The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign....
The agency projects that 30,000 drones could be in the nation’s skies by 2020. Big bad Bush did the Patriot Act and this board along with the media went nuts. Wonder if this will gt much coverage at all or if it will just be silently ignored like other bad decisions in this admin.
So what is the spin on this, how is this change we need? Republican house, and a Democrat Senate pass it, and a lib Democrat President to seal it into law.
Posted by buckstalker on :
Why are you so surprised? I have been telling you for quite some time now that THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DEMS AND THE GOP
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by buckstalker: Why are you so surprised? I have been telling you for quite some time now that THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DEMS AND THE GOP
Because he is stupid? Just a guess.
Posted by buckstalker on :
Not sure if it's stupidity or if he has just been thoroughly brainwashed by watching (and believing) what he hears on the the likes of Fox "News"
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
I watch more MSNBC and CNN than I do Fox. I watch all channels equally. Fox and MSNBC will air doubles of cable news at night so you can catch the episodes more easily. I have explained this before. I watch more Rachel Maddow than I do Hannity, if ever.
I am really shocked that you all are ok with this. Did you read the article? It says the FAA will not release WHO will get the government contracts, and wont say WHY. Big government, spy drones over your land, you are not allowed to know who gets all the money to build them or why. Why would Obama sign off on this if he is all about transparency? Whats the big coverup here?
Posted by glassman on :
cash, why not ask why your precious GOP house of representatives ALREADY passed this? they are already doing it, it's a bill to expedite the aproval process. i don't like it, but i also know that they use drones to monitor crops and otehr "harmless" things that don't invade our privacy...
Posted by buckstalker on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I watch more MSNBC and CNN than I do Fox. I watch all channels equally. Fox and MSNBC will air doubles of cable news at night so you can catch the episodes more easily. I have explained this before. I watch more Rachel Maddow than I do Hannity, if ever.
I am really shocked that you all are ok with this. Did you read the article? It says the FAA will not release WHO will get the government contracts, and wont say WHY. Big government, spy drones over your land, you are not allowed to know who gets all the money to build them or why. Why would Obama sign off on this if he is all about transparency? Whats the big coverup here?
I NEVER said I liked it...I merely pointed out the fact that the GOP is just as guilty of "relieving us" of our privacy and liberties
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: cash, why not ask why your precious GOP house of representatives ALREADY passed this? they are already doing it, it's a bill to expedite the aproval process. i don't like it, but i also know that they use drones to monitor crops and otehr "harmless" things that don't invade our privacy...
Why would I ask them when thy only control 1/3?
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by buckstalker:
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I watch more MSNBC and CNN than I do Fox. I watch all channels equally. Fox and MSNBC will air doubles of cable news at night so you can catch the episodes more easily. I have explained this before. I watch more Rachel Maddow than I do Hannity, if ever.
I am really shocked that you all are ok with this. Did you read the article? It says the FAA will not release WHO will get the government contracts, and wont say WHY. Big government, spy drones over your land, you are not allowed to know who gets all the money to build them or why. Why would Obama sign off on this if he is all about transparency? Whats the big coverup here?
I NEVER said I liked it...I merely pointed out the fact that the GOP is just as guilty of "relieving us" of our privacy and liberties
Well no sh**, I never said the GOP was perfect. They are not the ones in charge, and haven't been for a while now.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: cash, why not ask why your precious GOP house of representatives ALREADY passed this? they are already doing it, it's a bill to expedite the aproval process. i don't like it, but i also know that they use drones to monitor crops and otehr "harmless" things that don't invade our privacy...
Why would I ask them when thy only control 1/3?
LOL... cash you amaze me, the bill orignated in the House and was sponsored by mostly GOPs'-here's the bill:
COSPONSORS(24), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Barletta, Lou [PA-11] - 2/11/2011 Rep Bucshon, Larry [IN-8] - 2/11/2011 Rep Capito, Shelley Moore [WV-2] - 2/11/2011 Rep Coble, Howard [NC-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 2/11/2011 Rep Cravaack, Chip [MN-8] - 2/14/2011 Rep Denham, Jeff [CA-19] - 2/11/2011 Rep Farenthold, Blake [TX-27] - 2/11/2011 Rep Gibbs, Bob [OH-18] - 2/11/2011 Rep Graves, Sam [MO-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Guinta, Frank C. [NH-1] - 3/2/2011 Rep Hanna, Richard L. [NY-24] - 2/11/2011 Rep Hultgren, Randy [IL-14] - 2/11/2011 Rep Lankford, James [OK-5] - 2/11/2011 Rep Long, Billy [MO-7] - 2/11/2011 Rep Meehan, Patrick [PA-7] - 2/11/2011 Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 2/11/2011 Rep Petri, Thomas E. [WI-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Reed, Tom [NY-29] - 2/11/2011 Rep Rokita, Todd [IN-4] - 2/14/2011 Rep Shuster, Bill [PA-9] - 2/11/2011 Rep Southerland, Steve [FL-2] - 2/11/2011 Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 2/11/2011 Rep Young, Don [AK] - 2/11/2011 Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman:
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: cash, why not ask why your precious GOP house of representatives ALREADY passed this? they are already doing it, it's a bill to expedite the aproval process. i don't like it, but i also know that they use drones to monitor crops and otehr "harmless" things that don't invade our privacy...
Why would I ask them when thy only control 1/3?
