ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, February 05, 2013

Banning drones

It's a positive and encouraging first step.  But every city and township in America must follow suit just in case Washington fails to come to its senses:
Charlottesville, Va., has become the first city in the United States to formally pass an anti-drone resolution. The resolution, passed Monday, "calls on the United States Congress and the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia to adopt legislation prohibiting information obtained from the domestic use of drones from being introduced into a Federal or State court," and "pledges to abstain from similar uses with city-owned, leased, or borrowed drones."
I imagine that liberal and conservative Americans can find common ground in not wanting death-dealing, missile-equipped remote-controlled drones flying over their heads.  After all, it could be the likes of (George Bush/Barack Obama) with his evil (Republican/Democrat) on the trigger.

I don't recall the right to fly drones everywhere being a power granted to the Federal government anywhere in the Constitution.  Not even in the emanations and penumbras.

Labels: ,

76 Comments:

Anonymous Godfrey February 05, 2013 7:27 PM  

I see you're also drone-phobic.

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 7:31 PM  

What about the 2nd Amendment? I want to fly my own model airplanes with attached cameras, bombs, guns!

Anonymous Dissident February 05, 2013 7:40 PM  

The vote was 3-2. The only common ground is that both sides want drones in the air, so long as its their man in the White House.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 05, 2013 7:51 PM  

OK good, well at least now you're back to the serious stuff.

Hit the pause button on the Scalzi thing. It's really not interesting. Stuff about 'rabbits' and rabbit-analysis, well, semi-interesting. Stuff about this guy and his gang, personally? Um, not really, no. It may be a kinda-sorta interesting test case, but in a big-picture sense it isn't a good look, and that matters.

You're on the right track, stay there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF177Aj59C8

Anonymous VD February 05, 2013 7:55 PM  

Hit the pause button on the Scalzi thing. It's really not interesting.

Dude, why do you think I care what anyone else thinks? Have you learned nothing? Furthermore, I note that this is a post on a different subject AND YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT IT.

Anonymous Carl February 05, 2013 7:56 PM  

How long before an armed drone kills an American citizen on American soil? 3 - 5 years? Less?

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 7:57 PM  

So what do you shoot drones with? Shotgun? Birdshot? Double OO buck?

Do they make radar systems for private citizens?

farmer Tom

Anonymous Soga February 05, 2013 8:00 PM  

Scoobius, the last Scalzi post had 300+ posts. Not interesting?

Anonymous Zion's Paladin February 05, 2013 8:01 PM  

"How long before an armed drone kills an American citizen on American soil? 3 - 5 years? Less?"

Better question. Will they actually hit who they are aiming at without collateral damage or casualties? Or they will totally screw the pooch and hit the wrong person/people?

Anonymous HongKongCharlie February 05, 2013 8:05 PM  

I remember something about PETA using a drone to gather information about a pigeon shoot. If my memory serves me they had their panties in a wad over the thing picking up such a load of lead it couldn't fly.

HKC

Anonymous DrW February 05, 2013 8:08 PM  

The first person to shoot one down will be a hero... -judge

Anonymous bob k. mando February 05, 2013 8:10 PM  

it's got the same critical weakness as every single one of the secession petitions;
it's ASKING OTHERS to permit or prohibit something.

get back to me when Charlottesville passes an ordnance FORBIDDING any governmental entity from flying drones over the city

and

pays a bounty to every citizen who brings one down.

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 05, 2013 8:11 PM  

I don't recall the right to fly drones everywhere being a power granted to the Federal government anywhere in the Constitution. Not even in the emanations and penumbras.

But...
But...
The drone would be allowed if it shot tiny uterus-seeking missiles at pregnant women's stomachs, thereby inducing abortions from midair. That is really pump-starting the maiesiophilia.


Abortions by land, air, and sea. Forward! to the dream.

Anonymous jack February 05, 2013 8:13 PM  

Anonymous February 05, 2013 7:57 PM

So what do you shoot drones with? Shotgun? Birdshot? Double OO buck?

