Skip to main content

Imagine you’re in a Monty Python sketch in a parallel universe (like, say, the one Faux Nooz viewers live in), Viking voices are raised in song:

    Drones, drones, drones, drones
    Drones, drones, drones, drones

    Lovely drones, wonderful drones
    Lovely drones, wonderful drones

   Drones drones drones drones

    Lovely drones
    Lovely drones
    Lovely drones

    Drones, drones, drones, drones

Ah, Babylon.

The New York Times bumbles to the rescue with all the grace and sensitivity of a senile British blood hound, WOT’S ALL THIS THEN?!??

The Drone Question Obama Hasn’t Answered
Ryan Goodman / New York Times

    THE Senate confirmed John O. Brennan as director of the Central Intelligence Agency on Thursday after a nearly 13-hour filibuster by the libertarian senator Rand Paul, who before the vote received a somewhat odd letter from the attorney general. [...]

In the interests of full disclosure, I am here to out a moron, so if this kind of thing offends you, please avert your eyes.

Here’s the dumb part:

  Mr. Holder’s letter raises more questions than it answers — and, indeed, more important and more serious questions than the senator posed.

    What, exactly, does the Obama administration mean by “engaged in combat”? The extraordinary secrecy of this White House makes the answer difficult to know. We have some clues, and they are troubling.... One could argue that that definition applied solely to prolonged detention, not to targeting for a drone strike. But who’s to say if the administration believes in such a distinction?

And if cats and dogs cohabitate together, isn’t that just an unmistakable sign of the Apocalypse?

And, you could say that ‘solipsism’ is just a fancy word for wanking.

The point here that the entire national media has missed, that I pointed out several  YEARS ago and which has yet to make it into the national consciousness is that “drones” are reacted to EMOTIONALLY in a manner utterly inconsistent with the actual questions involved.

Instead we split one hair, and ignore the entire rest of the silver-backed gorilla. (Who is looking like he’s getting ready to rip us limb from limb and feast on our soft flesh.)

Substitute “black ops assassin” or “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” for “drone” and the question remains EXACTLY the same.

The conclusions remain the same, the micro-emphasis on a minor issue (the sensational, SCIENCE FICTION fantasy of “drone strikes” inside US borders killing “Hanoi Janes”) at the expense of reason remains the same, and the question “to drone or not to drone?” neatly precipitates out of the mixture, unaltered — a catalyst entirely unchanged by the violent chemical reaction engendered when Morons of the Press and Punditry meet ACTUAL policy questions of the Future.*

[ *And please note that, as a potential American, any NON-American is, by the transitive "potentiality" reasoning of the Anti Abortion Movement, an ACTUAL American, the notion of "US Citizen" is entirely meaningless. Shouldn't we be concerned with ASSASSINATION per se? Jeebus. Have these pricks no ethics or morals whatsoever?]

Cyril M. Kornbluth wrote a famous novella, now included in the Science Fiction Hall of Fame Vol. II about these, I recall distinctly.

More importantly, since March 1, 2008, I’ve been telling you about this on my blog, and now that it’s here, you’ve freaked out and run off through the snow with your pants around your ankles and toilet paper unrolling as your regal train. Let’s back up:

    Killer Death Robots! 1 March 2008…9:01 pm
    Return of the Killer Death Robots! 22 February 2009 · 2:46 am
    They Catch Up on Killer Death Robots 19 November 2012 · 1:49 pm

You see, “drones” in our current usage have NOTHING to do with robots.

Let me say that again: drones have nothing to do with robots, as currently used. They are remotely operated aircraft with human operators who make human decisions about killing or not killing (e.g. Rand Paul’s questions would apply and be troublesome to the EXACT SAME DEGREE as asking about CIA Ninja Assassins who look like something out of a Quentin Tarantino movie).

These are the real concerns that HAVE to be addressed:

1. Fake “drones” controversy: what do we do about the massive, unconstitutional spookocracy created in the fear, terror and paranoia following 9-11? And shouldn’t we force the GOPs to take most of the blame, since it was THEIR majorities that created this monstrosity? (Drones are the least of it).

2. Real “drones” controversy: we are developing robot killing machines with the actual ability to use artificial intelligence to take the kill shots themselves. Isn’t THAT the incredible moral issue that needs debate here?  and its corollary

3. Real “drones” controversy: we are destroying Americans’ privacy with surveillance  -- and as I predicted long ago, when the Supremes made the abominable decision that you have NO privacy to any airspace above your home and property, meaning that nanodrones (the size of a mosquito) could literally hover millimeters above your roof taking pictures and there’s NOTHING you can do about it.

