Kamala Harris asks audience if America is ‘ready’ for her presidency, crowd shouts ‘no’

Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., may have had what some are calling her “please clap” moment on Thursday when she got a not so favorable response to the question if America was “ready” for her to be president. 

New Weapons & The New Tactics Which They Make Possible: Three Examples

New Weapons & The New Tactics Which They Make Possible: Three Examples

Via The Saker blog,

There are probably hundreds of books out there about the so-called “Revolution in Military Affairs”, some of them pretty good, most of them very bad, and a few very good ones (especially this one). For a rather dull and mainstream discussion, you can check the Wikipedia article on the RMA. Today I don’t really want to talk this or similar buzzwords (like “hybrid warfare” for example). Frankly, in my experience, these buzzwords serve two purposes:

  1. to sell (books, articles, interviews, etc.)

  2. to hide a person’s lack of understanding of tactics, operational art and strategy.

This being said, there are new things happening in the realm of warfare, new technologies are being developed, tested and deployed, some extremely successfully.

In his now famous speech, Putin revealed some of these new weapons systems, although he did not say much about how they would be engaged (which is quite logical, since he was making a political speech, not a military-technical report). For those would be interested in this topic, you can check hereherehereherehere and here.

The recent Houthi drone and missile strike on the Saudi oil installations has shown to the world something which the Russians have known for several years: that even rather primitive drones can be a real threat. Sophisticated drones are a major threat to every military out there, though Russia has developed truly effective (including cost-effective, which is absolutely crucial, more about that later) anti-drone capabilities.

First, lets look at the very low-cost end of the spectrum: drones

Let’s begin with the primitive drones. These are devices which, according to one Russian military expert, roughly need a 486 CPU, about 1MB of RAM, 1GB of harddisk space and some (now extremely cheap) sensors to capture the signals from the US GPS, the Russian GLONASS or both (called “GNSS”). In fact, the “good terrorists” in Syria, financed, assisted and trained by the “Axis of Kindness” (USA/KSA/Israel) have been attacking the Russian base in Khmeimim with swarms of such drones for years.According to the commander of the air defenses of Khmeiminover 120(!) drones were shot down or disabled by Russian air defenses in just the last two years. Obviously, the Russians know something that some “Axis of Kindness” does not.

The biggest problem: missile systems should not be used against drones

Some self-described “specialists” have wondered why Patriot missiles did not shoot down the Houthi drones. This is asking the wrong question because missiles are completely ineffective in engaging attacking drone swarms. And, for once, this is not about the poor performance of Patriot SAMs. Even Russian S-400s are the wrong systems to use on individual drones or drone swarms. Why? Because of the following characteristics of drones:

  1. they are typically small, with a very special low profile, extremely light and made up of materials which minimally reflect radar signals;

  2. they are very slow, which does not make it easier to shoot them down, but much harder, especially since most radars are designed to track and engage very fast targets (aircraft, ballistic missiles, etc.);

  3. they can fly extremely low, which allows them to hide; even lower than cruise missiles flying NOE;

  4. they are extremely cheap, thus wasting multi-million dollar missiles on drones costing maybe 10-20 dollars (or even say, 30,000 dollars for the very high end) makes no sense whatsoever;

  5. they can come in swarms with huge numbers; much larger than the number of missiles a battery can fire.

From the above, it is obvious how drones should be engaged: either with AA cannons or by EW systems.

In theory, they could also be destroyed by lasers, but these would require a lot of power, thus engaging cheapo drones with them is possible, but not optimal.

It just so happens that the Russians have both, hence their success in Khmeimim.

One ideal anti-drone weapon would be the formidable Pantsir which combines multi-channel detection and tracking (optoelectronics, radar, IR, visual, third-party datalinks, etc.) and a powerful cannon. And, even better, the Pantsir also has powerful medium range missiles which can engage targets supporting the drone attack.

The other no less formidable anti-drone system would be the various Russian EW systems deployed in Syria.

Why are they so effective?

