Blog Commenters Blast the TSA

Following the thwarted "terrorist attack" on an international Northwest Airlines flight, DHS head thug Janet Napolitano issued the following statement:

I am grateful to the passengers and crew aboard Northwest Flight 253 who reacted quickly and heroically to an incident that could have had tragic results. The Department of Homeland Security immediately put additional screening measures into place - for all domestic and international flights - to ensure the continued safety of the traveling public. We are also working closely with federal, state and local law enforcement on additional security measures, as well as our international partners on enhanced security at airports and on flights.

The American people should continue their planned holiday travel and, as always, be observant and aware of their surroundings and report any suspicious behavior or activity to law enforcement officials.

Passengers flying from international locations to U.S. destinations may notice additional security measures in place. These measures are designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same thing everywhere. Due to the busy holiday travel season, both domestic and international travelers should allot extra time for check-in.

Proposed policy changes included keeping passengers in their seats for the last hour of an international flight, not allowing them to hold anything in their laps, and turning off all in-flight entertainment.

In light of those idiotic restrictions, the Transportation "Security" Administration began to get some interesting feedback on its blog. Here's a small sampling:

It's hardly "unpredictable" when airlines announce lockdowns during the last hour of flight into the US. If this is truly the TSA/DHS recommendation as claimed, then whats the difference between the last 30, 60, or 90 minutes of a flight? Does it matter, or is this another knee-jerk reaction to some idiot to show that "something" is being done, just like the whole shoe fiasco...?

* * * * *

ALL your layers of security failed yet again.

So what is the response of the TSA - to add even more confusion to the process with the hope that with any kind of plain dumb luck, you'll be able to flummox another idiot terrorist wannabe?

* * * * *

I am an American Citizen with absolutely no crime history or affiliation with anything illegal. I've been traveling world wide for over 40 years. *I* am on a watch list. Where is Umar's name on this list? What's wrong with this picture?

* * * * *

I think in failing this individual will have a greater impact on air travel than he would have had he succeeded.

Also re: the new "1 hour before landing, now sit quietly in your seats children" rule. Why does this only apply to international flights? If this is not just more theater it should apply to domestic flights also. Care to comment on that?

* * * * *

With as annoying as it is getting to fly, soon the only passengers will be terrorists.

I really can't wait for high speed trains.

It's nice to know others out there recognize airline "security" for the scam that it is.

Pakistan Plan

Oh, yeah. This headline is comforting:

"U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country Falls to Taliban."

Brought to you by the same people who had a plan for Afghanistan and Iraq -- only this time there are real weapons of mass destruction involved.

Get Them While They're Young

A new generation of thugs is being trained for post-9/11 law enforcement. From the New York Times:

The Explorers program, a coeducational affiliate of the Boy Scouts of America that began 60 years ago, is training thousands of young people in skills used to confront terrorism, illegal immigration and escalating border violence -- an intense ratcheting up of one of the group's longtime missions to prepare youths for more traditional jobs as police officers and firefighters.

"This is about being a true-blooded American guy and girl," said A. J. Lowenthal, a sheriff's deputy here in Imperial County, whose life clock, he says, is set around the Explorers events he helps run. "It fits right in with the honor and bravery of the Boy Scouts."

The training, which leaders say is not intended to be applied outside the simulated Explorer setting, can involve chasing down illegal border crossers as well as more dangerous situations that include facing down terrorists and taking out "active shooters," like those who bring gunfire and death to college campuses. In a simulation here of a raid on a marijuana field, several Explorers were instructed on how to quiet an obstreperous lookout.

"Put him on his face and put a knee in his back," a Border Patrol agent explained. "I guarantee that he'll shut up."

The kids sure seem to have fun while they learn:

One participant, Felix Arce, 16, said he liked "the discipline of the program," which was something he said his life was lacking. "I want to be a lawyer, and this teaches you about how crimes are committed," he said.

Cathy Noriego, also 16, said she was attracted by the guns. The group uses compressed-air guns -- known as airsoft guns, which fire tiny plastic pellets -- in the training exercises, and sometimes they shoot real guns on a closed range.

"I like shooting them," Cathy said. "I like the sound they make. It gets me excited."

Those running the Explorer programs want kids as young as possible to get hooked:

The law enforcement posts are restricted to those ages 14 to 21 who have a C average, but there seems to be some wiggle room. "I will take them at 13 and a half," Deputy Lowenthal said. "I would rather take a kid than possibly lose a kid."

And people demonize tobacco companies for targeting youngsters?

