HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This message was self-del...

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:55 PM

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (applegrove) on Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:19 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

58 replies, 3281 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply This message was self-deleted by its author (Original post)
applegrove Feb 2013 OP
applegrove Feb 2013 #1
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #17
applegrove Feb 2013 #18
kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #2
applegrove Feb 2013 #4
randome Feb 2013 #6
kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #9
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #10
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #16
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #19
jeff47 Feb 2013 #21
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #23
jeff47 Feb 2013 #53
Live and Learn Feb 2013 #30
jeff47 Feb 2013 #54
demwing Feb 2013 #3
Ian Iam Feb 2013 #7
longship Feb 2013 #5
sibelian Feb 2013 #12
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #20
Live and Learn Feb 2013 #31
longship Feb 2013 #32
Live and Learn Feb 2013 #33
longship Feb 2013 #34
Live and Learn Feb 2013 #35
longship Feb 2013 #37
geek tragedy Feb 2013 #46
otohara Feb 2013 #8
JaneyVee Feb 2013 #11
markpkessinger Feb 2013 #13
JaneyVee Feb 2013 #14
jeff47 Feb 2013 #22
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #24
jeff47 Feb 2013 #52
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #56
jeff47 Feb 2013 #57
jberryhill Feb 2013 #15
HiPointDem Feb 2013 #25
jberryhill Feb 2013 #27
HiPointDem Feb 2013 #28
jberryhill Feb 2013 #29
Silent3 Feb 2013 #43
SidDithers Feb 2013 #50
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #26
FSogol Feb 2013 #36
Shankapotomus Feb 2013 #38
jberryhill Feb 2013 #39
Shankapotomus Feb 2013 #40
KharmaTrain Feb 2013 #41
Shankapotomus Feb 2013 #45
KharmaTrain Feb 2013 #47
Shankapotomus Feb 2013 #51
randome Feb 2013 #42
geek tragedy Feb 2013 #44
MannyGoldstein Feb 2013 #48
Sunlei Feb 2013 #49
nebenaube Feb 2013 #55
arely staircase Feb 2013 #58

Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:55 PM

1. Don't know how accurate this site is.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:50 AM

17. MSN.

 

dissident poetry. ‏@raiseablackflag

ICE just confirmed drones set to target #Dorner. First official target inside the US. http://on-msn.com/XwOxmR #drones

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #17)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 01:24 AM

18. Thanks for the confirmation. I really didn't know whether or not to leave the thread up or not.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:03 PM

2. I cannot fathom why people are alarmed by this.

Reconnaissance drones make perfect sense for law enforcement, especially in terrain where flying a helicopter can prove hazardous.

He's not a "target". Recon drones are not armed with weaponry.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:08 PM

4. If the LAPD have a lethal force order because Dorner has demonstrated he

will kill anyone, I see no difference between an armed drone and any of the guns being carried by the LAPD. Only difference is that a police officer's life is not on the line with a drone. But the laws are the same. Show that you are willing to kill a lot of people and you will be killed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:11 PM

6. Except there are no armed drones being used by the LAPD.

There are no UFOs, either. Sasquatch is a myth.

'Before It's News' is accurately named.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:21 PM

9. No lethal force order would be valid for a drone (IF it were armed)

unless he posed an immediate threat to someone's life, as in SHOOTING at them.

As it stands right now, he is legally entitled to DUE PROCESS. That means arrest and trial by jury. There is no law which would permit him to be shot in cold blood right now.

Authorization to use lethal force is always contingent on a person not surrendering peacefully. No PD can simply gun someone down because they are suspected of or known to have committed a crime.

Thank god people like you are not in charge of LAPD. What we have is bad enough.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:33 PM

10. LAPD has demonstrated they're throwing due process out the window.

No other explanation for ambushing latina newapaper deliverers and white surfers. They're gonna kill any truck-driving bipeds, and ask questions later.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:42 AM

16. LAPD are shooting to kill before gaining positive ID. They cannot be trusted with guns, they cannot

 

be trusted with drones. Citizens are at deadly risk due to their policies and actions.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:03 AM

19. This is not about reconnaissance. Police, DHS, and FBI have been flying spy drones in the US

 

since at least 2011:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022349427

If they murder him with a weaponized drone, it is illegal. He is an alleged murderer, not a terrorist. I refuse to become "used" to the concept that weaponized drones may be rolled out against anyone the state deems a threat.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:20 AM

21. It's reconnaissance because THE DRONES AREN'T ARMED. (nt)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #21)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:29 AM

23. Then why would they even make an announcement since they've been using drones to spy

 

on (target) US citizens since at least 2011?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #23)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:07 AM

53. They didn't announce anything.

Journalists did the whole "journalism" thing and found out that we're using drones. Then they created bullshit headlines to get more page views over the drone controversy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:00 AM

30. And I can't fathom why you aren't alarmed by this.

Allowing drones has always been a slippery slope and the uses of them will only get worse, Do you care at all about our rights of privacy and fair trials?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #30)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:12 AM

54. Because police have demonstrated they can't be trusted with helicopters, right?

The most common police helicopter is a military helicopter with the missile racks removed. They've been flying them for around 50 years. Since they were once military helicopters, the police have killed thousands with them, right?

