Author Topic: Homeland Security, Border, sabotage of energy, transportation, environment  (Read 1082288 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #650 on: August 03, 2010, 07:44:17 AM »
But the standard now is lower, yes?

"the phone user has already forfeited any constitutional privacy rights he may have in his phone number or the number he calls by revealing them to the phone company"

The logic here makes me uneasy.  Read that sentence carefully.  Is the logic that anything not known only to me is devoid of privacy?
======================
And here's a different take on things from that of the article you posted:

http://www.eff.org/nsa/faq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_war...ce_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_call_database
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...raffic-too.ars
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 07:52:19 AM by Crafty_Dog »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #651 on: August 03, 2010, 08:42:02 AM »
I'm not talking about NSA, i'm talking about domestic law enforcement.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #652 on: August 03, 2010, 09:24:12 AM »
So, you disapprove of what the NSA has been doing?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #653 on: August 03, 2010, 09:32:35 AM »
Not of what I'm aware of, thus far.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #654 on: August 03, 2010, 09:33:51 AM »
Ok, then I am not getting the importance of your distinction between the NSA and domestic enforcement.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #655 on: August 03, 2010, 10:03:42 AM »
I don't know that the actual truth is known of exactly what the NSA has or hasn't done. I thought we were discussing the  PATRIOT act hype vs. reality.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #656 on: August 03, 2010, 10:12:46 AM »
I guess I was defining things more broadly, but that it is fair enough to focus on the Patriot Act , , , as long as we get to the big picture too.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #657 on: August 03, 2010, 10:28:14 AM »
Ok, say you just got appointed Attorney General and BBG is DNI. Please give me a law enforcement and intelligence model that deals with the current threat profile without offending libertarian sensibilities.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #658 on: August 03, 2010, 10:57:03 AM »
Yeah, and as that pesky Constitution clearly encumbers the current threat environment, justify its existence, too.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #659 on: August 03, 2010, 02:00:58 PM »
I'm pretty sure Thomas Jeferson didn't have a conceptual model of a jihadist nuke going off in an American city when he was putting quill to paper, did he?

The 4th amd is based on a "reasonable expectation of privacy". The courts have shaped what is defined as "reasonable".

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #660 on: August 03, 2010, 04:59:51 PM »
" Please give me a law enforcement and intelligence model that deals with the current threat profile without offending libertarian sensibilities."

Two ears, one bullet.

I wouldn't have thrown Iraq away; I wouldn't tell the Taliban we're leaving; I'd cut a deal with the Pashtuns to unite Pashtunistan; I'd support the Iranian opposition; I'd get out of the way of Israel's right to self-defense including against Iran; I'd acknowledge that to the extent that Islam seeks theocracy that it is an anti-American political ideology and to that extent not protected by the First Amendment; I'd prosecute those who divulge military intelligence.

That would be before lunch on the first day.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #661 on: August 03, 2010, 07:01:15 PM »
Quote
I'm pretty sure Thomas Jeferson didn't have a conceptual model of a jihadist nuke going off in an American city when he was putting quill to paper, did he?

Yes, there are always very good reasons to embrace despotism, which is why gents like Thomas Jefferson tried to make that impulse hard to realize.

We've had many versions of this conversation, and I understand you'll relentlessly embrace authoritarianism regardless of what I say, just as I'll err on the side of the founder's vision of a free society unfettered by bureaucratic scrutiny of any stripe as once you let the authoritarian djinn out of the bottle it's very unlikely it'll get stuffed back in.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #662 on: August 03, 2010, 08:33:05 PM »
Quote
I'm pretty sure Thomas Jeferson didn't have a conceptual model of a jihadist nuke going off in an American city when he was putting quill to paper, did he?

Yes, there are always very good reasons to embrace despotism, which is why gents like Thomas Jefferson tried to make that impulse hard to realize.

**I guess there are very good reasons to avoid offering specfic policies, when you have nothing to offer but romantic  sloganeering, devoid of tangible concepts.**

We've had many versions of this conversation, and I understand you'll relentlessly embrace authoritarianism regardless of what I say, just as I'll err on the side of the founder's vision of a free society unfettered by bureaucratic scrutiny of any stripe as once you let the authoritarian djinn out of the bottle it's very unlikely it'll get stuffed back in.


