Category Archives: Homeland Security

Minorites Against the Majority?

Government, Homeland Security, Racism, Terrorism, The State

It’s impossible to prove—more so because there is no will to prove it—but it’s hard not to view this sort of TSA pat-down, in this case, of a toddler in a cast (via LRC.COM), as devoid of the racial aspect. Racial profiling.

As was observed in “Congress: Call Off Your TSA Attack Dogs!”, “The TSA workforce manning crucial sections of the air terminals reflects the federal government’s legislated preference for minorities. Each one of these workers seems singularly intent on exacting revenge upon his or her perceived oppressors.”

In the TSA grope-a-thone, a preponderance of manifestly angry minorities face off against the submissive majority.

Can anybody find footage of TSA agents frisking black tots, or elderly and crippled black old ladies?

UPDATED: Grand Delusions of Democracy

America, Democracy, Free Speech, Government, Homeland Security, Individual Rights, Ron Paul

On ‘Criminalizing Protest in the States,” RT reports: “Last month that H.R. 347, the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011, had overwhelmingly passed the US House of Representatives after only three lawmakers voted against it. On Thursday this week, President Obama inked his name to the legislation and authorized the government to start enforcing a law that has many Americans concerned over how the bill could bury the rights to assemble and protest as guaranteed in the US Constitution.”

Under the Trespass Bill’s latest language … someone could end up in law enforcement custody for entering an area that they don’t realize is Secret Service protected and “engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct” or “impede[s] or disrupt[s] the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions.”

All the while, the US preaches about the demos and its rights to the rest of the world.

At first, it was reported that, “The only members of Congress to reject this alarming evisceration of the First Amendment were two Tea Party Republicans– Reps. Justin Amash of Michigan and Paul Broun of Georgia, and GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul of Texas.”

Another later news item has it that Paul “ABSTAINED on the final vote.” Is this possible? Please find out. I am finding it hard to believe.

UPDATE: Thanks, MyRon Pauli. Dr. Paul did not let us down, after all.

UPDATE II: ‘Absolute Invulnerability for America Means Absolute Vulnerability For Others’

Foreign Policy, Homeland Security, Middle East, Propaganda, Republicans, Russia, Terrorism

Truth is truth no matter who propounds it (and why, pray tell, am I forced to repeat this no-brainer year-in and year-out?). The next statement is immutably true—even profound—although Americans will first look at the man who uttered it, and will denounce his wise words, given that he is not a member of the DC duopoly and the comitatus that props these Demopublicans up (i.e., the “the sprawling apparatus … that encompasses not only the emperor’s household and its personnel … but also the ministries of government, the lawyers, the diplomats, the adjutants, the messengers, the interpreters, the intellectuals”).

Via Eurasia Review:

“’The Americans are obsessed with the idea of ensuring their absolute invulnerability – a thing, I would point out, that is utopian and achievable neither from a technological nor a geopolitical standpoint.
And herein lies the problem. Absolute invulnerability for one means absolute vulnerability for all the others. It is impossible to agree with this perspective.’
Addressing the unrest in the Arab world, Putin said Russia would not permit a ‘Libyan scenario’ to take place in Syria, where he said Moscow wanted to see an immediate halt in violence and a national dialogue to resolve the crisis.
He defended the decision by Russia and China to veto a resolution earlier this month pushed by Washington and its European and Arab allies that Moscow said would have opened the door to foreign military intervention in Syria.
Russia in particular faced blistering criticism that ‘bordered on hysterical’ from Western countries for its decision, Putin said, adding that Moscow strongly hoped the United States and others would not resort to force in Syria without UN approval.
Referring more widely to the Arab Spring, Putin said that efforts backed by the United States and the West to bring about ‘democracy with the help of violent methods’ were unpredictable and often led to precisely the opposite result.

UPDATE I (Feb. 28): Finally, China stands up to the ludicrous Hildebeest:

“The United States’ motive in parading as a ‘protector’ of the Arab peoples is not difficult to imagine,” it said in a commentary. “The problem is, what moral basis does it have for this patronising and egotistical super-arrogance and self-confidence?”
“Even now, violence continues unabated in Iraq and ordinary people enjoy no security. This alone is enough for us to draw a huge question mark over the sincerity and efficacy of US policy,” it added.

UPDATE II (March 4): “Putin [has] said the main problem is that the United States wants ‘to acquire complete invulnerability’ through missile defense. He also mentioned Washington’s refusal to provide written guarantees that the system will never be aimed at Russian territory.” [RT]

The Dynamics of Entrapment

Crime, Criminal Injustice, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Intelligence, Law, Terrorism

Singing from the same hymn-sheet, the Left and the Right did a little jig today: The brilliant FBI had gone and caught us one of dem Arab terrorists, looking to kill us because of our freedoms.

Or did it really?

Before you rejoice with the FBI and the unquestioning Candy Crowley (CNN) and Megyn Kelly (FoxNews), do read on. As I’ve already documented, “the FBI often entraps pliable dolts (to better serve their political masters). The seven Miami-based men who were accused of ‘concocting a plot to blow up Chicago’s Sears Tower’ come to mind. They were illiterate and probably borderline retarded.”

Such Psyops (psychological operations) had ensnared the simpletons who were going to explode the Bronx synagogue, and the “terror ring” tembels who were convinced (by FBI) that shooting a Stinger missile at a fighter plane was in the cards for them.

If a “U.S. agents – running two separate, world-wide sting operations worthy of a James Bond movie – received thousands of dollars in down payments,” then, voila, we have a terror plot, never mind that the agents set the sting up; seeking out fools to entrap.

Most recently, the brilliant and brave FBI and DEA entrapped Mansour Arbabsiar and Ali Gholam Shakuri. I read the court complaint. It had “more twists than a serpent’s tail, but none led conclusively to Teheran, unless Teheran is code for ‘Surveillance State USA.'” “That indictment was the kind of cloak-and-dagger that belongs in an episode of ‘The Unit,’ not in the courts of a civilized country.”

What amazes me repeatedly about American journos is that not one—giggly-girl, “keeping-them-honest” Anderson Cooper; are you listening?—has probed the legality of setting swarthy simpletons up and then nabbing them in a so-called terrorism sting.

You just know that each of these FBI targets is a low-IQ, poor sod, ripe for the taking, who happens to be too stupid to even know that this is how the FBI rolls. You can be sure that “legit” terrorists would never be ensnared this way.

“The federal criminal complaint against the” latest “suspect identifies him as Amine El Khalifi, a 29-year-old Moroccan citizen who has been living in the United States illegally since 1999 after his visa expired. He was nabbed following a lengthy investigation by the FBI, initiated after he allegedly expressed interest in conducting an attack.” (FoxNews)

It would be cheaper for the taxpayer, who’d be spared paying for the FBI’s sadistic games, to deport illegal aliens than set them up.