[WARNING -- REALLY bad language. Protect your virgin eyes. Alas: to describe one obscenity, others must be used. HW]
The Attorney General of the United States of America, on Friday, openly defied the Congress of the United States of America, in one of the most blatant acts of defiance of the law of these United States ever seen.
This Constitutional showdown was considered by our criminal media as barely worth mentioning. They sniffed, daintily:
Attorney general declines to investigate Bush advisers
CNN - 21 hours ago
WASHINGTON (CNN) — US Attorney General Michael Mukasey Friday said he will not ask a federal grand jury to investigate whether two top Bush administration …
Aww, CNN. That’s the BEST you could come up with? Dear ghod. That’s the sort of mentality that would criticize an Adolph Hitler for not sticking out his pinky while drinking tea and ignore the death camps.
Er … whoops. That’s kind of exactly what they DID do, isn’t it?
Mukasey Refuses to Prosecute Bush Aides
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 1, 2008; Page A02
Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey refused yesterday to refer two new House contempt citations to a federal grand jury, saying the White House aides involved in the case cannot be prosecuted because they were following legal advice from the Justice Department.
In a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Mukasey said the refusal by White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former presidential counsel Harriet E. Miers to comply with congressional subpoenas “did not constitute a crime.”
The department “will not bring the congressional contempt citations before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute Mr. Bolten or Ms. Miers,” Mukasey wrote.
Mukasey’s refusal further escalates a dispute between the administration and Congress over the firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.
Really? A DISPUTE? The use of the Attorney General’s office for political jihads against Democrats? The politicization of Justice in a manner not seen since Hitler’s Germany? The blatant pissing on the Constitution of the “Chief Law Enforcement Officer” of the land?
Where is brave Eliot Richardson, resigning rather than fire Archibald Cox, the Special Watergate Prosecutor? Where are the other principled AG officers who resigned until they came to sick, twisted Robert Bork*, who DID fire Cox?
[* Bork -- now a professional victim, enriching himself with his "victim" status for being rightfully denied his chance to besmirch the Supreme Court of the United States of America -- convinced Barry Goldwater (along with William Rehnquist) to vote and speak against the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act of 1964.]
Is our law left in the hand of the Borks?
Worse, listen to the Criminal Mukasey’s rationale for this:
“Today’s decision to shelve the contempt process, in violation of a federal statute, shows that the White House will go to any lengths to keep its role in the US Attorney firings hidden,” Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement.
The law provides for such cases to be sent to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia for possible referral to a grand jury. But Mukasey cited a 1984 Justice Department legal opinion, which said that “the contempt of Congress statute was not intended to apply and could not constitutionally be applied to an Executive Branch official who asserts the President’s claim of executive privilege.” (WashPo, ibid.)
Uh, quoting (without any sense of irony) a Nineteen Eighty Four Justice Department legal opinion? Hey, I used to type up and even help draft legal opinions for the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, and they’re worth the paper they’re written on … barely. A legal opinion is meant to be the best guess as to what the courts will rule on some policy issue, but has precisely the same force of law that a ruptured moth has. On a bad day. Here: this is what the ACTUAL law says (in contrast to the LSD Hallucination version of Law that the Bush Administration has been operating under ever since racist thug Rehnquist and his GOP cronies exercised their act of ultimate contempt of Constitution on 12-12-2000):
CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS
Congress has the authority to hold a person in contempt if the person’s conduct or action obstructs the proceedings of Congress or, more usually, an inquiry by a committee of Congress. Contempt of Congress is defined in statute, 2 U.S.C.A. Sec 192, enacted in 1938, which states that any person who is summoned before Congress who “willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry” shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a maximum $1,000 fine and 12 month imprisonment.
Before a Congressional witness may be convicted of contempt, it must be established that the matter under investigation is a subject which Congress has constitutional power to legislate. Generally, the same Constitutional rights against self-incrimination that apply in a judicial setting apply when one is testifying before Congress.