Do they make radar systems for private citizens?

farmer Tom

If you had access to a C band satellite uplink truck and had the ability to track the drone and had the stones to try it, a full power, continuous blast of microwave energy rotating through any and all freqs in the C band might do some interesting things to the drone communications and control, at least. Then, I don't know what signal bands the drones use. If you knew which satellites these drones used for signal relay you could hose them on general principal. The C band gear is normally used to radiate up to geosynchronous orbit and the allowed power levels on transmit are closely controlled. And, with good reason. Its not at all difficult to overload a satellite and burn stuff out. Or, at least have it go into shutdown mode for awhile; until the overloading signal is removed.
Again, you would need the balls and the direction. If you were uncaring you could sweep the satellite arc at full power over and over; until they came and arrested or shot you.

just sayin....

Anonymous bob k. mando February 05, 2013 8:14 PM  

and this provides another data point for Vox's "women ruin everything" thesis.

the last two paragraphs of the story, Vice Mayor Kristin Szakos, who voted against the resolution, says she "can imagine ways in which drones might be used for positive things" and that the move was premature.

"I think drones have been used for bad things, but it's like banning airplanes because they can drop bombs," she says. "At this point, the city isn't even talking about using drones. It seems premature to me to ban them altogether."

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 8:23 PM  

So I have three old C-band dishes laying around, now all I need is one of the Ilk with some knowledge how to use them and we could start selling old pickup trucks with dishes mounted on them to like minded friends?

farmer Tom

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 05, 2013 8:25 PM  

"Scoobius, the last Scalzi post had 300+ posts. Not interesting?"

Nope. As Lou Reed would say, "Not at all."

The last Batman movie had I don't know how many million viewers. Was it popular? Well, I guess. Was it interesting? Not at all.

If you want to know if something is popular or not, there are some fairly reliable metrics for that. If you want to know if something is interesting or not, probably best to check with me first. :-)

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 05, 2013 8:40 PM  

"Dude, why do you think I care what anyone else thinks?"

I don't think that. What gave you that impression? I'm quite the same way. I was just telling you something that's true, partly out of respect that you're a good host here. Do what you like with the information. Nice blog, by the way. Good conversation here. More air than many other places. It's really very good of you to take the trouble to host the rest of us and our brawlings. Lawd knows I could never manage it.

"Have you learned nothing?"

I come here for the conversation, not to be instructed. Except, perchance, by the conversation. Which happens a lot, which is part of why I like conversation so much. But I don't think you're going to have much luck if you have an idea that you're teaching me anything.

"Furthermore, I note that this is a post on a different subject AND YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT IT."

See, this is sort of why I semi-disapprove of your approach to logic. Think of what you said there. Think of what I said, and then think of what you said about it. There's a recurring verb here... think.

I know you're good at it, well much of the time anyway, but it's rather a mistake to become complacent.

And it never hurts to re-read Dean Swift.

DAFFY DUCK: Cab-driver! Follow that car!
[Cab drives off before Daffy even gets into it.]
DAFFY DUCK: (to audience) Keeps them on their toes.



Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 8:44 PM  

Not sure if you've seen this, but it's amazing how much clearer a perspective North Korea has on the west:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NMr2VrhmFI

Anonymous AlteredFate February 05, 2013 8:57 PM  

"Drones over 'Merica? Totally legit per da Constitution. It says right in da commerce clause..."The Congress shall have Power To regulate Commerce...among the several States..." See I told ya, sucka." -Eric Holder

The man knows his law, I'll give him that.

Anonymous Tad February 05, 2013 8:58 PM  

@vox Day

I don't recall the right to fly drones everywhere being a power granted to the Federal government anywhere in the Constitution. Not even in the emanations and penumbras

I suppose the flying of F-15s over the continental U.S. is unconstitutional too. We should do something about those unconstitutional Blue Angels too.

Oh my, Vox....The hits just keep on coming.