How to Tell if Your Neighbor Is a Terrorist

So, if you're outdoors watching birds, taking pictures, sketching a building, or writing in your journal, be advised that you may be exhibiting suspicious, terrorist-like behavior.

Shrouded in Secrecy

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The Obama administration is again invoking government secrecy in defending the Bush administration's wiretapping program, this time against a lawsuit by AT&T customers who claim federal agents illegally intercepted their phone calls and gained access to their records.

Disclosure of the information sought by the customers, "which concerns how the United States seeks to detect and prevent terrorist attacks, would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security," Justice Department lawyers said in papers filed Friday in San Francisco.

Kevin Bankston of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a lawyer for the customers, said Monday the filing was disappointing in light of the Obama presidential campaign's "unceasing criticism of Bush-era secrecy and promise for more transparency."

Police State Propaganda

One mark of a rising police state is a lapdog media that is sympathetic to those in power. And when it goes out of its way to portray agents of the state in a compassionate and heroic light, no one will dare raise criticism for fear of being branded unpatriotic. Enter Homeland Security U.S.A.:

This is how it starts.

Passé Comitatus Act

The Washington Post is reporting that the Pentagon plans to deploy up to 20,000 troops here within our own borders in an effort to "train" state and local officials to better respond to a nuclear attack or other catastrophe:

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change in military culture," he said.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

What would be next? Quartering troops in our homes? You know, as long as we patriotic Americans could still have our hot dogs and fireworks on the Fourth of July, I'm sure most of us would probably be OK with that.

Hobbyist or Terrorist?

If you like to build and fly model airplanes, be aware that purchasing supplies for your hobby might make you a terrorist suspect. From the South Florida Business Journal:

As part of its mission to fight terrorism, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security spin-off Businessafe has warned hobby shops that buying gyro systems with digital readouts for remote-control planes is a suspicious activity.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement in May launched Businessafe from its Tallahassee headquarters to prompt all businesses to alert police about patterns that could be indicators of terrorist activity. The program covers the entire state, but has a particular importance to South Florida, which has the state's largest concentration of residents and infrastructure like ports terrorists might target, said Scott McAllister, FDLE's assistant special agent in charge of domestic security.

Oh, yeah. I feel safe.

America, Prepare to Be Invaded...

...by your very own troops. From the Army Times:

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT [Brigade Combat Team] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.

It is not the first time an active-duty unit has been tapped to help at home. In August 2005, for example, when Hurricane Katrina unleashed hell in Mississippi and Louisiana, several active-duty units were pulled from various posts and mobilized to those areas.

But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.

After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one.

The article goes on to say that these soldiers "may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack."

Great. When catastrophe strikes, and you think things couldn't get any worse, along comes the federal government.

1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier could hardly contain his excitement. He said, "I don't know what America's overall plan is -- I just know that 24 hours a day, seven days a week, there are soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines that are standing by to come and help if they're called. It makes me feel good as an American to know that my country has dedicated a force to come in and help the people at home." Cloutier strikes me as the kind of uber-patriot who has that ridiculous Lee Greenwood song as a running soundtrack in his head.

Chuck Baldwin, presidential candidate for the Constitution Party, thinks deploying U.S. troops at home is a bad idea. He writes:

One of America's most sacred principles has always been that the U.S. military was never to be used for domestic law enforcement. The fear of standing armies ran very deep in the hearts and minds of America's founders. The tyranny and misery inflicted upon the colonies by British troops weighed heavily upon those who drafted our Constitution and Bill of Rights. In their minds, the American people would never again be subjected to the heavy weight of army boots. Furthermore, they insisted that America would have a civilian -- not military -- government.

I don't know about you, but the move to militarize and nationalize law enforcement in this country makes me a little uncomfortable.

Big Bird in Bed with Big Brother?

Since you're too stupid to know how to talk to your family about what to do in case of an emergency, Sesame Street is teaming up with the Department of Homeland Security during "National Preparedness Month" to do it for you. It's good to know our tax dollars aren't going to waste.

Your Computers, Please

Homeland Security employees want to have a peek at your files. From CNet.com:

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has concocted a remarkable new policy: It reserves the right to seize for an indefinite period of time laptops taken across the border.

A pair of DHS policies from last month say that customs agents can routinely--as a matter of course--seize, make copies of, and "analyze the information transported by any individual attempting to enter, re-enter, depart, pass through, or reside in the United States." (See policy No. 1 and No. 2.)

