MOSCA: The Obama Drone (Open Thread)

© Miri WTPOTUS February 28, 2013   Spoof alert.

Thanks to an anonymous tip, WTPOTUS has breaking news about the MOSCA (Morphable Obama Stealth Cybernetic Agent)–the very first miniature drone developed by the Barack Obama administration. This fly-like drone actually flies and, exactly like a regular housefly, “drones” (on and on and on, like the president).

Unlike some other drone technology (e.g., Darpa’s Hybrid Insect Micro Electromechanical Systems), which inserts mechanics inside of a real insect, the MOSCA was designed to be a totally self-replicating cybernetic organism (or cyborg). Thanks to nano- and bio-technology, a MOSCA can thrive on crap (again, like the president), gathering all the raw material it needs to replicate from sewage. Groundbreaking technology allows the drone to lay “eggs” that develop into cyborg-maggots and then into full-sized MOSCAs, whenever necessary. 

Nano-cameras in multifaceted eyes allow the drone to grab 360-degree images in the blink of an eye. Nano-mics allow it to pick up conversations from within any room; and its programming allows it to isolate conversations even from noisy public locales, such as an outdoor Tea Party rally.

This drone uses cutting-edge technology to store data in its morphable DNA. Instead of digital 1’s and 0’s magnetically encoded onto a silicon chip, data is stored within the components of the MOSCA’s DNA. Thymine, guanine, adenine, and cytosine (TGAC) are reconfigured so that the drone’s terminally redundant DNA can store hundreds of terabytes of information. The drone is also capable of transmitting this information via ubiquitous cellphone towers back to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in the event of an attack against its “person” (e.g., with a fly swatter, which will be a federal crime, of course).

Thanks to carbon-fiber wings, a MOSCA can fly much faster than an ordinary housefly; thus, the drone is nearly impossible to swat (unless you’re as quick as Obama). For its wings, the drone captures and contains carbon from the atmosphere, which helps to reduce CO2 and mitigate global warming, thus meeting one of Obama’s “green” goals.

Meeting yet another Obama green goal, the MOSCA has solar collectors on its wings, allowing it to gather energy from the sun and artificial lights, not unlike a solar-powered calculator. As might be expected, this drone is resistant to insecticides; and bug repellents are useless against it.

The defense contractor who developed the MOSCA (a Democrat-owned American firm located in Saudi Arabia, with subcontractors in Iran, China, and North Korea) received an $85 billion grant from the EPA, via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, thus creating or saving tens of thousands of high-paying jobs overseas, for Muslims and communists.

A MOSCA will be capable of infiltrating anywhere that the Obama administration wants to go: bedrooms, public restrooms, the House of Representatives, Republican National Headquarters, elevators, white supremacists’ outhouses, automobiles, port-a-potties, the NRA, living rooms, offices–the possibilities are endless.

Although a MOSCA may be useful in “overseas contingency operations“, the Obama administration intends to use this drone within the borders of the United States, without warrants, of course. They do not, however, expect to deploy it during “workplace violence” that involves Muslims.

Sources inform us that the drone is scheduled to deploy on 6/6/2013 (2+1+3=6). Rumors about MOSCA have been flying and buzzing around DC, recently.

At a White House press gaggle, someone asked presidential spokesperson Mocking Jay Carney-Barker to respond. (That reporter was subsequently banished from the White House Press Corpse and now “reports” at CNN.)

While Carney-Barker explained that he could not and would never confirm nor deny baseless rumors, he did also state that the Attorney General (AG) has advised the Obama administration that no persons in the USA (except illegal aliens, Muslims, felons, and liberal “persons of color”) have any reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to being observed by houseflies, real or cyborg.

Our sources inform us that the AG expects that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will not interfere in any way in the “political decision” to deploy fly drones within the USA, perhaps because a MOSCA, during testing, left the Ohio micro-aviary to gather some very useful information on every SCOTUS judge.

Our anonymous sources reveal that the MOSCA has the capability of being armed with a biological weapon. Septic pathogens, in a toxic stew propagated from the saliva of Varanus komodoensis (aka the Komodo Dragon), can be stored in a tiny reservoir. Once armed, a MOSCA can make a beeline to any break in the target’s skin (a pimple, a scratch, a papercut, e.g.) and regurgitate the putrid poisonous payload through its labellum. Flesh-eating, antibiotic-resistant bacteria do the rest.

The “beauty” of this approach, according to designers, is that the drone “strike” and its effect are separated by time–it takes days for the target to die, but die he will. Nothing connects this pesky “housefly” to the assassination.

