US Drone Sightings Provoke Reactions From New Jersey Legislature, Federal Government (apnews.com) 43
On Thursday New Jersey lawmakers passed a resolution "calling on the federal government to conduct a 'rigorous and ongoing' investigation into the drone sightings in the state," reports the Associated Press:
Meanwhile, federal and local authorities are warning against pointing lasers at suspected drones, because aircraft pilots are being hit in the eyes more often. Authorities also said they are concerned people might fire weapons at manned aircraft that they have mistaken for drones...
White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said Monday that the federal government has yet to identify any public safety or national security risks. "There are more than 1 million drones that are lawfully registered with the Federal Aviation Administration here in the United States," Kirby said. "And there are thousands of commercial, hobbyist and law enforcement drones that are lawfully in the sky on any given day. That is the ecosystem that we are dealing with." The federal government has deployed personnel and advanced technology to investigate the reports in New Jersey and other states, and is evaluating each tip reported by citizens, he said. About 100 of the more than 5,000 drone sightings reported to the FBI in recent weeks were deemed credible enough to warrant more investigation, according to a joint statement by the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Defense.
Speculation has raged online, with some expressing concerns the drones could be part of a nefarious plot by foreign agents or clandestine operations by the U.S. government. Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said it's unlikely the drones are engaged in intelligence gathering, given how loud and bright they are. He repeated Tuesday that the drones being reported are not being operated by the Department of Defense. Asked whether military contractors might be operating drones in the New Jersey area, Ryder rebuffed the notion, saying there are "no military operations, no military drone or experiment operations in this corridor." Ryder said additional drone-detecting technology was being moved to some military installations, including the Picatinny Arsenal...
U.S. Sen. Andy Kim, a New Jersey Democrat, said he has heard nothing to support the notion that the government is hiding anything. He said a lack of faith in institutions is playing a key part in the saga.
White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said Monday that the federal government has yet to identify any public safety or national security risks. "There are more than 1 million drones that are lawfully registered with the Federal Aviation Administration here in the United States," Kirby said. "And there are thousands of commercial, hobbyist and law enforcement drones that are lawfully in the sky on any given day. That is the ecosystem that we are dealing with." The federal government has deployed personnel and advanced technology to investigate the reports in New Jersey and other states, and is evaluating each tip reported by citizens, he said. About 100 of the more than 5,000 drone sightings reported to the FBI in recent weeks were deemed credible enough to warrant more investigation, according to a joint statement by the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Defense.
Speculation has raged online, with some expressing concerns the drones could be part of a nefarious plot by foreign agents or clandestine operations by the U.S. government. Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said it's unlikely the drones are engaged in intelligence gathering, given how loud and bright they are. He repeated Tuesday that the drones being reported are not being operated by the Department of Defense. Asked whether military contractors might be operating drones in the New Jersey area, Ryder rebuffed the notion, saying there are "no military operations, no military drone or experiment operations in this corridor." Ryder said additional drone-detecting technology was being moved to some military installations, including the Picatinny Arsenal...
U.S. Sen. Andy Kim, a New Jersey Democrat, said he has heard nothing to support the notion that the government is hiding anything. He said a lack of faith in institutions is playing a key part in the saga.
We need to look into... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A lot of politics these days is placating the mob with stupid stuff so they'll support everything else. If evil mind-control drones serve your needs, that's what you're going to push in the media.
Re:We need to look into... (Score:5, Informative)
And some are well identified. Legislator held up a picture of Orion as an example of the drones he saw.
Re: (Score:3)
I heard it reported as absolute fact that Iran had a drone carrier off the US coast and was sending fixed wing drones over New Jersey. It's mass hysteria.
I have no doubt that foreign actors are using drones to get intelligence on US sites, but if the foreigners have any sense they're hiding in plain sight among the roughly million hobby drones being operated by US citizens. It's just one of the disadvantages of trying to secure a largely free country.