Anonymous jack February 05, 2013 9:04 PM  

@Farmer Tom

Tom: You have three dishes. I suspect they are probably old style tv satellite dishes maybe 6 to 8 feet in diameter? A C band that I'm talking about would be or could be as much as 15, 18, or more feet in diameter. The dish size helps determine how much signal gain you could direct up the gravity well into space. But, the dish is not the critical item. The microwave power amps are the thing. A typical C band, broadcast truck will have at least two 600 watt min. transmit amps. And, it could be more. These beasts are usually traveling wave transmit tubes and are not easy to use without blowing something up. When you go to a major football game and see their satellite uplink trucks you will see a really wide dish. So wide it generally folds onto itself for transport. These things are BIG. Reason is they are used for the quality of transmission and have much less rain fade than a KU truck. The expense of renting them is considerable. Of course, if you're intent on nefarious activities you can at least lose the expense of C band satellite time from a provider.

As a damper on these ideas. The satellites used by the military for drones are almost certainly 'hardened' against what we are discussing. Otherwise I can assure you I would not be talking about it. So don't get any ideas guys. It would probably not work and all you would do, assuming you could find an uplink engineer willing to go to jail for a long time, is disrupt routine satellite operations.

Anonymous zen0 February 05, 2013 9:07 PM  

I suppose the flying of F-15s over the continental U.S. is unconstitutional too. We should do something about those unconstitutional Blue Angels too.

Category error Tad. Do try to be more observant.

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 9:09 PM  


"Oh my, Vox....The hits just keep on coming."

?

- DWLBRA

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 05, 2013 9:09 PM  

I don't recall the right to fly drones everywhere being a power granted to the Federal government anywhere in the Constitution. Not even in the emanations and penumbras

I suppose the flying of F-15s over the continental U.S. is unconstitutional too. We should do something about those unconstitutional Blue Angels too.

Oh my, Vox....The hits just keep on coming.


Tad, do you know what the word "everywhere" means? Read it again. About the only thing getting hit here is your small Jew-penis.

Anonymous Van February 05, 2013 9:13 PM  

Tad doesn't get what VD was doing.

Anonymous zen0 February 05, 2013 9:16 PM  

The man knows his law, I'll give him that.

Only the laws he wants you to discuss. How is the right to privacy thingy affected?

Anonymous kh123 February 05, 2013 9:16 PM  

Ah, ok; there's Tad complaining about freedom from government observation. Right on cue.

Just like arrest and confiscation, if you're not guilty of anything, then you won't mind being subject to it.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad February 05, 2013 9:17 PM  

Tad doesn't get what VD was doing.

I don't know if you have noticed yet, but Tad is simply a blithering idiot.

Anonymous Van February 05, 2013 9:22 PM  

Shutup Tad:

I've noticed: just found this example particularly amusing. Tadington Bear responded on cue.

Blogger Nate February 05, 2013 9:23 PM  

Farmer Tom

Forget the satellite stuff... 3.5 inch magnum 00 buck. Tracers and a full auto rifle would be better... since you could walk the rounds in on the thing... but that would also be... expensive... noisey... and well... it would complicate things considerably.

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 05, 2013 9:23 PM  

Tad, I've been meaning to go kitchen appliance shopping this past week. My oven seems to be acting up.

Considering your background, would you have any suggestions?

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 05, 2013 9:24 PM  

"I suppose the flying of F-15s over the continental U.S. is unconstitutional too. We should do something about those unconstitutional Blue Angels too."

OK, now that's the sort of silly statement that causes me to back away slightly from my more vatic position about logic, and get closer to VD's more literalist version. Christ, I'll be turning into some ordinary-language douchebag next if you keep this up.

The poverty of that statement sort of reveals the unfortunate truth that all politics in the USA is now completely tribal: you guys just want what you want, there isn't really any other guiding principle; politics in all places and times has always to a certain extent been a species of organized looting, but sometimes it's more restrained and refined, and sometimes less. But the unfiltered version is, you just want what you want, and what you want most of all is power over the Other, the people you just plain hate. All while blathering about the wickedness of racism and homophobia.

Like I keep saying, the gods of irony will not be mocked.


Anonymous Red Comet February 05, 2013 9:31 PM  

The vote was 3-2. The only common ground is that both sides want drones in the air, so long as its their man in the White House.

This is the heart of the matter on drones (and most anything political).

