Drones Over U.S. Get OK by Congress

Drones Over U.S. Get OK by Congress

I recommend you find a list of all the legislators that voted for this bill and think about voting them out when they come up for re-election.

Being that the bill passed, I suggest you start gathering supporters, and creating petitions to sign to get a repeal. You can interestingly exploit a loophole -- you can't write legislators out of state, but you can call them by phone.

Find any legislators that opposed this bill; any that are anti-surveillance or libertarian possibly. Contact people who live in their state if you can that support your views and use them to further bolster your efforts.


R.C.
Normally I joke when I post this, but I'm really seriously asking you to read my signature down below and be sure you understand what I mean by it...

I'm not joking here. Just because a law is passed, doesn't mean it can be repealed and; we need to keep getting rid of these people who will knowingly violate our basic freedoms. Namely freedom from unreasonable search and seizures, and potentially freedom from the taking of life liberty or property without due process of law.

Keep in mind these drones can be armed and our President has not just asserted, but has acted on the right to kill Americans he deems to be terrorists -- even on US soil. We don't know what definitions he's using for terrorist. Lately the definition of terrorist has expanded from some seriously fucked up people, to protesters.

The government is looking for what it constitutes as purposeful domestic resistance -- it doesn't define this resistance as violent or peaceful.


R.C.
Normally I joke when I post this, but I'm really seriously asking you to read my signature down below and be sure you understand what I mean by it...

This reminds me of this episode of Beavis and Butthead where they accidentally took control of an armed drone.

Coincidentally, I have an idea.

@hylogenisis

Coincidentally, I have an idea.

Okay, let's hear it


R.C.
Normally I joke when I post this, but I'm really seriously asking you to read my signature down below and be sure you understand what I mean by it...

Originally Posted by RobynC

I recommend you find a list of all the legislators that voted for this bill and think about voting them out when they come up for re-election.

No point, I already want to tar and feather the entirety of congress and senate.

Sure there might be one or two who don't deserve it, but I couldn't be bothered to pick them out among the liars. It would be their fault for getting elected to the legislative body.

I've been thinking about the transition of governments in history... US basically has two paths before it: socialized police state (likely), despotic tyrant in charge (unlikely... unless it comes after the socialized police state).

It's just a matter of picking our poison, and what... 50%? of Americans at least would *love* to have a socialized police state. They'll say it's bad if I word it like I am... but if you just find better wording and PR spin on the things a socialized police state would do... "taking care of the masses" for example... wouldn't 60% of the people love that?

I take care of myself, like every living creature should.

@Razare

No point, I already want to tar and feather the entirety of congress and senate.

Your opinion to hold, however I'd prefer to vote the ones out who have specifically demonstrated their support for things like… this

I've been thinking about the transition of governments in history... US basically has two paths before it: socialized police state (likely), despotic tyrant in charge (unlikely... unless it comes after the socialized police state).

It's just a matter of picking our poison, and what... 50%? of Americans at least would *love* to have a socialized police state. They'll say it's bad if I word it like I am... but if you just find better wording and PRspin on the things a socialized police state would do... "taking care of the masses" for example... wouldn't 60% of the people love that?

I take care of myself, like every living creature should.

Carl Jung once wrote about this:

"All mass movements, as one might expect, slip with the greatest ease down an inclined plane represented by large numbers. Where the many are, there is security; what the many believe must of course be true; what the many want must be worth striving for, and necessary, and therefore good.

In the clamor of the many there lies the power to snatch wish fulfillments by force; sweetest of all, however, is that gentle and painless slipping back into the kingdom of childhood, into the paradise of parental care, into happy-go-luckiness and irresponsibility. All the thinking and looking after are done from the top; to all questions there is an answer; and for all needs the necessary provision is made. The infantile dream state of the mass man is so unrealistic that he never thinks to ask who is paying for this paradise. The balancing of accounts is left to a higher political or social authority, which welcomes the task, for its power is thereby increased; and more helpless the individual becomes.

Wherever social conditions of this type develop on a large scale the road to tyranny lies open and the freedom of the individual turns into spiritual and physical slavery."

R.C.
Normally I joke when I post this, but I'm really seriously asking you to read my signature down below and be sure you understand what I mean by it...

Originally Posted by RobynC

@Razare
Your opinion to hold, however I'd prefer to vote the ones out who have specifically demonstrated their support for things like… this

The problem with that reasoning is that generally, you have to pick 1 issue and vote based on that issue. If you look at multiple issues, it then becomes this murky mish-mash because very few politicians draw lines in the sand and stick to it no matter what.

Then also it's a matter of evaluating the bills themselves, rather than what it said about the bill. Half the time stuff gets voted through based on something in the bill the politician liked, while they didn't care about the remainder of it.

On a positive note, socialized police states invariably fail. It's funny... what government does for power, actually strips their power away in the long-run. Socialize too hard, your economy fails, and so does your military... eventually you become a mediocre country with little real power. Then the politicians fight over the dwindling scraps left on the plate, and become absurdly corrupt... dipping into all manner of black-market dealings as a method of keeping their life-style and power. This is how Europe has largely functioned over the last 20 years. We're getting there.

The solution is the new government model which is actually going to take a lot longer than I would have thought. I'm feeling like it's 500+... which I suppose makes sense because world governments are rather entrenched. The better model may be discovered long before that, but discovery and implementation are two different things.

PS - Yes, democracies are great, but you have to establish a brand new one or they suck. So we'd have to overthrow our current democracy to reverse our current downward spiral. Even if it used the same constitution, you'd have to throw out the last 200 years of supreme court rulings and all the subsequent legislation. (Not that it's all bad, a lot of it isn't, but if you keep the dysfunctional aspects with the good, it's just dysfunctional.)

This wouldn't really be possible because you'd have to mount a civil insurrection on the premise you're going to re-establish democracy. Yet who would buy into that when we're already in a "democracy". ;)

Then it only lasts 500 years if the people are lucky... but surely it only had the greatness of the democracy in the first few centuries, after that it's just a corrupt government, little different from a large oligarchy.

Carl Jung once wrote about this:

"All mass movements, as one might expect, slip with the greatest ease down an inclined plane represented by large numbers. Where the many are, there is security; what the many believe must of course be true; what the many want must be worth striving for, and necessary, and therefore good.

In the clamor of the many there lies the power to snatch wish fulfillments by force; sweetest of all, however, is that gentle and painless slipping back into the kingdom of childhood, into the paradise of parental care, into happy-go-luckiness and irresponsibility. All the thinking and looking after are done from the top; to all questions there is an answer; and for all needs the necessary provision is made. The infantile dream state of the mass man is so unrealistic that he never thinks to ask who is paying for this paradise. The balancing of accounts is left to a higher political or social authority, which welcomes the task, for its power is thereby increased; and more helpless the individual becomes.

Wherever social conditions of this type develop on a large scale the road to tyranny lies open and the freedom of the individual turns into spiritual and physical slavery."

I had no idea Carl was this amazing. One of the top ten greatest thinkers of the last thousand years! :D

@Razare

The problem with that reasoning is that generally, you have to pick 1 issue and vote based on that issue. If you look at multiple issues, it then becomes this murky mish-mash because very few politicians draw lines in the sand and stick to it no matter what.


Then also it's a matter of evaluating the bills themselves, rather than what it said about the bill. Half the time stuff gets voted through based on something in the bill the politician liked, while they didn't care about the remainder of it.

Well there are a variety of reasons to vote people out -- just be careful who you vote out and vote in.

On a positive note, socialized police states invariably fail.

Everything eventually fails, but it can last beyond that of a lifetime and that ain't good for everybody except the handful of elites running the police state.

It's funny... what government does for power, actually strips their power away in the long-run. Socialize too hard, your economy fails, and so does your military... eventually you become a mediocre country with little real power. Then the politicians fight over the dwindling scraps left on the plate, and become absurdly corrupt... dipping into all manner of black-market dealings as a method of keeping their life-style and power. This is how Europe has largely functioned over the last 20 years. We're getting there.

Your thinking is flawed -- it's not just government. It's bankers and corporations subverting government and using it as the muscle for their own interests.

I had no idea Carl was this amazing.

While I can't say I'll agree with everything he says, but it's a very profound quote and surprisingly insightful.

R.C.
Normally I joke when I post this, but I'm really seriously asking you to read my signature down below and be sure you understand what I mean by it...