Let’s look at the major weaknesses of drones

First, drones are either remotely controlled, or have onboard navigation systems. Obviously, just like any signal, the remote signal can be jammed and since jammers are typically closer to the intended target than the remote control station, it is easier for it to produce a much stronger signal since the strength of a signal diminishes according to the so-called “inverse square law“. Thus in terms of raw emission power, even a powerful signal transmitted far away is likely to lose to a smaller, weaker, signal if that one is closer to the drone (i.e. near the intended target along the likely axis of attack). Oh sure, in theory one could use all sorts of fancy techniques to try to avoid that (for example frequency-hopping, etc.) but these very quickly dramatically raise the weight and cost of the drone. You also need to consider that the stronger the signal from the drone, the bigger and heavier the onboard power cells need to be, and the heavier the drone is.

Second, some drones rely on either satellite signals (GPS/GLONASS) or inertial guidance. Problem #1: satellite signals can be spoofed. Problem #2 inertial guidance is either not that accurate or, again, heavier and more costly.

Some very expensive and advanced cruise missiles use TERCOM, terrain contour matching, but that is too expensive for light and cheap drones (such advanced cruise missiles and their launchers is what the S-3/400s were designed to engage, and that at least makes sense financially). There are even more fancy and extremely expensive cruise missile guidance technologies out there, but these are simply not applicable to weapons like drones with their biggest advantage being simple technology and low costs.

The truth is that even a non-tech guy like me could build a drone ordering all the parts from online stores such as Amazon, AliBaba, Banggood and tons of others and build pretty effective drones to, say, drop a hand grenade or some other explosive on an enemy position. Somebody with an engineering background could easily build the kind of drones the “good terrorists” have used against the Russians in Syria. A country, even a poor one and devastated by a genocidal war, like Yemen, could very easily build the kind of drones used by the Houthis, especially with Iranian and Hezbollah help (the latter two have already successfully taken remote control of US and Israeli drones respectively).

Finally, I can promise you that right now, in countries like the DPRK, China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, Cuba, etc, there are teams of engineers working on the development of very low cost drones just like there are teams of military analysts developing new tactics of engagement.

This is, I submit, the first not-so-noticed (yet) kinda-revolution in military affairs.

Second, lets look at the very high end: 5th+ generation aircraft and 5-6th generation UAVs

While some in India have declared (for political reasons and to please the USA) that the Su-57 was not “really” a 5th generation aircraft (on the pretext that the first ones were deployed with 4th gen engines and because the Su-57 did not have the same kind of all-aspect RCS which the F-22 has), in Russia and China the debate is now whether the Su-57 is really only a 5th generation aircraft or really a 5th + or even 6th generation one. Why?

For one thing, rumors coming out of the Sukhoi KB and the Russian military is that the pilot in the Su-57 is really an “option”, meaning that the Su-57 was designed from the start to operate without any pilot at all. My personal belief is that the Su-57 has an extremely modular design which currently does require a human pilot and that the first batch of S-57s will probably not fly all alone, but that the capability to remove the human pilot to be replaced by a number of advanced systems has been built-in, and that the Russians will deploy pilot-less Su-57’s in the future.

This 3rd, 4th, 5th and now even 6th generation business is a little too fuzzy for my taste, so I rather avoid these categories and I don’t see a point in dwelling on them. What is important is what weapons systems can do, not how we define them, especially for a non-technical article like this one.

In the meantime, the Russians have for the first time shown this:

What you are seeing here is the following:

A Su-57 flies together with the new long range Russian strike drone: the Heavy Strike UAV S-70 Hunter and here is what the Russian MoD has recently revealed about this drone:

  • Range: 6,000km (3,700 miles)

  • Ceiling: 18,000m (60,000 feet)

  • Max speed: 1,400km/h (1,000mph)

  • Max load: 6,000kg (12,000lbs)

Furthermore, Russian experts are now saying that this UAV can fly alone, or in a swarm, or in a joint flight with a manned Su-57. I also believe that in the future, one Su-57 will probably control several such heavy strike drones.

Flag-waving patriots will immediately declare that the S-70 is a copy of the B-2. In appearance that is quite true. But consider this: the max speed of the B-2 is, according to Wikipedia, 900km/h (560 mph). Compare that with the 1,400km/h (1,000mph) and realize that a flying wing design and a supersonic flying wing design are completely different platforms (the supersonic stresses require a completely different structural design)

What can a Su-57 do when flying together with the S-70?