**So give me the libertarian national security model. Do it all devolve down to the Ron Paul "If we isolate ourselves, the bad people will go away and leave us alone"?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #663 on: August 03, 2010, 08:35:54 PM »
" Please give me a law enforcement and intelligence model that deals with the current threat profile without offending libertarian sensibilities."

Two ears, one bullet.

I wouldn't have thrown Iraq away; I wouldn't tell the Taliban we're leaving; I'd cut a deal with the Pashtuns to unite Pashtunistan; I'd support the Iranian opposition; I'd get out of the way of Israel's right to self-defense including against Iran; I'd acknowledge that to the extent that Islam seeks theocracy that it is an anti-American political ideology and to that extent not protected by the First Amendment; I'd prosecute those who divulge military intelligence.

That would be before lunch on the first day.

Sounds good, but from the law enforcement perspective, how do you root out and prosecute jihadist cells CONUS prior to them going operational ? Or do we wait for the attacks before we prosecute any left alive?

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #664 on: August 03, 2010, 09:01:17 PM »
Quote
**I guess there are very good reasons to avoid offering specfic policies, when you have nothing to offer but romantic  sloganeering, devoid of tangible concepts.**

Freedom is not a tangible concept? Interesting.

Quote
**So give me the libertarian national security model. Do it all devolve down to the Ron Paul "If we isolate ourselves, the bad people will go away and leave us alone"?

Speak softly and carry a big stick suits me.

You seem to be an all or nothing kind of guy. Is it not possible to want a strong national defense that doesn't do damage to the freedom it seeks to defend? Can one not state that US drug policy has failed without proposing something better? BHO's 2000 page healthcare takeover has yet to be implemented; do we have to wait for it to be irrevocably in place before we can object to it? I know how Stalin would answer these question, will your response be qualitatively different?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #665 on: August 03, 2010, 09:18:04 PM »
Quote
**I guess there are very good reasons to avoid offering specfic policies, when you have nothing to offer but romantic  sloganeering, devoid of tangible concepts.**

Freedom is not a tangible concept? Interesting.

**Freedom can be very tangible, like not having radioactive ash wafting down on one's head.**

Quote
**So give me the libertarian national security model. Do it all devolve down to the Ron Paul "If we isolate ourselves, the bad people will go away and leave us alone"?

Speak softly and carry a big stick suits me.

You seem to be an all or nothing kind of guy. Is it not possible to want a strong national defense that doesn't do damage to the freedom it seeks to defend? Can one not state that US drug policy has failed without proposing something better? BHO's 2000 page healthcare takeover has yet to be implemented; do we have to wait for it to be irrevocably in place before we can object to it? I know how Stalin would answer these question, will your response be qualitatively different?

No, i'm a pragmatic sort of guy that understands that the real world don't often comply with beatiful ivory tower theory. I'm interested in protecting this nation and ensuring it's survival. We face serious existential threats from many directions and a lack of awareness and apathy from the public for the most part.

Rarick

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #666 on: August 04, 2010, 03:53:01 AM »
"walk softly and carry a big stick" would mean something more like:  We ignore you as long as you do not come and attack us, however attack us and we will ERASE your government.  Once that is done we will leave you alone.......  We DO NOT stay in the country and try and impose our style on theirs, or create long term problems and drains that damage us more than it damages the attacker.    A fairly quick 2-3 year war followed by us being gone as quickly as possible after dealing in a final fashion with the responsible parties............  It does not mean "running and hiding" that you seem to be implying.

Yes FREEDOM is as tangible as that nervous feeling you get in traffic when a cop come up behind you and follows your for a couple of blocks, you KNOW you have done nothing wrong but that feeling is there..........  Freedom is the absence of that.   Right now we are not free.........   when a cop can shoot a scared cowering dog, and not be responsible for restitution to the home owner.  When police can take a gun from a CCW permit holder for safe keeping and require him to "come down to the station" to get it back instead of merely handing it back with his ID before they leave.   When a SWAT team is dispatched for a theft of a playstation.  (a few examples I have seen) We are not free and the government is not acting in compliance with its contract with the people.  The Constitution is that contract. Any law passed that violates that is not a law- and there are lots of those and they are ENFORCED not by consent of the government, but by a man with a gun.  

<SIGH> Time the continued condoned abuse makes it apparent where people stand here, time to do what a lot do disengage until the boxes are finally checked off for the final solution.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, 03:28:32 AM by Rarick »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #667 on: August 04, 2010, 05:55:18 AM »
Quote
No, i'm a pragmatic sort of guy that understands that the real world don't often comply with beatiful ivory tower theory. I'm interested in protecting this nation and ensuring it's survival. We face serious existential threats from many directions and a lack of awareness and apathy from the public for the most part.