Go check on any lib infested site and you'll see the same people that were outraged by the Patriot Act doing mental gymnastics to justify this just because it's their man in power now.

Anonymous JI February 05, 2013 9:35 PM  

It's strange, but twenty years ago the liberals I knew would have loved such a ban. These days, the liberals I know support the drones. I don't get it.

Anonymous jack February 05, 2013 9:37 PM  

@Nate

The 3.5 inch magnum 00 buck does sound interesting. But, my understanding is that these drones fly at really high altitudes with kickass cameras [at least in observation mode] I have no idea how low they would have to get to launch munitions.

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 9:46 PM  

"All while blathering about the wickedness of racism and homophobia."

But what can one do when they are trapped in Chappaqua?

- DWLBRA

Anonymous Godfrey February 05, 2013 10:02 PM  

Few "liberals will be opposed to spy drones. They're unsophisticated. They’re too focused on indulging their perversions and cashing checks from the government.

Anonymous Desiderius February 05, 2013 10:12 PM  

JI,

"It's strange, but twenty years ago the liberals I knew would have loved such a ban. These days, the liberals I know support the drones. I don't get it."

They're not liberals. Not close.

We don't win until we (libertarians and other liberals) get the language straight.

Anonymous dh February 05, 2013 10:21 PM  

The 3.5 inch magnum 00 buck does sound interesting. But, my understanding is that these drones fly at really high altitudes with kickass cameras [at least in observation mode] I have no idea how low they would have to get to launch munitions.

Not low at all. The most sophisticated small anti-personnel missiles only need the drone unit itself to give the munition a general bearing. The munition itself is then guided to the target depending on the onboard control mechanism - heat, radio, laser designator, GPS, etc.

A popular delivery method is for a relatively high flying drone to break cloud cover, literally drop a 5kb missile. The missile free falls for a bit, acquires the target, and then adjusts attitude, before utilizing power assist for the final impact.

The reality is that the missile can get smaller, making the drones smaller, lighter, and more capable. A 50cal shell will easily destroy a person with a nice hit. The rest of the weight needs only to be guidance and a small amount of propulsion.

Anonymous Desiderius February 05, 2013 10:21 PM  

"The poverty of that statement sort of reveals the unfortunate truth that all politics in the USA is now completely tribal: you guys just want what you want, there isn't really any other guiding principle"

There is a subset of the tribe presently kicking our asses (with several possible values for the word "our" - all regrettably viable at this point in time) for which this is true. Tad being a near perfect epitome of the members of that subset.

There is a larger subset for which it is not, but who have been convinced that we, principled or no, are on another team.

Do defeat the Tad subset requires convincing that larger subset that:

a. we are not committed to violating their principles.

b. the Tad subset is.

As both a. and b. are in fact the case, we have a head start. That alone will not be sufficient.

Then again, the tortoise (people) does (do) eventually beat the hare (people).

Slow, but steady.

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 10:22 PM  

But, if the drones don't fly, the terrorists win!

Signed,
A Loyal Citizen

Anonymous Desiderius February 05, 2013 10:26 PM  

"it isn't a good look, and that matters."

"Dude, why do you think I care what anyone else thinks?"

This is the crux of the matter.

And the heart of VD's appeal.

Anonymous dh February 05, 2013 10:35 PM  

If you had access to a C band satellite uplink truck and had the ability to track the drone and had the stones to try it, a full power, continuous blast of microwave energy rotating through any and all freqs in the C band might do some interesting things to the drone communications and control, at least. Then, I don't know what signal bands the drones use. If you knew which satellites these drones used for signal relay you could hose them on general principal. The C band gear is normally used to radiate up to geosynchronous orbit and the allowed power levels on transmit are closely controlled. And, with good reason. Its not at all difficult to overload a satellite and burn stuff out. Or, at least have it go into shutdown mode for awhile; until the overloading signal is removed.

