Tags: drones

Linux Powered Smart Rifles With Networked Tracking Scopes Have Arrived

Technological advancement is moving ahead so fast it is impossible to keep up. Pretty soon it doesn’t look like humans are going to be responsible for much of anything at all if we continue at this pace.

The latest military “advancement” is a Linux powered rifle that basically only requires the human soldier to mark a target and then a computer can “engage and assist.” Basically it sounds a lot like a drone rifle. Insane.

More from Geeky Gadgets:

It has been reported this week that the United States military has started investing funds into next-generation firearms in the form of “smart rifles” that will be powered by Linux and equipped with a Networked Tracking Scope.

A soldier equipped with a smart rifle and its new Networked Tracking Scope would simply need to tag a target viewable on a screen, which is found on the gun’s scope to allows the computer to engage and assist.

Tracking Point has announced that the US military has purchased six of its new next-generation “smart rifles”, that are priced at between $10,000 and $27,000 each.

Check it out below:


Hunting with a bow and arrow it is not.

For other articles on advancements in military/spy technology check out:

Meet the MQ-4C Triton – A New Navy Drone with the Wingspan of a Boeing 757

DARPA Unveils “Atlas”: A 6 Foot Tall Humanoid Robot

Meet ARGUS: The World’s Highest Resolution Video Surveillance Platform

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 1LefuVV2eCnW9VKjJGJzgZWa9vHg7Rc3r1


 Follow me on Twitter.

Obama is Called a “War Criminal” & “Hypocrite of the Century” in Irish Parliament

I had never heard of Clare Daly before yesterday, but I have a sneaking suspicion we are all going to be hearing a lot more from her in the months and years ahead.  This speech in front of the Irish Parliament is not only blistering and articulate, but more importantly demonstrates further evidence that anger and frustration over the rampant criminality of American oligarchs and war mongering chicken hawks is bubbling up from the street level toward parliaments worldwide.  She is right to focus on Obama’s latest policy to arm Syria rebels, which on record have Al Qaeda elements within them.  What a brave and honest woman.  Enjoy!

 

Senator Ron Wyden Calls for Congressional Hearings

I like Oregon Senator Ron Wyden.  He is one of the few Congressmen who has exhibited strong support in the defense of privacy issues, from his questions around drones, to his concerns with regard to the surveillance state being implemented all around us.  Recall, he was the only Democrat who strongly spoke in support of Rand Paul during his historic filibuster on the U.S. government’s drone program.

In light of recent information we have received from Edward Snowden regarding NSA spying on the entire populace, it is now entirely clear that former Booz Allen executive and Obama’s current Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, told a complete and total lie in front of Congress.  As such, Senator Wyden is calling for hearings.  Here is his statement:

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) issued the following statement regarding statements made by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper about collection on Americans. Wyden is a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“One of the most important responsibilities a Senator has is oversight of the intelligence community.  This job cannot be done responsibly if Senators aren’t getting straight answers to direct questions. When NSA Director Alexander failed to clarify previous public statements about domestic surveillance, it was necessary to put the question to the Director of National Intelligence.  So that he would be prepared to answer, I sent the question to Director Clapper’s office a day in advance.  After the hearing was over my staff and I gave his office a chance to amend his answer.  Now public hearings are needed to address the recent disclosures and the American people have the right to expect straight answers from the intelligence leadership to the questions asked by their representatives.”

Now here is the best part of this post.  Watch the video of James Clapper’s very clear and public lie.  No wonder he called Snowden’s information “gut wrenching.”  Talk about traitors…

 

Rand Paul Filibuster Shockwaves Continue…Now the Democrats are at War

Dear Mr. President:

In response to partial release of the Department of Justice memos describing the underlying legal justifications for the targeted killings of American citizens and others in the course of counterterrorism operations, we are writing to emphasize Congress’ vital oversight role in these matters.  Every American has the right to know the underlying legal rationale that ensures due process.

Authorizing the killing of American citizens and others has profound implications for our Constitution, the core values of our nation, our national security and future international practice.  The executive branch’s claim of authority to deprive citizens of life, and to do so without explaining the legal basis for doing so, set a dangerous precedent and is a model of behavior the United States would not want other nations to emulate.

Therefore, we ask that you release, in an unclassified form, the full legal basis of executive branch claims in the areas which are the subject of this letter.  The Executive’s claims of authority need to be fully articulated to the whole of Congress and the American people.