Well, for one thing since the S-70 has a lower RCS than the Su-57 (this according to Russian sources) the Su-57 uses the S-70 as a long range hostile air defense penetrator tasked with collecting signals intelligence and relaying those back to the Su-57. But that is not all. The Su-57 can also use the S-70 to attack ground targets (including SEAD) and even execute air-to-air attacks. Here the formidable speed and huge 6 tons max load of the S-70 offer truly formidable capabilities, including the deployment of heavy Russian air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-ship capabilities.

Some Russian analysts have speculated that in order to operate with the S-70 the Su-57 has to be modified into a two-seater with a WSO operating the S-70 from the back seat. Well, nobody knows yet, this is all top secret right now, but I think that this idea clashes with the Sukhoi philosophy of maximally reduce the workload of the pilot. True, the formidable MiG-31 has a WSO, even the new MiG-31BM, but the design philosophy at the MiG bureau is often very different from what the folks at Sukhoi develop and, besides, 4 decades stand between the MiG-31 and the Su-57. My personal guess is that the operations of the S-70 will be mostly full automated and even distributed along the network connecting all integrated air and ground based air defense systems. If an engineer reads these lines, I would appreciate any comments or corrections! After all, this is just my best guess.

The usual gang of trolls will probably object that the Russian computer/chip industry is so far behind the supposedly much superior western solid-state electronics that this is all nonsense; there was a human sitting inside the S-70; this thing don’t fly; the Su-57 is a 4th gen aircraft much inferior to the amazingly superb F-22/F-35; and all the rest of it. Especially for them, I want to remind everybody that Russia was the first country to deploy airborne phased array radars on her MiG-31s which, to boot, were capable of exchanging targeting data by encrypted datalinks with FOUR (!) other aircraft maintaining EM silence (while using their optoelectronics and relaying that data back). Furthermore, these MiG-31s could also exchange data with airborne (AWACS) and ground-based (SAMs) radars. And that was in the early 1980s, almost 40 years ago!

The truth is that the Soviet armed forces deployed plenty of network-centric systems long before the West, especially in the Soviet Air Force and Navy (while the Soviet Ground-Forces pioneered the use of so-called RSC “reconnaissance-strike complexes” which were the nightmare of NATO during the Cold War). Nowadays, all we need to do is parse the NATO whining about Russian Anti Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) capabilities to see that the Russians are still pioneering advanced military-technical capabilities which the West can only dream of.

Now let’s revisit some of the recent criticisms of the Su-57

So what about the fact that the Su-57 does not have all-around very low RCSWhat ifthe Su-57 was never intended to spearhead the penetration of advanced and integrated air defense systems? What if from day 1 the Sukhoi designers were warned by their colleagues at Almaz-AnteyNovatorKRET or even the good folks at the OSNAZ (SIGINT) and the 6th Directorate of the GRU that “stealth” is vastly over-rated?What if it was clear to the Russians from day 1 that a low frontal-RCS did not compromise other capabilities as much as a quasi-total reliance on all-aspect low-RCS never to be detected in the first place?

The crucial thing to keep in mind is that new technological capabilities also generate new tactics. By the way, western analysts understand that, hence the new network-centric capabilities of the F-35. This is especially true since the F-35 will be a pathetic dogfighter whereas the Su-57 might well be the most capable one out there: did you know that the Su-57 has several radars besides the main one, that they cover different bands and that they give the Su-57 a 360 degree vision of the battlefield, even without using the signals from the S-70, AWACS or ground based SAM radars?). And in terms of maneuverability, I will just show this and rest my case:

Lastly, the case of the invisible missile container 

Remember the Kalibr cruise-missile recently seen in the war in Syria. Did you know that it can be shot from a typical commercial container, like the ones you will find on trucks, trains or ships? Check out this excellent video which explains this:

Just remember that the Kalibr has a range of anywhere between 50km to 4,000km and that it can carry a nuclear warhead. How hard would it be for Russia to deploy these cruise missiles right off the US coast in regular container ships? Or just keep a few containers in Cuba or Venezuela? This is a system which is so undetectable that the Russians could deploy it off the coast of Australia to hit the NSA station in Alice Springs if they wanted, and nobody would even see it coming. In fact, the Russians could deploy such a system on any civilian merchant ship, sailing under any imaginable flag, and station it not only anywhere off the US coastline, but even in a US port since most containers are never examined anyways (and when they are, it is typically for drugs or contraband). Once we realize this, all the stupid scaremongering about Russian subs off the coast of Florida become plain silly, don’t they?

Now let’s look at some very interesting recent footage from the recent maneuvers in Russia:

Here is what the person who posted that (Max Fisher, here is his YT channel) video wrote about this coastal defense system, explaining it very well:

For the first time, during the tactical exercises of the tactical group of the Northern Fleet, carrying combat duty on the island of Kotelny, the coastal missile system “Bastion” was used The BRK was successful in firing a supersonic Onyx anti-ship cruise missile at a sea target located over 60 kilometers in the Laptev Sea, which confirmed its readiness to effectively carry out combat duty in the Arctic and perform tasks to protect the island zone and the Russian coast. Onyx is a universal anti-ship cruise missile. It is designed to combat surface naval groups and single ships in the face of strong fire and electronic countermeasures. On the basis of the rocket, there are two seemingly absolutely identical export options: the Russian Yakhont and the Indian BrahMos, but with significantly reduced combat characteristics. These vehicles are capable of starting from under water: they have a flight speed of 750 meters per second and carry the crushing high-explosive warhead with a weight of half a ton. The range of their flight is more than 600 kilometers. Previously, Rubezh BRK was used as the main coastal missile system of the tactical group of the Northern Fleet. At the end of August, he successfully hit two targets “Termit” missiles installed in the Laptev Sea at a distance of more than 50 kilometers from the coast.

Now let me ask you this: how hard would you think it would be for Russia to develop a container size version coastal defense system using the technologies used in the Bastion/Yakhont/BrahMos missile systems? Since the AngloZionists have now reneged on The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Russians have already developed a land-based version of their Kalibr missile which is ready to deploy as soon as the US deploys any such missile in Europe.

The fact is that Russia has perfected an entire family of ballistic and cruise missiles which can be completely hidden from detection and which can be deployed literally anywhere on the planet. Even with nuclear warheads.

This capability completely changes all the previous US deterrence/containment strategies (which are still halfway stuck in the Cold War and halfway stuck with low-intensity/counter-insurgency operations like what they have been doing (with no success whatsoever!) in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya and in Latin America and Africa).

In the light of the above, what do you make of the steady flow of NATO ships deployed in the Black Sea to “deter” Russia? If you find it completely suicidal, I agree. In fact, all these ships are doing is allowing the Russians to train their crews on the “real thing”. But should it ever come to a shooting war, the life span of any and every NATO ship in the Black Sea would be measured in minutes. Literally!

Now lets think of Iran. As I said many, many times, Russia will not enter a full-scale war against the combined powers of the “Axis of Kindness” on behalf of Iran (or any other country on the planet). But Russia very much might get seriously fed up with the “Axis of Kindness” and sell Iran any missile the Iranians would be willing to acquire. In the past I have often written that the real sign that Iran is about to be attacked would not be the presence of USN ships in the Strait of Hormuz or along the Iranian coast, but the opposite: a flushing out of all ships from the Strait itself and a careful repositioning of the bulk of the USN ships inside sea and land based US air defenses “umbrella” available at that moment. I can only imagine the nightmare for CENTCOM if Iran begins to acquire even a small number of Bastions or Kalibers or Yakhont or BrahMos missiles 

Conclusion: the “Axis of Kindness” countries are in big, big trouble!

The US and Israel have tremendous technological capabilities, and in normal times US specialists could gradually deploy systems capable of countering the kind of capabilities (not only necessarily Russian ones) we now see deployed in various areas of operations. And there sure is enough money, considering that the US alone spends more on the “promotion of kindness” than the rest of the planet combined! So what is the problem?

Simple, the US Congress, which might well be the most corrupt parliament on the planet, is in the business of:

  1. Hysterically flag-waving and declaring any naysayers “un-American”

  2. Making billions for the US ruling nomenklatura

Thus, to admit that the “shining city on the hill” and its “best armed forces in history” are rapidly falling behind foes which the US propaganda has described as “primitive” and “inferior” for decades is quite literally unthinkable for US politicians. After all, the US public might wonder why all these multi-billion dollar toys the US MIC has been producing in the last decades have not yielded a single success, never-mind a meaningful victory! Trump in his campaign tried to make that point. He was instantly attacked by the Dems for not supporting the “best military in history” and he quickly changed his tune. Now even the weapons the US does not even have yet are better than those already being tested and, possibly, deployed by Russia.

This “feel good” approach to military issues is very nice, warm and fuzzy. But it sure does not make it possible to even identify present, or even less so, future dangers.

Then, of course, there is the issue of money. The US, in its short history, has deployed some absolutely world class weapons systems in technologies. My personal favorites: the Willys MBm, also known as a Jeep, and the superb F-16. But there are many, many more. The problem with these, at least from the point of view of the US nomenklatura, is that they were designed for warfare, for the many and very different real-world battlefields out there. They were never designed to enrich the already fantastically rich!

Hence the country which produced the Jeep now mostly produces massive hulks of metal which drive like crap, which constantly break, but which give the narcissistic and baseball cum sunglasses hat wearing left-lane male drivers a delightful feeling of macho superiority. And, of course, the country which created and deployed the formidable, yet economic, F-16 in the thousands (well over 4000 I think) now produces the F-35 (good thing that the US colonies like Poland or Japan are willing to buy them to please their beloved Uncle Shmuel).

From the point of view of the US nomenklatura, the F-35 is a stunning, amazing, success, not a high-tech flying brick! The costs of this system are not the proof of the incompetence of US engineers, or the cluelessness of US military analysts. Rather, these costs are proof of the combined effects of infinite greed and self-worship of the US ruling class.

Sadly, one of the best ways to learn the important lessons, is by means of a painful or catastrophic defeat. The Russia of today would not have been possible without the horrors of the “democratic rule” of Eltsin in the 1990s. Think of it: during the first Chechen war, the Russians had a hard time even finding one complete combat capable regiment and they had to use “combined battalions” (сводный батальон) instead. This will probably also happen to the USA.


Tyler Durden

Fri, 10/04/2019 – 00:05

LA airport to shuttle Uber, Lyft, taxi customers between terminals and new pickup area: reports

Need a quick ride home from the airport? If you’ve just arrived in Los Angeles, you’ll soon have to take a shuttle to a parking lot away from the terminal to catch your Uber, Lyft or taxi.

Trump Baits Panicking Media – Says Forget 4 More Years, How About 16?

President Donald Trump poked some fun at the media generally, and apparently comedian Bill Maher specifically, after a crowd in Florida began chanting “four more years.” After the chants began during his Thursday speech on Medicare at The Villages, Trump said, “Don’t do four more years. Say eight more years,” Fox News reported. “If you…

The post Trump Baits Panicking Media – Says Forget 4 More Years, How About 16? appeared first on The Western Journal.

Putin: China Ready To Buy As Much Soybeans, Wheat As Russia Can Produce Amid US Trade War

Putin: China Ready To Buy As Much Soybeans, Wheat As Russia Can Produce Amid US Trade War

There were a number of interesting comments made by President Putin today regarding Russia’s increasingly cozy relations with longtime rival China at the Valdai Discussion Club at Sochi on Thursday. “We are now helping our Chinese partners to create a missile-warning system, a missile-attack warning system,” Putin announced

While slamming the recent US exit from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) as harming global stability, he added, “This is a very serious thing that will dramatically increase China’s defense capability, because only the U.S. and Russia have such a system now.”

Image via Sputnik 

Immediately after his comments, which further come on the heels China’s elaborate military hardware-laden 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Foreign Policy noted what’s become increasingly apparent as both Beijing and Moscow find themselves in the US administration’s cross hairs  with the latter grappling with the uncertain effects of Trump’s trade war, and the former under various sanctions:

Most strikingly, Moscow is back in the picture, once again officially deemed to be Beijing’s best comrade-in-arms, in a throwback to the earliest years of the People’s Republic of China

Though still in trial production, it’s expected that China will be among the first nations to acquire Russia’s S-500 anti-air missile system.

This month Chinese media touted the next generation S-500’s capabilities as “greatly exceeding any active air defense system in the world,” according to a report in Sina news portal.

Russia’s deadly S-500 SAM system, still in trial production phase, via Pravda.ru

Putin also made reference to deepening economic cooperation with Beijing, going so far as to claim China stands ready to buy as much soybeans and wheat as Russia can produce.

Of course, there’s no way Russia could even come close to filling the gap left by China’s latest tariffs imposed on soybeans coming from the United States, which Putin acknowledged. 

“They are ready to buy from us as much as we can produce but the issue is we are not ready for this now… not yet ready for such volumes,” Putin said.

