The United States of Drones
The Electronic Frontier Foundation put together a map of all the places in the United States that has received authorization from the Obama administration to fly drones in American skies. The list of agencies that has received permission from the FAA includes the usual suspects, but also surprising ones:

This week the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) finally released its first round of records in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for information on the agency’s drone authorization program. The agency says the twolists it released include the names of all public and private entities that have applied for authorizations to fly drones domestically. These lists—which include the Certificates of Authorizations (COAs), issued to public entities like police departments, and the Special Airworthiness Certificates (SACs), issued to private drone manufacturers—show for the first time who is authorized to fly drones in the United States.
Some of the entities on the COA list are unsurprising. For example, journalists have reported that Customs and Border Protection uses Predator drones to patrol the borders. It is also well known that DARPA and other branches of the military are authorized to fly drones in the US. However, this is the first time we have seen the broad and varied list of other authorized organizations, including universities, police departments, and small towns and counties across the United States. The COA list includes universities and colleges like Cornell, the University of Colorado, Georgia Tech, and Eastern Gateway Community College, as well as police departments in North Little Rock, Arkansas; Arlington, Texas; Seattle, Washington; Gadsden, Alabama; and Ogden, Utah, to name just a few. The COA list also includes small cities and counties like Otter Tail, Minnesota and Herington, Kansas. The Google map linked above plots out the locations we were able to determine from the lists, and is color coded by whether the authorizations are active, expired or disapproved.  

How long before we see armed drones roaming the skies of Los Angeles? And how long before we see our local communities suffer from “collateral damage?”

The United States of Drones

The Electronic Frontier Foundation put together a map of all the places in the United States that has received authorization from the Obama administration to fly drones in American skies. The list of agencies that has received permission from the FAA includes the usual suspects, but also surprising ones:

This week the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) finally released its first round of records in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for information on the agency’s drone authorization program. The agency says the twolists it released include the names of all public and private entities that have applied for authorizations to fly drones domestically. These lists—which include the Certificates of Authorizations (COAs), issued to public entities like police departments, and the Special Airworthiness Certificates (SACs), issued to private drone manufacturers—show for the first time who is authorized to fly drones in the United States.

Some of the entities on the COA list are unsurprising. For example, journalists have reported that Customs and Border Protection uses Predator drones to patrol the borders. It is also well known that DARPA and other branches of the military are authorized to fly drones in the US. However, this is the first time we have seen the broad and varied list of other authorized organizations, including universities, police departments, and small towns and counties across the United States. The COA list includes universities and colleges like Cornell, the University of Colorado, Georgia Tech, and Eastern Gateway Community College, as well as police departments in North Little Rock, Arkansas; Arlington, Texas; Seattle, Washington; Gadsden, Alabama; and Ogden, Utah, to name just a few. The COA list also includes small cities and counties like Otter Tail, Minnesota and Herington, Kansas. The Google map linked above plots out the locations we were able to determine from the lists, and is color coded by whether the authorizations are active, expired or disapproved. 

How long before we see armed drones roaming the skies of Los Angeles? And how long before we see our local communities suffer from “collateral damage?”

Soon, very soon in the skies near you

Soon, very soon in the skies near you

The lesser of two evils is not Obama
Just a reminder.

The lesser of two evils is not Obama

Just a reminder.

Memorial Day

So, I received an award from the Veterans for Peace for “outstanding service” in activism.

The text on the plaque reads: “We cherish your leadership and devoted service to protect individual liberty and Constitutional rights. We salute your devotion to peace, social justice, and [O]ccupy movement.”

I was also recognized by the Mayor and City Council of Cathedral City, as well as the California State Assembly for the same.

I think the last one is rather funny. California recognizes my work in the Occupy movement after arresting me, charging me, dragging me through trial for the same actions.

Please reblog and signal boost if you cannot or unable to pitch in!

“EmoProgs” are so liberal that they dare criticize Obama, which means they are really conservatives who like Romney!

Join me in yelling at them to “SHUT UP AND VOTE DEMOCRAT!”

Obama campaign’s blatantly racist, anti-Arab ad

From Electronic Intifada:

US President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign has just released a blatantly anti-Arab video ad on its official YouTube channel.

The not-so-subtle message by the Obama campaign is that being Arab might possibly the worst thing you could call this president. They even dug up a video of Sen. John McCain insisting that Obama is “a decent family man, citizen” which apparently is opposite of being an Arab.

Always remember, it is okay to be racist when you are a Democrat. See the glorification of the vile Sen. Robert Byrd, aka “the conscience” of the Democratic Party, former Ku Klux Klansman, Vietnam War warmonger, and Civil Rights Act opponent. More than sixty years after the Civil Rights movement started, it seems that hatred and open racism against brown-skinned Arabs is de rigueur in American political discourse.

A bipartisan consensus on blatant, unapologetic racism, with the Obama campaign at the fore. Hope and change, indeed.

Democrats are proud that Obama will not hesitate to bomb Iran

Al Jazeera columnist Charles Davis reminds us that the Democratic Party is the War Party and they are proud, absolutely proud, that Obama will not consult lawyers before starting a war with Iran and that his administration has imposed the harshest, toughest, and crippling child-killing sanctions ever.