Could armed MOSCAs be used within the USA? We can gather a clue from what John Brennan, nominated to head the CIA, said recently about other types of drones currently in use by our government:

Asked squarely, “Could the Administration carry out drone strikes inside the United States?” Brennan replied, “This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so.”

This is what is known as a non-responsive answer. It is reasonable to assume that if the answer was “no,” Brennan would simply have written, “no.” Instead, in order to avoid a giving straightforward “yes,” he answered a different question than the one that was asked.

When asked at [his confirmation] hearing whether he believed that the Obama administration could carry out drone assassinations on US soil, Brennan responded that he was determined to “optimize transparency on these issues, but at the same time, optimize secrecy and the protection of our national security.” He thus completely evaded the question …

Sources reveal that there was quite a dust-up during the development phase. Obama required each MOSCA to be “branded” on its forehead with a tiny image of Obama’s face. This, he insisted, is payback for the embarrassment that houseflies have caused him over the years.

Obama, often jokingly referred to as “The Lord of the Flies“, seems to be overly attractive to Musca domestica, which habitually land upon his lips, face, and forehead, eliciting snarky commentary in the blogosphere.

Obama won that battle, as he wins most battles, so each MOSCA will have Obama’s face emblazoned upon its head, right between the eyes. The administration is convinced that nobody will ever notice the Obama branding. Our sources paraphrased their attitude:

Ain’t nobody gonna look that close. The past four years have shown that the American people seldom see what’s right in front of their noses. We gave them bread and circuses to keep them distracted.

And so, come June sixth, the Fourth Reich, I mean, the Obama administration will “move forward” (Heil!) with deployment of the MOSCA. Before then, you might want to consider buying one of these:

End of  spoof.

#####

I’m making light of something which is very serious, indeed. Perhaps you could say that I’m whistling past the graveyard. The above quotes by John Brennan are REAL, as are the linked pages, while the MOSCA is, of course, a figment of my imagination. Or is it?

Drones truly are in the news these days: [emphasis added to quotes]

The Federal Aviation Administration said [that] it had issued 1,428 permits to domestic drone operators since 2007, far more than were previously known. Some 327 permits are still listed as active.

Operators include police, universities, state transportation departments and at least seven federal agencies. The remotely controlled aircraft vary widely, from devices as small as model airplanes to large unarmed Predators.

The FAA, which has a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, has estimated 10,000 drones could be aloft five years later. The FAA this week solicited proposals to create six sites across the country to test drones, a crucial step before widespread government and commercial use is approved. …

In theory, drones can offer unblinking eye-in-the-sky coverage. They can carry high-resolution video cameras, infrared sensors, license plate readers, listening devices and other high-tech gear. Companies have marketed drones disguised as sea gulls and other birds to mask their use.

That’s the problem, according to civil liberties groups. The technology is evolving faster than the law. Congress and courts haven’t determined whether drone surveillance would violate privacy laws more than manned planes or helicopters, or whether drone operators may be held liable for criminal trespassing, stalking or harassment.

“Americans have the right to know if and how the government is using drones to spy on them,” said Catherine Crump, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has called for updating laws to protect privacy.

Drones are becoming more and more worrisome:

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is funding research on “micro-drones” that resemble moths, hummingbirds and other small flying creatures and hence can “hide in plain sight,” as one Air Force researcher told me. The Air Force is now testing micro-drones at facilities such as the “micro-aviary” at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio.

These micro-drones could be armed. The Air Force has produced an extrordinarily creepy animated video extolling possible applications of “Micro Air Vehicles,” which a narrator extols as “unobtrusive, pervasive, lethal.” The video shows winged drones swarming out of the belly of a plane and descending on a city, where the drones stalk and kill a suspect. …

The Obama regime has quietly compiled legal arguments for assassinations of American citizens without a trial, as reported recently by NBC News.

It’s heartening to see this story covered in National Geographic, a respected, widely read publication. Their article is comprehensive, giving historical background on drones and information about this fast-developing global technology:

At least 50 other countries have drones, and some, notably China, Israel, and Iran, have their own manufacturers. Aviation firms—as well as university and government researchers—are designing a flock of next-generation aircraft, ranging in size from robotic moths and hummingbirds to Boeing’s Phantom Eye, a hydrogen-fueled behemoth with a 150-foot wingspan that can cruise at 65,000 feet for up to four days.