LOL... cash you amaze me, the bill orignated in the House and was sponsored by mostly GOPs'-here's the bill:
COSPONSORS(24), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Barletta, Lou [PA-11] - 2/11/2011 Rep Bucshon, Larry [IN-8] - 2/11/2011 Rep Capito, Shelley Moore [WV-2] - 2/11/2011 Rep Coble, Howard [NC-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 2/11/2011 Rep Cravaack, Chip [MN-8] - 2/14/2011 Rep Denham, Jeff [CA-19] - 2/11/2011 Rep Farenthold, Blake [TX-27] - 2/11/2011 Rep Gibbs, Bob [OH-18] - 2/11/2011 Rep Graves, Sam [MO-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Guinta, Frank C. [NH-1] - 3/2/2011 Rep Hanna, Richard L. [NY-24] - 2/11/2011 Rep Hultgren, Randy [IL-14] - 2/11/2011 Rep Lankford, James [OK-5] - 2/11/2011 Rep Long, Billy [MO-7] - 2/11/2011 Rep Meehan, Patrick [PA-7] - 2/11/2011 Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 2/11/2011 Rep Petri, Thomas E. [WI-6] - 2/11/2011 Rep Reed, Tom [NY-29] - 2/11/2011 Rep Rokita, Todd [IN-4] - 2/14/2011 Rep Shuster, Bill [PA-9] - 2/11/2011 Rep Southerland, Steve [FL-2] - 2/11/2011 Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 2/11/2011 Rep Young, Don [AK] - 2/11/2011
Glass. I never said that they didnt sign off on it. I am saying that the Republicans only control the house. So this bill that they signed, went to the Dems in the Senate and was passed. Now, Obama is set to sign it.
I GET IT...yes I know Republicans and Democrats both signed on it. I love this poor decision is marginalized by focusing attention on the minority control who supported it and not the overal leader. Anyway, I dont know why they are even screwing around with crap like this when we have far greater issues that need attention.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
This might sound silly, but I have a hunch that there are people in this administration who are wanting to tax tithes given at church at Sunday services.
Posted by glassman on :
I love this poor decision is marginalized by focusing attention on the minority control who supported it and not the overal leader.
LOL... they are all in it together. you only focus on 'the leader" cuz you are partisan, which we've been telling you for years is how they keep screwing everybody and get away with it.
Posted by glassman on :
BTW cash? if yo had clicked on the bill and seen how many pages it was? you might complain about that too like you did when the Dems wrote 2000 page bills... not all of are getting what we deserve, but enough of us are that rest have to suffer too.
Posted by buckstalker on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: I love this poor decision is marginalized by focusing attention on the minority control who supported it and not the overal leader.
LOL... they are all in it together. you only focus on 'the leader" cuz you are partisan, which we've been telling you for years is how they keep screwing everybody and get away with it.
Exactly why I'm supporting Paul...
Posted by glassman on :
me too Buck but we have to be realistic and understand that the media is against him too. hence everybody has a hard time taking him seriously.
i belive in critisizing any politician (even Paul) regardless of party affiliations if i don't belive in what they are up to.
it's just getting to be sickening at how the masses are manipulated into beleiving falsehoods and strwmen
Posted by buckstalker on :
I here ya Glass...people in this country have been "dumbed down" to a level I never thought possible
You can clearly see it in the primary results
as far as the media goes...it too is "owned" by the elitists
Posted by glassman on :
as far as the media goes...it too is "owned" by the elitists
those eletist ranks include ruprecht mudrock- even while they blast the rest of the media outlets...
the Americna two party system, you can have your choice between:
Dumb and Dumber
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
It had to happen eventually. Drones have been far too effective on the field for domestic enforcement not to want them.
For departments using this for surveillance I think it is mostly just novelty and desire driving this. You ever look out of a plane window with a good view of Nebraska? How long did it take you to get bored? 1 minute? 2?
No matter how many eyes you have in the sky unless you have something specific to look at you are looking at a whole lot of nothing. Take it from a guy who knows.
As to border and other enforcement agencies, it's all about money in my opinion. I think the future of the US armed forces air superiority will increasingly rely on drones. It is easier to train a joystick pilot whose workstation is the same as his training station than to prepare a man to fly a fighter at 40,000ft. And how much less will construction cost be if you can build to 3/5ths scale carrying the same armament but not having to include life support or central structure integrity reinforcement? Building on assembly you could outfit three drones for every F-22 Raptor.
I agree that it is not the same but I truly believe it is the future of air/space warfare.
Posted by glassman on :
unless you have something specific to look at you are looking at a whole lot of nothing
like standing sonar watch Posted by CashCowMoo on :
So what will you all feel when you find out drones are looking at you in your backyard? By both government and private sectors? Collecting your patterns of behavior such as time of day you leave your house, and what you do in your backyard such as target shoot, or make something, or whatever. Its all no big deal right? Lets keep blaming Republicans for their faults and dismiss any adverse moves made in the current administration. I could care less if Republicans signed off on this with Democrats. Obama has the final say, he can say this is too creepy and too much big government, but he never talks like that when it comes to expansion.
All I ever hear is "but...Republicans yadda yadda yadda". but but but....
Somehow even though Obama is the President, if something goes wrong its because the Republicans started it.
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
Cow, what I'm telling you is I am the guy that has been looking in your backyard, and quite frankly, your backyard is boring.
Eventually you are correct, air rights over private homes will become important. Before we get to that though we will have to settle who gets the oil under the north pole. I think that will be pressing far earlier than commercial companies deciding to spy to find out what you grill and which herbicide you use.
Hell...I'd image Google has a good idea already anyway and they didn't need flying equipment to do it.
Posted by jordanreed on :
tru dat....
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: So what will you all feel when you find out drones are looking at you in your backyard? By both government and private sectors? Collecting your patterns of behavior such as time of day you leave your house, and what you do in your backyard such as target shoot, or make something, or whatever. Its all no big deal right? Lets keep blaming Republicans for their faults and dismiss any adverse moves made in the current administration. I could care less if Republicans signed off on this with Democrats. Obama has the final say, he can say this is too creepy and too much big government, but he never talks like that when it comes to expansion.
All I ever hear is "but...Republicans yadda yadda yadda". but but but....
Somehow even though Obama is the President, if something goes wrong its because the Republicans started it.