- Excerpts from a letter by eight Democrat Representatives to Obama on March 11, 2013

Last Thursday, I took the time to write a lengthy article on the historic Rand Paul talking filibuster because I had a strong sense of its significance.  It was exactly the sort of event we needed as a nation to blow a hole right through the false “left-right” paradigm used by mainstream Democrats and Republicans to trick the public into thinking there is a difference between the two parties on the major issues.  The whole point of the article was that Rand had successfully united libertarian and progressive activists, and also sparked a long overdue civil war within the Republican party.  By forcing John McCain and Lindsey Graham to come out in defense of Obama’s assassinated killing program the day after dining with Obama (while Rand stood on his feet for 13 hours), he brilliantly exposed them for the dinosaur fraud RINOs that they are.

Well now the shockwaves have hit the Democratic Party, as eight members of the House of Representatives have sent Obama a letter demanding he release the details of his assassination program.  The biggest problem for the Obama Administration is that four of them are black, which essentially neutralizes his favorite defense, which is to just say that anyone that disagrees with him must be a racist.  Interesting times have finally come to American politics, and it’s long overdue.

Great job Representatives:  Barbara Lee, John Conyers, Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva, Donna Edwards, Mike Honda, Rush Holt and James McGovern

In Liberty,
Mike

Follow me on Twitter!

It’s Time to Repeal the AUMF

Even a mainstream media dinosaur like the New York Times will publish something decent and in the public interest from time to time.  In case you aren’t familiar with the AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force), it was the law enacted three days after 9/11 to provide the President of the United States with the flexibility to fight the now never-ending “war on terror.”  It is very important that we deal with the AUMF and get rid of it once and for all, since it is the key law used by the Obama Administration to justify the NDAA, and very soon may be used to kill “associates of associates” (basically anyone they want) of Al Qaeda without charges or a trial.  This editorial published l over the weekend calls for a repeal of the AUMF and I completely agree.  We can’t trust our current or future leaders to not abuse this authority.  From the New York Times:

Three days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Congress approved the Authorization for Use of Military Force. It was enacted with good intentions — to give President George W. Bush the authority to invade Afghanistan and go after Al Qaeda and the Taliban rulers who sheltered and aided the terrorists who had attacked the United States.

Mr. Bush used the authorization law as an excuse to kidnap hundreds of people — guilty and blameless people alike — and throw them into secret prisons where many were tortured. He used it as a pretext to open the Guantánamo Bay camp and to eavesdrop on Americans without bothering to obtain a warrant. He claimed it as justification for the invasion of Iraq, twisting intelligence to fabricate a connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks.

Unlike Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama does not go as far as to claim that the Constitution gives him the inherent power to do all those things. But he has relied on the 2001 authorization to use drones to kill terrorists far from the Afghan battlefield, and to claim an unconstitutional power to kill American citizens in other countries based only on suspicion that they are or might become terrorist threats, without judicial review.

The concern that many, including this page, expressed about the authorization is coming true: that it could become the basis for a perpetual, ever-expanding war that undermined the traditional constraints on government power. The result is an unintelligible policy without express limits or protective walls.

Read the Full Article »

#StandwithRand: The Filibuster that United Libertarian and Progressive Activists

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court. That Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Kentucky, is an abomination.” 

- Senator Rand Paul during his 13-hour talking filibuster yesterday

One of the biggest disappointments for me during 2012 was Ron Paul’s failure to run as a third party candidate for President.  Last January, I wrote a very popular post titled Why I Support Ron Paul in which I predicted that the Republican establishment would sabotage his attempted run and that he needed to break ranks and run on his own.  The reason I was so adamant on this point was not because I thought he would necessarily win (although I think he would’ve done much better than most people think), but because his being up there next to Romney and Obama would have exposed both political parties for the frauds that they are.  It would have exposed the fact that on the most important issues like the Federal Reserve, TBTF Wall Street criminal banks, aggressive and short-sighted foreign policy and civil liberties they are completely on the same page.  It would have brought certain issues to the fore that the establishment parties don’t want debated in public.  They’d much rather divide and conquer the nebbish with issues like abortion, gay marriage and gun rights.  Issues that while very important to many, are easily used to split people along geographic and cultural lines and do not represent existential issues core to the survival of the spirit of the nation itself. To paraphrase, I agree with the statement “to know who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”  Ron Paul would have criticized those people and institutions in a very public forum in a third party run and elevated the debate for all of us.  It didn’t happen and the public debate went back into the gutter.

Then Rand Paul stood up and talked for 13 hours.

