Original Post: Digital Journal
Washington - A bill passed last week allocating more than $63 billion to the Federal Aviation Administration would increase the existence of drones in civilian airspace across America and is expected to be signed into law by President Barack Obama.
As America’s drone war begins a new surge in Pakistan, the U.S. House and Senate have both approved the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act bill, a bill which would pressure the FAA to weaken rules currently in place on domestic drone authority, and allow American skies to be filled with tens of thousands of drones.
If the new bill becomes law, up to 30,000 drones could by flying in U.S. airspace by decade’s end. The Senate passed the bill by a 75-20 margin. Civil liberties groups have spoken out on the measure, stating the new legislation offers no restrictions on drone surveillance operations by police and federal agencies and could put us on track toward a “surveillance society.”
As drone technology rapidly advances, America’s law enforcement community is eager to use these robotic machines in their daily operations, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes
Unfortunately, nothing in the bill would address the very serious privacy issues raised by drone aircraft. This bill would push the nation willy-nilly toward an era of aerial surveillance without any steps to protect the traditional privacy that Americans have always enjoyed and expected.
Details in the new drone bill are extensive. Among them, the bill would require the FAA to expedite and simplify its drone operation permission process to government agencies, to be completed within 90 days. The FAA is currently considering a proposed set of regulations alleviating drone rules, set to be released this spring.
The operation of any drone weighing 4.4 pounds or less would require the FAA’s approval to “a government public safety agency,” as long as certain parameters are heeded (sight lines, daytime operation, operation below 400 feet in altitude, and operated only in safe airspace.)
Also included in the new measure is a requirement the FAA produce a comprehensive plan “to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system,” Common Dreams reports.
In this instance, “civil” drones applies to those operated in the private sector, but as things currently stand, permission to operate a drone is all but impossible for a non-government entity, save for hobbyists. Drone industry groups, along with their congressional backers, consider this as a potential source of income. The bill requires the FAA’s plan allow the integration of drones into U.S. airspace “as soon as practicable, but not later than September 30, 2015.
The FAA has been given nine months to produce the plan. Additionally, it must develop a five-year “roadmap for the introduction” of these civil drones in national airspace.
The bill would also require the FAA’s final ruling, within 18 month of the comprehensive plan’s submission, “that will allow” civil operation of drones weighing under 55 pounds in U.S. airspace along with a proposed ruling for conducting the plan.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a watchdog group, has brought a lawsuit against the federal government requesting the FAA release records on agencies, almost 300 of them, carrying authorization for domestic drone operations.
Jennifer Lynch, an attorney with EFF told Talking Points Memo the new drone bill increases the importance of the lawsuit. “I think the fact that Congress is pressuring the FAA to expand its UAS program through the FAA Reauthorization Act only reinforces the need for these records,” she noted. “It’s important that we learn more about how the federal government and state and local law enforcement agencies are already using UASs before we expand their use further. The privacy concerns posed by the use of drones for domestic surveillance are too great to excuse the FAA’s lack of transparency on this issue."
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Lincoln Republican abolishes slavery, Obama Democrat brings it back
Original Post: ABC News
"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., shot down the Obama administration’s compromise on contraception Sunday, discounting the plan that requires insurance companies, instead of religious hospitals or universities, provide access to free birth control under the new health care law as nothing more than an “accounting trick.” “This thing is a distinction without a difference,” Ryan told me Sunday on “This Week.” “It’s an accounting gimmick or a fig leaf. It’s not a compromise...”
There are so many things wrong with Obama here.
1)I thought Congress already wrote the bill. How can he now offer a compromise? How can the president change the terms of this bill at a whim? I thought we had a separation of powers.
2)Forcing Catholics to provide contraception is against their doctrine and clearly violates the 1st amendment.
3)The Church put out a letter coming out against this change. Obama ordered the Chaplains in the army not to read this letter. A second violation of the first amendment.
4)Obama's "compromise" requires the insurance companies to produce this product for free. What is it called when you force someone to work and you don't pay them? It's slavery. We fought a war over it.
Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves and Democrat Barack Obama re-instituted it.
"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., shot down the Obama administration’s compromise on contraception Sunday, discounting the plan that requires insurance companies, instead of religious hospitals or universities, provide access to free birth control under the new health care law as nothing more than an “accounting trick.” “This thing is a distinction without a difference,” Ryan told me Sunday on “This Week.” “It’s an accounting gimmick or a fig leaf. It’s not a compromise...”
There are so many things wrong with Obama here.
1)I thought Congress already wrote the bill. How can he now offer a compromise? How can the president change the terms of this bill at a whim? I thought we had a separation of powers.
2)Forcing Catholics to provide contraception is against their doctrine and clearly violates the 1st amendment.
3)The Church put out a letter coming out against this change. Obama ordered the Chaplains in the army not to read this letter. A second violation of the first amendment.
4)Obama's "compromise" requires the insurance companies to produce this product for free. What is it called when you force someone to work and you don't pay them? It's slavery. We fought a war over it.
Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves and Democrat Barack Obama re-instituted it.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
EXCLUSIVE: GAB Investigating Democrat Allegations of Fraud From Wirch Recall
Original Post: Media Trackers
By Collin Roth
The GAB is investigating fraud in a recall effort!
But it is not an investigation into any of the of the recall efforts involving Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch, or four Republican State Senators. This is an investigation into the effort to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch from nearly a year ago.
On Thursday, Media Trackers learned that the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board dispatched two investigators to Kenosha to interview circulators involved in the effort to recall Senator Bob Wirch. According to sources, the investigators were asking about recall training, whether individuals were misled, and about the appearance of the late Bill Pocan’s signature on a recall petition.
Spokesman for the Government Accountability Board Reid Magney had no comment indicating that he cannot comment about ongoing investigations.
One year ago this month, the Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch launched their drive to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch after he and thirteen other Democratic State Senator’s fled Wisconsin to avoid a vote on the Budget Repair Bill. The recall effort collected 17,138 valid signatures to force a recall of Senator Wirch over the 60-day period from February 24, 2011 to April 25, 2011.
During the signature gathering process, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin recklessly alleged “overwhelming evidence” of fraud in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.
The heart of the Democratic Party’s “overwhelming evidence?” A total of twenty affidavits, or 1/10 of 1% of the signatures gathered.
As a Media Trackers article from May 13, 2011 documents, the affidavits were extremely weak and lacked merit:
Of the 20 signed affidavits, five of the individuals signed recall petitions at Recall Wirch drive-thru’s, which were clearly marked by large signs. Others claimed to have been “tricked” into signing recall petitions for Scott Walker, in support of Sen. Robert Wirch, or even to “recall Sen. Wirch from Illinois.” Three of the 20 affidavits lacked a notary, and two were notarized by Heather Libbey, a staffer of Democratic Senator Mark Miller who Hunt contends, was “sent to Kenosha to thwart the recall efforts.”
The only affidavit that Hunt admitted had “relative substance” was that of Mrs. Pocan, whose deceased husband Bill Pocan, was discovered on a recall petition. Hunt went on to vouch for his organization saying “no one from Recall Wirch put that name on a petition.” A sampling of the affidavits went along these lines:
“I was mistaken when I signed the petition to recall Senator Wirsh(sic). I thought he was a Republican cronie(sic) of Scott Walker. When I found out he was Democrat I wanted to take back the signature.”- Wayne L., Kenosha County
“My neighbor stopped by my house about a month ago and he asked me to sign a petition. Had I known the petition was to recall Senator Wirch, I would not have signed the petition.”- Gertrude Z., Kenosha County
“I saw a sign and stopped. Asked if this was for Senator Wirch and they said yes. I thought that the petition was to get Senator Wirch back to Wisconsin and was not informed that the petition was to recall the Senator.”- Celia G., Kenosha County Dan Hunt, the former Chairman of Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch, told Media Trackers that special investigators from the GAB arrived on Thursday and interviewed individuals from the Recall Wirch effort concerning citizens who claimed they were “misled.” One such individual who claimed she was misled and signed an affidavit was Lisa Turner of Kenosha. Turner signed an affidavit saying:
A man came to my door and told me that they were trying to get people to sign a petition to have work done on the neighborhood park…I do not and have not supported the efforts to have a recall election held for Senator Wirch’s seat. When the Recall Wirch circulator accused of misleading Turner hired a private investigator to clear his name, the truth quickly came to light and Ms. Turner’s story fell apart. Media Trackers reported on August 12, 2011:
When the private investigator interviewed Turner, Turner stated that in April 2011, she was contacted by a representative from the Wirch campaign who asked explicitly if she had signed a recall petition against State Senator Robert Wirch. Turner responded that she had. As Prijic notes, “since Lisa Turner admitted to signing the Wirch Recall Petition, it makes no sense to claim later that it was a petition to improve a park.”
