ICYMI: Obama Justifies FEMA imprisonment of civilians

TSA - Terrorist Searching Americans

Obama Administration Wants to Give FBI Access to Personal Internet Activity

A recent report in The Washington Post has revealed that the Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to collect information on the personal Internet activities of American citizens without the requirement of a search warrant.

The change, if implemented, would give the executive branch and the FBI increased powers by forcing companies to provide upon request, the records of any individual’s Internet activity without being required to obtain a court order.

According to the Post, the Obama administration will be able to provide information to the FBI if they feel it is important and pertinent to a "terrorism or intelligence investigation." Merely by inserting the words "electronic communication transactional records" to a list of materials that current laws state that the FBI may request without the approval of a judge. This includes personal user Internet web browser activity and the addresses to which an individual sends e-mail. More important is that the request would be secretly obtained and withheld from the individual user.

Unknown to many is that according to government sources, many Internet and e-mail services already provide the government with such data. During his campaign, Obama ran on many issues, including enhancing individual civil liberties. However, this effort may lead to an erosion of individual rights and privacy. In 2007, a published report by the Inspector General’s office revealed that the FBI might have incurred many violations in requesting such data — including the solicitation of information without having an approved investigation to justify the request.

Warrantless surveillance programs are unconstitutional, yet the current administration, following where former President George W. Bush left off, argues that such information is the same or equal to telephone toll billing records, which the FBI can obtain without court authorization. This means that finding out who a person sends an e-mail to or a Facebook friend request is the same as a telephone call.

It would seem as a constitutional law scholar, Obama would understand that the First Amendment protects the personal association information of a citizen.

The question is how this might impact future government legislation. On March 4, 2010, the “Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010” was introduced by John McCain. This bill, if passed, would eliminate several constitutional protections allowing government to arbitrarily pick up Americans on mere suspicion — with no probable cause. Not to mention, in May of this year, the president gave a speech in which he asked Congress to pass legislation to give the president, power to detain any person in the U.S. that the government deems a “combatant” or likely to engage in a violent act in the future.

How far does the government plan to go invade the private lives of its citizens under the guise of national security? We will have to wait and see, for it seems to reflect what Huxley predicted would happen in a A recent report in The Washington Post has revealed that the Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to collect information on the personal Internet activities of American citizens without the requirement of a search warrant.

The change, if implemented, would give the executive branch and the FBI increased powers by forcing companies to provide upon request, the records of any individual’s Internet activity without being required to obtain a court order.

According to the Post, the Obama administration will be able to provide information to the FBI if they feel it is important and pertinent to a "terrorism or intelligence investigation." Merely by inserting the words "electronic communication transactional records" to a list of materials that current laws state that the FBI may request without the approval of a judge. This includes personal user Internet web browser activity and the addresses to which an individual sends e-mail. More important is that the request would be secretly obtained and withheld from the individual user.

Unknown to many is that according to government sources, many Internet and e-mail services already provide the government with such data. During his campaign, Obama ran on many issues, including enhancing individual civil liberties. However, this effort may lead to an erosion of individual rights and privacy. In 2007, a published report by the Inspector General’s office revealed that the FBI might have incurred many violations in requesting such data — including the solicitation of information without having an approved investigation to justify the request.

Warrantless surveillance programs are unconstitutional, yet the current administration, following where former President George W. Bush left off, argues that such information is the same or equal to telephone toll billing records, which the FBI can obtain without court authorization. This means that finding out who a person sends an e-mail to or a Facebook friend request is the same as a telephone call.

It would seem as a constitutional law scholar, Obama would understand that the First Amendment protects the personal association information of a citizen.

The question is how this might impact future government legislation. On March 4, 2010, the “Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010” was introduced by John McCain. This bill, if passed, would eliminate several constitutional protections allowing government to arbitrarily pick up Americans on mere suspicion — with no probable cause. Not to mention, in May of this year, the president gave a speech in which he asked Congress to pass legislation to give the president, power to detain any person in the U.S. that the government deems a “combatant” or likely to engage in a violent act in the future.

How far does the government plan to go invade the private lives of its citizens under the guise of national security? We will have to wait and see, for it seems to reflect what Huxley predicted would happen in a totalitarian society in his book Brave New World. society in his book Brave New World.

keeping our eyes on the ball

You know historically, if we couldn’t do nothing right in these United States of America, we could train some of the finest and brightest minds in the world as scientist. This is still true today albeit not to many folk want to be scientist as opposed to rappers, entertainers or pro athletes. And even in light of new intellectual circles the likes of India, China and Brazil are emerging to the top of the coffee as of late.But as far as our being proactive and forward thinking, we seem to sometimes take our eyes off the ball. Let’s take so-called terrorism for example. We have been so caught up in looking for folks with bombs wrapped around their somas that we don’t even move beyond thinking for ourselves. Not to mention we always want to contain them in certain regions as well as certain disposition. My problem is that bombs and guns and airplanes are not the only way to strike fear into the hearts of the affeared – especially us in the west. My diabolical mind has me thinking other wise.

For example, since the peanut contamination in South Georgia, I wave wondered what would be the quickest way to strike terror in the world I live in is to attack my stomach, I just wonder if our intelligence community has thought of this? I mean I was just a child when I first heard of Swine flu. I remember the new because it was in the year of the bicentennial, 1976, and occurred at Fort Dix where a young solider was killed by an influenza not seen since the plague of 1918-19.