More than a thousand companies, from tiny start-ups like Miser’s to major defense contractors, are now in the drone business—and some are trying to steer drones into the civilian world. Predators already help Customs and Border Protection agents spot smugglers and illegal immigrants sneaking into the U.S. NASA-operated Global Hawks record atmospheric data and peer into hurricanes. Drones have helped scientists gather data on volcanoes in Costa Rica, archaeological sites in Russia and Peru, and flooding in North Dakota.

So far only a dozen police departments, including ones in Miami and Seattle, have applied to the FAA for permits to fly drones. But drone advocates—who generally prefer the term UAV, for unmanned aerial vehicle—say all 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. are potential customers. They hope UAVs will soon become essential too for agriculture (checking and spraying crops, finding lost cattle), journalism (scoping out public events or celebrity backyards), weather forecasting, traffic control. “The sky’s the limit, pun intended,” says Bill Borgia, an engineer at Lockheed Martin. “Once we get UAVs in the hands of potential users, they’ll think of lots of cool applications.”

Recently, a woman from Ukraine was arrested for allegedly entering into a sham marriage so that she could stay in the USA. What was most interesting about the story was its connection to drone technology:

The woman was not a mail-order bride. She had come here to study. She graduated from the University of Missouri with bachelor’s and master’s degrees in mechanical and aerospace engineering. … [C]ourt records show that the woman was working in Arizona. … “She also has worked on research for the Department of Defense, according to online résumés, specializing in micro-air vehicles: drones the size of birds and insects.”

That is the wonderful thing about a newspaper. Sometimes reading a single sentence is like opening a door into the future.

Drones the size of birds and insects.

We are already being monitored. …

Perhaps it’s a good thing that this woman doesn’t want to go back to Ukraine and take with her all that she has learned, courtesy of our government.

As more and more countries develop their own drones (including our enemies, like Iran) or purchase the technology, allegedly for peaceful uses, it would behoove our leaders to carefully consider the Pandora’s Box that has been opened up with Obama’s extensive use of drone assassinations in foreign countries. How long before other countries claim the right to carry out assassinations, within our borders, against individuals they consider threats to their way of life?

Recently, the son of the “Blind Sheik”–the man imprisoned in the US for his role in the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center–threatened us:

We issued many warnings that a lack of response to our peaceful demands might encourage some Jihadi groups, who view the imprisonment of an Islamic icon like Dr. Omar Abdel Rahman in the U.S. as a direct affront to Islam. As we saw, some youths in Algeria took several people hostage, and tried to exchange them for Dr. Omar Abdel Rahman and for the Pakistani doctor Aafia Siddiqui.

We say: America should be held accountable for the actions of these groups. America got itself into this mess by kidnapping and imprisoning Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, followed by the kidnapping of Sheik Tal’at Fu’ad Qasim, of Abu Omar in Italy, and of Ahmad Salama in Azerbaijan. They were all kidnapped after President Bill Clinton made a decision, in 1993, to allow the CIA to kidnap these men, to interrogate them, and then extradite them to their countries…

… It is America that proves, both directly and indirectly, that peaceful methods do not work with it. These guys undoubtedly wanted justice to be done, and that is why they carried out their actions.

So, you see, they believe that they are justified to take violent action against us to defend Islam and rectify what THEY BELIEVE is an injustice. While we think they’re lunatics, we can’t be sure, given recent history, that the UN or “international law” will see things our way.

The National Geographic article covers many important aspects of the debate about drones: safety, privacy, how to defend against drones from enemy countries, autonomous drones.  Shades of TERMINATOR.  Yikes!

What once was science fiction is very quickly becoming our worst “nightmare scenario.”  Big Brother on steroids … and potentially worse.

Obama may yet make good on his promise to unite us all, but not in the way he pretended to envision.  When it comes to our government using drones inside the USA, conservatives and libertarians now find common cause with liberal groups like the ACLU and the EFF.  It remains to be seen whether or not Congress and the Courts will protect us from the likes of MOSCA in the hands of a tyrannical executive branch.

#####

UPDATE 06/21/13:  FBI head Robert Mueller ADMITTED that the FBI currently deploys drones to spy on US citizens:

The FBI uses drones for domestic surveillance purposes, the head of the agency told Congress early Wednesday.

Robert Mueller, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, confirmed to lawmakers that the FBI owns several unmanned aerial vehicles, but has not adopted any strict policies or guidelines yet to govern the use of the controversial aircraft.

“Does the FBI use drones for surveillance on US soil?” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) asked Mr Mueller during an oversight hearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Yes,” Mueller responded bluntly … Earlier in the morning, however, Mueller said that the agency was only now working to establish set rules for the drone program.