A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State

by Whitehead, John W.

  While there are undoubtedly legitimate uses for drone technology domestically, such as locating missing persons, domestic drones will be armed with "less-lethal" weaponry, including rubber bullets, bean bag guns, and tasers, while flying over political demonstrations, sporting events, and concert arenas. Eventually, these drones will be armed with the lethal weaponry that is currently being used overseas in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

  The power of these machines is not to be underestimated. Many are equipped with cameras that provide a live video feed, as well as heat sensors and radar. Some are capable of peering at figures from 20,000 feet up and twenty-five miles away. They can also keep track of sixty-five persons of interest at once.485 Some drones are capable of hijacking Wi-Fi networks and intercepting electronic communications such as text messages.486 The Army has developed drones with facial recognition software,487 as well as drones that can complete a target-and-kill mission without any human instruction or interaction.488

  Thus, with this single piece of legislation, Congress, in conjunction with the president, opened the floodgates to an entirely new era of surveillance and domestic police tactics–one in which no person is safe from the prying eyes of the government or the reach of its weapons. Yet the fact that these drones are coming home to roost (and fly) in domestic airspace should come as no surprise to those who have been paying attention. The U.S. government has a history of commandeering military technology for use against Americans. We saw this happen with tear gas, tasers, sound cannons, and assault vehicles, all of which were first used on the battlefield before being deployed against civilians at home.

  The Hit Man

  As President Obama learned first-hand, drones are the ultimate killing and spying machines. Indeed, the use of drones to target and kill insurgents became a centerpiece of the president's war on terror.

  President Obama

  [Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

  As the New York Times revealed in 2012,489 President Obama, operating off government "kill list," personally directed who should be targeted for death by military drones. Every few weeks, Obama and approximately a hundred members of his national security team gathered for their "Terror Tuesday" meetings in which they handpicked the next so-called national security "threat" to die by way of the American military/CIA drone program.490 Obama signed off personally on about a third of the drone strikeS.491 (By the time he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, Obama had given the go-ahead to more drone strikes than Bush did during his entire presidency492 By the third year of his presidency, two times as many suspected terrorists had been approved for killing by drone strikes than had been put in Guantanamo Bay during George W. Bush's presidency493) It's not only suspected terrorists whose death warrants were personally signed by the president but innocent civilians geographically situated near a strike zone, as well, whether or not they have any ties to a suspected terrorist. As an anonymous government official on Obama's drone campaign observed, "They count the corpses and they're not really sure who they are."494 In fact, Obama's first authorized drone attack in Yemen led to the deaths of fourteen women and twenty-one children, and only one al-Qaeda affiliate.495

  Whatever one may say about the dubious merits of the President's kill list, there can be no doubt about the fact that President Obama managed to create a radical and chilling new power allowing future presidents to kill anyone at will. This includes American citizens whom the president might deem a threat to the nation's security. Indeed, in a decision he claimed was "an easy one,"496 Obama killed two American citizens in this fashion: Anwar al-Awlaki, an American cleric living in Yemen who served as a propagandist for al-Qaeda, and his 16-year-old son.497

  Entirely lacking in accountability498 and legal justification as required by the Constitution, Obama's kill list takes to new heights Richard Nixon's brazen claim that "if the president does it, it's not illegal."499 The ramifications are far-reaching, especially now that Obama has authorized the use of drones domestically.

  Drone Ed

  This is not a problem that's going to go away quickly or quietly. In fact, the FAA is facing mounting pressure from state governments and localities to issue flying rights for a range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to carry out civilian and law-enforcement activities. As the Associated Press reports, "Tornado researchers want to send them into storms to gather data. Energy companies want to use them to monitor pipelines. State police hope to send them up to capture images of speeding cars' license plates. Local police envision using them to track fleeing suspects."500

  Even universities are getting in on the drone action. As Richard Wheeler writing for Wired magazine points out:

  Federal education and stimulus money is being used to create nonmilitary drone education programs. The Department of Aviation at the University of North Dakota, located in Grand Forks and the operator of the test and training site at Grand Forks AFB, now offers the first Bachelors of Science program in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations. The Aviation Maintenance Technology program at Northland Community and Technical College, located in Thief River Falls, Minnesota just 40 miles east of Grand Forks, will soon offer courses in the repair of UAVs.501

  The University of North Dakota is also offering a four-year degree in piloting drones in what is soon expected to be a $20 billion industry.