And one of those existential threats that we faced before, are facing now, and will face again involves folks of an authoritarian bent using the existential threat du jour to eliminate perceived enemies, as Sacco and Vanzetti can attest. We saw it with the Alien and Seditions Act, we saw it where anarchists and wobblies were concerned, we saw it in the '50s, we saw it during the Civil Rights struggle, we saw it under Richard Nixon, and likely saw it numerous other times that aren't leaping to mind at the moment.

If we can't beat our enemies without becoming like them then we've lost the war already. If that puts me on the wrong side of things in your book, well, I'm in good company.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #668 on: August 04, 2010, 06:49:19 AM »
"walk softly and carry a big stick" would mean something more like:  We ignore you as long as you do not come and attack us, however attack us and we will ERASE your government.

So big chunks of DC and Manhattan disappear in a flash. AQ releases a martyrdom video from UK and German nationals claiming credit. Who exactly are you declaring war on?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #669 on: August 04, 2010, 09:25:54 AM »
Rarick wrote:

"walk softly and carry a big stick" would mean something more like:  We ignore you as long as you do not come and attack us, however attack us and we will ERASE your government.  Once that is done we will leave you alone.......  We DO NOT stay in the country and try and impose our style on theirs, or create long term problems and drains that damage us more than it damages the attacker.    A fairly quick 2-3 year war followed by us being gone as quickly as possible after dealing in a final fashion with the responsible parties............  It does not mean "running and hiding" that you seem to be implying.

----------

This is exactly what Col. Ralph Peters proposed.

GM asks:

"So big chunks of DC and Manhattan disappear in a flash. AQ releases a martyrdom video from UK and German nationals claiming credit. Who exactly are you declaring war on?"
-----------------

A very pertinent question.

The larger point intended by my previous answer was that the answer lies not in defensively trying to plug all the holes here at home, because as an open society ultimately it cannot be done, but in aggressively going after the enemy on his home turf.

Yes I recognize that this does not solve the UK and German Islamo-fascists posited by GM's question, but what I said does go after the possible sources of nukes:  Pakistan, Iran, etc.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #670 on: August 04, 2010, 10:15:37 AM »
In this scenario, the post-blast analysis shows that the nuclear materials were probably produced by the Soviets in the cold war. What now?

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #671 on: August 04, 2010, 10:37:41 AM »
How'd the material get past the gamma ray detectors in C 130s flying 24/7 above DC & NY?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #672 on: August 04, 2010, 10:54:42 AM »
I won't go into that in this venue.

BTW, aren't you outraged that fissionable material possessors might get Sacco and Vanzetti'ed by oppressive aircraft with Orwellian radiation detection equipment? Without a warrant, even!
 :cry:

"First, they came after those with weapons grade fissionable materials, I didn't speak up, as I had no weapons grade fissionable material....."

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #673 on: August 04, 2010, 11:20:06 AM »
Oh, Sacco and Vanzetti might not be the innocents you imagine.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5245754

Sacco and Vanzetti were a cause célèbre during the 1920s. Left-leaning intellectuals, including Sinclair, championed their innocence. Their eventual execution in 1927 touched off riots in Paris and London. Upton Sinclair's letter reveals he knew more than he let on about the case. We've invited Upton Sinclair's biographer, Anthony Arthur, to tell us about it.

Hello.

Mr. ANTHONY ARTHUR (Upton Sinclair's Biographer): Hello, it's nice to be with you.

ELLIOTT: So in this letter, Sinclair describes a meeting with Fred Moore, who was Sacco and Vanzetti's lawyer at the time. They're meeting at a hotel in Denver. And he writes, quote, "Alone in a hotel room with Fred, I begged him to tell me the full truth. He then told me that the men were guilty and he told me in every detail how he had framed a set of alibis for them."

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #674 on: August 04, 2010, 11:34:31 AM »
Quote
BTW, aren't you outraged that fissionable material possessors might get Sacco and Vanzetti'ed by oppressive aircraft with Orwellian radiation detection equipment? Without a warrant, even!

Pshaw, if you are unable to make the distinction here no number of words I keyboard will do so for you.

