FBI admits to domestic surveillance drone use

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

The FBI has admitted it sometimes uses aerial surveillance drones over US soil, and suggested further political debate and legislation to govern their domestic use may be necessary.

Speaking in a hearing mainly about telephone data collection, the bureau's director, Robert Mueller, said it used drones to aid its investigations in a "very, very minimal way, very seldom".

However, the potential for growing drone use either in the US, or involving US citizens abroad, is an increasingly charged issue in Congress, and the FBI acknowleged there may need to be legal restrictions placed on their use to protect privacy.

"It is still in nascent stages but it is worthy of debate and legislation down the road," said Mueller, in response to questions from Hawaii senator Mazie Hirono.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/19/fbi-drones-domestic-surveillance

[Swede Atlanta]

1. Not surprising........

9-11 was a watershed in this country that went far beyond the tragic loss of life and property.

It created the justification for unconstitutional surveillance of American citizens, the killing of Americans without due process and the use of attack drones over American cities.

We now live in a George Orwellian world. The FBI will NEVER give up the right to use drones now that they have it. They may talk big about the need for better governance but I suggest that is pillow talk.

I have never known an entity to willingly give up something that makes them feel more empowered.

[frylock]

3. yep, and people wonder why the Official Narrative is questioned

[Politicalboi]

10. So true

If they can take us to war over a lie, 9/11 is a walk in the park. Those that see 9/11 different are considered
And it still works to this day. 9/11 is their trump card to do ANYTHING they want to us.


<a href="http://imgur.com/i0mBqyb"><img src="" title="Hosted by imgur.com"/></a>

[geek tragedy]

2. What is it about the word "drones" that turns a mundane story into a panic-inducing one?

"FBI uses aerial surveillance from planes and helicopters and hot air balloons" would generate no buzz.

But, throw the word "unmanned" in there or refer to "drones" and all of a sudden it's East Germany.

[cstanleytech]

4. No idea but if you ever figure out how it manages to turn off the reasoning center for

peoples brains shoot me a PM as I would really like to know.

[hughee99]

6. People equate drones with the things that launch missiles, they tend not to do that

with planes, helicopters and hot air balloons.

[geek tragedy]

7. Well, in the case of hot air balloons they're right.

But, haven't they seen Blue Thunder or Airwolf?

[cstanleytech]

8. Ummmm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_military_ballooning

[geek tragedy]

9. Sure, they can drop stuff on people. But missiles are a different story. nt

[cstanleytech]

11. Not really.

All you need is to equip the missiles with delayed ignition switches and have them drop, wait 1 - 10 seconds and then ignite.
As for mounting them its not to hard to imagine either having them mounted on mini wings like a copter does or even just have large missile pods under the balloon remotely controlled to drop and release them.
Not a very practical system mind you but it could be done.

[geek tragedy]

12. If we ever decide to wage steampunk war, I'm sure we'll see it nt

[hughee99]

13. They can drop bombs out of a blimp if they want to, but that's not where people's thoughts

automatically go when you say "blimp". Drone has become so synonymous with "drone strike" these days that people automatically equate the two.

[cstanleytech]

14. Hmmm guess not many folks recall the Hindenberg or the USS Akron. nt

[hughee99]

30. In all fairness, that was more than 70 years ago.

Most people have never even seen a rigid airship and the only blimps they see fly safely over sporting events.

[TalkingDog]

16. I don't know about other people, but it would light up my amygdala.

I'm not a fan of surveillance in any way shape or form.

[geek tragedy]

17. So, traffic helicopters must have you in a constant state of agitation then nt

[TalkingDog]

25. AHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Not out where I live. (and I live out here for a reason)

On edit: I always love it when people make assumptions about how other people live (or should live) based on their own experience. That's a small world you've got between your ears.

[geek tragedy]

29. We have all kinds of helicopters where I live.

Airplanes flying overhead too.

Never struck me that I was living in Oceania.

[Mojorabbit]

51. I have helicopters frequently

circling my neighborhood shining their searchlights in my yard and thru my windows in the middle of the night. I find it very disconcerting.

[Psephos]

19. Drones are robots. You're good with robots surveiling you?

I'm not.

Drones are already equipped with AI capabilities, and their AI is being continuously upgraded. More and more, they will autonomously make decisions about what information acquired, and how it is acquired. They most certainly will not be programmed with human capacities for moral or legal judgment. I expect that this will actually be used as a loophole to do things a human would not.

Technology advances exponentially. Once robots are accepted as normal State security apparatus, they will never go away.

It takes a particularly weak imagination to not see where this is going.

[geek tragedy]

22. Drones are controlled by humans. nt

[Psephos]

53. You don't seem to have absorbed what I wrote. n/t

[I love weed]

56. Last year I would have thought you a tinfoiler.

Now I agree with you.

I have zero faith left in our government. Screw the R vs D charade. It's only THEM vs us.

[Psephos]

58. Last year I would have thought me a tinfoiler too.

It's been a hard education, hasn't it?

You are DEAD ON about the charade.

[Hydra]

20. Simple

"Unmanned" vehicles don't need to eat, sleep and don't say "no" to illegal orders.

They also don't need as many people to monitor them.

That means less and less people with more and more capabilities and less oversight to boot.

Awesome, huh?

[geek tragedy]

23. Helicopters don't say no to illegal orders either.

The person operating a drone, or a helicopter, is responsible for obeying or disobeying orders.

[Hydra]

28. Right, but they don't even have to get in the helicopter

They can send the drone out halfway around the world. Into your bedroom. Onto your nightstand.

Cool, huh?

[geek tragedy]

31. The drone can teleport through walls? nt

[Hydra]

34. You never open a window or door in your house?

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/04/business/la-fi-mo-mini-drone-battlefield-20130204

[geek tragedy]

45. Cute little fellow. Haven't seen any in my backyard. nt

[MADem]

39. People always make the leap between a camera with a motor in the sky--something that would be

handy to have, say, near fires or when you want to fly further without refueling--and something with a camera and MISSLE and a motor on it.

Drones are not always armed. In the early days, they were never armed. They started out as surveillance tools.

And they are "manned" (or womanned, if we want to get gender specific)--the operator is just not sitting in or on the aircraft.

Down the line there will be, more commonly, "unmanned" drones--they will use them to check pipelines, the integrity of railroad beds, stuff like that--but not in the near term.

[Maedhros]

57. Q: What is it about the word "drones" that turns a mundane story into a panic-inducing one?

A: There is a heightened awareness of drones.

Unlike planes, helicopters and balloons, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) entered the public consciousness purely as offensive military weapons. The evolution of the rules of engagement for UAVs has resulted in very, very questionable tactics: targeting of weddings/funerals, double-taps, signature strikes. These tactics have generated horrific outcomes with regard to civilian casualties and are almost assuredly counter-productive.

The thought of UAVs deployed in a domestic law enforcement capacity naturally leads to thoughts of how domestic rules of engagement will evolve. Right now there are few in operation and they are used exclusively for surveillance. However, arms manufacturers are flocking to the UAV gravy train and multiple contractors are marketing different designs to law enforcement agencies. Most of those designs can be equipped with weapons of varying lethality, from bean bag projectiles to tear gas to machine guns.

Given the rampant militarization of law enforcement agencies over the last few decades, and watching how other new technologies have been abused by law enforcement officers, it is prudent to be wary of how they might use UAVs.

[Romulus Quirinus]

61. Because drones are cheap, wheras helicopters are expensive.

Their relative low cost may enable ubiquitous surveillance. As the technology progresses, who knows what could be done to stop it.

[geek tragedy]

62. That certainly means we should develope rules restricting their use.

But, does that really justify "welcome to Oceania?"

[Romulus Quirinus]

63. It is the context of the times.

One can make a quad-copter drone for around $1000, and that is with low-grade DIY gear. Meanwhile, cost is falling rapidly, and capability is increasing proportionally, as technology is wont to do. Mix in the fact that our intelligence agencies are willing to spend billions just to monitor the internet, and it isn't hard to make the logical leap to mass deployment of drones to blanket problem areas and problem people.

As far as I know, there is no legal framework to prevent this, and none is in the pipeline. What are people to do? to think? Especially people who are not technically adept, to whom much of the jargon tossed around in the last week must seem like black magic incantations.

[geek tragedy]

64. But, what can a drone see that satellites can't?

My backyard is on Google Maps. People can check out how big my hydrangeas are.

[Romulus Quirinus]

65. It's a function of the density of watching eyes and potential time on station.

Satellites may see an uncovered surface for a few minutes out of every 90 or so, depending on orbital inclination and altitude. Spy planes do better, but are expensive to operate and maintain. Predator/Reaper level drones can improve even on that, flying for days or more (possibly - not an expert) but still require extensive expertise, manpower, and infrastructure to support. They are still serious multi-million dollar investments.

What scares people (well, me, at least) is the potential proliferation of drones, drones that could be purchased for dozens to the kilo-buck, managed centrally by rapidly-trained technicians, capable of routine autonomous flight. Anyplace could be monitored 24/7. Combined with our nation's history of close scrutiny of opposition figures, I think a dangerous brew could be fermented.

I'm excluding armaments from the discussion for the time being, because it seems that the legal machinery seems to be moving against that, at least.

[geek tragedy]

66. I'd be more worried about them in private hands.

General Dynamics could put up quite a fleet.

[Romulus Quirinus]

67. Absolutely. Hell, pretty much anyone who can drop enough cash to buy iStuff could afford a fleet.

I don't think our age has an edge on the past when it comes to the "controlling psychopath" concentration in places of power, J. Edgar Hoover would have loved them, too! Ours just has more tools for them to work with, and a population that by and large can't be bothered to understand how they work.

Sometimes, I think the only way to even the tables would be radical transparency. Everyone would know everyone's scandalous behavior, bringing everyone to the same level. No one is perfectly spotless, and the powerful tend to be spottier than most. Glass houses for everyone! It probably won't work that way, though.

[blkmusclmachine]

5. The Police State is upon us.

And it was well planned in advance of the events of 9/11.

OPERATION NORTHWOODS - http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1#.UcIMW9gW5kg

[DeSwiss]

44. Amen, brother.

[center]

[/center]

They keep trying to tell us. It sounds so absurd, no one wants to even consider it. And if you repeat it, you're just another crazy CT. That's the beauty of it. It's a self-correcting system of oversight integrity which relies principally upon its victims to protect its existence through their own ignorance and incredulity. And through the constant use of ridicule against those able to see things more objectively and realistically, they maintain a consistent hard outer shell made of incredulous, unknowing people. Because it is understood in our society that being accused of being stupid is the one thing an truly ignorant person hates to be accused of the most.

[center][/center]

[TalkingDog]

15. I could'a told you that. When the DNC was in Charlotte last year, one flew near my house.

I live in the middle of nowhere north of Charlotte and was out for a walk about 2 days before the convention. Heard a plane-like noise. Figured from the sound it was a remote controlled unit on the nearby lake.

It got closer and I looked up and saw something that looked approximately (but not exactly) like this

[Kelvin Mace]

18. Within five years

they will be openly armed.

Within ten years they will be used to kill someone.

[Hydra]

21. Won't even take that long I bet

as soon as they are armed, they'll be used to kill a "terrorist." And then several. Then hundreds.

Brave new world coming.

[geek tragedy]

24. You're betting hundreds of people will be killed inside the United States

by armed drones within a relatively short time period?

LMAO.

[Hydra]

32. They're already doing it in several other countries

Say the Gov't blows you up by accident- collateral damage killing a criminal, for instance. They'll say that you were his or her accomplice, and nobody will say anything to contradict that.

If you think it can't happen, look up "signature strikes" and how those people are usually referred to as "militants" without any evidence.

[geek tragedy]

33. How many missile strikes has the USG launched against domestic targets?

We already have planes and helicopters capable of doing just that.

[Hydra]

40. lol

Apparently we prefer to do it the old fashioned way for now:

Kid gets a flash grenade dumped on her by a very professional SWAT team that sounds like they raided the wrong house or just didn't have anything better to do that week:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/raid-of-the-day_n_2568491.html

And look, it happens again!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073031/Woman-suffered-appalling-burns-police-lobbed-flash-grenade-searched-apartment-wins-1million.html

Just imagine what they'd be doing with hellfire missiles!

[geek tragedy]

46. Um, okay. nt

[cjbgreen]

26. Drones come in all sizes

I sat next to a man on a plane who was leading a team to launch drones in Afghanistan, former military now a contractor. According to him, drones can be the size of a small insect. They can spy on anything and any where. They can carry chemicals and not just bombs. We contract out more and more services with little oversight. Should we really believe that they are used in a very minimal way?

[DeSwiss]

35. Rome did the same thing. Right before it fell.

- In fact it was their barbarian contractors who turned on them.....

[Eric J in MN]

27. We need a law against arming them.

Otherwise, cops will get a call about graffiti, see someone with a drone who happens to be out for a run near where the graffiti was drawn, and tase him with the drone.

[DeSwiss]

37. Are you sure you want to tie the authorities hands like that?

I mean they're risking carpal-tunnel syndrome and low-back strain, at the least. Sheesh! How bout letting 'em have some tear gas grenades, maybe a couple of microwave heat inducers, and a few rubber bullets for self-defense. Is that too much to ask???

- Besides, who would it hurt?

[Eric J in MN]

68. LOL (NT)

NT

[mckara]

36. How are Drones Different than Airplanes or Helicopters?

Except, they are probably cheaper to fly saving taxpayer money.

In a sense, the whole drone debate is silly. Are we going to ban the use of helicopters and piloted fixed wing aircraft too?

[DeSwiss]

38. I KNOW!!!!

- Privacy rights are sooooooooo silly, ain't they?!?!?!?!

[mckara]

41. We are Talking about Drones as Opposed to Other Aircraft

Which has nothing to do with the right to privacy.

[DeSwiss]

42. What do you think they use drones for?

- Well, besides the cowardly murdering innocent women and children that is.....









Domestic policing

UAVs are increasingly used for domestic police work in Canada and the United States (a dozen US police forces had applied for UAV permits by March 2013). Texas politician and commentator Jim Hightower has warned about potential privacy abuses from aerial surveillance. In February 2013, Seattle Mayor Michael McGinn responded to protests by scrapping the Seattle Police Department’s plan to deploy UAVs.

[mckara]

43. Gee, I Recall All those Capabilities on F-14s Years Ago, and More

[DeSwiss]

47. Cost. Cost. Cost. Cost!!!

The relative cost between the two alternative is no comparison. It's a question of the bigger bang for the buck in:

Training requirements.
Personnel needed.
Shear numbers of drones possible as compared to fighter jets.
Severely reduced support personnel and armament costs.

In 1998 a F-14 cost about $38,000,000 per plane. Add the cost of pilots, maintenance personnel, parts, etc. and then compare all that against the 2013 cost of a MQ-9 Reaper drone at $16.9M.

- Starting to get the picture? If not, I'll stop. Because I don't want to waste your time anymore than I want to waste mine.

[mckara]

49. About the Cost of a New Cobra Gunship Helicopter

The public can ban drones out of paranoia, but the capabilities of aircraft will not disappear.

[DeSwiss]

50. Welcome back to society!

- Because apparently you've been in a cave. It's not paranoia if its real......

[mckara]

54. What? That was My Original Point

With or without drones the technology can be deployed on other platforms. Drones are tools nothing more, nothing less. The problem is not the tool but policies that infringe upon rights of citizens.

[DeSwiss]

60. You stated that it was NOT a privacy issue.

I demur.

[cstanleytech]

52. Now I wonder what other uses they could make of drones as well

http://news.discovery.com/earth/flying-drones-fight-fires-111110.htm

Well, gee who would have thought that they could be used for something like this ^^

[warrprayer]

48. WOOHOO!!!!

[gussmith]

55. Mission Creep

Intellectually I can understand that measures need to be taken to protect our national security. In reality I have doubts that people working on behalf of our government can be trusted to the extent that current programs require. Those spying on us are mere mortals, our peers, too many to have the level clearances they do, too much intelligencia that can be corrupted.

[deurbano]

59. "We Already Have Police Helicopters, So What’s the Big Deal Over Drones?"(link)

http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty-criminal-law-reform/we-already-have-police-helicopters-so-whats-big-deal

By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project

<<...1. Drones erase “natural limits” on aerial surveillance

Manned helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft are expensive to acquire, staff, and maintain. A police helicopter costs from $500,000 to $3 million to acquire, and $200-$400 an hour to fly. Manned aircraft are large, complex machines requiring expert ground crews, multiple shifts of pilots and co-pilots, and (unlike drones which can often be hand-launched) runways or helipads....

...With drones, on the other hand, it’s easy to foresee a day when even a professional police drone could be acquired for less than a hundred dollars, including maintenance costs.

2. Drones make new forms of privacy invasion possible

In addition, there are some kinds of privacy invasion that are only possible with drones... even the smallest manned helicopter can’t fly into a garage or hover unseen outside a third-story bedroom window. ... Silent or high-flying drones that can’t be heard provide no such notice.

3. Drones’ capabilities are likely to expand even further in the future
...drones will permit continuous, 24/7 surveillance in a way that we haven’t seen with manned aircraft.... drone technology, on the other hand, is moving toward allowing unmanned craft to stay aloft for ever-longer periods of time, for example through solar power, ground-based laser recharging, or the use of blimps.

[NorthCarolina]

69. Wow...we've gone all Cold War Era Soviet like.

We have become, as a nation, exactly what we despised.