  Up in the Sky

  Unbeknownst to most Americans, remote-controlled aircraft have been employed domestically for years now. They were first used as a national security tool for patrolling America's borders and then as a means of monitoring citizens. For example, back in 2006, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department was testing out a SkySeer drone for use in police work. With a 6.5-foot wingspan, the lightweight SkySeer can be folded up like a kite and stored in a shoulder pack. At 250 feet, it can barely be seen with the naked eye.502

  As another news story that same year reported, "one North Carolina county is using a UAV equipped with low-light and infrared cameras to keep watch on its citizens. The aircraft has been dispatched to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air–close enough to identify faces–and many more uses, such as the aerial detection of marijuana fields, are planned."503

  Drone technology has advanced dramatically in the ensuing years, with surveillance drones getting smaller, more sophisticated and more lethal with each evolution. Modeling their prototype for a single-winged rotorcraft on the maple seed's unique design, aerospace engineering students at the University of Maryland have created the world's smallest controllable surveillance drones, capable of hovering to record conversations or movements of citizens.504

  Nowhere to Hide

  Thus far, the domestic use of drones has been primarily for surveillance purposes. Eventually, however, police departments and intelligence agencies will make drones a routine part of their operations. However, you can be sure they won't limit themselves to just surveillance.

  Parrot AR Drone (Micah Green/Dispatch Staff)

  Police today use whatever tools are at their disposal in order to anticipate and forestall crime. This means employing technology to attain total control. Technology, which functions without discrimination because it exists without discrimination, tends to be applied everywhere it can be applied. Thus the logical aim of technologically equipped police who operate as technicians must be control, containment, and eventually restriction of freedom. Unfortunately, to a drone, everyone is a suspect because drone technology makes no distinction between the law-abiding individual and the suspect. Everyone gets monitored, photographed, tracked, and targeted.

  In this way, under the guise of keeping Americans safe and controlled, airborne drones will have to be equipped with an assortment of lethal and nonlethal weapons in order to effectuate control of citizens on the ground. The arsenal of nonlethal weapons will include LRADs, which are used to break up protests or riots by sending a piercing sound into crowds and can cause serious hearing damage; high-inten
sity strobe lights, which can cause dizziness, disorientation, and loss of balance and make it virtually impossible to run away; and tasers, which administer a powerful electric shock.

  "Also available to police," writes journalist Paul Joseph Watson, "will be a drone that can fire tear gas as well as rubber pellets to disperse anyone still living under the delusion that they were born in a democratic country."505 In fact, the French company Tecknisolar Seni has built a drone armed with a double-barreled 44 mm Flash-Ball gun. The one-kilo Flash-Ball resembles a large caliber handgun and fires so-called non-lethal rounds, including tear gas and rubber impact rounds to bring down a suspect. Despite being labeled a "non-lethal weapon," this, too, is not without its dangers.506 As David Hambling writes for Wired News, "Like other impact rounds, the Flash-Ball is meant to be aimed at the body–firing from a remote, flying platform is likely to increase the risk of head injury"507

  Drones are also outfitted with infrared cameras and radar508 that can pierce through the darkness, allowing the police to keep track of anyone walking around, regardless of the nature of their business. Police drones are equipped with thermal imaging devices to see through walls.509 There is absolutely nowhere to hide from these machines–even in your home.

  As Congressmen Edward Markey and Joe Barton pointed out in a letter to the FAA

  [S]tate and local governments, businesses, and private individuals are increasingly using unmanned aircraft in the U.S., including deployments for law enforcement operations. As technology advances and cost decreases-drones are already orders of magnitude less expensive to purchase and operate than piloted aircraft–the market for federal, state, and local government and commercial drones rapidly grows.

  Many drones are designed to carry surveillance equipment, including video cameras, infrared thermal imagers, radar, and wireless network "sniffers." The surveillance power of drones is amplified when the information from onboard sensors is used in conjunction with facial recognition, behavior analysis, license plate recognition, or any other system that can identify and track individuals as they go about their daily lives.510

  American scientists have also created blueprints for nuclear powered drones which would increase air time from days to months. Potential problems are dire, such as a crashed drone becoming a dirty bomb or a source of nuclear propulsion for any terrorist groups that get their hands on it.511

  However, while the lethal capabilities of these drones are troubling, especially when one factors in the possibility of them getting into the wrong hands or malfunctioning, the more pressing concern has to do with the drones' surveillance capabilities. As discussed earlier, with the help of nanotechnology, scientists have been able to create ever-smaller drones that mimic the behavior of birds and insects and are almost undetectable.512 Despite their diminutive size, these drones are capable of capturing and relaying vast amounts of data and high-definition video footage. It's inevitable that as more local police agencies acquire these spy flies, their surveillance efforts will expand to include not only those suspected of criminal activity but anyone within range of the cameras.

  Drone Errors, Risks and Vulnerabilities

  Drones, however, are not foolproof. In fact, drones have a history of malfunctioning in midair. As David Zucchino reported in the Los Angeles Times, "The U.S. military often portrays its drone aircraft as high-tech marvels that can be operated seamlessly from thousands of miles away. But Pentagon accident reports reveal that the pilotless aircraft suffer from frequent system failures, computer glitches, and human error."513 For example, the first drone sent to the Texas-Mexico border in the summer of 2010 experienced a communications failure that led to "pilot deviation."514 Drones had to be temporarily grounded while technicians received more training. Fortunately, no one was hurt.