But indeed, and as you should know from what I've posted and all the words we've exchanged, I don't have a problem applying the right tool for the right job. Start sucking up inordinate amounts of data from sources where there is an expectation of privacy in a manner where there is little accountability and a poor probability it will get to an investigator who really needs it unless it migrates on to a server so accessible the data soon shows up on Wikileaks, then yes, I have trouble with that sort of charlie foxtrot, and you ought to, also. As my gamma example ought to illustrate, however, is there are technological tools aplenty out there that can and are applied to the dire scenarios you posit as an excuse to toss this nations's founding principles on to the slag heap. Surely we are smart enough to perform a little technological triage before we start blue penciling the constitution?

Body-by-Guinness

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #675 on: August 04, 2010, 11:36:30 AM »
Quote
Oh, Sacco and Vanzetti might not be the innocents you imagine.

No doubt, though if their supposed crimes were transplanted to this day and age they'd be appearing on talk shows sitting next to Bill Ayers rather than heading to the gallows.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #676 on: August 04, 2010, 12:10:18 PM »
I don't wander the halls of Langley or Ft. Meade, but I can tell you that for law enforcement there are strict rules and structures in place regarding intelligence systems. I recently did a 5 day course on the topic and they beat us over the head with 28 CFR 23 daily.

http://www.iir.com/28cfr/

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #677 on: August 04, 2010, 08:16:05 PM »
Yes FREEDOM is as tangible as that nervous feeling you get in traffic when a cop come up behind you and follows your for a couple of blocks, you KNOW you have done nothing wrong but that feeling is there..........  Freedom is the absence of that.   Right now we are not free.........   

**Well, traffic laws and traffic stops by police aren't going away in the US. So where are you moving to? I hear the tribal regions of Pakistan are lovely this time of year.**

JDN

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2004
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #678 on: August 05, 2010, 07:14:17 AM »
Speaking of "bully" feel about it, someone posted a while ago (I couldn't find it) that photography is allowed/protected in a public
place.  I agree; I enjoy photography (film) and am up on the laws.  Yet I find Police want to be exempt from the law - can't take the heat???
Or they just enjoy the intimidation?  No matter how you look at it, it's wrong.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2008566,00.html?hpt=T2


Anthony Graber, a Maryland Air National Guard staff sergeant, faces up to 16 years in prison. His crime? He videotaped his March encounter with a state trooper who pulled him over for speeding on a motorcycle. Then Graber put the video — which could put the officer in a bad light — up on YouTube.
It doesn't sound like much. But Graber is not the only person being slapped down by the long arm of the law for the simple act of videotaping the police in a public place. Prosecutors across the U.S. claim the videotaping violates wiretap laws — a stretch, to put it mildly.

Law enforcement is fighting back. In the case of Graber — a young husband and father who had never been arrested — the police searched his residence and seized computers. Graber spent 26 hours in jail even before facing the wiretapping charges that could conceivably put him away for 16 years. (It is hard to believe he will actually get anything like that, however. One point on his side: the Maryland attorney general's office recently gave its opinion that a court would likely find that the wiretap law does not apply to traffic stops.)

The legal argument prosecutors rely on in police video cases is thin. They say the audio aspect of the videos violates wiretap laws because, in some states, both parties to a conversation must consent to having a private conversation recorded. The hole in their argument is the word "private." A police officer arresting or questioning someone on a highway or street is not having a private conversation. He is engaging in a public act.

Even if these cases do not hold up in court, the police can do a lot of damage just by threatening to arrest and prosecute people. "We see a fair amount of intimidation — police saying, 'You can't do that. It's illegal,'" says Christopher Calabrese, a lawyer with the ACLU's Washington office. It discourages people from filming, he says, even when they have the right to film.

Most people are not so game for a fight with the police. They just stop filming. These are the cases no one finds out about, in which there is no arrest or prosecution, but the public's freedoms have nevertheless been eroded.








Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #679 on: August 05, 2010, 08:01:37 AM »
I sense we are drifting from the subject of this thread.  JDN may I ask you to please post that at
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1336.50
The subject is an important one and deserves its own discussion.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #680 on: August 05, 2010, 12:37:28 PM »
And that final line is why I geneally try and ignore you.  Too bad this bbs does not have an ignore button, every once in a while I get the urge to tilt at windmills..............and end up with the same result a certain Castillian did.

Your outlook is one of the reasons I decided NOT to continue serving the country as a cop, it is definately anti-constitutional and has way too much of the "bully" feel about it.