It was only after admitting she had signed the Recall Wirch petition that the representative from the Wirch campaign told Turner that “the circulators had been informing signers of the recall petition that it was for parks, neighborhood improvements, and streets etc.” When a representative from the Wirch campaign came to Turner’s door to sign the aforementioned affidavit alleging fraud, “Ms. Turner stated she did not read the affidavit or know its contentsI know I totally sign affidavits and legal all the time with out reading any it, including the title so that's an easy mistake to makes. Sarcasm.” Despite the weakness of the actual allegations and affidavits, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has dispatched at least two special investigators to Kenosha to interview those involved in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.
Dan Hunt, organizer of the Recall Wirch effort told Media Trackers that “the timing of this investigation is rather suspect.”
“At the time of the Democratic challenges, we vigorously defended ourselves and the GAB sided with us on most of the challenges” Hunt said. “It boggles my mind that the GAB can determine at this late date that an investigation is warranted,” Hunt added.
With numerous stories fraud and errors running rampant in the four State Senate recalls, as well as the efforts to recall Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch, the timing of this investigation could not be more suspect. Just last week, an Racine man found his name four times on the petition to recall Senator Van Wanggaard without having signed at all.
Nevertheless, it appears the GAB is devoting their precious resources not to investigating fraud that could effect current recall efforts but to a witch-hunt based on trumped up affidavits gathered by the Democratic Party nearly a year ago.
My comments:
And they didn't even have to be sued to to it? What I want to know is how this investigation started. Presumably the GAB didn't launch this investigation on their own, since their only job is to review petitions. I don't think the Wirch campaign asked for this since it happened a year ago. We also know that the GAB has no possible way of accepting requests to look into fraud from anyone else so what prompted this and why do they suddenly have the resources and authority to do this when they don't for Republicans? Surely it's not a violation of the Equal Protection clause, a group of judges would know better than to violate the Constitution wouldn't they?
By Collin Roth
The GAB is investigating fraud in a recall effort!
But it is not an investigation into any of the of the recall efforts involving Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch, or four Republican State Senators. This is an investigation into the effort to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch from nearly a year ago.
On Thursday, Media Trackers learned that the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board dispatched two investigators to Kenosha to interview circulators involved in the effort to recall Senator Bob Wirch. According to sources, the investigators were asking about recall training, whether individuals were misled, and about the appearance of the late Bill Pocan’s signature on a recall petition.
Spokesman for the Government Accountability Board Reid Magney had no comment indicating that he cannot comment about ongoing investigations.
One year ago this month, the Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch launched their drive to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch after he and thirteen other Democratic State Senator’s fled Wisconsin to avoid a vote on the Budget Repair Bill. The recall effort collected 17,138 valid signatures to force a recall of Senator Wirch over the 60-day period from February 24, 2011 to April 25, 2011.
During the signature gathering process, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin recklessly alleged “overwhelming evidence” of fraud in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.
The heart of the Democratic Party’s “overwhelming evidence?” A total of twenty affidavits, or 1/10 of 1% of the signatures gathered.
As a Media Trackers article from May 13, 2011 documents, the affidavits were extremely weak and lacked merit:
Of the 20 signed affidavits, five of the individuals signed recall petitions at Recall Wirch drive-thru’s, which were clearly marked by large signs. Others claimed to have been “tricked” into signing recall petitions for Scott Walker, in support of Sen. Robert Wirch, or even to “recall Sen. Wirch from Illinois.” Three of the 20 affidavits lacked a notary, and two were notarized by Heather Libbey, a staffer of Democratic Senator Mark Miller who Hunt contends, was “sent to Kenosha to thwart the recall efforts.”