Here is the quote from the official Democratic National Committee website titled “MITT ROMNEY CONTINUES TO DISTORT THE TRUTH ON IRAN”:

Contrary to Romney’s rhetoric today, President Obama has repeatedly stood by Israel and said it would be unacceptable for Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon. He has consistently stated that no option is off the table. And he backs up his rhetoric with action. The Obama administration has put in place the most severe sanctions Iran has ever faced and requested a record level of military assistance to aid Israel’s security.

In contrast to President Obama’s decisive action, Romney said more than four years ago he would consult with his lawyers before figuring out how to deal with Iran. He also has had investments in companies that do business in Iran. The commander-in-chief only gets one chance to get it right when it comes to matters of foreign policy, and Romney’s bluster on Iran only shows yet again that he will say anything to get elected.

PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS MADE IT CLEAR HE WILL NOT ALLOW A NUCLEAR IRAN AND ALL OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE

Did you see the bit that was bolded and underlined? I did not and no one else reading it would miss it as it appears like that on the website.

The implication of this attack on Romney is that unlike the masculine, terrorist-killing Obama, Romney is a sissy who will consult his lawyers whether it is legal to attack a country which poses no threat whatsoever to the United States.

“ALL OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE” the Democrats proudly scream.

self-ownership:

Scenario 1: A higher up in the military orders a colleague to murder an innocent person. The masses mourn for the innocent person but many people do not fault the murderer because they were following orders.

Scenario 2: A higher up at McDonald’s, Walmart, Apple, or any other private company orders a colleague to murder an innocent person. The masses mourn for the innocent person and the claim that the murderer was simply following orders holds no weight.

Is it really following orders that’s the issue or have people learned to accept innocent lives lost at the hands of the military?

As much as I hate to disagree with a fellow libertarian, I am going to have to point out that there is a difference between the two scenarios.

In the second scenario, the alternative to following orders in a private institution is that you are promptly fired from that institution. The choice then becomes a choice between being fired and committing murder. This is, of course, assuming that the private institution is not going to commit violence against the people it orders to kill others.

In the first scenario, the alternative to not following orders is to experience violence in the hands of the State in form of incarceration or worse. Individuals operating within an institution built upon violence will be expected to mete violence on others or else have violence mete on them.

Back to the second scenario: what if this private institution threatens its employees with violence for not following orders? If there are no recourse for these employees (including leaving the institution), then this institution is no longer a “private” institution but quite simply another entity built upon violence. It is a monopoly of force. What is the difference then between it and the State? Or the employee and a slave?

Two female Army reservists are suing the DOD because policies excluding them from assignments “solely because they are women” violate their right to equal protection guaranteed by the Constitution’s 5th Amendment. “This limitation on plaintiffs’ careers restricts their current and future earnings, their potential for promotion and advancement, and their future retirement benefits.”

So actually, they just want money, but are willing to kill to get it if necessary.

And I thought joining the military was for patriotism, honor, duty, and country?

— Laurence Vance on women who want to kill.

Bush and Obama lie, Marines and soldiers die

Bush and Obama lie, Marines and soldiers die

What am I doing this Memorial Day? Not celebrating, but mourning.

White House pressured Afghanistan to adopt indefinite detention regime

In a story that is not getting enough attention, it appears to be that the White House has succeeded in pressuring Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai in adopting an indefinite detention regime for the over 3,000 prisoners in Obama’s Afghan Gitmo.

John Glaser reports:

With Washington’s supervision, Afghanistan is secretly adopting a system of indefinite detention for thousands of prisoners previously held without charge by the U.S., human rights organizations have found.

As part of the Obama administration’s concessions to the government in Kabul, led by President Hamid Karzai, control of all Afghan prisons will be relinquished to Afghan control. But Washington has directed Karzai to secretly adopt what is called “administrative detention,” which means indefinite imprisonment without charge or trial for the over 3,000 detainees held in Bagram Airbase.

This convenient arrangement allows the White House to commit egregious human rights abuses without the risk of political liability by outsourcing all of that to Afghanistan’s government.

It can be argued that the existence of these “gulags” also delegitimizes Karzai’s government in the eyes of the Afghan people. Empowered by the United States’ approval, the use of indefinite detentions by the Afghan government will inevitably increase and, if it has not already happened, be expanded to include the suppression of dissent.

After promising to withdraw all troops out of Afghanistan, French President Francois Hollande pulls an Obama as he backpedaled on that alluring campaign promise and pledged that 1,400 French troops will remain in Afghanistan. Just do not call them “combat troops!”

On a surprise visit to Afghanistan, Hollande announced that France is actually withdrawing just a little over half of their 3,400 troops from the nation, and will leave “around 1,400″ troops in the country beyond the new year.

Taking a page out of President Obama’s playbook, Hollande will label the 1,400 troops “non-combat,” and insists that they will focus on training and logistics missions. It doesn’t appear that they are ruling out them taking a role in combat, however.

And you thought voting actually mattered.

What a great idea! Start them young with the Surveillance State, because there is nothing at all creepy about young people spying on their fellow citizens to benefit a particular political party.