Oh wait....not armed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:07 PM

3. Redirects to a story in the UK Daily Express

Not a very responsible editorial voice...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Express#Controversies

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:12 PM

7. Very polite of you :-)

 

The Daily Express is a rag.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:11 PM

5. Totally appropriate use of the technology.

You do know that they're not talking about armed drones, don't you?

Recon in this situation is a perfect use for drones.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:40 PM

12. Yes, of course, until


cries of "why didn't they just shoot him" make it useful to start sending armed drones after the next one.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:18 AM

20. Exactly right

That is where this will eventually lead.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:01 AM

31. Sure, let's wait until they start using armed drones against citizens

to complain about there use.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #31)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:10 AM

32. But they are NOT armed, are they?

I don't know where your logic comes from.

Not all drones are armed. Not all drones can be armed.

Drone tech is not necessarily evil. There are many benevolent uses for it. This may very well be an appropriate one.

Thanks for your response anyway.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #32)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:16 AM

33. My logic comes from not waiting until the slippery slope concludes its logical

completion to stop the end result from happening.

I don't get where your logic comes from, if you can't see that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #33)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:31 AM

34. I fully understand your position.

And I see how you come by it. I have no problem with you taking it.

But drone technology is not going to go away. We have it now, so the only rationale is to put policies in place for its ethical use.

There's no way the tooth paste is going back into the tube.

Shit! Even high school students are playing with the technology. It's all over the place and it it's senseless to start wringing ones hands every time somebody uses a drone.

And again, the drones LA is using are unarmed.

Don't like drones? Fine, help change policy for their use. Saying they'll be armed some day doesn't solve the problem without suggesting a solution. But please open your eyes to the fact that the technology has beneficial uses as well as evil ones.

The technology itself is neutral. And it's not going to go away.

Thank you for your response.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #34)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:38 AM

35. But it is not neutral. It is an invasion of privacy.

And we have rights that protect against that. I believe all humans have these rights but United States citizen's rights to it can't be denied even by those that don't care about human rights.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #35)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:56 AM

37. I don't agree.

Your position seems to be filtered by an assumption that all drones are malevolent without considering exactly what a drone actually is and what it can do.

It is nothing more than a remote pilotable platform on which one can do many different things, some good, some bad, and some neither good nor bad.

Would you call the sky crane that dropped the Curiosity rover on Mars evil? That used the exact same technology as drones use, plus a bit, since it was piloted autonomously. And, yes, that's coming, too, maybe sooner than people think.

Shit! Google has licensed autonomous automobiles on the roads in Nevada and the auto manufacturers are researching the same.

Again, these technologies are not going to go away. They are here for good or evil. The only rational response is therefore to make policy for their ethical use.

Taking a "Luddite position" is not going to be an effective strategy and fails utterly to address the ethics. IMHO.

These are tough issues!

Enjoying this colloquy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #35)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:21 AM

46. Poor Donner's right to privacy is being violated. Boo fucking hoo. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:12 PM

8. Compared to Gun Deaths

The drones got some catching up to do!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:39 PM

11. But they used drones to capture Jimmy Lee Dykes.

I doubt they would fire a missile at Dorner, most likely for surveillance.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #11)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:42 PM

13. And why do we find collateral damage unacceptable here, but not over there? n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to markpkessinger (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:45 PM

14. Hypocrisy?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to markpkessinger (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:21 AM

22. Because we have other options here.

We can actually arrest the guy here. We can't arrest anyone in Yemen.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #22)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:36 AM

24. The 178+ children killed by drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen find that small consolation.

 

Much less the larger number of innocent adult civilians who have suffered the same fate there and in the 3 or so other countries we are attacking yet with whom we are not actually at war.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=how+many+children+killed+by+drones&form=MOZSBR&pc=MOZI

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #24)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:57 AM

52. How many children died in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Our other alternatives are:

1) Invade. That's gonna kill a lot more kids, as demonstrated by Iraq and Afghanistan.

2) Do nothing. However, doing nothing isn't going to convince the terrorists to stop. Doing nothing before 9/11 allowed them to plan the attack. And how many kids died in Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of that?

I'd love to use your time machine so we can go back and not do stupid things like overthrow the Shah of Iran. But you don't have one. Leaving drone strikes as the least-terrible of only terrible options.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #52)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 01:52 PM

56. Are you actually implying that Iraq had something to do with 9/11? That was only about grabbing oil.

 

Bush directly conflated Hussein and 9/11 by repeatedly mentioning them in the same sentence, but not directly claiming association.

We have an enormous military which uses up more than 50% of our tax dollars. You are also missing that the "war on terror" is enormously profitable to some, such as Halliburton. Remember that Cheney was strongly involved with them, owns massive stock, gave them no-bid contracts in Iraq, his stock soared, and Halliburton were caught charging something like $80 per 15lb bag of soldier's laundry, and other overcharging and privatization of services to soldiers. Don't wave your flag at me. It galls.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #56)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:14 PM

57. No. I'm saying W could invade because of the aftermath

where very serious people were busy tongue-polishing his naughty bits instead of asking "what's Iraq got to do with it?"