The only affidavit that Hunt admitted had “relative substance” was that of Mrs. Pocan, whose deceased husband Bill Pocan, was discovered on a recall petition. Hunt went on to vouch for his organization saying “no one from Recall Wirch put that name on a petition.” A sampling of the affidavits went along these lines:
“I was mistaken when I signed the petition to recall Senator Wirsh(sic). I thought he was a Republican cronie(sic) of Scott Walker. When I found out he was Democrat I wanted to take back the signature.”- Wayne L., Kenosha County
“My neighbor stopped by my house about a month ago and he asked me to sign a petition. Had I known the petition was to recall Senator Wirch, I would not have signed the petition.”- Gertrude Z., Kenosha County
“I saw a sign and stopped. Asked if this was for Senator Wirch and they said yes. I thought that the petition was to get Senator Wirch back to Wisconsin and was not informed that the petition was to recall the Senator.”- Celia G., Kenosha County Dan Hunt, the former Chairman of Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch, told Media Trackers that special investigators from the GAB arrived on Thursday and interviewed individuals from the Recall Wirch effort concerning citizens who claimed they were “misled.” One such individual who claimed she was misled and signed an affidavit was Lisa Turner of Kenosha. Turner signed an affidavit saying:
A man came to my door and told me that they were trying to get people to sign a petition to have work done on the neighborhood park…I do not and have not supported the efforts to have a recall election held for Senator Wirch’s seat. When the Recall Wirch circulator accused of misleading Turner hired a private investigator to clear his name, the truth quickly came to light and Ms. Turner’s story fell apart. Media Trackers reported on August 12, 2011:
When the private investigator interviewed Turner, Turner stated that in April 2011, she was contacted by a representative from the Wirch campaign who asked explicitly if she had signed a recall petition against State Senator Robert Wirch. Turner responded that she had. As Prijic notes, “since Lisa Turner admitted to signing the Wirch Recall Petition, it makes no sense to claim later that it was a petition to improve a park.”
It was only after admitting she had signed the Recall Wirch petition that the representative from the Wirch campaign told Turner that “the circulators had been informing signers of the recall petition that it was for parks, neighborhood improvements, and streets etc.” When a representative from the Wirch campaign came to Turner’s door to sign the aforementioned affidavit alleging fraud, “Ms. Turner stated she did not read the affidavit or know its contentsI know I totally sign affidavits and legal all the time with out reading any it, including the title so that's an easy mistake to makes. Sarcasm.” Despite the weakness of the actual allegations and affidavits, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has dispatched at least two special investigators to Kenosha to interview those involved in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.
Dan Hunt, organizer of the Recall Wirch effort told Media Trackers that “the timing of this investigation is rather suspect.”
“At the time of the Democratic challenges, we vigorously defended ourselves and the GAB sided with us on most of the challenges” Hunt said. “It boggles my mind that the GAB can determine at this late date that an investigation is warranted,” Hunt added.
With numerous stories fraud and errors running rampant in the four State Senate recalls, as well as the efforts to recall Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch, the timing of this investigation could not be more suspect. Just last week, an Racine man found his name four times on the petition to recall Senator Van Wanggaard without having signed at all.
Nevertheless, it appears the GAB is devoting their precious resources not to investigating fraud that could effect current recall efforts but to a witch-hunt based on trumped up affidavits gathered by the Democratic Party nearly a year ago.
My comments:
And they didn't even have to be sued to to it? What I want to know is how this investigation started. Presumably the GAB didn't launch this investigation on their own, since their only job is to review petitions. I don't think the Wirch campaign asked for this since it happened a year ago. We also know that the GAB has no possible way of accepting requests to look into fraud from anyone else so what prompted this and why do they suddenly have the resources and authority to do this when they don't for Republicans? Surely it's not a violation of the Equal Protection clause, a group of judges would know better than to violate the Constitution wouldn't they?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)