Quinn v. U.S., 349 U.S. 155, 75 S. Ct. 668, 99 L. Ed. 964, 51 A.L.R.2d 1157 (1955).
Fields v. U.S., 164 F.2d 97 (App. D.C. 1947).
For you laypersons, the Subpoena power of Congress is what allowed Congress to compel the testimony of mafia figures in the 1950s, and Iran Contra figures in the 1980s. Imagine, for a moment, if Reagan had said: Naw. Ollie North and Admiral Poindexter don’t have to testify. Or, if Nixon had said John Dean doesn’t have to testify.
But that’s what Bush is doing, and our syphilitic whores of the Mainstream Media are giving him a pass. Consider the headlines:
Contempt Orders a Proxy for Impeachment?
The Associated Press – 6 hours ago
Mukasey rejects contempt citations
Detroit Free Press, United States – 15 hours ago
Attorney general declines to investigate Bush advisers
CNN – 21 hours ago
Pelosi, Branded Panderer to Loony Liberals, Asks DOJ to Probe Bush …
Wall Street Journal – Feb 29, 2008
Pelosi Asks Justice Dept. to Pursue 2 Bush Aides
New York Times, United States – Feb 28, 2008
House speaker seeks grand jury probe of 2 Bush aides
CNN – Feb 28, 2008
US House speaker asks for probe of Bush aides
Xinhua, China – Feb 28, 2008
Pelosi Calls For Grand Jury Investigation Of Bolten, Miers
CBS News, NY – Feb 28, 2008
Pelosi Wants Bush Aides Investigated
The Associated Press – Feb 28, 2008
US Attorney General Rejects Calls For A Grand Jury Investigation
AHN – 9 hours ago
Mukasey to Pelosi: I’ve Got Your Contempt Right Here
Hot Air, MD – 21 hours ago
AG Mukasey blocking investigation of criminal acts by Bush advisors
AlaskaReport, AK – 21 hours ago
Mukasey rejects grand jury probe of Miers, Bolten contempt of …
JURIST – 22 hours ago
Mukasey swiftly rebuffs Pelosi
Politico, DC – Feb 29, 2008
Pelosi urges grand jury probe into Bolten, Miers contempt of …
JURIST – Feb 28, 2008
Pelosi Demands Grand Jury for WH Aides
AOL News Newsbloggers, VA – Feb 28, 2008
Pelosi seeks grand jury investigation of White House aides
The Hill, DC – Feb 28, 2008
Pelosi Makes Criminal Referral for Contempt Citations of White …
TPM, NY – Feb 28, 2008
Mukasey won’t pursue contempt probe of Bush aides
Reuters India, India – 21 hours ago
AG Refuses Probe of Ex-Bush Aides
The Associated Press – Feb 29, 2008
Wooo. The biggest Constitutional crisis of my lifetime and the human waste of the media treat it AS IF it were a minor dustup over whether the crumpets were crisp enough at the garden club brunch. It’s Pelosi being unpleasant and Mukasey “rebuffing” said unpleasantness.
Why, you’d think that Muffy and Ducky had been having a tiff at the yacht club over whose AKC Pedigree’d miniature poodle went first at the Westminster Dog Show. Easy, there, Muffy! You might break a nail.
Listen to this worthless fucking cunt from AP, who consigns the whole goddamned crisis to “politics,” like it was just the latest PEOPLE Magazine naughtiness from Britney or Paris:
On Friday, Mukasey said he would not refer the citations to a grand jury and that neither Bolten nor Miers had committed a crime. Pelosi then announced that she has given the Judiciary Committee authority to sue Bolten and Miers in federal court.
The reasons for the Democrats’ two-pronged approach were about much more than the balance of power. They were unmistakably political, a point the White House highlighted in its response.
Democrats did not even spend much energy denying it.
