christo-f Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 White House to Abandon Spy-Satellite Program JUNE 22, 2009, 11:16 P.M. ET http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124572555214540265.html WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration plans to kill a controversial Bush administration spy satellite program at the Department of Homeland Security, according to officials familiar with the decision. The program came under fire from its inception two years ago. Democratic lawmakers said it would lead to domestic spying. The program would have provided federal, state and local officials with extensive access to spy-satellite imagery — but no eavesdropping capabilities— to assist with emergency response and other domestic-security needs, such as identifying where ports or border areas are vulnerable to terrorism. It would have expanded an Interior Department satellite program, which will continue to be used to assist in natural disasters and for other limited security purposes such as photographing sporting events. The Wall Street Journal first revealed the plans to establish the program, known as the National Applications Office, in 2007. "It's being shut down," said a homeland security official. The Bush administration had taken preliminary steps to launch the office, such as acquiring office space and beginning to hire staff. The plans to shutter the office signal Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's decision to refocus the department's intelligence on ensuring that state and local officials get the threat information they need, the official said. She also wants to make the department the central point in the government for receiving and analyzing terrorism tips from around the country, the official added. Lawmakers alerted Ms. Napolitano of their concerns about the program-that the program would violate the Fourth amendment right to be protected from unreasonable searches-before her confirmation hearing. Once she assumed her post, Ms. Napolitano ordered a review of the program and concluded the program wasn't worth pursuing, the homeland official said. Department spokeswoman Amy Kudwa declined to speak about the results of the review but said they would be announced shortly. The lawmakers were most concerned about plans to provide satellite imagery to state and local law enforcement, so department officials asked state and local officials how useful that information would be to them. The answer: not very useful. "In our view, the NAO is not an issue of urgency," Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton, wrote to Ms. Napolitano on June 21. Writing on behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Chief Bratton said that were the program to go forward, the police chiefs would be concerned about privacy protections and whether using military satellites for domestic purposes would violate the Posse Comitatus law, which bars the use of the military for law enforcement in the U.S. Rep. Jane Harman (D., Calif.), who oversees the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence, said she was alarmed when she recently saw that the Obama administration requested money for the program in a classified 2010 budget proposal. She introduced two bills that would terminate the program. "It's a good decision," Ms. Harman said in an interview. "This will remove a distraction and let the intelligence function at [the department] truly serve the community that needs it, which is local law enforcement." Supporters of the program lamented what they said was the loss of an important new terrorism-fighting tool for natural disasters and terrorist attacks, as well as border security. "After numerous congressional briefings on the importance of the NAO and its solid legal footing, politics beat out good government," said Andrew Levy, who was deputy general counsel at the department in the Bush administration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 but they are continuing the blimp program and the predator drone program over our soil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R@ndomH3ro Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 i can see you pee casek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 i can see you pee casek lolwut? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y@d@d@ Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 yeah right, just like they're shutting down gitmo and they're worried about protecting the 4th amendment, yet have constitution free zones 100 miles inland from all borders and sea coasts.... psssht, 'protecting the 4th amendment'.... what about all the dhs and cbp suspicionless warrantless checkpoints popping up all over the place? ...now they'll just do it without public interference and controversy. and when brought up people'll tell you 'HEY IT DOESNT EXIST, THE GOVERNMENT SAID SO' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y@d@d@ Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 just like gitmo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y@d@d@ Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 yeah fucking right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewAccount12345 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 federal reserve homeland security department of education dea atf how many more to name that shouldnt exhist? those snakes will never stop and all good people must never stop aquiring and protecting freedom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrasivesaint Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 The program came under fire from its inception two years ago. Democratic lawmakers said it would lead to domestic spying. uh.. ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R@ndomH3ro Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 They are going to keep the satellites up, just going to use them for natural disasters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desism_ktc Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 ha ha when I was in the navy they said they were closing Gitmo..that was yearsssssssssss ago... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 They are going to keep the satellites up, just going to use them for natural disasters like i said, they have the blimps and predators over our cities. no need for 'spensive satellites. obama! whoooooo! CHANGE!!!! HOOOOOOPE!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 How do you know about there being predators over US soil (I know SFA about conus stuff)? I would be assuming that they are not armed other than with surveillance kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 How do you know about there being predators over US soil (I know SFA about conus stuff)? I would be assuming that they are not armed other than with surveillance kit. http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=3236726d-7163-4dcc-bbb1-09c848ff5980 http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/06/22/drone-great-lakes022.