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