Democratic aides involved in the progression of the contempt citation acknowledged its political benefits, notably cheering up a base demoralized by Pelosi’s inability to get the caucus to force Bush to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.
(Here’s the tagline: EDITOR’S NOTE — Laurie Kellman has covered Congress and politics in Washington for a decade. And here’s the headline: Contempt Orders a Proxy for Impeachment?)
That’s fucking TREASON from this worthless newbie. By all rights she ought to be staked to a red ant hill, and honey poured over her most sensitive parts. That would be the KINDEST punishment deserved for betraying everything this country stands for in ginning up this monstrous lie: it’s all just a little political tiff. Nothing to see here. Move along.
(Talk about being an enabler.)
Not one of these worthless bastards hits anywhere near the truth:
The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, — the supreme branch of the government, Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution — being pissed on by the Attorney General of the United States, the head of the Justice Department, charged with “preserving and protecting the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC” in a very special way that no other officer of our government is.
Where are the goddamned tanks surrounding and facing the White House? Where are the enraged citizens in the streets? Where the FUCK are the goddamned talking heads, at least?
Suppose they had a Constitutional Crisis and nobody gave a damn.
Worse, who are these whores of our media, and what are their priorities?
Well, the treasonous weasels at the Wall Street Urinal have this to say:
February 29, 2008, 9:12 am
Pelosi, Branded Panderer to Loony Liberals, Asks DOJ to Probe Bush Aides
Posted by Dan Slater
Pelosi Here’s what went down on Capitol Hill yesterday
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked DOJ:
To open a grand jury investigation and pursue misdemeanor charges against Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, and Joshua Bolten, President Bush’s chief-of-staff for contempt of Congress. Miers refused to testify to Congress regarding the dismissals of federal prosecutors in 2006. As for Bolten, he failed to turn over White House documents related to the dismissals.
She gave him one week to respond and said refusal to take the matter to a grand jury would result in the House’s filing of a civil lawsuit against the Bush administration.
The White House Responded:
Speaker Pelosi’s request, coming two weeks after the House voted to hold Miers and Bolten in contempt, is “truly contemptible.”
The DOJ Responded:
That it had received Speaker Pelosi’s request, but noted a “longstanding department precedent” against letting a US attorney refer a Congressional contempt citation to a grand jury or prosecute an executive branch.
John Boehner, House Republican leader, Put in Two Cents:
“This sort of pandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists does nothing to make America safer.”
The comments, BTW, are (generally) remarkably sane, and chide the WSJ’s law blog for not seeing the black and whiteness of the issue at hand (e.g.):
Finally doing something to hold this group of criminals accountable for their actions makes you a “Loony Liberal”??? Holding government officials accountable for their actions is called justice. So does this mean that republicans and conservatives are soft on crime??
Comment by – February 29, 2008 at 10:16 am
On this day (and I’ll get to the killer death robots in a minute), this was what was important to the human filth that inhabit our media — even as reporters are being laid off, wholesale, right and left — via aggregators Google News and Memeorandum):
Obama Spends Heavily to Seek Knockout Blow
New York Times – 1 hour ago
Prince Harry and the Secret Kept by Fleet Street
New York Times – 3 hours ago
Bush Urges Iraqi Leaders to Give Ahmadinejad Clear Message
Voice of America – 2 hours ago
A Liberal’s Praise for William F. Buckley*
Newsweek – 5 hours ago
(* “A Collaborator’s Praise for Nazi Death Camps” evidently wasn’t ready in time to go to press — HW)
White House aide resigns over plagiarism
Los Angeles Times – 5 hours ago
Which segues neatly into Memeorandum‘s aggregation of blogosphere traffic. Exhibiting the same fine sense of priorities that Nero did when he gave his musical recital during a Roman conflagration, the bloggers paid scant attention to the dustup*:
[* Most traffic was about Hillary's "If you vote for Obama, your children will die in their sleep" ad.]