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 like i said, they have the blimps and predators over our cities. no need for 'spensive satellites. Going off the links you have provided this statement above is misleading to the point of being dishonest. According to those two articles you posted they are being used for border control along the US/Canada border. Border surveillance is an integral part of national security for any country. How on earth could you have a problem with that? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Going off the links you have provided this statement above is misleading to the point of being dishonest. According to those two articles you posted they are being used for border control along the US/Canada border. Border surveillance is an integral part of national security for any country. How on earth could you have a problem with that? well, right now it's border patrol for the predators. the blimps are over every major u.s. city. they have camera arrays all over the bottom. http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003718.html meet the RAID http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-06/dread-zeppelin-armys-new-surveillance-blimp?page= the LEMV http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/13/nation/na-spyblimp13 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A48616-2004Sep24?language=printer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 That article only talks about their deployment in combat zones. You say they are tethered over every major US city, where do you get that info from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 That article only talks about their deployment in combat zones. You say they are tethered over every major US city, where do you get that info from? was in army times or air force times a a few years ago, also in some white papers i have come across. best evidence is mistaken ufo reports from larry king live. with video. find it on youtube. they are the LEMV's. http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/41368 what's really funny is that these have been around for a long time. one more. caught over arizona. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 25, 2009 Author Share Posted June 25, 2009 One link is for something completely different that has more military usages than anything (it's an X-band radar, dude) and the other link you provided was about the aerostat being used for border protection, again. Unless you can come up with white papers (not exactly sure why it would be in a white paper, but anyway...) or something from an authoritative source that states these items are deployed over every major city in the US, I'm going to have to call bullshit on that, Casek. As a matter of fact, I think I can confidently say that there are neither drones or aerostats over every major city...., maybe ANY major city in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 newsweek http://www.newsweek.com/id/201697 defensetech http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000816.html defense industry daily http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/darpas-isis-project-seeks-slow-soaring-surveillance-superiority-updated-02189/ washington post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/19/AR2008101901572.html engadget http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/22/lockheed-martin-to-build-high-altitude-airship-for-homeland-secu/ chicago tribune http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/mar/13/nation/chi-spy-blimp_frimar13 DARPA http://websearch.darpa.mil/search?q=ISIS&btnG=Search&entqr=0&ud=1&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&site=default_collection raytheon http://search.raytheon.com/search?site=default_collection&client=raytheon&proxystylesheet=raytheon&output=xml_no_dtd&q=ISIS wired http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/08/imagine-a-blimp/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/03/air-force-signs/ ABC news http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2142760/a_giant_blimp_ufo_over_salt_lake_city/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewAccount12345 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 i hope they dont make our govermnment into a bunch of stalker voyeurs. i had an idea that i would petition the attorney general or my local congress people to create a law that prevents government or police from stalking people. actually making stalking illegal and punishing the us government for violating it. this would eliminate paparazi as well. maybe even sting operations and wiretaps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y@d@d@ Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 my thing is, if they're using them for border security...as christof keeps referring to from the articles.... THEN WHY ARE THE BORDERS STILL WIDE OPEN? the government doesn't give a shhheeeeiiiiitttt about the borders! so why do they say thats what the drones and blimps are for? ? ? ? ...deffo not the real use Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 Still nothing at all that says they are over every major city in the US, Casek. There's one that's over a car race, which I would also bet was used more for testing the device in heavily crowded areas with a large amount of radio/frequency traffic. Sure, there is mention that they could be used over US cities for law enforcement but I give you one question that would represent the biggest barrier to that; who will pay for it? Either way, you still have provided nothing to even make me suspicious that it is happening now. Y@d@d@, so, what is the real use, mate? And if you're going to make a claim you have to back it up with some kind of evidence otherwise you're just using guess work, which means diddly squat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreaken1993 Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 my thing is, if they're using them for border security...as christof keeps referring to from the articles.... THEN WHY ARE THE BORDERS STILL WIDE OPEN? the government doesn't give a shhheeeeiiiiitttt about the borders! so why do they say thats what the drones and blimps are for? ? ? ? ...deffo not the real use because it has nothing to do with protecting the border, because soon there will be no borders, its to further condition the public into situations like this so when they happen when you go into your grocery stores it wont come as a shock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christo-f Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 Take your pick, paranoid, gullible or drama queen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y@d@d@ Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 whats your pick chrissy chris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreaken1993 Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 Take your pick, paranoid, gullible or drama queen. directed at me??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.