Personally, I would have preferred the issue that united libertarian and progressive activists to have been the Federal Reserve, since it is the core cancer of this country and indeed the world. Without Federal Reserve funding, none of the awful things our government and multi-national corporations do at home and abroad would be possible, but you don’t always get what you want.  If civil liberties is the issue that does it, so be it.

Read the Full Article »

Eric Holder Responds: Claims Military Can Assassinate U.S. Citizens on U.S. Soil

Last week, I highlighted the fact that Kentucky Senator Rand Paul had still not received an answer to his question of whether the U.S. government believes it has the authority to assassinate a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil.  Well we finally have an answer from Attorney General Eric Holder and it’s not good.  In a press release from Senator Paul we discover that:

Attorney General Holder stated in a letter to Sen. Paul dated March 4, 2013: “It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”

There you have it folks.  Any questions?

Full press release here.

In Liberty,
Mike

Follow me on Twitter!

Cornel West: Obama is a “War Criminal”

It’s refreshing to know that at least some public figures still have the critical thinking capabilities and courage to speak the truth.  From Raw Story:

“I think, my dear brother, the chickens are coming home to roost,” West told Smiley. “We’ve been talking about this for a good while, the immorality of drones, dropping bombs on innocent people. It’s been over 200 children so far. These are war crimes.”

“I think we have to be very honest, let us not be deceived: Nixon, Bush, Obama, they’re war criminals,” West said. “They have killed innocent people in the name of the struggle for freedom, but they’re suspending the law, very much like Wall Street criminals. The law is suspended for them, but the law applies for the rest of us. You and I, brother Tavis, if we kill an innocent person we go to jail, and we’re going to be in there forever.” 

Read the Full Article »

When Lindsay Graham and Barrack Obama Agree…Run the Other Way Fast

The easiest way for a patriotic, civil liberties defending U.S. citizen to know whether to support or oppose an issue is when two of the most authoritative, narcissistic politicians from the two controlled political in America are in strong agreement. In this case, I am referring to Lindsay Graham and Barrack Obama’s recent love fest on drone warfare.  From Politico:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) will offer a resolution next week commending President Barack Obama’s use of drones and the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki.

“Every member of Congress needs to get on board,” Graham said. “It’s not fair to the president to let him, leave him out there alone quite frankly. He’s getting hit from libertarians and the left.

“Everyone needs to get on board…” in commending the death of someone from 30,000 feet?  What kind of Nazi talk is this?  So this is what America has become.  Politicians with 10% approval ratings patting themselves on the back for killing other humans being without ever getting their hands dirty.  USA! USA!

Full article here.

In Liberty,
Mike

Follow me on Twitter!

Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama by Conor Friedersdorf

This fantastic article made the rounds yesterday, but I didn’t have time to get to it until now.  It is an impassioned piece written by a former Obama supporter explaining why he can no longer support a man who as President has done more to damage The Constitution of the United States than even George W. Bush.  It is written in the mainstream magazine The Atlantic, and he even goes so far as to say that he will be likely voting for Gary Johnson in the election, a position very similar to my own.

Personally, I think that the best thing that could happen in the current election is for as many people as possible to vote third party.  I don’t care who you vote for, just don’t vote for either of these establishment cronies.  If a decent percentage vote away from the two party dictatorship, it will empower the people in a small way and set us up for some real political fireworks in 2016.  So my rallying cry from now until the election will be: Vote, but Vote 3rd Party.

Here is my favorite section of his article.

There is a candidate on the ballot in at least 47 states, and probably in all 50, who regularly speaks out against that post-9/11 trend, and all the individual policies that compose it. His name is Gary Johnson, and he won’t win. I am supporting him because he ought to. Liberals and progressives care so little about having critiques of the aforementioned policies aired that vanishingly few will even urge that he be included in the upcoming presidential debates. If I vote, it will be for Johnson. What about the assertion that Romney will be even worse than Obama has been on these issues? It is quite possible, though not nearly as inevitable as Democrats seem to think. It isn’t as though they accurately predicted the abysmal behavior of Obama during his first term, after all. And how do you get worse than having set a precedent for the extrajudicial assassination of American citizens? By actually carrying out such a killing? Obama did that too. Would Romney? I honestly don’t know. I can imagine he’d kill more Americans without trial and in secret, or that he wouldn’t kill any. I can imagine that he’d kill more innocent Pakistani kids or fewer. His rhetoric suggests he would be worse. I agree with that. Then again, Romney revels in bellicosity; Obama soothes with rhetoric and kills people in secret.

To hell with them both.

Read the full piece here.

In Liberty,
Mike