Swine flu normally infects pigs, but has been detected recently in people in Mexico, the U.S., New Zealand, Canada, and the U.K... And just yesterday in New York officials stated eight "probable" cases, of swine flu have been documented. And over the past year, we can recant of food contamination -- salmonella found in pistachio nuts; Halal International Processing, a York, S.C., recalling almost 3000 pounds of beef, chicken, goat, and lamb products, and today in Georgia, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today recommended that consumers not eat raw alfalfa sprouts, because the product has been linked to Salmonella contamination.

I won’t even talk about things over the past 3 years. Like On December 4, 2006, health investigators linked an E. coli outbreak that has sickened approximately 22 folk at Taco Bell restaurants in New Jersey and 14 in Long Island And remember not just meat, but that E. coli infections are also associated with sprouts or leafy vegetables such as spinach. That same year three people died and more than 200 fell ill from an outbreak traced to packaged spinach grown in California.

Now I’m not trying to scare anybody (folks who don’t grow their own food) but, if I know this I think so-called terrorist do too, but aint so sure about our homeland security apparatus. Salmonella, E. coli and Listeria are just a few of pathogens that can invade a food product and food poisoning causes about 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and up to 5,000 deaths each year. Listeria is found in soil, vegetation, raw milk, meat, poultry, cheeses (particularly soft mould-ripened varieties) and salad vegetables. I just want to make sure that we think and discuss and talk about such possibilities and that if we really want to secure our homeland, our food should be first and that we can never take out eyes off the ball. Besides folks like aren't NSF types, we cuss, hunt wild turkey on our frams and spend quality time with our kids - being a scientist and 185 IQ or not.

Musharraf Amour

Believe it or not, having no government in Iraq at the moment means more problems for the folks we consider our allies, Especially Pakistan. Pakistan, a country that is run by a man that took over in a military Coup and still prefers to wear his military uniform as opposed to a suit and tie. What’s the problem you say? Well let me put it like this.

In a speech to the European Parliament foreign affairs committee last year, Pakistan’s President General Pervez Musharraf blamed the United States and the West for “breeding terrorism in his country by bringing in thousands of mujahideen to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and then leaving Pakistan alone a decade later to face the armed warriors,” according to an article in the Pakistan’s Daily Times published last year.

Now these same forces, once friends to the US are our enemies and we put them in place. The situation is precarious for Musharraf since they are trying to push him out of leadership the Malcolm X way – by any means possible

You would expect this given that Bush and the General are all buddy buddy now, all would be god in the home front for the General – but it is not. Although I really don’t think the General wants such to be the case, Bush has fallen hook, line and sinker for his partner in crime. For one, being in Bed with Bush is not god from his perspective. Although he says he is partner in fighting against Bin Laden, truth is al-Qaeda had found a safe haven in Pakistan and that his country is slowly becoming more assumed with radical islamic fundamentalis, that he may need to keep is military closer than the norm.

Then taking money from The US will place his grip on the People of Pakastain in a more tenous sight. Bush administration has offered $750m over the next five years in aid for the tribal agencies, including $300m to help to patrol the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Sop to make a long story short, it may not be too long before we get a news bulliten saying the general has fled in exile or has been kiled and Bin Ladden and his folks have their hands on real weapons of Mass destruction. Talk about creating your own reality.

the terrorist win

A few weeks ago, while speaking at a rally held at Georgia Southern University to support Max Burn’s congressional run, President Bush suggested that a vote for Democrats was essentially a vote for terrorists and that if that occurred, the “terrorists win and America loses.” From the results of November 7, 2006, it seems that the terrorists have won. Albeit, not all of the terrorists, which includes one of my favorites and my homeboy, U.S. Representative Harold Ford Jr. Nonetheless, the Democrats put it on the GOP even if this lifetime Libertarian has to say so himself.

Nationally, the Democrats picked up GOP seats for the Senate in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. In the Congress, they picked up seats in Florida, North Carolina and several other states. Then there is Deval Patrick, who whipped up on Republican Kerry Healy in Massachusetts to become the second African American elected governor of any state, ever. In Georgia, a Morehouse classmate of mine, John Eaves, was elected Fulton County Commission Chairman.

What does this mean? The sea changes affect African Americans namely at the national level. With House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi becoming the Majority Leader, she will play a key role in determining which Democratic lawmakers receive powerful committee chairs, many of which — if her promise of rewarding seniority stands — will go to members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Therefore, cheers to the terrorists.

homeland insecurity

The recent terrorist plot uncovered in London to blow up planes destined for the United States has proven to me that we have truly lost our minds and more important, the ability to think and reason critically. During the entire event, it seemed as if the media was more concerned with telling honest Americans about our security weaknesses and flaws and showing them what technology was being used to protect them, that they forgot we were also giving terrorists an introductory 101 class on how to blow us up.

Now don’t be quick to judge me, but I figure that the so-called terrorists (which I just prefer to call regular maniacs) are watching television and reading the newspapers as well and are taking notes. What really gets me is when they tell the public/terrorists via an undercover operation of how easy it is to get in the airport bypassing security. Then there is the ubiquitous mentioning of mundane information such as reporting that baggage and other support personnel are not screened before they are hired. Lastly, it is the way they suggest new ways for them to attack us, including mentioning how easy it is to get a bomb onto a subway train in any town.

Obviously, we have wasted all that Homeland Security money. Our ports are still vulnerable, more than 40 percent of goods imported to the United States comes through the Los Angeles and Long Beach Ports, yet our government has only spent $40 million for port security purposes while they spend that much each day on airports with no reasonable facsimile of security. So all y’all in the media, just go on and tell them how to bomb us, and we will just keep on taking our shoes off for no purpose when we go to the airport.
--torrance stephens