You are also missing that the "war on terror" is enormously profitable to some

No, again I see it as the least-bad of only-bad options.

Again, doing nothing will allow terrorist to plan large attacks. Such as the 2000 attack against LAX that Clinton thwarted at the last minute. Or 9/11 when W had his head so far up his ass he didn't thwart it. We aren't perfect, and so we will not successfully detect and stop all such attacks in the future.

The result of another successful large-scale attack will be another invasion - even if the sitting president refuses, his replacement will run on "smoking out the evildoers". Such invasions will kill WAY more than 200 children.

We have no good options. Our good options expired decades ago, when cold war idiocy caused us to fuck over the middle east. We're now living with the repercussions of those mistakes. And we'll have to keep living with them for quite a while - we'll need a lot more "Arab Springs" to get the theocrats that support terrorists out of power.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #11)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:34 AM

15. Uh, he was in an underground bunker

Okay, I'll bite. In what way was a drone used in connection with a guy in a small room in a known spot underground for a week?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #15)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:45 AM

25. "FBI sources said surveillance drones constantly monitored the situation."

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #25)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:34 AM

27. Invisible ones the assembled press couldn't see

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #27)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:38 AM

28. do you have a link for the press claiming they saw no drones?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #28)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:40 AM

29. Brilliant!

Unfortunately, they were distracted by the absence of Sasquatch in the area, which was likely a diversion.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #29)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:16 AM

43. +1 n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #29)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:41 AM

50. Hehehe...



Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 03:03 AM

26. ZOMG O NO O NO DRONES NEW WORLD ORDER ALEX JONES WAS RIGHT ZOMG DRONES ROBOT APOOKALYPSE ZOMG O NO

DRONES NO NO AWEUYEIIEIEIEUEE DRONES DRONES DERP

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:40 AM

36. Bullshit. Drones have been used to look for people along the US/Mexico border and

the Dept of Agriculture uses them too.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:00 AM

38. I don't think the title is factual

I beleive drones were used on Dykes.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shankapotomus (Reply #38)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:09 AM

39. Can you describe the underground drones used on Dykes?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #39)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:14 AM

40. Lol

All I know is I saw a news report that mentioned and showed a drone flying over Dyke's property.

They may have not been effective or needed but the were apparently used before Dorner.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shankapotomus (Reply #38)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:14 AM

41. They've Been Using Surveillance Drones On The Border...

Once again...and I know others have posted this as well...there's no validity that they're hunting Dorner with a missile-tipped drone. Once again agendas trump facts and reality. They've had drones flying the borders for quite some time and I've read of police departments that were investing in all sorts of robotics, including small ROVs and drones...and why not. If using this device hastens the capture of this murderer then it's technology being used for the common good.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #41)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:21 AM

45. No argument here

as far as use at the border, which I did not know.

I didn't really think they would be used for anything other than surveillance, though.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shankapotomus (Reply #45)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:32 AM

47. It's A Tough Call...

...primarily since this technology is inexpensive and is sure to get moreso (and more sophisticated) over time. I'm fully for the establishment of judicial oversight on the use of drones...including for domestic surveillance.

In the case of "war" this genie is long out of the bottle...our "success" is being viewed by other countries who are adding drones to their military arsenal. Except for those on our side of the sandbox, you've heard little international condemnation of the use of drones in the Middle East and I find that indicative of how others want to reserve the right to use these weapons for their own purposes (such as the French in Mali). There needs to be some kind of international protocols on the use of these weapons and where it's abuse can be constituted as a war crime.

As far as for domestic purposes, I see many positive uses of drones in public safety issues...and to monitor the public officials who have the access and ability to abuse this technology...

Cheers...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #47)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:55 AM

51. And drones are great for...

http://tacocopter.com/

other peaceful applications....like taco delivery.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:16 AM

42. It's the Hunger Games, dudes! We're all gonna be next!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:20 AM

44. Heaven forbid they use legal, non-lethal technology to capture an armed mass murderer.

The fainting couch over the Purported violation of Donner's rights is mighty crowded.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:35 AM

48. Breaking... Dorner revealed to be al Qaeda #2 in California

There, that ties it up with a bow.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:39 AM

49. sounds like Americas police have unlimited $$ to search for one person

Those parks are loaded with wildlife and humans camping. Winter resorts are in full season now.

We have been told America can't afford National parks anymore. We have been told America can't afford to house their homeless. He has a population of thousands (2 million?) of homeless he can blend in with.

Be a lot less expensive to move his short-list of targets away from the general public. So the police don't kill more innocent bystanders.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:21 AM

55. bullshit

 

They've been used in Montana already.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to applegrove (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:18 PM

58. not really, the border patrol has been using them for some time now

and if they mean specific individual, i still can't help but think the border patrol has used them to try to interdict specific traffickers of drugs or people that they have been tipped off about.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink