Posted on 07/28/2013 5:01:11 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Last month, the FBI admitted it had used surveillance drones in domestic airspace but refused to disclose specific details. Now, after pressure from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., the bureau has been forced to come clean.
In a recent letter to Paul, published on the senator’s website Thursday, the FBI acknowledges that it has used drones domestically in 10 cases in response to a “specific, operational need.” The bureau says that, since late 2006, it has used unmanned planes for surveillance to support missions related to kidnappings, search and rescue operations, drug interdictions, and fugitive investigations. On eight occasions the drones were used as part of criminal cases, and two in national security-related operations.
In none of these cases, the bureau says, did it apply for a warrant to conduct the drone surveillance. The letter states that the FBI will seek a warrant when using a drone only if it is attempting "to acquire information in which individuals have reasonable expectations of privacy under the Fourth Amendment." But it does not clarify exactly what kind of information it believes individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy over. Paul has requested that the FBI provide more details, saying he is concerned that the bureau may be adopting an “overbroad” interpretation of the rules in order to conduct warrantless surveillance....
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
“Yeah, we burn down churches. And OKaaaaay, yeah sometimes we do shoot mommies holding babies through their kitchen windows -ya got us, FINE..! And, eh.......yeah, it’s TEN TIMES we spied on ya’s. TEN, kay?”
> Translation: We’ve done it thousands of times for many years now.
And you can’t prove otherwise...
Exactly. If they confess 10 times, they are hiding 10,000 times.
I read Patrice Lewis’ blog. She is a homesteader up in north Idaho, living the hardworking dream on a farm, homeschooling her daughters, married to the same man for 20+ years. She recently wrote about working out in her garden and looked up into the clear blue sky, and there was a drone flying overhead (photo in link). Now she has written some rather uncomplimentary things about our PINO, so maybe she is a huge threat to national security....ya think?
http://www.rural-revolution.com/2013/06/caught-in-act.html
...guess they lost count on how many times they’ve
used them on the southern border right?......what?
So, is "law enforcement sensitive" some kind of new top secret classification they're using now to justify their sneakiness?
correction to my previous post - Patrice didn’t take that photo as she didn’t have her camera with her - her husband found a picture for her to identify. Sorry for the hasty error.
About the only place they won’t use them. That and the gay pride parades, “Justice for Trayvon” riots, Occupy encampments and Islamic training camps.
The USAF has clandestinely cooperated with local officials for decades, using the high resolution U-2 cameras on departure and arrival routes from Beale AFB, California. After all, ya gotta test your cameras before you get to altitude, and of course, avoid flying through any build-ups...
Hi Doogle: U-Tapao and Don Muang 1968-1973 flying StratoBladders ;o)
..betcha ya still smell like JP-4
Every time you go out into your yard, give your middle finger to the sky, in case a drone is above you. On second thought, don’t do that, you will probably get a missile up your behind.
Several miles up?
Hellfire missiles are expensive and in limited number. They’re not going to waste them on the likes of you and me.
Who believes anything the feral government says? Every podunk village with more than three cops has to get SWAT ninja suits so they can imagine they are important as they shoot dogs or each other. Can you really imagine the FBI using drones only 10 times when they are the newest toy?
I see a big need for balloons and 100 feet of light wire.
A fleet released will cause havoc.
10 times? Does this include the incident with Joseph Farah, while he was on vacation at the lake?
love it...I wanted the Boy Scouts to have a Drone Down Merit Badge but sigh....now they only fire butt plugs
10 times or 10, 000 times, the message coming out of the obama administration is consistently “we don’t care what the law is, we are going to do what ever we want to do. If we get called on it, we will lie. If we get caught red handed, we will just lie more and delay, obfuscate, and deflect.” This is the most corrupt, dishonest administration in history. Well, in the US anyway. They seem to be going for the global title too.
“We’re only going to apply for a warrant when it pertains to reasonable expectations of privacy, and now, with the NSA revelations, no one reasonably believes they have any privacy whatsoever, in any sphere at all, ergo, we have stopped asking for warrants and will use the drones 24/7 everywhere over the entire country. Thanks for the very good question. Next question please.”
Finally, a plausible explanation of what happened to the missing FReepers such as quidam, Howlin, Michael Rivero, and classygreeneyedblonde, to list just a few.
LOL, you are correct sir, but would you believe a couple of standard NATO rounds? Those are cheaper.
You took the words out of my mouth.
How is a drone different from a stake out in an adjacent building or an auto?
Don’t forget to ping them. And who was the liberal female who was famous here in the old days? Can’t recall the name.
I know the female you have in mind, though she was more recent than tghe others, no? Somebody will recall the nick. And then, there was Silly!
If God can see you, you have no expectation of privacy.
And He’s watching everyone. On both sides.
It is very different. For starters, there are no LEOs on the scene when you have a drone patrolling overhead. The drone operator (domestically) may be 500 miles away. Perhaps if the surveillance was from manned aircraft your argument would be stronger.
And the drone overhead may be flown by some perv 500 miles away that’s never been a LEO.
Or a terrorist.
Or a criminal gang looking for targets.
etc.
Murraysmom? (can’t ping her)
And Weiner only flashed his junk a couple of times...
A fleet released will cause havoc.
A slow moving high visibility thing like that will get anyone who deploys them arrested and imprisoned.
In order to get your freedom, ultimately conservatives are going to have to strap on a pair and start shooting at those who control the drones (and who make slaves of you in 1000s of other ways).
The elites know conservatives are too cowardly to do that, and that is why they will keep taking more from you.
The drone operator is not relevant. The FBI (Federal LEO) special agent observing the video is what is relevant.
Additionally, the recording of what was observed is evidence.
Yeah, I think that’s the one. She gone?
/johnny
"You did not pay your pRes_ _ent your dhimmi tax.
The IRS has deemed that today you die."
I think it was Murraymom.
In none of these cases, the bureau says, did it apply for a warrant to conduct the drone surveillance.
On the famous "bright side" that sometimes does and sometimes doesn't shed actual light, the F, the B, and the I never bothered with warrants when its main business was blackmailing politicians. See? It's not a problem, but a policy, so it's okay, so we're not a police state, after all.
I guarantee it won't be interpreted that way by LE.
I would argue you are not even known to them and they probably would never even know you were pissed
LOL! The Wiener distraction!
Jawohl. Are you former Stasi? I wonder, since you are defending this crap.
what crap?
Police have been using air craft for years. Helicopters were and perhaps still are used extensively to locate pot fields. They are in use daily in local law enforcement.
In Virginia there are still lines on the interstate at quarter mile intervals for police in the air to catch speeders
Drones are merely a different type of aircraft
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.