**If you are opposed to traffic stops, exactly what were you planning on doing as a police officer?**

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Body scans stored?
« Reply #681 on: August 05, 2010, 12:48:06 PM »
I interrupt the witty repartee for this:

August 4, 2010 4:00 AM PDT
Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images

by Declan McCullagh

 TSA's X-ray backscatter scanning with "privacy filter"
(Credit: TSA.gov)

For the last few years, federal agencies have defended body scanning by insisting that all images will be discarded as soon as they're viewed. The Transportation Security Administration claimed last summer, for instance, that "scanned images cannot be stored or recorded."

Now it turns out that some police agencies are storing the controversial images after all. The U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.

This follows an earlier disclosure (PDF) by the TSA that it requires all airport body scanners it purchases to be able to store and transmit images for "testing, training, and evaluation purposes." The agency says, however, that those capabilities are not normally activated when the devices are installed at airports.

Body scanners penetrate clothing to provide a highly detailed image so accurate that critics have likened it to a virtual strip search. Technologies vary, with millimeter wave systems capturing fuzzier images, and backscatter X-ray machines able to show precise anatomical detail. The U.S. government likes the idea because body scanners can detect concealed weapons better than traditional magnetometers.

This privacy debate, which has been simmering since the days of the Bush administration, came to a boil two weeks ago when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that scanners would soon appear at virtually every major airport. The updated list includes airports in New York City, Dallas, Washington, Miami, San Francisco, Seattle, and Philadelphia.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, has filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to grant an immediate injunction pulling the plug on TSA's body scanning program. In a separate lawsuit, EPIC obtained a letter (PDF) from the Marshals Service, part of the Justice Department, and released it on Tuesday afternoon.
These "devices are designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded, which is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing," EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg told CNET. "We think it's significant."

William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, acknowledged in the letter that "approximately 35,314 images...have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine" used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse. In addition, Bordley wrote, a Millivision machine was tested in the Washington, D.C. federal courthouse but it was sent back to the manufacturer, which now apparently possesses the image database.
The Gen 2 machine, manufactured by Brijot of Lake Mary, Fla., uses a millimeter wave radiometer and accompanying video camera to store up to 40,000 images and records. Brijot boasts that it can even be operated remotely: "The Gen 2 detection engine capability eliminates the need for constant user observation and local operation for effective monitoring. Using our APIs, instantly connect to your units from a remote location via the Brijot Client interface."
 TSA's millimeter wave body scan
(Credit: TSA.gov)

This trickle of disclosures about the true capabilities of body scanners--and how they're being used in practice--is probably what alarms privacy advocates more than anything else.

A 70-page document (PDF) showing the TSA's procurement specifications, classified as "sensitive security information," says that in some modes the scanner must "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide a mechanism for "high-speed transfer of image data" over the network. (It also says that image filters will "protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger.")

"TSA is not being straightforward with the public about the capabilities of these devices," Rotenberg said. "This is the Department of Homeland Security subjecting every U.S. traveler to an intrusive search that can be recorded without any suspicion--I think it's outrageous." EPIC's lawsuit says that the TSA should have announced formal regulations, and argues that the body scanners violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits "unreasonable" searches.

For its part, the TSA says that body scanning is perfectly constitutional: "The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible, while still performing its crucial function of protecting all members of the public from potentially catastrophic events."

Declan McCullagh has covered the intersection of politics and technology for over a decade. E-mail Declan.
__________________
www.NoPoliticalLemmings.com

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #682 on: August 09, 2010, 08:50:56 PM »
Woof,
 Are the doors still open for 9/11 style attacks?

 http://cis.org/faisal-shahzad

                  P.C.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #683 on: August 09, 2010, 09:18:06 PM »
Although AQ will return to aviation oriented attacks in the future, Beslan style or VBIED attacks are more easily done these days.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #684 on: August 23, 2010, 06:07:16 PM »

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #685 on: August 30, 2010, 05:15:01 PM »
Woof,
 Tis the season... www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gdDi_luupyZlcRMQLIlyqNh-NilQ
                         p.c.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Narcos taking over AZ
« Reply #686 on: September 01, 2010, 11:15:44 AM »
Pasting here GM's post from the US-Mexico thread because of its relevance to Homeland Security.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/31/signs-in-arizona-warn-of-smuggler-dangers/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Zakaria: What America has lost
« Reply #687 on: September 06, 2010, 06:12:10 AM »
Some points worth keeping in mind here:
=====================================

by Fareed Zakaria

September 04, 2010

 

What America Has Lost

It’s clear we overreacted to 9/11

 

Nine years after 9/11, can anyone doubt that Al Qaeda is simply not that deadly a threat? Since that gruesome day in 2001, once governments everywhere began serious countermeasures, Osama bin Laden’s terror network has been unable to launch a single major attack on high-value targets in the United States and Europe. While it has inspired a few much smaller attacks by local jihadis, it has been unable to execute a single one itself. Today, Al Qaeda’s best hope is to find a troubled young man who has been radicalized over the Internet, and teach him to stuff his underwear with explosives.