DHS claims the border search of electronic information is useful to detect terrorists, drug smugglers, and people violating "copyright or trademark laws." (Readers: Are you sure your iPod and laptop have absolutely no illicitly downloaded songs? You might be guilty of a felony.)

This is a disturbing new policy, and should convince anyone taking a laptop across a border to use encryption to thwart DHS snoops. Encrypt your laptop, with full disk encryption if possible, and power it down before you go through customs.

CNet presented a guide to customs-proofing your laptop back in March. You can read it here.

You Don't Have Anything to Hide, Do You?

It's official. We finally got rid of that pesky Fourth Amendment that was hampering our war of...er, war on terror. Not only can the government monitor our e-mails and phone conversations, but they can enlist the help of private companies.

Thinking of suing? Forget about it. Those companies have been given legal immunity. As Senator Kit Bond (R-Missouri) said, "It is not right to punish patriotic Americans who stepped forward to help our government by subjecting them to the harassment of lawsuits." Yes, it's all part of the domestic spying bill passed earlier today.

Senator Bond tried to console those who might be worried about having their liberties trampled, saying, "Unless you have Al Qaeda on speed dial, you're not going to be [monitored]." Straight from the horse's ass. Nothing to worry about.

What, not good enough? You don't have anything to hide, do you?

Electronically Tagging the Sheep

Coming soon to an airport near you, courtesy of Lamperd Less Lethal Inc.:

Just remember that one person's "small inconvenience" is another person's tyranny.

Idle Threats?

Don Bacon, in his latest column, calls our attention to the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity's ridiculous color-coded scare chart. The terrorist threat level is currently at yellow for the nation at large and orange for all domestic and international flights. But according to the government watchdogs themselves, "At this time there is no credible information warning of an imminent, specific threat to the homeland."

Writes Bacon: "Does that make sense? Don't ask. Actually, it's not supposed to make sense except to make it clear to Americans that the government is in charge."

He goes on to explain the sobering implications this has for you, me, and every other American citizen.

Bringing the Fight to Us

"We fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

That's the typical justification for our unconstitutional war in the Middle East. But in spite of (or, more likely, because of) our actions in Iraq, al Qaeda leaders are gaining new recruits and are once again setting their sights on the U.S.

But how is that even possible? Wasn't Saddam removed from power to keep just this kind of thing from happening? And what about the troop surge we were all told was working?

Then again, what do I know? I'm just an ordinary citizen. I couldn't possibly understand the intricacies of international diplomacy, foreign policy, or national defense. We should simply do our part by spending and borrowing more to help the economy and leave the important stuff to those more qualified. King George will protect us from the evildoers.

"Choose This Day Whom You Will Serve..."

If the government were to declare martial law, they may try to seek a little help from above. From KSLA TV:

Could martial law ever become a reality in America? Some fear any nuclear, biological or chemical attack on U.S. soil might trigger just that. KSLA News 12 has discovered that the clergy would help the government with potentially their biggest problem: Us. ...

... If martial law were enacted here at home, like depicted in the movie The Siege, easing public fears and quelling dissent would be critical. And that's exactly what the "Clergy Response Team" helped accomplish in the wake of Katrina.

Dr. Durell Tuberville serves as chaplain for the Shreveport Fire Department and the Caddo Sheriff's Office. Tuberville said of the clergy team's mission, "the primary thing that we say to anybody is, 'let's cooperate and get this thing over with and then we'll settle the differences once the crisis is over.'"

Such clergy response teams would walk a tight-rope during martial law between the demands of the government on the one side, versus the wishes of the public on the other. "In a lot of cases, these clergy would already be known in the neighborhoods in which they're helping to diffuse that situation," assured Sandy Davis. He serves as the director of the Caddo-Bossier Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness.

There's a fine line between trying to keep people calm and actually aiding and abetting enemies of the Constitution (which, by the way, is the proper Romans 13 "governing authority" in this country). My concern is that most clergy in America today wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

More "Terror Plots" Soon to Be Exposed

How do I know this? Because the FBI is building an army of informants:

The FBI is taking cues from the CIA to recruit thousands of covert informants in the United States as part of a sprawling effort to boost its intelligence capabilities.

According to a recent unclassified report to Congress, the FBI expects its informants to provide secrets about possible terrorists and foreign spies, although some may also be expected to aid with criminal investigations, in the tradition of law enforcement confidential informants. The FBI did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

The FBI said the push was driven by a 2004 directive from President Bush ordering the bureau to improve its counterterrorism efforts by boosting its human intelligence capabilities.

I feel safer already.