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians answer to their constituents. Now recall the George Carlin quote about stupid people
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians answer to their constituents. Now recall the George Carlin quote about stupid people
Please tell me it wasn't "stupid people forget what George Carlin said."
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians love an issue that gets people excited but can't be solved.
New defense system tests (Score:2)
Total mystery... (Score:5, Informative)
Bruce Simpson from my country of New Zealand did a great video earlier on in the week on this.
There's some comparisons of some of the images and other common objects in the sky.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
let the cops bring down whatever doesn't have a transponder using a jammer. If it's too big (or has shielded auto-nav) for that, hand it off to the military. Or hell, fill it full of lead if you aren't worried about where the shrapnel and bullets will land.
You should be more worried about what the drone crashes into when you shoot it down. That shit is gonna hurt when it hits you, or your car, or your house... plus the fire from the punctured batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
>You should be more worried about what the drone crashes into when you shoot it down
Yep. I thought that adequately covered with, "if you aren't worried about where the shrapnel and bullets will land".
Non-military drones typically have a 'safe auto-descent' mode if they lose their control source, so if they're not fully autonomous they'll either attempt to return to their point of origin or slowly descend until they land wherever they are if you're jamming them.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, you did say it, but...I thought it was big enough deal to be specific for the less thoughtful readers among us.
When you shoot a done, it is not going to perform a safe descent, its gonna crash and burn. Same if the military hits it with a directed energy weapon and fries its electronics.
Re: (Score:2)
We will not be ignored! (Score:5, Funny)
New Jersey legislators passed a bill demanding they be taken seriously, and that everyone needs to stop pointing and laughing at them!
Grovers Mill (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is so last month.
Duh! (Score:4, Funny)
When will these thick-headed politicians get it through their heads that these weren't drones -- just regularly scheduled commercial aircraft flights at night.
Seriously, what they're doing is somewhat akin to banning pedestrians because cars are crashing on the freeway.
Let me repeat:
Drones are not the problem -- idiots who can't tell the difference between a drone and a freaking airliner are the problem!
I live on the other side of the world from the USA but I pointed out *exactly* what was going on long before the penny finally dropped in the USAA.
New Jersy Drone Mystery Solved [youtube.com] (from December 10th).
Re: (Score:3)
Most of the (low resolution shit) footage I've seen on the news is obviously either airliners or general aviation aircraft. Some of it is so ridiculously obvious as to be laughable. I turned on Fox News the other day and Laura Ingram was looping footage while interviewing some so-called expert about the "drone crisis." 100% of the shots they were showing were aircraft obviously coming in for landing. They had nav lights, strobes, and landing lights on. One of them clearly even had its gear already down.
This
Re: (Score:2)
I once saw a Fox News station showing a picture of a UFO trailing sparks over Manhattan. It was Jupiter with the Galilean moons off to one side.
Re: (Score:2)
>Drones are not the problem -- idiots who can't tell the difference between a drone and a freaking airliner are the problem!
Well, if THAT is what's happening I fully support anyone making such a report - or a reporter relaying it when the evidence is clear - having "STUPID" forcibly tattooed on their forehead as a warning to everyone they talk to from that day forward.
And maybe 'MORON' high on their cheeks in case they take to wearing a hat or headband.
our paranoid society (Score:2)
National Guard (Score:2)
Interposition is the controlling doctrine and the NJ Governor ought to grow a pair and utilize his Air National Guard.
But he's who he is so he won't.
And some plurality of the population voted for a leader like that.
Re: (Score:2)
the NJ Governor ought to grow a pair and utilize his Air National Guard.
Since much of what has been reported as drone incursions are apparently general aviation aircraft, that could get very interesting.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, back when I was James Bond I infiltrated the Dulce Base in New Mexico. After I evaded the laser traps using only a can of hairspray so I could visualize them and my incredible flexibility and martial arts skills, I made it down to the thirteenth sublevel where I met with a grey alien who telepathically communicated with me. He explained that they were going to keep full running lights on at all times so their existence could not be ignored. Unfortunately, that's all I remember because that's when I wo
Mike West on Youtube ... (Score:2)
Most of them are just airplanes. ...
One video an elected official posted are the stars of the Orion constellation.
And so on and on
Check out what Mike West posted on the drone situation [youtube.com].
For those not familiar with Mike, he often does detailed debunking of UFO/UAP claims, and provide evidence to why it is most likely this or that (balloons, stars, airplanes, ...).
Mass hysteria (Score:2)
I never really believed in the concept of mass hysteria until everything in the sky with strobes and landing lights became a "drone".
Re: (Score:1)
UAPs are so last year.
Large drones must broadcast radio beacons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of credible people say they are drones; police, politicians.
Why would these people be credible on aviation topics? That said, I have no doubt there are drones all over the place. I've been seeing people *launching* the things for years now.
As for drones being noisy, that's true, but even a quadcopter be pretty faint if they're flying at 400 feet. Also, a party with what they call "national means" wouldn't have any trouble altering the firmware of the drone to make it capable of flying higher; some drones limited to 400 feet are capable of reaching 500m. Other
Re: (Score:2)
Surely, the most brilliant and honest our society has to offer.
psyops (Score:3)
There is a strong impression that the federal government just does not care about whatever is occuring and that is raising alarm across large areas of the country, which is decidedly odd.
The military assures us that there is no threat, but claims they don't know who it is over their bases. Riiiight.
I believe them: It surely is no threat, as they are perfectly capable of identifying drones and dealing with them.
This simply means that it's classified, and that for some reason "The USA is testing drones" is not a sufficient cover story. So why would that explanation not fly? I you think about it for five seconds, it is obvious that this is all a psuops "test" (directed at, but not "against". if you will) our own country.
The military knows it's not a threat, but can say with a straight face that they don't know who it is. That's a plain lie, coming from the JCS or SECDEF. It could be that base commanders "don't know who it is", as they have just been advised that it's not a threat and to cooperate. The drones could even been launched from their bases without them "knowing". They are expressly forbidden from saying, "We got the word that it's no threat, in fact, we even let them use our base to operate from."
The government's public response is to dispatch special drone-observing assets. This could be a politician response: "We can and are doing SOMETHING about it." The psyop certainly predicted/included that too -- it's all part of the psyop.
The interesting thing that I don't understand is what the government will say when this is all over. They can't admit that it was a government operation, as that will upset everybody and make people very angry. The alternative is to lie and say:
"We had no idea, but we figured it out. How embarrassed we are, this was like the balloons. But we have taken steps, and the Chinese will never be able to do this to us again!"
PS. We need more anti-drone funding.
And, Thank You for playing our game.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program.
The purpose of the psyop is multifaceted; most of it is obvious, use your imagination. It likely includes the standard (SUV-sized) drones that I see flying around the Washington, D.C. metro area all the time -- in addition to these "unknown" psyop drones.
I'm a (real airplane and helicopter) pilot by the way, so more practiced at identifying things in the sky. It is very hard (even for me) to easily figure out what I'm looking at. No surprise about the general mis-identification hysteria.
The truth that we often conduct psyops "against" our own country will never be admitted, of course. Not sure why this conspiracy theory is not all over the media. I have a long association working with the military and I'm fine with it, but where are the whackos? And what does this all say about the politically-charged socially-disrupted information environment that we live in?
Where are the drones? (Score:1)
The drones are not in the sky. The drones are on the ground making all these ridiculous claims.
they'd have more credibility if (Score:2)
1) they spent the first several days of the 'Chinese balloon overflight' not saying the exact same thing, before they basically got caught completely lying and then freaked the shit out, spending $millions to down a balloon.
2) they didn't start with "we have no idea what they are or where they're from" following into "...but we are sure they're not dangerous"
Jesus Christ even the quality of government coverups has fallen.
Nuclear material (Score:2)