferences in Las Vegas next week, Mike Tassey and Richard Perkins plan to show the crowd of hackers a year’s worth of progress on their Wireless Aerial Surveillace Platform, or WASP, the second year Tassey and Perkins have displayed the 14-pound, six-foot long, six-foot wingspan unmanned aerial vehicle. The WASP, built from a retired Army target drone converted from a gasoline engine to electric batteries, is equipped with an HD camera, a cigarette-pack sized on-board Linux computer packed with network-hacking tools including the BackTrack testing toolset and a custom-built 340 million word dictionary for brute-force guessing of passwords, and eleven antennae.

“This is like Black Hat’s greatest hits,” Tassey says. “And it flies.”

On top of cracking wifi networks, the upgraded WASP now also performs a new trick: impersonating the GSM cell phone towers used by AT&T and T-Mobile to trick phones into connecting to the plane’s antenna rather than their carrier, allowing the drone to record conversations and text messages on a32 gigabytes of storage. A 4G T-mobile card routes the communications through voice-over-Internet or traditional phone connections to avoid dropping the call. “Ideally, the target won’t even know he’s being spied on,” says Tassey.

Now that we are moving from wired to wireless, these drones will help fill the spying gap. Has me shaking my head.

If you need a refresher on the AT&T/NSA story click here.

OiO

reply to post by bacci0909

I dont think his dad did enough to back himself

Very much agree with that. He didn't seem all that serious to me.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by satron

 

They they could overturn it if they had a 2/3 vote, and they probably would.



This just looks like a Public Relations stunt by Rand to try and make up for endorsing Romney. It's probably a good bill but whatever.

He did some pro-liberty stuff before screwing around with Romney. Like for example he fought against NDAA indefinite detention with a couple other Reps (Smith/Amash ammendment) about the same time that NY Judge ruled against it.

I always have been and still am on the fence with Rand, but I've noticed him try to pass some good stuff so far. He doesn't appear to have much to gain personally or politically from his pro-liberty actions.

When (and hopefully IF) he flip flops that will be the day I see him as any other politician... forever. Pandering to Romney or the Rep party, of which he is a part of, I don't think qualifies as such a flip flop.

Drones are put in place to make sure any resistance to government is stopped. They know that most of the military would not turn on the American people. They will probably have some ground forces but not enough to do anything. Drones will be used to cause the most damage at first. Once they take out the backbone of the resistance, UN troops and mercenaries will go in to take control. Neutron bombs can also be used in high populated areas as and it will leave infrastructure intact.