AG Refuses Probe of Ex-Bush Aides
Laurie Kellman* / Associated Press:
AG Refuses Probe of Ex-Bush Aides — WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Michael Mukasey on Friday rejected referring the House’s contempt citations against two of President Bush’s top aides to a federal grand jury. Mukasey says they committed no crime. — Mukasey said White House Chief …
[* Yes, it's the same worthless traitorous traitoress I cited earlier, who pooh-pooh'ed her own report today, suggesting that it was all just a tempest in a teapot - HW]
Eli / Firedoglake: Rule Of Law Still Clinging To Life
Office of the Speaker / The Gavel: Pelosi Response to Administration Decision Not to Enforce Contempt …
GottaLaff / Cliff Schecter: Mukasey lets Bolten and Miers off the hook
CNN: Mukasey: No contempt inquiry for Bush aides — WASHINGTON (CNN) — U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey Friday said he will not ask a federal grand jury to investigate whether two top Bush administration officials should be prosecuted for contempt of Congress.
Macranger / Macsmind: Muskasy: No Investigation on Miers and Bolton
Reuters: Mukasey won’t pursue contempt probe of Bush aides
Discussion: Ed Morrissey / Hot Air: Mukasey to Pelosi: I’ve Got Your Contempt Right Here
It is instructive to see what Bush’s favorite blogger and White House invitee — that ambulatory slime, chickenhawk “Captain” Ed Morrissey– has to say, now that he’s blogging for Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air:
… In this case, though, the House has been itching for a fight. The White House has offered to meet the committee members partway, but they have insisted on demanding that the Bush administration give up its claim on executive privilege instead — which no one ever believed they would do. Mukasey found that Bush’s use of executive privilege meets legal requirements.
Now the courts will have to make a decision that will make one branch or another very unhappy, and for a very long time — all over terminations that were obviously in the purview of the executive, and after a fishing expedition that produced nothing more than an incompetent AG. Thankfully, we have a much more talented replacement at the helm.
“Constitutional expert” “Special Ed” hath Broken his Wind. Aren’t We All Impressed?
The reason that Ed Morrissey (one of the fug-ugliest “radio faces” you’ve ever not seen) has been so “successful” as a propagandist is his ability to make the most monstrous things sound reasonable and even pleasant. An expert on everything, with a tone of moderation in defense of monstrous insanity that Josef Goebbels would envy, Morrissey has granted a pass to an Administration that’s openly consulted with him on strategy and getting the talking points out in the blogosphere.
How credible do you suppose that is?
Oh, did I mention that “Special” Ed originally suggested a conference call in late July 2007 to discuss “strategy” on defending the Bush Administration on THIS VERY ISSUE:
At the urging of top conservative bloggers, the White House set up a Friday morning conference call to promote its message on the subject of executive privilege, RAW STORY has found.
“The White House hosted a blogger conference call to discuss the issues surrounding the Bush administration’s use of executive privilege in the probe of the firings of eight federal prosecutors,” wrote Ed Morrissey, who produces the blog Captains Quarters. “The White House arranged the call based on a recommendation by this blog, in order to familiarize the blogosphere with the legal and political arguments on which the administration will rely to prevail in the upcoming fight regarding the contempt citations Congress seems likely to approve.”
How corrupt is THAT? Thank you “Dr. Goebbels” Morrissey: Those aren’t Soviet Tanks on the outskirts of Berlin. No. They’re just beer farts from a dress rehearsal for Oktoberfest.
And now, Killer Death Robots!
(And you thought that I was speaking metaphorically.)
Here’s something that ought to scare the living piss out of you, when you consider that this is the same Administration sneering at the concept of subpoenas and law itself:
The FBI Deputizes Business
February 10, 2008 By Matthew Rothschild
Today, more than 23,000 representatives of private industry are working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The members of this rapidly growing group, called InfraGard, receive secret warnings of terrorist threats before the public does- and, at least on one occasion, before elected officials. In return, they provide information to the government, which alarms the ACLU. But there may be more to it than that. One business executive, who showed me his InfraGard card, told me they have permission to “shoot to kill” in the event of martial law. InfraGard is “a child of the FBI,” says Michael Hershman, the chairman of the advisory board of the InfraGard National Members Alliance and CEO of the Fairfax Group, an international consulting firm.
InfraGard started in Cleveland back in 1996, when the private sector there cooperated with the FBI to investigate cyber threats.
“Then the FBI cloned it,” says Phyllis Schneck, chairman of the board of directors of the InfraGard National Members Alliance, and the prime mover behind the growth of InfraGard over the last several years.
In November 2001, InfraGard had around 1,700 members. As of late January, InfraGard had 23,682 members, according to its website, http://www.infragard.net, which adds that “350 of our nation’s Fortune 500 have a representative in InfraGard.”
To join, each person must be sponsored by “an existing InfraGard member, chapter, or partner organization.” The FBI then vets the applicant. On the application form, prospective members are asked which aspect of the critical infrastructure their organization deals with. These include: agriculture, banking and finance, the chemical industry, defense, energy, food, information and telecommunications, law enforcement, public health, and transportation.
On May 9, 2007, George Bush issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 entitled “National Continuity Policy.” In it, he instructed the Secretary of Homeland Security to coordinate with “private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.”
One business owner in the United States tells me that InfraGard members are being advised on how to prepare for a martial law situation-and what their role might be. He showed me his InfraGard card, with his name and e-mail address on the front, along with the InfraGard logo and its slogan, “Partnership for Protection.” On the back of the card were the emergency numbers that Schneck mentioned.
This business owner says he attended a small InfraGard meeting where agents of the FBI and Homeland Security discussed in astonishing detail what InfraGard members may be called upon to do.
“The meeting started off innocuously enough, with the speakers talking about corporate espionage,” he says. “From there, it just progressed. All of a sudden we were knee deep in what was expected of us when martial law is declared. We were expected to share all our resources, but in return we’d be given specific benefits.” These included, he says, the ability to travel in restricted areas and to get people out. But that’s not all.
“Then they said when-not if-martial law is declared, it was our responsibility to protect our portion of the infrastructure, and if we had to use deadly force to protect it, we couldn’t be prosecuted,” he says.
Rule by fear or rule by law?
by Lewis Seiler, Dan Hamburg
The San Francisco Chronicle
Monday, February 4, 2008
… Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of “an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs.”
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of “all removable aliens” and “potential terrorists.”
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of “new programs” require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?
[...] What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?
The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.
Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc. Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director.
This article appeared on page B – 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle [4 Feb 2008]
And, finally, I really wasn’t kidding about killer death robots. I ran across this story in late October, and had been waiting to see if anyone picked up on it.
Finally, last week, they sort of did. Sort of.
Way down the page on Memeorandum, on February 27 (the blogosphere was dominated by the Dead Wm. F. Buckley story that day) we find this news item
Automated killer robots ‘threat to humanity’: expert …* Increasingly autonomous, gun-totting robots developed for warfare could easily fall into the hands of terrorists and may one day unleash a robot arms race, a top expert on artificial intelligence told AFP…
[* Note: I've changed the link from Breitbart, since, even though it's their most popular story-- 525 "diggs" -- the story itself seemed to have mysteriously vanished when I checked it tonight. Comments still there; story gone. HW]
Yes, that’s right, Virginia, the ultimate chickenhawk wet dream, a robot that will do your killing FOR you, so that you don’t have to, like confront the person you’re going to murder, don’t have to listen to the screams of your victims, or, heaven forfend, get their brains all over your nice, clean REMF fatigues. Oh. Sorry. It seems that what they’re worried about is AUTOMATED killing, not joystick and camera killing. My bad.
