There is a new drone with a gun on it. Oh, that can't be good.

Courtesy of BBC: 

A US technology firm has developed a drone that is able to aim and fire at enemies while flying in mid-air. 

The Tikad drone, developed by Duke Robotics, is armed with a machine-gun and a grenade launcher. 

The gun can be fired only by remote control, and is designed to reduce military casualties by cutting the number of ground troops required. 

But campaigners warn that in the wrong hands, it will make it easier to kill innocent people. 

The Tikad drone, available for private sale at an undisclosed price, has won a security innovation award from the US Department of Defense, and there is interest from several military forces around the world, including Israel, reports Defense One.

You know this would concern me if Barack Obama were still in the White House, but with Donald Trump in the Oval Office this is nothing less than terrifying. 

I have seen both the Terminator movies and the Robocop films so clearly I am an expert on this kind of thing.

Spoiler alert, things go really, really, really bad.

So did Russia know about the chemical attack in Syria ahead of time? Yeah, maybe.

Courtesy of the AP:

The United States has made a preliminary conclusion that Russia knew in advance of Syria's chemical weapons attack last week, but has no proof of Moscow's involvement, a senior U.S. official said Monday. 

The official said that a drone operated by Russians was flying over a hospital as victims of the attack were rushing to get treatment. Hours after the drone left, a Russian-made fighter jet bombed the hospital in what American officials believe was an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons. 

The U.S. official said the presence of the surveillance drone over the hospital couldn't have been a coincidence, and that Russia must have known the chemical weapons attack was coming and that victims were seeking treatment. 

The official, who wasn't authorized to speak publicly on intelligence matters and demanded anonymity, didn't give precise timing for when the drone was in the area, where more than 80 people were killed. The official also didn't provide details for the military and intelligence information that form the basis of what the Pentagon now believes.

As you have probably already predicted the Pentagon refutes this accusation:

A Department of Defense spokesman discounted an Associated Press report that claimed Russia knew in advance about the chemical weapons attack in Syria last week that left more than 80 people dead. 

“I’ve seen nothing that corroborates this definitive statement,” Major Jamie Davis told the Daily Caller in a statement Monday. “We continue to review the available intelligence surrounding this incident.” 

Boy who to believe on this one.

A report from the highly respected Associate Press news agency, or a statement from Donald Trump's Pentagon reported on the Daily Caller and Info Wars?

Boy that is a conundrum alright.

If Chris Christie is elected President he wants to hire the founder of Fed Ex to help track immigrants just like they do packages.

Courtesy of ABC News:  

"At any moment, FedEx can tell you where that package is. It's on the truck. It's at the station. It's on the airplane," Christie said, speaking at a VFW hall in New Hampshire Saturday morning. "Yet we let people come to this country with visas, and the minute they come in, we lose track of them." 

As president, Christie said, he would enlist the help of Fred Smith, founder of Federal Express, to show Immigration and Custom Enforcement how to track immigrants who might otherwise overstay their welcome. 

"We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in, and then when your time is up, we go get you and tap you on the shoulder and say, 'Excuse me, thanks for coming, time to go,'" Christie said.

Later a Christie spokesperson clarified the statement to suggest that Christie is suggesting the use of technology, such as drones, to keep track of immigrants.

I wonder if Christie understands that Fed Ex is able to keep track of a package because it is constantly in one of its warehouses, planes, or vans at all time?

Surely Christie is not suggesting that we warehouse human beings so we can keep track of them?

What did they call that during World War 2?

Interment camps I think.

Or perhaps Christie is suggesting that all new immigrants visiting the country using a Visa have a microchip tracking device implanted under their skin?

That WOULD achieve the same purpose, I but I think there might be a little pushback from religious fundamentalists who consider that to be in the same category as the Mark of the Beast from the book of Revelations.

I think it's time to remind Christie that "people are not packages."

John Oliver's report on America's use of drones is a must see.

I know I am supposed to be a mindless Obama zombie, or something like that, but in my opinion this is a very serious situation that needs to be publicized and opened for debate.

Like a lot of Americans I have a number of mixed feelings when it comes to drones.

On the one hand they allow us to take out bad guys with little or no risk to our soldiers, but on the other hand we are asked to place an almost overwhelming amount of faith in our ability to gather solid intelligence on possibly dangerous terrorists, faith that others killed in an attack against a target are ALSO bad guys, and confidence that the drones are being handled by well trained experts and not simply by young soldiers who just so happen to have logged a lot of hours on Playstation playing "War Thunder."

Your thoughts?

Rally organizers believe that once they get to Washington they can intimidate President Obama into stepping down. That is unless he kills them with a drone attack.

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

A spokesman for a group that hopes to oust President Barack Obama from office by rallying next week in Washington fears the president will attack participants with a drone strike. 

Terry Trussell, chief of staff for Operation American Spring, told “Patriot Nation” radio host Mark Hoffman that organizers are “expecting the unexpected,” reported Right Wing Watch – including a possible drone strike. 

The conservative radio host warned protesters to be prepared for the worst if they attended the May 16 rally, which organizers have claimed would draw 10 million – possibly even 30 million – participants. 

“People are going to be down there for days, (and) I said you might want to bring a bug-out bag of sorts, because you never know what’s going to happen down there, you may have to run for your life,” Hoffman warned. “It may never happen, they just go peacefully, these guys may step down and we’ll all pat each other on the back and say ‘God bless America, let’s get back to the Constitution and move on.’” (Yes what a likely scenario THAT would be.)