I have worked on command and control of some dual use non-classified UAV's (drones). The newest stuff is surprisingly robust against SIGINT and SIGAT activities. The classified and military/CIA models are surely a big step ahead of the civilian models. The most recent one I saw 12-months ago was capable of communications with a whole host of MILSAT gear, as well as ground-based communications. They are capable of sophisticated anti-intercept behavior when threatened, and have the ability to stay aloft for extended periods of times. The model I was using could communicate in panic mode over shortwave or packet radio even, which would be difficult to intercept.

These are not first generation predators. These are the real deal semi-autonomous killing machines that are flying now. The next generation in R&D are even scarier.

IF you didn't have to worry about the DIA/CIA/FCC tracking down your overload transmission gear (which as you mentioned is fairly easy to do), you could probably put a modern UAV into panic mode, which would cause it to take preservation moves. But part of that would be to work out alternative communications, and to seek safety in altitude, and that would probably re-establish contact and thus reveal your position, leaving you prone to retaliation. Ground-based authorities would not have much trouble removing your overloaded C-band broadcast in the 6-24 hour window.

The biggest trend I have seen is the concept of a swarm of semi-independent drones. One reserach project is prepping for a wide-scale test to see if they can use a swarm of inexpensive-ish UAVs (20k per unit) to fight wildfires. Each unit would seek water, and ferry approximately 1.5 gallon of water (max payload) to a drop zone. A full implementation would be comprised of perhaps 100,000 units or more. Comparison point, a C130 supertanker, used to fight fires, can be loaded with about 3900 gallons of water. A 100k swarm that costs about as much as 10 C130's could, with a local source of water, could easily be configured to dump that much water, every minute, in an endless loop until water is depleted or the fire is put out.

That's the scary part. A swarm of cheap drones that they don't even have to individually manage can do a lot of damage in a small amount of time.

Anonymous dh February 05, 2013 10:51 PM  

I would also say that Pres. Obama's use of drones on Americans, and his secret kill list, are abhorrent and almost certainly illegal. It is beyond comprehension that more liberals are not outraged. It appears that most are simply happy to put out a press-release once a year, and sign onto the odd ACLU letter, and then leave it at that.

It is pretty much proof positive that Washington is where principle goes to die.

Anonymous Porky? February 05, 2013 11:15 PM  

It is beyond comprehension that more liberals are not outraged.

Lol! Yeah why aren't leftist authoritarian centralized power freaks outraged by a leftist authoritarian centralized power grab? Lol!

Does dh stand for "Dumb as Hell"?

Anonymous daddynichol February 05, 2013 11:21 PM  

Our company developing a non-military small, lightweight UAVs for agri mapping and research. Others are working on units for other purposes but all of them are very cheap, carry still and video cameras, auto launch, fly and recover, will fly a set pattern and a whole host of other applications. The unit we're working on can be built for well under a $1,000.

Camera resolution is 1 pixel per inch at 600ft.

If you think you can shoot one down, good luck. Once a 5-6 foot wingspan craft is 600 feet up, it disappears, and since it's electric, you can't hear it.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 05, 2013 11:27 PM  

And now House Republicans going wobbly on gun control

Anonymous realmatt February 05, 2013 11:33 PM  

Yeah I'm sure that will stop them. Somewhere, the unlisted government official holding an unnamed title is smirking, thinking to himself "How cute.."

Anonymous Aeoli Pera February 05, 2013 11:33 PM  

Maybe I can get something passed in my city. We voted overwhelmingly for Ron Paul (so overwhelmingly that I'm convinced the GOP engaged in voter fraud at the state level).

Anonymous Aeoli Pera February 05, 2013 11:36 PM  

It's a small Minnesota city. Surrounding cities voted similarly.

But hey, I'm just a conspiracy theorist and those guys are crazy and stupid and fat and stuff.

Anonymous realmatt February 05, 2013 11:36 PM  

Tad is what the power-mad leftist hoping for an excuse to commit mass murder dreams of. Someone so naive he actually buys into the bureaucratic nonsense and doesn't see that's how they sneakily do what every they want.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera February 05, 2013 11:38 PM  

I was getting a little down on this, but then I scrolled up and saw that rabbit and it put a smile on my face again.

Anonymous Daniel February 05, 2013 11:39 PM  

What? They banned drones? Does that mean no Scalzi?