Courtesy of Common Dreams, the AFP story:
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 by Agence France PresseIncreasingly autonomous, gun-totting (sic) robots developed for warfare could easily fall into the hands of terrorists and may one day unleash a robot arms race, a top expert on artificial intelligence told AFP.0227 08“They pose a threat to humanity,” said University of Sheffield professor Noel Sharkey ahead of a keynote address Wednesday before Britain’s Royal United Services Institute.Intelligent machines deployed on battlefields around the world — from mobile grenade launchers to rocket-firing drones — can already identify and lock onto targets without human help.
There are more than 4,000 US military robots on the ground in Iraq, as well as unmanned aircraft that have clocked hundreds of thousands of flight hours.
The first three armed combat robots fitted with large-caliber machine guns deployed to Iraq last summer, manufactured by US arms maker Foster-Miller, proved so successful that 80 more are on order, said Sharkey.
But up to now, a human hand has always been required to push the button or pull the trigger….
OK, class. Now if you’ve been paying attention, you’re way ahead of me. First of all, you now know that these killer robots have ALREADY BEEN USED ON HUMAN BEINGS in Iraq. (I leave it to you to parse the horrific amorality of THAT little innovation.)
And, before I ask you to ask yourself WHY they woudn’t be deployed against YOU, as SWAT teams have increasingly been deployed against citizens of the formerly “land of the brave and home of the free,” I want you to ask yourself this:
… if this isn’t a Constitutional Showdown™, then what the hell is?[Mukasey's contempt of Contempt] should be front page news, in 200 point news gothic on every front page in the land. But it’s not. It’s not as important as pecksniffery on Obama, Hillary and McCain.What on EARTH makes anybody think that there’s GOING to be an election? We don’t even have a Constitution! How about focusing on the crisis in the here and now, rather than playing PEOPLE Magazine with the there and when?
This was what I found back in October (WIRED):
We’re not used to thinking of them this way. But many advanced military weapons are essentially robotic — picking targets out automatically, slewing into position, and waiting only for a human to pull the trigger. Most of the time. Once in a while, though, these machines start firing mysteriously on their own. The South African National Defence Force “is probing whether a software glitch led to an antiaircraft cannon malfunction that killed nine soldiers and seriously injured 14 others during a shooting exercise on Friday.”
Which led me to THESE creepy stories (from the same page):
* Roomba-Maker unveils Kill-Bot
* New Armed Robot Groomed for War
* Armed Robots Pushed to Police
* Armed Robots Go Into Action
* Cops Demand Drones
* First Armed Robots on Patrol in Iraq
* Unmanned “Surge”: 3000 More Robots for War
* Taser-Armed ‘Bot Ready to Zap Pathetic Humans
* Top War Tech #5: Talon Robots
* More Robot Grunts Ready for Duty
* Israel’s Killer ‘Bot: Safe Enough for War?
So, here ya go. How come you never heard of this? How come you think they WANT Americans to hear about this? Keep watching Britney. Look! Paris! Lindsey! Ooh!o
There’s a good piece in this month’s National Defense magazine on the deployment of the first armed ground robots in Iraq. These are tele-operated rather than autonomous machines, giving ground troops a way of extending their presence into dangerous areas without exposing themselves to fire….*
[* NOTE: You'll never guess WHICH Death Robot is pictured in the article.]
Now, ask yourself, if people are willing to build detention camps and tell businesses to use “deadly force” when martial law is declared, would THOSE people hesitate for one nanosecond in unleashing deadly killer robots? Battle tested and field certified killer death robots?
Every step in this stairway to hell has been paved with robotic obeisance to unseen “masters” in Washington D.C. And at some point, the “metaphor” of killer death robots becomes the reality of killer death robots, and we are faced with the epistemological conundrum as to just WHEN the paradigm shifts.
Rather than asking “Will the real Killer Death Robots please stand up?” let’s ask this, instead:
Will the real Killer Death Robots please stand down?