And more generally Putin made an unprecedented defense of China over and against those seeking to “restrain” Russia’s powerful southeast neighbor.

A prior visit of Putin with China’s Xi, via the WSJ. 

Regarding the attempts to restrain China: I think that by definition it is impossible. And if someone makes such attempts, he, the one who does it, will understand that it is impossible. And during those attempts, of course, will harm himself,” Putin said at Valdai’s plenary session.

“In any case, I consider such a development of events to be destructive and harmful, while joining efforts to create an environment of friendly cooperation and finding common security systems for all, is what we should work on together,” the Russian president added.


Tyler Durden

Thu, 10/03/2019 – 23:45

Tags

REPORT: Ousted Citizenship and Immigration Services chief returns to DHS

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News App offers the following information published by TheHill.com:

The former head of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has returned to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a policy role.

A DHS spokesperson told The Hill in a statement Thursday that Lee Francis Cissna has “assumed new duties” in the department’s policy office.

The article goes on to state the following:

“Prior to his appointment as the Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Francis Cissna was a career official in the Department’s Office of Policy, where he has assumed new duties,” the official said.

“News of his new role in the administration was met with surprise by some officials Tuesday,” BuzzFeed News reports. “’It’s like having your ex over for holidays with your new in-laws,’ an administration official told BuzzFeed News. ‘Super awkward.’”

“Given the way the administration disposed of him so publicly from USCIS, it’s hard to see how he’ll be able to get anything done in this key immigration policy office at DHS,” a USCIS official told Buzzfeed.

 

To get more information about this article, please visit TheHill.com. To weigh in, leave a comment below.

The post REPORT: Ousted Citizenship and Immigration Services chief returns to DHS appeared first on DML News.

REPORT: Bugs, mold and unwashed hands: ‘Horrible’ nursing home kitchens endanger the elderly, advocates say

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News App offers the following information published by NBCNews.com:

Flies buzzing the undercooked hamburgers. Cockroaches scurrying for cover behind the oven. A moldy ice machine. Mystery debris, clinging to the crevices of a meat slicer. Hundreds of mouse droppings, trailing across the hood of the stove.

These incidents are not logged in any restaurant inspector’s notebook. They are among the thousands of food safety violations discovered in the last three years in America’s nursing homes, where fragile residents can least tolerate such lapses.

The article goes on to state the following:

While allegations of elder abuse and neglect dominate the horror stories in long-term care settings — bedsores, falls, medication errors, sexual assaults — food handling remains a consistent and often overlooked hazard, FairWarning found in a five-month investigation.

NBC says this article was produced by the nonprofit news organization FairWarning, which “focuses on public health, consumer and environmental issues.”

Read more at NBCNews.com

To get more information about this article, please visit NBCNews.com. To weigh in, leave a comment below.

The post REPORT: Bugs, mold and unwashed hands: ‘Horrible’ nursing home kitchens endanger the elderly, advocates say appeared first on DML News.

What’s The Big Problem With Facial Recognition?

What’s The Big Problem With Facial Recognition?

Authored by Michael Maharrey via Tenth Amendment Center,

The Oakland City Council recently gave final approval to an ordinance banning facial recognition in that city. This is part of a broader movement at the state and local level to ban outright or at least limit this invasive surveillance technology.

So, what’s the big problem with facial recognition?

There are plenty.

In the first place, it’s just not very accurate, especially when reading African American and other minority facial features. It gets it wrong a lot of the time.

This isn’t just theoretical musing. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature as people in a database of arrest photos.

But as ACLU attorney Matt Cagle said, this isn’t a problem that can be fixed by tweaking an algorithm. There are more fundamental issues with facial recognition. Government use of facial recognition technology for identifying and tracking people en masse flies in the face of both the Fourth Amendment and constitutional provisions protecting privacy in every state constitution.

Berkeley, California, City Councilmember Kate Harrison is pushing for a facial recognition ban in her city. In her recommendation of the ordinance, she pointed out the inherent constitutional problem with facial recognition.

It eliminates the human and judicial element behind the existing warrant system by which governments must prove that planned surveillance is both constitutional and sufficiently narrow to protect targets’ and bystanders’ fundamental rights to privacy while also simultaneously providing the government with the ability to exercise its duties.