Posted by glassman on :
cash. the ttruth is? google bought operation keyhole from the CIA in 2004....
BTW? black helicopters just buzzed my house for pointing out that keyhole was built by The Company, not A company Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Well, I dont like it. I dont want DRONES flying over my land and property taking video or images of me. I know Google Earth does this is a soft manner. This though can be used for streaming.
All I know is if this was signed off on by Bush, this board would be up in arms over it. Now its just no big deal.
When the "Patriot Act" was passed by Bush this board was livid over it, but when Obama signed a FOUR YEAR extension over it....it gets little debate if any.
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
The anger at the Patriot act was because it actively allowed entry and search without warrants. It allowed seizure of private documents (such as financial statements) without obtaining warrants. The language was intentionally broad brushed so that nearly any act could be labeled as terrorism if you were an investigation target.
That is a tad different than someone peeping from 10,000 feet.
The act is still a major problem and something I disagree with the administration, the senate majority, and the congressional majority on. I understand why they like having the powers afforded but it infringes way too far. Much farther than exterior cameras ever could.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Well, I dont like it. I dont want DRONES flying over my land and property taking video or images of me. I know Google Earth does this is a soft manner. This though can be used for streaming.
All I know is if this was signed off on by Bush, this board would be up in arms over it. Now its just no big deal.
When the "Patriot Act" was passed by Bush this board was livid over it, but when Obama signed a FOUR YEAR extension over it....it gets little debate if any.
cash, when i was a kid i knew the kids of the people who put the satellites up.... the joke was that our parents knew what brand of cigarretes we were smoking with them... this was in the 70's...
in 1982 i was lucky enought to be in HI when this band came out and toured witht his album, the concert hall there is tiny, and these guys were HOT! enjoy and try not to get too worked up about what you can't control...
Do you think one of those drones could help me find my car keys that I lost last week?
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Groups Concerned Over Arming Of Domestic Drones
"Chief Deputy Randy McDaniel of the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office in Texas told The Daily that his department is considering using rubber bullets and tear gas on its drone."
Keep the tin foil hat jokes and black helicopter remarks coming, but this is serious and is happening right before your eyes. If this was President Bush the media would be all over it, but since Obama is in office....this is "no big deal".
Posted by raybond on :
Why would obama sign this bill? Very simple there is a group of very very wealthy people at the top that realy run the country. Nobody in either party can get nominated to run in a presidential election unless they get the official nod from them.
And if you read your history and put two and two together it is easy to see that this is no recent event. We only have rights as long as they fall with in a margin of acceptence. I happen to believe if the population realy starts to catch on this group will take the gloves off. Drones for observation and armed might just be the first real step.
Posted by glassman on :
people are catching on tho...
the only defense is to understand the technology...
start here and work your way up the food chain:
Review: iPhone-controlled drone fun but expensive
November 3, 2010 By MICHAEL FELBERBAUM , AP Business Writer Review: iPhone-controlled drone fun but expensive (AP)
Enlarge
This product image provided by Parrot, shows the AR.Drone. Parrot, a company known more for its Bluetooth hands-free car speakerphones, has launched a small, unmanned aircraft that can be controlled using an iPhone or another of Apple Inc.'s Wi-Fi-enabled gadgets, including the iPod Touch and the iPad.(AP Photo/Parrot) NO SALES
(AP) -- You can pretty much do anything with your iPhone these days - control your digital video recorder from afar, unlock your car, and now, fly a drone.
Ads by Google
Android Phones - Comparing Wireless Rates? Create a Personalized Plan with C Spire! - cspire.com
Parrot, a company known more for its Bluetooth handsfree car speakerphones, has launched a small, unmanned aircraft that can be controlled using an iPhone or another of Apple Inc.'s Wi-Fi-enabled gadgets, including the iPod Touch and the iPad. After reading about it online, I felt compelled to take the drone for a test drive because, honestly, what gadget geek wouldn't want one?
The $300 AR.Drone is a quadricopter - a helicopter with four separate propellers - made of carbon fiber and strong plastics.
Weighing less than a pound, the gadget can fly up to 11 mph, controlled from up to 150 feet away. The drone has two built-in cameras that stream video of what it sees directly to your iPhone, or another Apple device. You then control aspects of the flight by tilting the iPhone from side to side, using the gyroscope in the device.
Don't worry if you don't have a good cellular or Wi-Fi connection. The drone has its own Wi-Fi system to communicate directly with the iPhone without needing to go through an outside Wi-Fi hotspot.
The setup was quite easy. After downloading the free app from Apple's iTunes store and charging the battery for the AR.Drone, I was ready to fly. With one touch of a button on the screen, the AR.Drone was hovering about three feet off the ground. Landing is just as simple, with one on-screen button that slowly lowers the drone to the ground.
video transmission with lo power can be very diffucult to mainatin
and drone on drone might be a fun game too
in the 60's it was popular to fight the model airplanes that were on wires... anybody else remember those? i built a compettition model to 90% but never got eh motor, it got crushed by one of my siblings "by accident" for something i did to 'em... i prolly deserved it too Posted by glassman on :
Explore making custom maps in an interactive tutorial. Map of Domestic Drone Authorizations Public · 80,940 views Created on Apr 17 · By Jennifer · Updated Apr 24 16 ratings · 16 comments · KML ·
PUBLISHED: 04:32 EST, 26 May 2012 | UPDATED: 12:46 EST, 26 May 2012
Revealing: A list of keywords used by government analysts to scour the internet for evidence of threats to the U.S. has been released under the Freedom of Information Act
The Department of Homeland Security has been forced to release a list of keywords and phrases it uses to monitor social networking sites and online media for signs of terrorist or other threats against the U.S.
The intriguing the list includes obvious choices such as 'attack', 'Al Qaeda', 'terrorism' and 'dirty bomb' alongside dozens of seemingly innocent words like 'pork', 'cloud', 'team' and 'Mexico'.
Released under a freedom of information request, the information sheds new light on how government analysts are instructed to patrol the internet searching for domestic and external threats.
The words are included in the department's 2011 'Analyst's Desktop Binder' used by workers at their National Operations Center which instructs workers to identify 'media reports that reflect adversely on DHS and response activities'.
Department chiefs were forced to release the manual following a House hearing over documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit which revealed how analysts monitor social networks and media organisations for comments that 'reflect adversely' on the government.
However they insisted the practice was aimed not at policing the internet for disparaging remarks about the government and signs of general dissent, but to provide awareness of any potential threats.
They must be on allstocks OT board all the time then!
Posted by glassman on :
hmmmmm.... what an instersting notion... do ya think dey cood undretsnad dis psot
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Try using some different words
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
EPA Is Using Drones to Spy on Iowa Cattle Ranchers
Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency is using aerial drones to spy on farmers in Nebraska and Iowa. The surveillance came under scrutiny last week when Nebraska’s congressional delegation sent a joint letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.
On Friday, EPA officialdom in “Region 7” responded to the letter.
“Courts, including the Supreme Court, have found similar types of flights to be legal (for example to take aerial photographs of a chemical manufacturing facility) and EPA would use such flights in appropriate instances to protect people and the environment from violations of the Clean Water Act,” the agency said in response to the letter.
“They are just way on the outer limits of any authority they’ve been granted,” said Mike Johanns, a Republican senator from Nebraska.
In fact, the EPA has absolutely zero authority and is an unconstitutional entity of an ever-expanding and rogue federal government. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution does not authorize Congress to legislate in the area of the environment. Under the Tenth Amendment, this authority is granted to the states and their legislatures, not the federal government.
back when i lived in VA? my ex-submarine captain neighbor was paid by the govt to photograph the whole state by airplane. he bid a contract to do it- i laid on the floor of his plane the first year he had the contract and snapped a picture every 20 seconds all day for 2 weeks... yawn.
no difference here. nobody complained then, the photos were of crops being planted (or not)
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: back when i lived in VA? my ex-submarine captain neighbor was paid by the govt to photograph the whole state by airplane. he bid a contract to do it- i laid on the floor of his plane the first year he had the contract and snapped a picture every 20 seconds all day for 2 weeks... yawn.
no difference here. nobody complained then, the photos were of crops being planted (or not)
Its not streaming glass, the new drones coming out can go for days or weeks at a time, streaming real time footage of you in your yard.
Its no big deal right? Because the government knows whats best with what it collects from us...which is why we need to let those Bush cuts expire and pull more money into Washington because it wont get wasted in another country or squandered in pork here at home.
Pre-crime will be a thing in the not too distant future. Monitoring citizens for certain patterns of behavior that pre-programmed computers can pick up on and alert some center where it gets a deeper look.
Posted by glassman on :
cash, i don't 'like" the govt. a cop ain't my bud cuz he has uniform. but there's job need'n doing.
cattle ranchers? complaining abou the govt? LOl.
read this:
Estimates of the screwworm population in any given year are based on the number of infested animals, referred to as cases. Prior to 1962, livestock owners estimated that one million cases were treated in Texas in a normal year. Thousands of cases were reportedly treated each year in Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri as a result of the migration of screwworms from Texas.
In 1961 a massive educational campaign was conducted. Hundreds of thousands of sample vials and forms to be completed were distributed to livestock owners. They were instructed to collect a sample of larvae from each animal treated for a suspected screwworm infestation and to return the sample and form with pertinent data to the designated laboratory for identification.
The winter of 1961-62 was very severe, and the screwworm population in the overwintering area was reduced to an unusually low level. Taking advantage of this natural suppression, the USDA Research facility at Kerrville, Texas began production of sterile flies in February 1962. Weekly production was initially 5 million but increased to over 22 million flies by May 1962. Sterile flies were dispersed at the rate of 80 per square kilometre over central Texas. The effects were monitored by collection of egg masses from wounded sheep, and as many as 75 percent were found to be sterile (Bushland, 1985).
In June 1962, production of sterile screwworm flies began in a new plant in Texas. The flies were initially distributed over 388500 km² of Texas and New Mexico and in a band extending 80 km south of the Texas border into Mexico. Production of flies gradually increased from 28 million per week in July to 75 million per week by October 1962.
never heard of it before? that's cuz we have pushed them all the way to south america where we have stopped because the cattle ranchers don't WANT US to go furhter, becuase it will hurt their business.
that is considered the most effective pest control program in human history ( i'm sure Pagan will have somethign to say about thatt tho )
there si no way to really cacklack the benefits to ranchers adn ultimatley consumers..
it's just not possible to put real numbers on it. now, not everything about th govt is good or bad. but when you NEED the govt? they BETTER friggin be there,right?
the only way to make sure they are is tokeep 'em around like a unwanted parasite that once inawhile saves your life
why are these guys whining about drones when they never compalined about airplanes with people in 'em? and never complained when the Govt certified their cattle to be free of mad cow (LOL) disease?
cuz we WOULD have mad cow here and now if it weren't for the US Govt telling the feed makers they can't use bovine (cattel) bone meal in the feed.. they would grow better if they used it.. then they would start dropping on thground writhing around and get carried to teh market for us to eat.
all this whining is just sad....
Posted by glassman on :
as to the issue of watching us in our in our yard? they have had that technology for years with satellites anyway. this is cheaper... get over it man. the world changes around you change or be left behind. this ain't goin away unless civilization does too...
Posted by glassman on :
i wonder if it possible to even know what is really going on form the internet anymore?
by the way cash that plane my neighbor had? he was ex-nam era and he bough it cuz it was a 4 seater used in nam as a scout plane- it was fondly called a push me pull you, or better known a aCessna skymaster - his was 4 seater... just like thye say they are still using in this article...
The recent controversy over the Environmental Protection Agency’s aerial surveillance of cattle farmers in Iowa and Nebraska has led to suggestions that they are using drones to spy on cattle ranches.
The EPA is defending its right to use aerial surveillance in areas that have high numbers of impaired watersheds and Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), justifying the surveillance in part by saying that the planes used are not drones, but four-seat Cessna planes.
EPA spokesperson Chris Lancaster told The Daily Caller that the planes are manned by privately contracted pilots with EPA staff on board.
Since 2010, there have been 18 CAFO flyovers in Nebraska and Iowa, which have led to eight farmers receiving penalty orders, mostly in Iowa.
Lancaster said that the photos collected on flyovers are reviewed only by EPA staff and that this is entirely an EPA initiative, not associated with any other environmental group.
Aerial surveillance has been a cost-effective measure for the EPA. It has allowed them to eliminate the need for on-site inspections on CAFOs that are in compliance with their regulations.
However, for the farmers the flyovers are costing them more. According to The Omaha World-Herald, they feel that EPA regulations are undermining state environmental regulations. Farmers are concerned that they are going to have to funnel more money into manure-control to meet federal regulations, after having already invested in meeting state regulations.
you know all these scares from eating salad? that's usually e coli from poo... cow poo, pig poo or even people poo (farm hands)?
this whole thing is a joke. i actually participated in contract work just like this and nothing creepy was going on...
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Drones That May Fly ‘Indefinitely’ Can Be Recharged By Lasers
LOS ANGELES (KNX 1070) — A recently demonstrated breakthrough in technology may help Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), better known as drones, stay airborne for very long periods of time before having to return to Earth.
This development comes at a time when the U.S. government is actively encouraging the domestic use of drones, first by law enforcement, and later, by private concerns.
Lockheed Martin and a company called LaserMotive have been able to keep a drone flying for some 49 hours non-stop, using a ground-based laser to recharge the drone’s on board battery, says Tom Koonce, the project manager for Lockheed Martin, in an interview with KNX1070 Newsradio.
The test, says Koonce, was conducted in a wind tunnel in Palmdale. The system will very soon be tested in actual airspace in the desert, requiring coordination with both the FAA and NASA to keep the ground-based laser from interfering with either commercial aircraft or Earth-orbiting space vehicles.
“Maybe it’s police, maybe it’s fire, maybe it’s emergency services. If they need to be up overhead for a long period of time, that makes a lot of sense to put a system like this in place,” says Koonce, who also told KNX1070′s Charles Feldman that “it aligns very well with the president’s directive to the FAA to prepare unmanned aerial systems into the national airspace to integrate them seamlessly by 2015.”
this technology is DIRECLTY a result of US GOVT TAX DOLLARS, being spent and you are worried that somebody is going to catch you doing soemthing wierd to your sheep in the backyard?
seriously> Beamed power competitions held in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2009 were directed at space elevator applications. Teams built mechanical devices (climbers) that could propel themselves up a vertical cable. The power supply for the device was not self-contained but remained on the ground. The technical challenge was to transmit the power to the climber and transform it into mechanical motion, efficiently and reliably. In the 2009 competition, the competitors drove their laser-powered devices up a cable one kilometer high, suspended from a helicopter. LaserMotive LLC was awarded $900,000 in the 2009 Power Beaming Challenge. Official results, as well as video and photography, are available at:
Yes I know this. My problem as I have explained before, and have to again is that it is going to lead to darker things down the road.
Posted by glassman on :
stop messing with your ahhh sheep then
seriously? i don't like the drones in my backyard either and I am alawabiding citizen so i wouldnever do anthing to them
i fianlly got my laser sight for my ruger 22 comp slabside. it's pretty cool.
if you read that article i linked? it mentions how the near infrared lasers show up on most cameras even tho we don't see them..... just another "glimpse" into how these things don't always work too good
on ebay you can almost always buy infrared lasers up to about 100 watts
bigger ones over 100 watts show up on occasion, but they get expesnive fast, but no more than say- an Ar15 fully floated bull barrel with laser and 20X mildot night scope Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman:
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: So what will you all feel when you find out drones are looking at you in your backyard? By both government and private sectors? Collecting your patterns of behavior such as time of day you leave your house, and what you do in your backyard such as target shoot, or make something, or whatever. Its all no big deal right? Lets keep blaming Republicans for their faults and dismiss any adverse moves made in the current administration. I could care less if Republicans signed off on this with Democrats. Obama has the final say, he can say this is too creepy and too much big government, but he never talks like that when it comes to expansion.
All I ever hear is "but...Republicans yadda yadda yadda". but but but....
Somehow even though Obama is the President, if something goes wrong its because the Republicans started it.
Gee glass, am I still wearing a tin foil hat when it comes to the massive increase in drone use, and the coming drone use in society? Drone attacks on American Citizens.....I thought citizens were given a trial before guilty. The use of them by corporate interests, your local police dept, your neighbor, etc.
Posted by glassman on :
cash, have you bought your 100 watt infrared laser yet? they really will brun out the optics on most everything within a couple hundred yards, you just need to focus it properly...
war is hell, and we are always at war, quit whining so damn much and do something.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: cash, have you bought your 100 watt infrared laser yet? they really will brun out the optics on most everything within a couple hundred yards, you just need to focus it properly...
war is hell, and we are always at war, quit whining so damn much and do something.
i toldja before cash the USDA has been using them for along time to study crops... that's half those flights listed... they'll be using them to crop- dust before long...
Posted by Lockman on :
Keep the tin foil hat jokes and black helicopter remarks coming, but this is serious and is happening right before your eyes. If this was President Bush the media would be all over it, but since Obama is in office....this is "no big deal".
This is why we need a Republican in the White House...the Liberal media cannot call this president out for fear of being labeled racist...had Mitt Romney be elected you can bet the hounds on MSNBC would have been all over this...
Posted by raybond on :
What is the difference an f-22 flying .overhead or a drone or in my fathers day a p-38. War aircaft have been flying around you forever.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Keep the tin foil hat jokes and black helicopter remarks coming, but this is serious and is happening right before your eyes. If this was President Bush the media would be all over it, but since Obama is in office....this is "no big deal".
This is why we need a Republican in the White House...the Liberal media cannot call this president out for fear of being labeled racist...had Mitt Romney be elected you can bet the hounds on MSNBC would have been all over this...
seriously? i don't beleive that. first off? Bush did it Paksitan after Obama campaigned on it... they may have been doing it in secret prior to that, but whne Obma was campaigning he stated he would use drones to attack alqueda in pakistan and Bush began announcing he was foing it just a few eeks later..
as tot the drone flying over the US? i have been aware of projects using drones since about 2005 at USDA, they regualry advertise for new hires to work on the project, it is an open non0secret project. heck i knew one guy who was using them to track fire ants in '06....
all of this the sky is falling stuff is silly...
the ONLY questionable activity so far is killing US citizens who have claimed allegiance to alqueda overseas, and i don't care, that dude they klled earned it IMO...
if they want to impeach Obam for doing ti? then they should, and they prolly can win it and unseat him if they want. i don't care tho... it's like the torture thing tho, i don't approve if it either, but it should have been done and then the torturers should have been presidentially pardoned. Bush himself shuld have pardoned thoem for doing what had to be done, that is IMO what the presidential pardon was really for, not as gift, but to interven when you have to break the law on occasion..
the drones are nothing new anyway, i took photos of crops under contract for the USDA laying inte floor of plane all day every for weeks as far back as the early 90's... this saves alot of moeny, they paid me and the pilot very well ... now they don't have to pay as much.
Posted by raybond on :
If the American citizen you are talking about is the bozo overseas hob nobbing with our enemy alqueda, IMHO he had no rights as an American. Look at what these people did to us. French fry them all'and the hell with anybodies opinion.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: If the American citizen you are talking about is the bozo overseas hob nobbing with our enemy alqueda, IMHO he had no rights as an American. Look at what these people did to us. French fry them all'and the hell with anybodies opinion.
that's who i am talking about ray, and you cannot "just" suspend people rights without due process...
in battlefeild situation? yes, and tht is how Obama will defned himslef, but ray, the next thing you know? citizens in the USA will lose thier rights cuz they don't think like you, and that is the slippery slope
Posted by raybond on :
We did not feel that way with our enemies in WWII and our rights were protected.
If you were overseas having a nice lunch with Osama and a 1000 lb bomb fell on you its just To damn bad. I can't see where this is a civil rights issue.
As a matter of fact why don't you call up what is left of Osama's staff invite them all out to lunch and talk over rights and events sit down on a sidewalk cafe and dare anybody to touch youbecause you are an American.And when a drone blows you to kingdom come you will be happy to know that your family has a civil rights suit in your behalf.
Posted by glassman on :
LOL... you are back on fictitious ground. executing US citizens wherever they are is not ok. it's called due process, i can show you in the Constitution where it is . you can have trials in absentia and find them guilty, but here's the thing, there's a huge difference between sending in a team and killing somebody like Osama when his finger is on the trigger and he is not a US citizen, and sending in a drone to kill a US citizen... as to violation of civil rights? LOL, it is called Murder in th eFirst degree is what it is called.
you don't wanna see the differnce but you would be screaming if Bush did it. you are nothing but partisan hack and you could care less about civil rights, the only thing you care about is your precious party, just like cashcow
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Originally Posted By Raybond:
What is the difference an f-22 flying .overhead or a drone or in my fathers day a p-38. War aircaft have been flying around you forever. -------------------------------------------------
I don't think a drone flying over is the same as a war aircraft flying over.
They both might fly over, but i am guessing one is gathering information, and the other is just flying over. I am not positive of this, since i am not controling either, again just a guess.
-
Posted by Pagan on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: LOL... you are back on fictitious ground. executing US citizens wherever they are is not ok. it's called due process, i can show you in the Constitution where it is . you can have trials in absentia and find them guilty, but here's the thing, there's a huge difference between sending in a team and killing somebody like Osama when his finger is on the trigger and he is not a US citizen, and sending in a drone to kill a US citizen... as to violation of civil rights? LOL, it is called Murder in th eFirst degree is what it is called.
you don't wanna see the differnce but you would be screaming if Bush did it. you are nothing but partisan hack and you could care less about civil rights, the only thing you care about is your precious party, just like cashcow
So...you are saying...that killing any US citizen anywhere by the military without "due process" is not acceptable?
What if...Adolf Hitler had been born in the US and migrated to Germany as a child. He would still be a US citizen at that point. But you would be opposed to a drone strike that might eliminate him? A strike that might eliminate the holocaust? Really? Your such a fool/tool sometimes.
Posted by raybond on :
According to glass if there is a bunch of people we are at war with and we find out where they are hidding we should send in immagration first and see if they are citizens before we take them out. What do we do if they are green cards ?
Posted by rounder1 on :
Not acceptable.... .ever.... ever..... if satan were a citizen...... he gets due process...... that is all.
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Originally Posted By Raybond:
According to glass if there is a bunch of people we are at war with and we find out where they are hidding we should send in immagration first and see if they are citizens before we take them out. What do we do if they are green cards _________________________________________________
They will probably run if they see immigration coming, even if they have green cards.
Problem is Raybond, many of those green cards, are not quite what they want to show immmigration.
In the past, i have seen many different names on green cards for the same person, as they go back and forth across the border.
-
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Pagan:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: LOL... you are back on fictitious ground. executing US citizens wherever they are is not ok. it's called due process, i can show you in the Constitution where it is . you can have trials in absentia and find them guilty, but here's the thing, there's a huge difference between sending in a team and killing somebody like Osama when his finger is on the trigger and he is not a US citizen, and sending in a drone to kill a US citizen... as to violation of civil rights? LOL, it is called Murder in th eFirst degree is what it is called.
you don't wanna see the differnce but you would be screaming if Bush did it. you are nothing but partisan hack and you could care less about civil rights, the only thing you care about is your precious party, just like cashcow
So...you are saying...that killing any US citizen anywhere by the military without "due process" is not acceptable?
What if...Adolf Hitler had been born in the US and migrated to Germany as a child. He would still be a US citizen at that point. But you would be opposed to a drone strike that might eliminate him? A strike that might eliminate the holocaust? Really? Your such a fool/tool sometimes.
hitler wasn't US citizen pagan... stop fantasizing
as to calling me a fool?
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
you are showing your hypocrisy and you lack of edjemkatshum.
there is a way indict them and a way to find them guilty in absentia, and if they didn't do that? then it is murder... there has been no formal Declaration of War since 1942, even so, it is illegal to murder US citizens even in other countries..
Not the president and not the CIA has the legal right to do that- it's settled law, remembr Castro and his special CIA cigars? well, he wasn't even a US citizen and they made that illegal
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Pagan:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: LOL... you are back on fictitious ground. executing US citizens wherever they are is not ok. it's called due process, i can show you in the Constitution where it is . you can have trials in absentia and find them guilty, but here's the thing, there's a huge difference between sending in a team and killing somebody like Osama when his finger is on the trigger and he is not a US citizen, and sending in a drone to kill a US citizen... as to violation of civil rights? LOL, it is called Murder in th eFirst degree is what it is called.
you don't wanna see the differnce but you would be screaming if Bush did it. you are nothing but partisan hack and you could care less about civil rights, the only thing you care about is your precious party, just like cashcow
So...you are saying...that killing any US citizen anywhere by the military without "due process" is not acceptable?
What if...Adolf Hitler had been born in the US and migrated to Germany as a child. He would still be a US citizen at that point. But you would be opposed to a drone strike that might eliminate him? A strike that might eliminate the holocaust? Really? Your such a fool/tool sometimes.
one more thing, i didn't say anything about killing any US citizen anywhere by the military without "due process" is not acceptable.
killng soemone in a firefight while they resist capture is NOT the same as sending a drone with hellfire.... so try to read better next time..
Apoclypse Now was about sending in a hit man to murder a US citizen gone rogue in antoher country.. nobody consodered it the least bit legal then eitehr. but they did it.
i we are going to claim that the USA is an exceptional nation? this goes a long way to making that claim hollow.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: According to glass if there is a bunch of people we are at war with and we find out where they are hidding we should send in immagration first and see if they are citizens before we take them out. What do we do if they are green cards ?
i stated no such thing. once again your readin comreheneion fails completely. desertion or treason is punishable with 180 grains of lead administered immediately in war... citizenship has no bearing on it... that's not what is happening with these drone strikes. How did we get into teh war in Iraq? on bad intel and bad judgemnt of that itnel...
but now?all the intel is good and interpretted perfecctly right? cuz Obama is president that is ALL FIXED right? ssheeesh. i already toldja it needed to be done go back and read, but the way they did ti was wrong..... Obam shoul have been able to pardon the poepl who did it. by doing it himslef? he could be impeached, that's only a question of politcal expediancy.... the GOP might want to impeach him, but not for doing whathtye wish they could do... so whem they get in? they'll do it too just to porve they are badder... then it's be commonlace and we'll all be knonw as the murdereing countrry all around the world wooohhoooo!
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by rounder1: Not acceptable.... .ever.... ever..... if satan were a citizen...... he gets due process...... that is all.
it's true rounder, it's also true each party ahs a large group of people init that will allow thei rcandidate to do almost anythingin the name of the party, other than compliment the other party .
if they were to impeach him? which i duobt they will and they tossed him? Biden would pardon him right away (and have my support) that is IMO waht presidential pardons are really for, but only a jury has the that power by findings of not guilty (jury nullification) and the president has that power. but he cannot pardon himslef...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Originally Posted By Glassman:
as to the issue of watching us in our in our yard? they have had that technology for years with satellites anyway. this is cheaper... get over it man. the world changes around you change or be left behind. this ain't goin away unless civilization does too... ------------------------------------------------- This topic seems to be going between fiction and facts, alot, hard to follow.
I still have a tough time with the spies in the sky idea, no matter how it's presented.
Phone taps, spies,surveillance etc. ain't good, at least not around me. Again i don't like getting use to my freedoms being taken away for any reason, never have, never will.
-
Posted by buckstalker on :
quote:Originally posted by rounder1: Not acceptable.... .ever.... ever..... if satan were a citizen...... he gets due process...... that is all.
I wholeheartedly AGREE!!!
Posted by raybond on :
posted by glassman
one more thing, i didn't say anything about killing any US citizen anywhere by the military without "due process" is not acceptable.
killng soemone in a firefight while they resist capture is NOT the same as sending a drone with hellfire.... so try to read better next time..
Apoclypse Now was about sending in a hit man to murder a US citizen gone rogue in antoher country.. nobody consodered it the least bit legal then eitehr. but they did it.
i we are going to claim that the USA is an exceptional nation? this goes a long way to making that claim hollow.
------------------------------------------------- If that is what you feel then I have no problem with that and we agree.
I hope that you don't want to hang yourself after hearing that.
Posted by glassman on :
LOL- all they 'need" do toprovide due process is have a Judicial review of the acts that these fg-ing guys commit to lose their protected status.
just re,ember that thi only applies outside the US, when they start using deadly force for 'convenince" sake in side the US? all bets are off anbd the Govt is gone rogue...
remebr ruby ridge? and waco? that was your boy Clinton behind that crap.
