March 8, 2013
Following predictions that her legislation to disarm America will flounder in the bowels of the Senate, California Democrat and chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, has weighed in on drones.
Anti-drone protest in Hawaii coinciding with the Obama inauguration. Photo: Debra Sweet. Describing the technology as a “perfect assassination weapon,” Feinstein told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews there needs to be some rules for the technology Obama and the Justice Department say may or may not be used to murder Americans.
“In some respects it’s a perfect assassination weapon. It can see from 17,000 to 20,000 feet up in the air, it is very precise, it can knock out a room in a building if it’s armed, it’s a very dangerous weapon. Right now we have a problem, there are all these nations that want to buy these armed drones. I’m strongly opposed to that,” she said.
Feinstein said minus government regulation she frets drones will be used to snoop on her most cherished constituents, Hollywood celebrities. She warned one day soon we may see drones “hovering over the homes of Hollywood luminaries, violating [their] privacy.” She apparently did not find it important to mention the privacy – to say nothing of the Fourth Amendment rights – of millions of Americans who are not on par with famous celebrities.
“This question has to be addressed and we need rules of operation on the border, by police, by commercial use and also by military and intelligence use. So this is now a work in progress,” Feinstein said. “The administration is looking at a rules playbook as to how these won’t be used and how they will be used. So It’s a very complicated subject of new technology and I think we have to take a pause and get it right,” the Democrat explained.
Meanwhile, the “enhanced” torture apologist masquerading as a lawyer, John Yoo, has come out in defense of Obama’s effort to circumvent the Constitution and take out Americans in much the same way the technology is used to dispatch alleged terrorists in faraway lands.
“I admire libertarians but I think Rand Paul’s filibuster in many ways is very much what libertarians do — they make these very symbolic gestures, standing for some extreme position,” Yoo told his neocon compatriots at the Federalist Society, an elite organization parading as a libertarian project.
“I think it’s right if an American joins an enemy with which we are at war he is or she is a valid target as an enemy combatant. That’s been the rule throughout our history.”
Neocons have insisted for over a decade that the United States is “at war” despite the fact Congress has not issued a formal declaration of war as required in Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution.
This article was posted: Friday, March 8, 2013 at 12:15 pm