USA police department Surveillance Drones Spying on civilians end times news 3-7-13

USA police department Surveillance Drones Spying on civilians end times news 3-7-13


7 March 2013 USA police department Surveillance Drones Spying on civilians end times news 3-7-13 Government arms race kicks into high gear as DHS buys 2,700 armored vehicles for streets of America When DHS purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition to be used domestically, inside the USA, and I said this looks like a government agency preparing for war with the American people, I was told, "That's crazy. The government would never do that." When DHS purchased 7,000 full-auto assault rifles to be used inside the United States, calling them "personal defense weapons" that could be used in urban warfare, I was once again told I was crazy for suggesting the government was arming up for war with the American people. Now DHS has retrofitted 2,717 "Navistar Defense" armored vehicles for service on the streets of America. Click here to see pictures and specs for this vehicle from the manufacturer's website. Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039345_DHS... The prospect of identifying armed Americans concerns Second Amendment advocates, DHS built civilian surveillance tech into Predator drones. Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed. Also specified: "signals interception" and "direction finding" for electronic surveillance.Homeland Security required that this Predator drone, built by General Atomics, be capable of detecting whether a standing human at night is "armed or not." (U.S. Department of Homeland Security) Homeland Security's Predator B drone can stay aloft conducting surveillance for 20 hours. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has customized its Predator drones, originally built for overseas military operations, to carry out at-home surveillance tasks that have civil libertarians worried: identifying civilians carrying guns and tracking their cell phones, government documents show. The documents provide more details about the surveillance capabilities of the department's unmanned Predator B drones, which are primarily used to patrol the United States' northern and southern borders but have been pressed into service on behalf of a growing number of law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service, the Texas Rangers, and local police. Homeland Security's specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they "shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not," meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify "signals interception" technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and "direction finding" technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios. The Electronic Privacy Information Center obtained a partially redacted copy of Homeland Security's requirements for its drone fleet through the Freedom of Information Act and published it this week. CNET unearthed an copy of the requirements that provides additional information about the aircraft's surveillance capabilities. Concern about domestic use of drones is growing, with federal legislation introduced last month that would establish legal safeguards, in addition to parallel efforts underway from state and local lawmakers. The Federal Aviation Administration recently said that it will "address privacy-related data collection" by drones. "I am very concerned that this technology will be used against law-abiding American firearms owners," says Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation. "This could violate Fourth Amendment rights as well as Second Amendment rights." A Homeland Security official, who did not want to be identified by name, said the drones are able to identify whether movement on the ground comes from a human or an animal, but that they do not perform facial recognition. The aerial surveillance would comply with the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and other applicable federal laws. The documents show that CBP specified that the "tracking accuracy should be sufficient to allow target designation," and the agency notes on its Web site that its Predator B series is capable of "targeting and weapons delivery" (the military version carries multiple 100-pound Hellfire missiles). CBP says, however, that its Predator aircraft are unarmed.

Glenn Beck Interviews Rand Paul After Drone Filibuster

Glenn Beck Interviews Rand Paul After Drone Filibuster

Rand Paul used a 13 hours filibuster to denounce the Obama Admin. violation of constitutional rights by killing US citizens abroad and potentially at home with drone strikes .Finally Rand, show your true spirit. It's difficult to live up to your dad but I believe one day you might be even greater. We can defeat this machine.

Canadian Supreme Court Rules Biblical Speech Opposing Homosexual is a 'Hate Crime'

Canadian Supreme Court Rules Biblical Speech Opposing Homosexual is a 'Hate Crime'
http://christiannews.net/2013/02/28/c... The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Biblical speech opposing homosexual behavior, including in written form, is essentially a hate crime. On Wednesday, the court upheld the conviction of activist William Whatcott, who found himself in hot water after distributing flyers regarding the Bible’s prohibitions against homosexuality throughout the Saskatoon and Regina neighborhoods in 2001 and 2002.

Police State of America ~ Here Come The Mini Drones

Soon we will have Robotic mosquitoes capable of assassinating people at random with plausible deniability by covertly injecting them with AIDS (or any lethal substance which dissipates within a few hours). Soon after that: Government tries to kill the wrong person, scheme ends up on news.

Rush Limbaugh Interviews Rand Paul After Drone Filibuster: You Are A Hero To A Lot Of People Today

3/7/13 - Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh invited Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on his program on Thursday for a thorough debriefing following the senator's marathon filibuster on Wednesday. In a wide-ranging interview, Paul told Limbaugh that he was thought it was important to have a debate about President Barack Obama's approach to American citizens who are viewed by the administration as being subject to a drone strike. Limbaugh heaped praise on Paul for his ability to "take this president on" and said that many see him as "a hero" today. "I was thinking of you when I was in the middle of this 13-hour -- I got about five hours into it, and I was like, 'well, Rush does four hours of this every day. Certainly, I can do four more hours," Paul said. "I doubt I was in your thoughts last night," Limbaugh laughed. Paul explained that he had been concerned about the issue of drones for some time, but only decided to filibuster in order to compel the White House to surrender more information on the drone program yesterday morning. "Nobody in the Republican Party has dared take this president on," Limbaugh exclaimed. "You did last night, and you're alive today to talk about it." "You are, in certain ways, a hero to a lot of people today," he added. "This was, to me, a seminal event last night that could change the direction that we are all heading -- particularly in terms of educating and informing the American people about what actually is happening in their country." "We ask a pretty important question, and that's whether you get to pick and choose which parts of the Bill of Rights apply to American citizens," Paul replied. "We don't think that the president, or any politician --Republican or Democrat — should get to choose when the Fifth Amendment applies." Paul added that the president's "intention" to not execute citizens on American soil without due process was insufficient for Paul to dissuade him from engaging in a filibuster. Paul clarified that he was not against the use of drones on the battlefield, but that he was concerned about the collateral damage that these unilaterally authorized strikes have incurred. He added that, for American citizens inside the country, they must have their "day in court" if they are not an active combatant.