  The U.S. military was on the verge of launching fighter jets and even entertained ideas about a possible shoot-down when an errant Navy drone veered into restricted airspace near Washington, D.C., in August 2010. The incident only served to reinforce concerns about drones let loose in American skies. "Do you let it fly over the national capital region? Let it run out of gas and hopefully crash in a farmer's field? Or do you take action and shoot it down?" said Navy Adm. James Winnefeld Jr., head of Northern Command. "You don't want to shoot it down over a populated area if you can avoid it."515 Even so, Winnefeld is pushing to get more drones into the air, citing the need for a slower and lighter aircraft that could be used to monitor events such as outdoor sports games, political conventions, or inaugural activities.

  Apart from the safety concerns, of which there are many, the widespread use of drones domestically also poses certain security and privacy risks. As one blogger notes, "One has to wonder if the cost of these high tech machines would be balanced by their potentially limited uses or if departments would be forced to expand the uses in order to even employ the drones. Like SWAT battering rams and armored vehicles, would departments feel compelled to use the drones more often than necessary simply to justify their cost?"516

  There's also the problem of drones being hacked into and potentially hijacked. There have been a handful of high-profile crashes involving American drones abroad, including in Iran, the island nation of Seychelles,517 and most recently in Somalia.518 The Iranian government claimed they brought down the drone flying in their territory via a computer hack. This is two years after Iraqis were able to hack into the live feed of a few spy drones using "$26 off-the-shelf software."519 And back in October 2011, the U.S. military admitted that their drone fleet had been infected by a "mysterious virus."520 One can only imagine what a technically proficient hacker in America might be able to do with the wealth of information he could potentially take from these drones, not to mention what a terrorist could do with a fully-armed, remote-controlled airplane.

  If there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that these drones will be equipped with weapons. In fact, the Pentagon actually wants some drones to be able to carry nuclear weapons.521 The destruction brought about by a midair collision or sudden communications failure with a drone carrying weapons would be devastating.

  Here to Stay

  There are many constitutional concerns presented by drones recording Americans' daily activities, with the most obvious being what it means for the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures by government agents. While it will certainly give rise to a whole new dialogue about where to draw the line when it comes to the government's ability to monitor one's public versus private life, the courts have been notorious for their inability to keep pace with rapid advances in technology and its impact on our freedoms.

  As with just about every freedom-leeching, technology-driven government policy inflicted on us by Congress and the White House in recent years, from whole-body scanners in airports to RFID chips in our passports and drivers licenses, the mass introduction of drones into domestic airspace has one main goal: to empower the corporate state by controlling the populace and enriching the military industrial complex. In the meantime, all you can do is keep your eyes on the skies. As Peter W Singer, a military analyst for the Brookings Institution, recognizes, "There's no stopping this technology. Anybody who thinks they can put this genie back in the box–that's silliness."522

  One thing is clear: while the idea of airborne drones policing America's streets may seem far-fetched, like something out of a sci-fi movie, it is now our new reality. It's just a matter of how soon you can expect them to be patrolling your own neighborhood. The crucial question, however, is whether Americans will be able to limit the government's use of such tools of surveillance and compliance or whether we will be caught in an electronic nightmare from which there is no escape.

  CHAPTER 22

  Soylent Green is People!

  The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is fascism–ownership of government by an individual,
by a group, or any controlling private power."525 –FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

  The one strand that weaves itself throughout all of the dystopian novels and films we have discussed thus far is the fact that the future will be ruled by a government that has fused with a corporate elite. "Orwell," as with other dystopian thinkers, writes sociologist Erich Fromm, "is simply implying that the new form of managerial industrialism, in which man builds machines which act like men and develops men who act like machines, is conducive to an era of dehumanization and complete alienation, in which men are transformed into things and become appendices to the process of production and consumption."526

  Dehumanized people? How else do we explain the aggressive use of SWAT teams for minor crimes in American cities, the use of weapons of compliance on American citizens, the atrocities at Abu Ghraib, the President's kill lists, and the drone attacks that wipe out innocent civilians? Consider, too, how we have been reduced to mere consumers, carefully calculated parts of the GDP to be processed, packaged, and sold to the highest bidder.

  This was all inevitable once "we the people" lost control of the government which now rules from the centralized bureaucracy in Washington, D.C. Gone are the local governmental units such as towns and counties which used to serve as our primary form of government. Now we are ruled from afar by a governmental elite which too often operates in secret formulating policies and laws.

  Take, for example, the fact that the laws under which we are all regulated and sometimes prosecuted are no longer written by our so-called representatives. Such innumerable and often oppressive laws are written by such corporate membership organizations as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). These groups are merely the conduits that the megacorporations use to rule us.