Terror at Home and Abroad

What's this? Another terror plot thwarted in the U.S.?:

NEW YORK -- According to NewsChannel4's Jonathan Dienst, three people were arrested and one other was being sought Saturday in connection to a plot to blow up jet-fuel lines at John F. Kennedy International Airport, officials said.

Four people have been charged. Three suspects are in custody: Russell Defreitas, Kareem Ibrihim and Abdul Kadir. Abdul Nur is still at large.

Defreitas is to be arrainged Saturday in Brooklyn on terror conspiracy charges.

Sources said Defreitas, a cargo worker at JFK allegedly began to plot attacking the US last July or August. The cargo worker sought help in carrying out a plan and went to an FBI informant, who gathered information about the plot.

The cargo worker is a U.S. citizen with roots in Guyana. Sources said he may be a former government official in Guyana.

Sources said counter-terrorism officials have been following the plot for a little less than one year.

Yet another blow to the "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" argument.

Meanwhile, the death toll in Iraq continues to rise.

Safe at Home? Not Quite

It seems that the war in Iraq hasn't made us any safer after all. Our glorious protectors now think there's a chance we could be attacked with chlorine bombs here at home:

The U.S. Homeland Security Department is concerned the use of chlorine bombs in Iraq is now a threat to the United States, USA Today reported Tuesday.

In Washington, Robert Stephan, Homeland Security's infrastructure protection chief said 150-pound tanks of chlorine are common throughout the world and terrorists have learned to make bombs from them that kill not only by explosive force but by suffocating victims with toxic fumes.

"This is now being used as a tactic against us in another part of the world," Stephan said.

So much for the "Let's fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" argument.

"Conservatives" Condemn Freedom of the Press

The folks at the Weakly Substandard have joined the ranks of "conservatives" calling for a crackdown on journalists who "leak" national security "secrets." In an essay entitled "Leaks and the Law," Gabriel Schoenfeld tries to make "the case for prosecuting the New York Times":

Can journalists really be prosecuted for publishing national security secrets? In the wake of a series of New York Times stories revealing highly sensitive counterterrorism programs, that question is increasingly the talk of newsrooms across the country ...

... Although the editors of the Times act as if prosecution is not a possibility, not everyone concurs. One person who is still mulling the matter over is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Asked in late May about the prospect of prosecuting the Times and others who publish classified information, he by no means ruled it out. "There are some statutes on the books," he said, "which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility."

Schoenfeld goes on to mention a 1949 Senate report which noted that a book published in the early 1930s about U.S. successes in breaking Japanese codes had caused "irreparable harm" to our national security because it supposedly prompted the Japanese to come up with more secure codes. The report concluded that this was why we weren't able to "decode the important Japanese military communications in the days immediately leading up to Pearl Harbor."

It is therefore Schoenfeld's conclusion that Pearl Harbor had nothing to do with economic sanctions, oil embargoes, or naval blockades. No, the devastating attack was made possible "by leaks of classified information."

Schoenfeld sums up his criticism of a free press this way:

At stake here for Attorney General Gonzales to contemplate is not just the right to defend ourselves from another Pearl Harbor. Can it really be the government's position that, in the middle of a war in which we have been attacked on our own soil, the power to classify or declassify vital secrets should be taken away from elected officials acting in accord with laws set by Congress and bestowed on a private institution accountable to no one?

"Accountable to no one?" That sounds a lot like the ruling elite in Washington. After all, they are the ones with the power to fine, imprison, and kill with impunity. Despite what "conservatives" like to think about their enemies in the mainstream press, the fact remains that the New York Times does not have that kind of power. But since when did facts matter?

We have already seen similar assaults on liberty in our nation's history. Abraham Lincoln, for example, fought against freedom of the press during his war against the South. He shut down newspapers that were critical of his illegal invasion and arrested editors who were sympathetic toward the Southern states and their right to secede.

Now it seems the Bush administration is prepared to pick up where Lincoln left off. And, as Schoenfeld's article demonstrates, there is no shortage of "conservatives" willing to go along with the plan.

It isn't difficult to spot the usual suspects. Those who support the prosecution of journalists for reporting the truth are the same ones who supported every other encroachment on our civil liberties under the current administration. They stood proudly by President Bush when he signed the anti-free speech Incumbent Politician Protection Act (a.k.a. the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) into law. They cheered when the PATRIOT Act made every American citizen a potential terrorist suspect. They praised the REAL ID Act and its creation of a de facto national ID card.

As a reminder of the kind of nation we once had, here's what Thomas Jefferson said about freedom of the press: "The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." How soon we forget.