But he still advised participants to bring emergency supplies, walkie-talkies, and stay in small groups to remain safe from pro-government agents. 

“Get together and stay together and be safe, always keep your eyes open because I’m sure there’s going to be people from the liberal-left-progressive side, the Marxists, the anti-freedom and liberty people, in the crowd starting trouble, that’s almost a guarantee,” Hoffman said.

The organizer claims to have a deal with D.C. law enforcement to help deal with the "Marxists," however he does fear one thing.

The event organizer warned Obama that an attack on his opponents would most likely backfire. 

“Now if something bigger happens, you know, they can pull in drones, but when the government destroys the capital just to get rid of us, I think it’s going to work to their discredit,” Trussell said.

Yes, of course the President would attack a group of protesters with a drone on American soil.  Because you know that would certainly be something that a constitutional professor would deem reasonable.

What a dipshit.

I can hardly wait to hear about the actual number that show up at this "rally." I would be really impressed if it attracted even a thousand people.

The fact that they are predicting in excess of 10 million shows how deeply deranged these people are.

Colorado drone hunting ordinance shot down. Oh the irony.

Courtesy of Esquire:  

Deer Trail, Colorado residents shot down their infamous drone hunting ordinance on Tuesday, showing that at least 73% of the small town’s residents have common sense. The matter fell to the voters after the town’s board came to a 3-3 draw on enacting the legislation, which had strong support from the mayor. 

Well, ex-mayor. Not too surprisingly, he didn’t make it past Tuesday, either. 

It had been a good run for the ordinance’s author Phil Steele, who had been preemptively selling the licenses since the fall, with up to 900 of the now-decorative paper permits being issued, though, Steele admitted to the LA Times, only three of them went to residents.

What? Now Deer Trail, Colorado residents will not have a reason to discharge firearms indiscriminately into the sky?

It's like they have lost their raison d'etre.

Stephen Colbert on the United States approach to foreign relations.

Okay I know it is done as a joke, but it is also kind of scary how accurate it feels.

Another brilliant idea by the Teabaggers. "Let's shoot down the drones!"

Courtesy of The Daily Caller: 

The tiny town of Deer Trail, Colo. — barely more than a wide spot on Interstate 70 about 55 miles east of Denver, population 546 — is considering an ordinance that would authorize licensed bounty hunters to shoot down unmanned aircraft violating its “sovereign airspace.” 

A six-page petition circulated by a resident says that the threat of surveillance from drones — regardless of who is piloting them — is a threat to “traditional American ideas of Liberty and Freedom” enjoyed by Deer Trail’s “ranchers, farmers, cowboys and Indians, as well as contemporary citizens.” 

Therefore, drone incursions are to be seen as acts of war. 

According to the proposed ordinance, which will be considered by the town council at its next meeting on Aug. 6, prospective bounty hunters can get a one-year drone-hunting license for $25. 

Proposed bounties will be $25 for those turning in the wings or fuselage of downed aircraft and $100 for mostly intact vehicles. To collect the bounty, the wreckage must have “markings, and configuration … consistent with those used by the United States federal government.” 

Such “trophies” then become the property of Deer Trail. 

It would seem to me that it is only a hop, skip, and a jump from  firing on unmanned drones to firing upon Federal agents investigating crime in your town. I mean what would these "licensed bounty hunters" do if the Feds came to arrest them for destroying government property?

Now I am not sure what kind of drones the government might use domestically, but the 10 MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aircraft that we use overseas costs over 12 million dollars.

Somehow I think the Federal government would not take kindly to having one shot out of the sky by a bunch of morons looking to collect a $25.00 bounty. Nor by the way do I think that is likely possible.

This is just another example of rednecks believing that their little popguns can stand up to the might of the Federal government, when in fact if they were to engage in an act of aggression they be overwhelmed and locked away before they could even say "Obama's a Muslim Socialist."

(P.S. By the way it is blogger etiquette to link to the Daily Caller because that is where I got this article, but do not feel you need to give them any clicks. I cut and pasted the interesting part, and besides, they're are Right Wing assholes.)

President interrupted three times during speech on drones.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Courtesy of MSNBC:  

President Barack Obama was repeatedly interrupted by a heckler whose taunts slowed the delivery of a major national security speech in the Washington, D.C. area. 

The unidentified heckler began shouting at the president toward the tail end of his highly-anticipated address, when he touched upon U.S. policy toward detainees suspected of terrorist acts.  

Obama was forced to pause three separate times and talk over the protester, interrupting the flow of the closing section of the speech at National Defense University. 

“I'm about to address it ma'am, but you've got to let me speak,” Obama scolded the woman. “Why don't you sit down and let me tell you exactly what I'd do." 

The antiwar group Code Pink, which often interrupts high-profile political events with vocal protests against U.S. foreign policy and national security strategy, said its founder Medea Benjamin was the person responsible for the interruption. 

Though the president appeared somewhat irritated by the interruption, he said he was willing to cut the woman “some slack, because it’s worth being passionate about.” 

He added after another interruption: “The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to. Obviously I do not agree with much of what she said. And obviously she wasn’t listening to me and much of what I said. But these are tough issues, and the suggestion that we can gloss over them is wrong.”

I think he handled that pretty well. And he is right, this is something many of us feel very passionately about and he, and his administration, need to recognize that.

Here is the transcript of the entire speech in case, like me, you missed it earlier.