Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Defense Dept. Directed To Disclose Domestic Drone Use

Posted by Soulskill on from the admit-to-using-them-to-do-beer-runs dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to make the Pentagon disclose whether military drones are being used in U.S. airspace to spy on U.S. citizens. This follows Rand Paul's filibuster on the floor of the Senate in which he demanded answers from the Obama administration as to whether drone strikes on U.S. soil were a possibility. (Senator Paul received an amusingly brief response (PDF) to his 13-hour question.) From the article: 'A requirement buried in a lengthy appropriations bill calls on newly confirmed Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to disclose to Congress what "policies and procedures" are in place "governing the use" of military drones or other unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) domestically. The report is due no later than 90 days after the bill is signed into law. The vote on the bill, which was overwhelmingly supported by Republicans and opposed by Democrats, comes as concerns about domestic use of drones have spiked. ...The House's language stops short of requiring Hagel to disclose whether he or his predecessor have taken the step of approving the targeting of any U.S. citizens for surveillance.'"

8 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. So you don't waste your time... by canadiannomad · · Score: 5, Informative

    The PDF download response is kinda funny... But basically not worth the download...

    It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the
    President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in
    combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.

    I'm glad... Now if hopefully they will keep it that way...
    I won't hold my breath.

    --
    Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
    1. Re:So you don't waste your time... by characterZer0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      "engaged in combat" is can be interpreted many ways.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:So you don't waste your time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Due Process" has become something different from what most people think as well.

      Most people believe that means the suspect would be taken into custody and have a fair trial but in an unguarded moment in an interview Holder said that "due process" now only requires some consideration from someone in the executive branch.

  2. Re:And remember, by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is an extraordinary amount the U.S. government doesn't tell us because they think we don't care. We oblige them by being apathetic.

  3. What's really sad about this by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In 2007, it was the Democrats screaming for full disclosure about Bush's violations of civil liberties, while Republicans in Congress were doing everything they could to protect their dear leader. In 2013, the roles are reversed, but the play is basically the same.

    Why is it that so few politicians are willing to say "All violations of civil liberties are wrong, regardless of who's party is currently in control of the presidency?"

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:What's really sad about this by CannonballHead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      THIS. Obama even ran partially on that whole transparency thing... but now transparency is, I assume, some sort of national threat because we wouldn't want rogue nations to know what we're ... doing ... with drones ... on American soil ... errrrr.... maybe if we *aren't* doing it, then terrorists will feel safer.

      It's like watching a football game. Root for your team. Smear the opposing team. Doesn't matter what you do, as long as you win. When the refs make calls that you don't like, blame the ref, not your actions (assuming the call was fair).

  4. Wrong by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Informative

    In fact, the US government has historically been more limited in what it does domestically than abroad. Voice of America, for example, is a propaganda broadcast that cannot be broadcast within the United States but which was famously broadcast along the USSR's borders.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  5. Re:And remember, by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sorry... I stopped paying attention after the first few words. What was your point again?

    --
    #DeleteChrome