Anonymous The other skeptic February 05, 2013 11:41 PM  

Why is Dick Head telling us scary stories about drones?

Is it because he is a government goon?

History shows us again and again the folly of believing in government goons.

Anonymous bob k. mando February 05, 2013 11:43 PM  

jack February 05, 2013 9:37 PM
my understanding is that these drones fly at really high altitudes with kickass cameras [at least in observation mode] I have no idea how low they would have to get to launch munitions.




they're outfitting UAVs with Hellfire missiles. Hellfires have a 5 mile range and carry 18lb fragmentation loads for soft targets.

the missile load is not likely to be the limiting factor for distance of effective standoff.

Anonymous Gx1080 February 05, 2013 11:54 PM  

@dh

You expect a bunch of power-hungry maniacs to be outraged against a measure that destroys the right to privacy and increases the power of the Feds?

I mean, I get that being naive (or just playing fool) is a requisite to vote Democrat, but there's limits.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 05, 2013 11:57 PM  

Heh, NCIS likes to pretend that 192.168.0.xxx is some mad crazy skilz place on the internet. Oh, yeah, and you can connect to it from NCIS.

Blogger Ghost February 06, 2013 12:06 AM  

While I agree with Scoobius that this topic is far more interesting and important than the Gamma Rabbit, the latter is far more hilarious.

Quite frankly, those of us who read too much news would probably go insane if we didn't have things like Scalzi to laugh at.

The neocons are pissing me off on this drone thing, though. They can't imagine an America where they would be considered criminals, yet they swear they won't give up their guns.

It's like they never played chess before. They only play one move at a time, then stare in shock when they get stuck in checkmate.

Anonymous Anonagain February 06, 2013 12:23 AM  

A Game of Drones

Anonymous The other skeptic February 06, 2013 12:52 AM  

If it's Social Science, then it's not science

Anonymous LI February 06, 2013 1:17 AM  

Has Tad ever not been diametrically opposed to whatever the topic of the post is?

Anonymous 11B February 06, 2013 2:01 AM  

I suppose the flying of F-15s over the continental U.S. is unconstitutional too. We should do something about those unconstitutional Blue Angels too.

Tad, if those F-15s were conducting surveillance on American citizens than I would agree that we should do something about them. But I don't think that is the case.

The point of the drones is that they eavesdropping and accumulating data on citizens without any due process.

What really blows my mind is that I keep expecting to find common cause with those on the Left and it appears there is just too much between us. It appears we'd rather throw everything down the shitter than, God forbid, cooperate or find common cause.

For example, I always thought those on the Left where pro Bill of Rights, highly suspicious of government and strong supporters of privacy. That was true in the 1970s and 1980s, but it no longer appears to be the case.

I also thought that the Left was against war which they were from Vietnam up through 2008. Lately they seem to be unconcerned. That's too bad since many on the Right, especially on blogs like this, are wanting to help dismantle Uncle Sam's empire and would like to have help from the Left.

Anonymous Anonymous February 06, 2013 2:38 AM  

I don't even think it drones should be allowed to bomb Uncle Tom Cracker Scalzi.

The sad thing is that you can buy drones on Amazon. It's only a matter of some days before our self made enemies will be able to send drones(with weapons) into our border.

Be just like Israel then, Only we don't even have a wall.

Our leaders step in the poop and make us smell it.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 06, 2013 2:55 AM  

"For example, I always thought those on the Left where pro Bill of Rights, highly suspicious of government and strong supporters of privacy. That was true in the 1970s and 1980s, but it no longer appears to be the case."

Welcome to Cultural Marxism, also known as Get Whitey, version 2.0

The Left is no longer an ideology or a set of principles (I'd argue that actually it never was, but some may reasonably disagree); it's now just a tribe, with tribal hatreds and tribal rites. There's no principle in play, just group loyalty. When Bush makes war crimes, BAD! When King Bammy makes war crimes... GOOD! Bush debt BAD, Bammy debt GOOD!

American politics is now Lord of the Flies, and non-whites and non-Christians have got the conch. And the straight white goyim are the fat kid with the glasses.

Look, it's pretty simple: all politicians, no matter their political stripe, are pretty much bad people, but Leftists are not just bad, they're actually Evil. They're in love with it. Now that they've got power, they're going to do the same failed crackpot shit they've done over and over again. They can't help themselves, it's what their tribe is committed to.

Personal to George W. Bush: I consider you a Leftist, too, and therefore also evil.





Anonymous Shutup, Tad February 06, 2013 3:56 AM  

Idle Spectator February 05, 2013 9:23 PM

Tad, I've been meaning to go kitchen appliance shopping this past week. My oven seems to be acting up.

Considering your background, would you have any suggestions?


Tad the kinda of jew that would help the Nazis in the death camps. Referred to variously as Sonderkommando, kapo, or Funktionshäftling (prison functionary).

They would drive work crews all day and get special privileges. They even loaded the ovens. Tad, of course, would provide additional services to his superiors. Whenever the tables turned, however, the Tads were killed in various slow and brutal ways.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad February 06, 2013 3:58 AM  

kinda of = kinda of, like,

Anonymous DrTorch February 06, 2013 6:47 AM  

I find it interesting that students at UVa recently created a drone using 3D printing.

http://www.wired.com/design/2012/11/3d-printed-autonomous-airplane/all/?pid=1201

Anonymous Stilicho February 06, 2013 7:52 AM  

You'd be surprised at what a clown in a black robe can discover emanating from the penumbras.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza February 06, 2013 8:12 AM  

Will cities ban drones along with promoting their 2nd amendment rights?

On cspan's wash journal the drone topic was discussed at the start of the show. Dems and repubs are very disturbed at the aspect of stateside, already in place drones. There appears to be voter remorse and great apathy. But this issue raised serious disgust and fear at any mention of having a drone used on them. A caller mentioned a worry that his business travels overseas could place him at risk for being collateral damage.

Recall from 4-2012; http://www.heraldstaronline.com/page/content.detail/id/572915/EGCC-on-list-to-fly-drones.html?nav=5010

The prior articles are either scrubbed from the net or I couldn't find them but colleges have brought the UAV/drone technology into their institutions. Perhaps to train students or have some other access to them or for law enforcement. The college in question is also called a community center and ID processing center but that is unverified local rumor (I moved from the area last summer so I cannot actually verify EGCC being called a processing center.)

The story was originally on an overseas fracas that made its way to the American media. Students and locals demanded to know where the local media was when it made international not national headlines first. It took some schools like EGCC nearly 5 days to respond.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 February 06, 2013 8:48 AM  

Keep in mind that this measure will last as long as the various states and localities keep getting money from the Federal government. Once the Feds decide not to give them their precious money because they nullified the drones, gun control laws, Obamacare, etc., then you'll see a quick reversal of policy.

Anonymous dh February 06, 2013 9:39 AM  

Is it because he is a government goon?

History shows us again and again the folly of believing in government goons.


The point was an is (a) they need to be regulated closely and (b) liberals have an inconsistent point of view on drones and warfare.

I don't and never have worked for the government. 100% civilian employment.

Anonymous dh February 06, 2013 9:42 AM  


Look, it's pretty simple: all politicians, no matter their political stripe, are pretty much bad people, but Leftists are not just bad, they're actually Evil. They're in love with it. Now that they've got power, they're going to do the same failed crackpot shit they've done over and over again. They can't help themselves, it's what their tribe is committed to.

Personal to George W. Bush: I consider you a Leftist, too, and therefore also evil.


There is a lot of truth to what you are saying, but I can't support your argument that this is the leftist problem. Unless you find that all of Congress is leftists. Is that the case?

Anonymous Josh February 06, 2013 9:48 AM  

Unless you find that all of Congress is leftists. Is that the case?

For the most part, excluding Paul in the senate and Amash, Jones, Duncan, and Massie in the house.

Anonymous Stilicho February 06, 2013 10:21 AM  

speaking of privacy: new encryption options for smartphones

Blogger The Aardvark February 06, 2013 1:18 PM  

Farmer Tom, here's what you need.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts