One nation, under surveillance
|
|
March 6, 2013 |
March 5, 2013 - evening addition of Fox News,
Hannity had Senator Rand Paul discussing the
latest White House memo from Attorney General
Eric Holder’ which implies that President Obama
may have, under certain circumstance (not
defined), the power to assassinate Americans on
American soil without due process of law.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The Obama
administration does not condone the use of
torture techniques on our enemies, however
killing American without a trial may be
justifiable!
To re-enforce today's White House memo a person
can reflect upon the senate confirmation
hearings, where Mr Brennan could not bring
himself to immediately say that the president
does not have the power to assassinate Americans
(and others) right here within the United States
is revealing. He undoubtedly knows that the
president does claim to wield such power and
that the president just doesn’t want to alarm
Americans by informing them that he now wields
the power to assassinate anyone he wants,
including Americans.
One possible technological method that this
administration could use on its citizens, is
actually already being used on our Southern and
Northern borders.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s) or Drones
If the above White House news isn’t alarming
enough! Consider carefully the transitions now
taking place within our borders.
Currently many Americans believe UAV’s or
drones, are unconstitutional on US soil.
Many of our citizens now have significant
reservations about the use of drones by our
government and law enforcement agencies.
A recent Reason-Rupe national survey indicated
that 60% of respondents believe that the use of
UAV’s by local law enforcement to conduct
surveillance without a warrant is an invasion of
personal privacy. In addition, 47% of
respondents to the poll said they believe they
have a right to destroy a UAV if it flies over
their house without their permission. 57 % of
respondents indicated it is unconstitutional to
order the killing of Americans overseas, finally
59% believe that the federal government abuses
its power when it comes to targeted strikes.
More US states are passing laws against the use
of drones in their skies by government and law
agencies. Plans to roll out drones by law
enforcement agencies in Washington State,
Virginia, California and New York have recently
met with stern opposition. Yet sixty (60) public
entities across the nation, from cities and
states to schools and universities, already have
permission to operate UAV’s. Now law enforcement
agencies are expressing interest, and they “have
also voiced interest in outfitting drones with
both lethal and non-lethal weapons.”
While the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet issued
a statement on the use of drone surveillance, as
the technology is developed, the threat to
privacy will become even more substantial.
High-rise apartments, security fences, remote
farms and even the walls of a building are no
longer barriers to increasingly common drone
technology. Without the protection of a warrant
requirement, individuals in the United States
will find that the intimate details of their
daily lives are freely available to the roving
eyes of our government.
What is unbelievable; UAV lobbyists are now
actively seeking approval for drones to be
employed for “lethal force” within the United
States, with ongoing secrecy surrounding
domestic and foreign drone use, and with
revelations that the long term plan for drones
has always been to target American citizens,
people are finally making their voices heard on
the issue. Check out for yourself http://www.infowars.com/poll
- -almost 50% of Americans believe they have the
right to shoot down government spy drones.
If that isn’t bad enough, the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security has customized its Predator
“B” UAV’s originally built for overseas military
operations. These are primarily used now to
patrol the United States’ northern and southern
borders but have been pressed into service on
behalf of a growing number of law enforcement
agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service,
the Texas Rangers, and local police.
These UAV’s are built by San Diego-based General
Atomics Aeronautical Systems, which indicates
they “are capable of identifying a standing
human being at night as likely armed or not,”
meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also
specify “signals interception” technology that
can capture communications in the frequency
ranges used by mobile phones, and “Direction
Finding” (DF) technology that can identify the
locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center
obtained a partially redacted copy of Homeland
Security’s requirements for its drone fleet
through the Freedom of Information Act and
published it last week. CNET unearthed an
unredacted copy of the requirements that
provides additional information about the
aircraft’s surveillance capabilities.
These UAV’s have the capability of provide
automatic and manual Direction Finding (DF) of
multiple signals simultaneously. Automatic DF
can separate out individual communication links.
Automated direction-finding for cell phones has
become an off-the-shelf technology: one company
sells a unit that its literature says is
“capable of taking the bearing of every mobile
phone active in a channel.
A UAV, can be equipped with gigapixel cameras,
infrared cameras, heat sensors, GPS, movement
detectors and automated license plate readers.
Also, “UAV’s are currently being developed that
will carry facial recognition technology, able
to remotely identify individuals in parks,
schools, and at political gatherings.”
A UAV, with the capability of staying aloft for
hours or days at a time, could monitor a
person’s daily life as they go from home to work
to school to the store and back,
UAV documents show that the “tracking accuracy
should be sufficient to allow target
designation,” and the Predator B series is
capable of “targeting and weapons delivery” (the
military version carries multiple 100-pound
Hellfire missiles).
These UAV’s are remotely piloted by FAA-licensed
operators on the ground. They can fly for up to
20 hours and carry a payload of about 500 lbs.
The prospect of identifying armed Americans
concerns Second Amendment advocates, who say
that technology billed as securing the United
States’ land and maritime borders should not be
used domestically.
“I am very concerned that this technology will
be used against law-abiding American firearms
owners,” says Alan Gottlieb, founder and
executive vice president of the Second Amendment
Foundation. “This could violate Fourth Amendment
rights as well as Second Amendment rights.”
In what I have read thus far, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) are not deploying
signals interception capabilities on its UAV
fleet yet . Any potential deployment of such
technology in the future I pray, would be
implemented in full consideration of civil
rights, civil liberties, and privacy interests
and in a manner consistent with the law and
long-standing law enforcement practices.
Retired Air Force Major General Kostelnik, has
stated that CBP currently have 10 Predator UAV’s
and are considering buying up to 14 more. What
does that tell us?
Ginger McCall, director of the Open Government
Project at the Electronic Privacy Information
Center says. “Documents clearly evidence that
the Department of Homeland Security is
developing UAV’s with signals interception
technology and the capability to identify people
on the ground, This allows for invasive
surveillance, including potential communications
surveillance, that could run afoul of federal
privacy laws.”
Can you imagine how using UAV’s for broad,
untargeted surveillance could chill the speech
and expressive rights of “We the People” or any
political opposition?
The logical way to protect those rights is to
require search warrants for the eyes in the sky.
H.R. 6100, the Preserving American Privacy Act
of 2012, is a good place to start, but much more
needs to be done.
Wake up, or Look up America!
|
Lee Haarstick
Porthill |
|
Questions or comments about this
letter?
Click here to e-mail! |
|
|
|
|