 

I do not minimize Al Qaeda’s intentions, which are barbaric. I question its capabilities. In every recent conflict, the United States has been right about the evil intentions of its adversaries but massively exaggerated their strength. In the 1980s, we thought the Soviet Union was expanding its power and influence when it was on the verge of economic and political bankruptcy. In the 1990s, we were certain that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear arsenal. In fact, his factories could barely make soap.

 

The error this time is more damaging. September 11 was a shock to the American psyche and the American system. As a result, we overreacted. In a crucially important Washington Post reporting project, “Top Secret America,” Dana Priest and William Arkin spent two years gathering information on how 9/11 has really changed America.

 

Here are some of the highlights. Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has created or reconfigured at least 263 organizations to tackle some aspect of the war on terror. The amount of money spent on intelligence has risen by 250 percent, to $75 billion (and that’s the public number, which is a gross underestimate). That’s more than the rest of the world spends put together. Thirty-three new building complexes have been built for intelligence bureaucracies alone, occupying 17 million square feet—the equivalent of 22 U.S. Capitols or three Pentagons. Five miles southeast of the White House, the largest government site in 50 years is being built—at a cost of $3.4 billion—to house the largest bureaucracy after the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs: the Department of Homeland Security, which has a workforce of 230,000 people.

 

This new system produces 50,000 reports a year—136 a day!—which of course means few ever get read. Those senior officials who have read them describe most as banal; one tells me, “Many could be produced in an hour using Google.” Fifty-one separate bureaucracies operating in 15 states track the flow of money to and from terrorist organizations, with little information-sharing.

 

Some 30,000 people are now employed exclusively to listen in on phone conversations and other communications in the United States. And yet no one in Army intelligence noticed that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had been making a series of strange threats at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where he trained. The father of the Nigerian “Christmas bomber” reported his son’s radicalism to the U.S. Embassy. But that message never made its way to the right people in this vast security apparatus. The plot was foiled only by the bomber’s own incompetence and some alert passengers.

 

Such mistakes might be excusable. But the rise of this national-security state has entailed a vast expansion in the government’s powers that now touches every aspect of American life, even when seemingly unrelated to terrorism. The most chilling aspect of Dave Eggers’s heartbreaking book, Zeitoun, is that the federal government’s fastest and most efficient response to Hurricane Katrina was the creation of a Guantánamo-like prison facility (in days!) in which 1,200 American citizens were summarily detained and denied any of their constitutional rights for months, a suspension of habeas corpus that reads like something out of a Kafka novel.

 

In the past, the U.S. government has built up for wars, assumed emergency authority, and sometimes abused that power, yet always demobilized after the war. But this is a war without end. When do we declare victory? When do the emergency powers cease?

 

Conservatives are worried about the growing power of the state. Surely this usurpation is more worrisome than a few federal stimulus programs. When James Madison pondered this issue, he came to a simple conclusion: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germs of every other … In war, too, the discretionary power of the executive is extended... and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.

 

“No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual war,” Madison concluded.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #688 on: September 06, 2010, 11:53:27 AM »
We didn't do enough, post 9/11. Unsecured borders, political correctness have hampered what needs to be done.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #689 on: September 06, 2010, 09:22:51 PM »
Woof,
 Earth to Fareed, that's how terrorism works. We didn't overreact, we reacted because we had no choice. 9/11 was an attack intended to get a reaction, it was intended to make us use valuable resources for security. It worked. Had we not reacted then there would have been more attacks until we did. Al-Qaeda is just as deadly a threat as it ever was and if we drop our guard they'll attack again. Terrorism is a tool that can be used and then set aside until it's needed again, it's only part of a strategy to weaken and over stretch American's resources. Yes, our bureaucrats have dealt with this problem as they have with all our problems, like imbeciles, but that does not mean that none of it was necessary or that it is now unnecessary. These fly by night jihadist are just useful idiots, if and when al-Qaeda wants to launch another attack on the U.S. trust me it will be well planned and they have plenty of quality terrorist willing to carry it out.
                                  P.C.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2010, 10:44:17 PM by prentice crawford »

