By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | JUNE 26, 2012
Military drones have worked just fine for armies to remotely carry out their attacks on enemies. It has also proven lethal when chasing down supposed terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan where US led military attacks have murdered innocent children, men and women. Those attacks too, have been labeled successful, despite the unnecessary killing of unsuspecting victims.
But what if someone was able to actually hack into a frequency being used to direct a drone and used to carry out attacks on civilian targets. Even worse, what if those attacks were intended to cause panic and this panic was meant to justify the introduction of tighter government control on everything and everyone?
The previous two scenarios are equally awful when it comes to a maintaining social order, and keeping the government further from our private lives. However, there is another, more tragic scenario that could play out. What if, as it happened in the Gulf of Tonkin attack, a military drone were hijacked and used to attack a country in an attempt to kick start conflict between two nations? If it was done with a boat, why couldn’t it be done with an unmanned drone?
An article by Steve Watson at Infowars.com explains how Todd Humphreys a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, managed to infiltrate military drone frequencies and could have taken control of those drones if he had wanted to do so. Professor Humphreys was able to enter drone frequencies simply by emitting a stronger signal to the drones than those sent to them by satellites used to guide the aircraft. According to the article, military drones nowadays operate with unencrypted frequencies which are at the mercy of anyone with enough know-how and rather simple technology.
Although Infowars.com’s article does not specifically highlight the fact that the drones could be hacked to carry out false-flag events, and neither does professor Humphreys, the truth is that governments have proven very crafty when finding ways to create chaos and then propose and bring about ‘solutions’ out of that chaos. On August 2, 1964, the US military to bomb its own ship during the Vietnam War, according to declassified documents that confirmed US officials faked the incident justify the escalation of war.
Other examples of false-flag operations used to clamp down on people’s civil liberties and to carry out unnecessary wars all over the world include the Oklahoma City bombing, which occurred during the Bill Clinton administration. As proven by the documentary film A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City in 1995, which successfully exposes the real facts of the self-inflicted terrorist attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. The government blamed the explosion on a patsy known as Timothy McVeigh. In the same fashion, the terrorist attacks of July 7, 2005 in London and September 11 2001 in New York and Washington, DC, where drills and war games were used as smoke screens to blur the actions that would later be used to turn North American and British societies into high tech prison cities. See a list of government admitted false-flag attacks here.
Military drones that were hijacked by anyone with just over $1000 to get the technology and just enough know-how could fire missiles not only on its country of origin, but also be flown over foreign lands and fire against innocents to cause a military reaction from governments or terrorist groups. These governments or terrorist groups could be blamed by powerful military nations to carry out war campaigns or to take over cities and whole nations as it is now happening in the United States, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Britain and others.
Attacks on Pakistan and Afghanistan could actually be considered examples of false-flags since those countries have not attacked the US and governments in those countries did not give authorization for the US military to carry out the bombings. In fact, both Pakistan and Afghanistan have warned the US to stop the attacks. But the US has ignored the petitions and defied those countries sovereignty by carrying out more attacks. Neither country has responded militarily to US attacks on their soils.
Professor Humphreys told Fox News that he had spoken with both the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Homeland Security about how “each one of these could be a potential missile used against the US.” Mr. Humphreys conducted experiments that showed how the lack of encryption contributed to the easy hijacking of the drones. “Spoofing a GPS receiver on a UAV is just another way of hijacking a plane,” Humphreys told Fox News. During his appearance in front of DHS and FAA, professor Humphreys explained how a spoofer, a GPS jammer available for purchase on the internet, was an effective instrument to take control of a drone. Spoofers can manipulate navigation computers with false information that can appear as the real information put into it by the manufacturer of the drone or the operator. Mr. Humphreys used a $1,000 spoofer to infiltrates the GPS system of the drone by emitting a signal that was more powerful than the one from the satellites above the earth.
What would stop a government, or a government proxy group to use this technology to carry out attacks to cause conflict? Nothing. The consequences of the use of this technology are scarier than many made up threats. This is so because there are plans being drawn to have some 30,000 drones in the air at any given point in the near future. Those would be 30,000 potential missiles flying above ready to be deployed as terror weapons. But don’t think that encrypting a military drone frequency would spare us from this kind of disaster. Police drones are already being deployed in countries like the United States and Great Britain to spy the population and those drones are even more easily hackable because they fly at even lower altitudes, which makes it easier to break their encryption and hack their signals.
Besides being potential missiles that can be taken over and simply dropping them over a building or a populated area, military drones could also be used to attack passenger jets. Although so far most of the drones used by police over cities do not carry weapons on them, the likelihood of those being equipped with missiles themselves increases as governments give themselves more power to keep track of citizens. The potential for drones to become weapons of mass destruction, directly or indirectly, either when used by real terrorists or terrorist governments is about to become reality.