Facial recognition technology automates the search, seizure and analysis process that was heretofore pursued on a narrow basis through stringent constitutionally-established and human-centered oversight in the judiciary branch. Due to the inherent dragnet nature of facial recognition technology, governments cannot reasonably support by oath or affirmation the particular persons or things to be seized. The programmatic automation of surveillance fundamentally undermines the community’s liberty.

Facial recognition puts every person who crosses its path into a perpetual lineup without any probable cause. It tramples restrictions on government power intended to protect our right to privacy. It feeds into the broader federal surveillance state. And at its core, it does indeed fundamentally undermine liberty.


Tyler Durden

Thu, 10/03/2019 – 23:25

Tags

Hannity: Media trying to ‘flood the zone’ with ‘anti-Trump speculation’

Sean Hannity reacted to a new report Wednesday evening that President Trump brought up former Vice President Joe Biden during a phone call with the president of China by calling for the release of an transcripts between Biden and Ukraine, saying it was all “a fishing expedition.”

REPORT: Police chief says what’s next for officer suspended for turning driver over to ICE

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News App offers the following information published by WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM:

A Virginia police officer who was suspended for violating department policy against conducting civil immigration enforcement for Immigration and Customs Enforcement will return to duty Friday.

Fairfax County Police Chief Edwin Roessler said in a Wednesday statement that the unnamed officer would be back on the force, although he noted that an internal investigation into the matter was still ongoing.

The article goes on to state the following:

“We have one of the best police forces in the U.S. and I have confidence that our officer will represent us well throughout his career. Our internal administrative investigation continues as prescribed by policy,” Roessler said.

To get more information about this article, please visit WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM. To weigh in, leave a comment below.

The post REPORT: Police chief says what’s next for officer suspended for turning driver over to ICE appeared first on DML News.

US Army Readying Massive Order For M16A4 Assault Rifles

US Army Readying Massive Order For M16A4 Assault Rifles

Whether it’s because of the threat of war in the Middle East or maybe due to modernization efforts via the Pentagon, a new report from Defense Blog indicates that the U.S. Army Contracting Command is requesting two, 5-year fixed contracts for M16A4 assault rifles.

Defense Blog initially found the announcement posted on FedBizOpps, the U.S. government’s main contracting website, dated Sept. 27, is asking private industry to fulfill two orders for assault rifles. Each order will include anywhere from 12 to 215,000 standard configuration M16A4 with backup iron sight and adapter rail system.

Selected vendors will be required to sign a license agreement with Colt’s Manufacturing Company, LLC. and the U.S. Government before manufacturing begins. Vendors will also be asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement to receive technical data on how to manufacture the M16A4.

The US Marine Corps first adopted the M16A4 assault rifle in 1998. It was the standard-issued weapon of the USMC until 2015, replaced with the M4 carbine ever since.

The M16A4 has been widely exported to U.S. allies, such as Thailand, Tunisia, and Turkey.

The weapon is a gas-operated rifle and chambers a standard NATO 5.56×45 round. It has an effective range of 550 meters.

The weapon isn’t fully automatic, has a fire mode selector that the operator can switch to “safe,” “semi-auto,” and “3-round burst”.

It’s unclear if the M16A4s are intended for U.S. service members, or will be sold to allies.

Last month, we reported that the Army is closer to deploying a new service weapon that could soon replace the M16, M4, and M249 light machine gun sometime in the early 2020s.

The Army announced in August that it selected three defense companies to deliver prototype weapons for the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) program. The new weapons must be lighter and able to penetrate the world’s most advanced body armor from at least 600 meters away, defense insiders say.

The Army will test AAI/Textron, G.D., and Sig Sauer assault rifles in a 27-month test. The Army is expected to wrap up the test in 1H22 when it’s supposed to announce the winning design. By 2H22, the Army could start fielding the new weapons to combat units.

And with that being said, the new M16A4s are likely for export to allies rather than U.S. service members.


Tyler Durden

Thu, 10/03/2019 – 23:05

Quibi’s Jeffrey Katzenberg, Meg Whitman to Deliver CES 2020 Keynote

Quibi founder Jeffrey Katzenberg and CEO Meg Whitman are slated to hit the CES 2020 keynote stage in Las Vegas to talk up their billion-dollar bet on mobile TV streaming, three months ahead of its scheduled debut. The duo are to deliver a keynote presentation at the annual consumer-electronics convention on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, […]