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Originally Posted By Raybond:
Apoclypse Now was about sending in a hit man to murder a US citizen gone rogue in antoher country.. nobody consodered it the least bit legal then eitehr. but they did it. -------------------------------------------------
Apoclypse Now was fiction, i assume everyone knows that. It was a movie more about frustration by the american people and some soldiers, than anything else.
Some parts of the movie had reality in them.
There was one important thing to come out of that movie, war does not necessarily have due process. Whether it be Americans involved or other nations, even when it becomes an american vs. american. That's the reality.
Maybe in some cases, due process in war becomes a liability. Sometimes we are the only ones allowing this due process, which means we have more casualties than we should.
I think that's why the american people have so much trouble dealing with the wars of today.
It's not about fair fights, two gun slingers on the street drawing against each other, drawing at the same time. It's about killing and running, and doing whatever needs to be done to win, including killing their own people to get information etc.
That's the reality.
-
Posted by glassman on :
i agree iwish, Apocolyspe now was fiction, but it posed moral dilammas that are still relevent now and were then too... my ONLY issue is that when you send drones in? you are not risking anything but some hardware, which is a good thing, but drones do not accept a surrender do they? and that IS the problem i have. You can have a trail and find them guilty of treaosn that would make this all legit. Drones are not heat of battel, they are cold-blooded decisons madein board rooms type settings..
BTW? if the target is not an American and one is in the way? that's colateral damage, it is only the intentional; execution of an American Citizen that is targeted that i have questions about. I donot question that it has to be done, just how it is done.
Posted by glassman on :
I just wactched a natgeo special on 21st centruy warships... the Navy today looks nothing like the navy i was in. everything is remote control and joysticks run everything now.. drones are part of the fabric of the new miltary and are not going away... they are even running 27 foot speed boat drones at 30 knots on the high seas now.. one of those armed with harpoons and released from a mother ship (carrier) could do some real damage
Posted by raybond on :
Face it wars of th future are going to be fought by a very small percentage of the poulation using hi tech. most wars will be something that we see on the evening news and not feel the pain in our daily lives. to me this is a very dangerous step for humanity it might even lead to our destruction.
Posted by glassman on :
yeah war without pain make it easier to wage, and then there's the mistakes, always mistakes...
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
Originally Posted By Glassman:
i agree iwish, Apocolyspe now was fiction, but it posed moral dilammas that are still relevent now and were then too... my ONLY issue is that when you send drones in? you are not risking anything but some hardware, which is a good thing, but drones do not accept a surrender do they? and that IS the problem i have. You can have a trail and find them guilty of treaosn that would make this all legit Drones are not heat of battel, they are cold-blooded decisons madein board rooms type settings.. BTW? if the target is not an American and one is in the way? that's colateral damage, it is only the intentional; execution of an American Citizen that is targeted that i have questions about. I do not question that it has to be done, just how it is done. ------------------------------------------------- When i was speaking of american vs. american, i was refering to what can happen in the field, without due process, when guys don't get along, or do something really wrong. Sometimes the bullet becomes the only due process.
I understand what your saying about drones,the good news and the bad news all rolled into one.
-
Posted by glassman on :
Sweating Obama Admits Drone Strikes Have Been Happening On Their Own News in Brief • politicians • barack obama • News • ISSUE 49•06 • Feb 8, 2013 WASHINGTON—Speaking at a hastily called White House press conference Friday, a visibly tense and perspiring President Barack Obama confessed that the United States’ fleet of roughly 700 armed drones have been conducting airstrikes entirely on their own for the past several years. “Look, I’m just going to come clean here: Every single U.S. drone currently deployed has been selecting and bombing targets without any guidance from military officials on the ground,” a trembling Obama told reporters, admitting that he last authorized a drone attack in 2010, and that recent strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and most perplexingly, the Philippines, have been planned and executed entirely by the unmanned combat air vehicles themselves. “I’ll admit that the extensive use of drone aircraft was something my administration readily embraced, but we’ve lost all contact with these things, and as it stands now, we have no idea who or what is controlling them—or if they’re even being controlled at all. Jesus, these things are terrifying. We need to shut them down before it’s too late!” At press time, all the blood had reportedly drained from Obama’s face and he stood stock-still as a faint whirring noise could be heard high above the White House briefing room. http://www.theonion.com/articles/sweating-obama-admits-drone-strikes-have-been-h app,31219/?ref=auto Posted by a surfer on :
Put 20,000 of them on the borders and the other 10,000 on our great leaders and then we may have something....
Posted by raybond on :
close off the border what a joke. We will never do that the expense would be to great that is if you could ever do it.
The only people that ever closed a border to keep people out that I know off were the Chinese with the great wall to keep people out and the Romans in Briton. The Nazies did it but that was to keep people in. WHO IN THERE RIGHT MIND WANTED TO GO TO NAZI GERMANY, MR. HENRY FORD WAS THE EXCEPTION.
Posted by a surfer on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: close off the border what a joke. We will never do that the expense would be to great that is if you could ever do it.
The only people that ever closed a border to keep people out that I know off were the Chinese with the great wall to keep people out and the Romans in Briton. The Nazies did it but that was to keep people in. WHO IN THERE RIGHT MIND WANTED TO GO TO NAZI GERMANY, MR. HENRY FORD WAS THE EXCEPTION.
Too expensive?? Are you kidding me? If we have drones being built would you rather them watch you or the border?
Too expensive? Do you realize how expensive it is to you and me for each and every one that comes here? Not only do they take our work but we give them food and in some cases shelter too. They cost our country in so many ways I don't even know where to begin. I don't think we can afford not to.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)![[Cool]](cool.gif)