Those are the REAL issues. The notion that remote controlled drones are any different than bombs, or smart bombs, or precision guided missiles is only a controversy to the mind that either has the intellectual capacity of macaroni, or hasn’t really thought it through.

So: we are stymied by false dichotomies and false issues while the REAL life and death issues lie untouched, stinking like dead mackeral washed up into the midday sun.

We must either debate the REAL issues here, or else give in to the inevitable conclusion that we are morons barely even deserving of the drone strike that will mercifully end our imbecile presumption on the resources of a limited planet.

Grow a pair America.

And by that I mean: a pair of frontal lobes in your collective brain.

Or just drone on and on and on and on and on …

    Drones, drones, drones, drones
    Drones, drones, drones, drones …


Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zenox, glorificus, NancyWH

    Every new opinion, at its starting, is precisely in a minority of one. -- Thomas Carlyle

    by harto on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 03:50:40 AM PDT

  •  People like to bitch, what ya gonna do? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I remember all the bitching about the Glock. It was plastic you see. Invisible to the metal detectors of the time. Except that it wasn't all plastic and the bullets were still metal. And it still looked like a gun in the Xray. But both sides were screaming about the new juju. Much ado.

    We're fools whether we dance or not, so we might as well dance.

    by PowWowPollock on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:13:13 AM PDT

  •  Kind of agree with SCOTUS on airspace. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnny wurster

    If you're dumb enough to mix a 50 gallon drum of fertilizer and heating oil outside your garage you deserve a visit from your local law enforcement agency.

    "Michael Moore, who was filming a movie about corporate welfare called 'Capitalism: A Love Story,' sought and received incentives."

    by Bush Bites on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:34:51 AM PDT

    •  Air space means drones able to "see" (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      glorificus, NancyWH, harto

      inside of your house too. PRIVACY is the issue here to be addressed, not having a lab outside of your garage.

      Again, the point of the diary is to grow some reasoning skills which have been -obviously- lacking due to too much FEAR MONGERING...not?

      "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

      by zenox on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 05:32:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  ...and then maybe sit in a cell for a few days, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      until a judge decides if there is a case against you, and if bail is a good idea, or keeping you in jail until a trial can be arranged is a good know, due process and stuff.

      "We refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war." -freewayblogger

      by Bisbonian on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 06:26:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You can have the drones, but from now on the (0+ / 0-)

    American people vote on any new weaponry and that means we have final say as to weather it is ultimately deployed against people or property or land no exceptions except by our vote.  That is the compromise I am willing to make: drones are the last new weapon deployed without the majority consent of the American people.

  •  Impressive (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    First four comments display ZERO comprehension of what was written.


    Amazing. (In a Cthulhu sort of way.)

    Reading with comprehension. Try it.

    Every new opinion, at its starting, is precisely in a minority of one. -- Thomas Carlyle

    by harto on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 04:51:32 AM PDT

  •  Well!...and tipped and rec'd for: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    glorificus, NancyWH, harto
    Grow a pair America.

    And by that I mean: a pair of frontal lobes in your collective brain.

    I was amazed when one of the 'potential and likely to happen scenarios' given to warn us about the dangers of drone use was the droning of Richard Reid, the shoe-bomber.

    By that logic we were warned that the drones would be used to blow-up Richard Reid's plane to Reid from blowing up the plane...??!!

    Insane? Yes. But I think the manufacturers of the drone hype aiming to turn left against Holder and Obama intentionally created such an environment (including Rand Paul's so called filibuster asking "questions" like if the drones were going to be used on American citizens while they are sitting in cafes and such) to elicit mass hysteria and thus bypassing our "FRONT LOBES" that are there to protect us from turning into slobbering idiots.

    But it happened. Even here on this site where most like to claim 'reason' and 'logic' to be their guide.

    Thanks for the excellent diary.

    "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

    by zenox on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 05:27:15 AM PDT

  •  this argument ignores that it's Unconstitutional (0+ / 0-)

    for the President to use Military force on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.

    That's the difference between a "black ops assassin" and a drone -- no one is arguing that the President can use a black op assassin on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, except the diarist and the red herring crew.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 07:11:32 AM PDT

  •  The Drone is a war weapon. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NancyWH, harto

    No different from any other war weapon.

    Americans are killed without due process every day.  Ask poor people. They don't execute rich people.

    guns are fun v. hey buddy, watch what you are doing -- which side are you on?

    by 88kathy on Sun Mar 10, 2013 at 09:21:23 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site