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #690 on: September 07, 2010, 03:01:17 AM »
 I would agree that we should evaluate and make new assessments as to what is effective security and what isn't but I'll remind you that after 9/11, until the American public felt the security standards were improved significantly enough, no one was flying and airlines and the tourism industry were going bankrupt. They pretty much had to do what they did in order to restore confidence at the time. I don't think that was an overreaction.
                                             P.C.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #691 on: September 07, 2010, 06:31:46 AM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_effects_arising_from_the_September_11_attacks

Exactly how many 9/11s are we supposed to just shrug off?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #692 on: September 07, 2010, 09:21:36 AM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #694 on: September 12, 2010, 07:46:38 PM »
GM:

Invariably you have excellent judgement in what you share, but may I ask for a bit more description to accompany the URLs?  Thank you.

prentice crawford

  • Guest
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #695 on: September 12, 2010, 10:43:08 PM »
Woof,
 I have the same tendency but I really have very little time to type much out and my computer skills aren't up to speed as well, with how to cut and paste to a forum reply. However, I will try to add a little more text when I can.
                                                P.C.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Re: Homeland Security and American Freedom
« Reply #696 on: September 13, 2010, 03:30:21 PM »
Just a sentence or three to help people decide whether it is of sufficient interest to them to go to that site is all we are hoping for  :-)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile
Silenced hits
« Reply #697 on: September 27, 2010, 08:26:05 AM »
Our man in Iraq reports today as follows:

"A few weeks back I told some of you I noticed a trend towards silenced pistols in hits.  Well I spoke today to somebody who works closely with the Ministry of Interior, and he said attacks by silenced pistols are off the charts and are now a more likely occurrence than a non-silenced pistol.
 
"Since the jihadist movement learns from each other, and adopts each other's effective tactics, and since we know stuff happening stateside is only a matter of time, keep this in mind even in the homeland."

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72129
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Patriot Act helped foil New York terror plot
« Reply #699 on: September 30, 2010, 05:40:54 AM »
**Just a reminder**
Patriot Act helped foil New York terror plot
Examiner Editorial
September 30, 2009
President George W. Bush signed the Patriot Act in 2001 after a hard-fought debate in Congress.

President Obama called New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly to thank him for his efforts in thwarting a planned terrorist attack on the city's subway system, which counterterrorism experts describe as the most serious terror plot since 9/11. But Obama should have also thanked his predecessor in the White House.

The arrest and indictment of Najibullah Zazi on charges of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction was made possible by the "roving wiretaps" allowed by the Patriot Act, which was signed into law in 2001 by President George W. Bush. "All the layers of defense President Bush set up after Sept. 11 are working," Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., pointed out. The Patriot Act caused plenty of controversy, but it was key to the Bush administration's successful eight-year counterterrorism strategy that focused on disrupting terror attacks and thereby preventing the deaths of more Americans here at home.

Even the FBI's investigation into the 24-year-old airport shuttle driver began on Bush's watch. Agents tracked the Afghan native (and legal resident of the United States) when he traveled to the tribal areas of Pakistan last year, where he was allegedly taught how to make bombs by al Qaeda operatives. Nine pages of handwritten formulas for homemade explosives, fuses and detonators were later found on his laptop, e-mailed from an Internet account originating in Pakistan, court documents charge. This is exactly the kind of foreign communications the Patriot Act was designed to intercept.

After purchasing "unusually large quantities of hydrogen peroxide and acetone products from beauty supply stores" in Denver this summer, Zazi on Sept. 6 allegedly asked an unnamed individual to give him "the correct mixtures of ingredients to make explosives" before leaving acetone residue in a Colorado hotel room. Tailed by the FBI, he rented a car and drove to New York, where his fingerprints were reportedly found on batteries and a scale in a Queens home that law enforcement officials raided on Sept. 14.

Also indicted in the subway bombing plot was Queens imam Ahmad Wais Afzali -- who warned Zazi in a call intercepted by the FBI around Sept. 11 that he was under investigation, thus forcing officials to speed up the arrest. Again, this wiretap is exactly the kind of domestic communication the Patriot Act was designed to intercept in the effort to prevent new bloodshed.