Report Slams DHS Fusion Centers: No Terrorists Nabbed, Civil Rights Violated 178
PolygamousRanchKid writes with news of a Senate report on just how ineffective those DHS "Fusion centers" have proven to be. From the article: "The lengthy, bipartisan report is a scathing evaluation of what the Department of Homeland Security has held up as a crown jewel of its security efforts. ... Because of a convoluted grants process set up by Congress, Homeland Security officials don't know how much they have spent in their decade-long effort to set up so-called fusion centers in every state. ... 'The subcommittee investigation could identify no reporting which uncovered a terrorist threat, nor could it identify a contribution such fusion center reporting made to disrupt an active terrorist plot,' the report said. When fusion centers did address terrorism, they sometimes did so in ways that infringed on civil liberties. The centers have made headlines for circulating information about Ron Paul supporters, the ACLU, activists on both sides of the abortion debate, war protesters, and advocates of gun rights."
Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
There are virtually no government ministries that are effective, why would this one be different? Actually, it is... it's even less effective and even more insulting than most.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet it will be buried as a failure and ignore the next time someone wants to implement something similar.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
Be careful not to confuse dishonesty with ineffectiveness. If you go by their ostensible objective(reducing the already pretty tiny threat of 'terrorists' to an even tinier one), they are a total failure. Whether they have been quite as feckless on other metrics(number of jackboot keyboard jockeys employed, assorted entirely-legal-but-officially-disliked groups surveilled and/or COINTELPROed, etc.) is another question entirely.
Re: (Score:3)
The Fusion Center network has been plausibly alleged [counterpunch.org] to be used for coordination by various municipalities with Federal agencies - for suppression of "Occupy" protests.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
IIRC it is partially a privately run organization (TSA). The only thing worse than government, is private contractors to government, because of (a) the private sector's belief that the government is a endless source of income, (b) the private sector's disdain for the government and (c) the general belief that the government is usually the worst at getting things done (so the blame tends to slide completely over the private contractors)*.
* Note, this isn't to absolve the government of their incompetence or irresponsibility - just to point out part of the problem that is overlooked.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
More succinctly put:
Government private contractors combine the worst parts of the government-run systems with the worst parts of a corporate-run system, while bringing in few to none of the intended benefits of either.
The government side brings in ineffectiveness at designed purpose, and effective immunity from prosecution in event of error. The private side brings in a higher cost (gotta have a profit margin, after all) and an utter disregard for anything so trifling as "human rights". The combination of the two latters is particularly dangerous.
Re:Surprise! (Score:4, Interesting)
Can we finally admit that the Republicans were right after 9/11, that DHS is not needed and in fact a bad thing, and dismantle it?
Re:Surprise! (Score:4, Informative)
"Can we finally admit that the Republicans were right after 9/11, that DHS is not needed and in fact a bad thing, and dismantle it?"
The republicans were in charge at that time. They, in fact, voted to put the damn thing in to go with the republican president who signed the bill. Get your facts straight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ummm.
Higher cost?
Government needs no help here. It is in fact is a "Absurdly High Cost" certified trainer.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Well said sir.
Re: (Score:2)
Even as a libertarian and a free marketer, I wholeheartedly agree. If something is deemed important and universal enough that we as a society decides it needs to be done by government, then the work actually needs to be performed by government. Not the company with the lowest bid, that just so happens to be owned by a friend of a politician, who then also overruns the original budget by 400%.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who works in the government contracting realm, I do find this attitude frustrating. I have found in general that government contractors do tend to be patriotic and want to do a good job in serving their government. Many are former military people, so the "disdain" just doesn't exist for most contractors. Also, most of them damn well know that there isn't endless money, which is why there is always a lot of work put in finding new work.
Not to say that government contracting is perfect, but in general they do a good job serving the needs of government. Now, you can question whether those jobs need to be done at all, but that isn't a question for contractors, who are mostly there to do what their customer wants. Most of the faults of contractors are similar to the faults of most private enterprises.
Don't forget Criminal (Score:5, Informative)
A detective, Shannon Dowell, from a Fusion center has been implicated in setting up the "Gulf Port 7" (Occupy protesters) for felony charges:
http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/09-06-12-a-chilling-police-infiltration-of-occupy-houston-port-protest-shines-a-harsh-spotlight-on-undercover-cops/ [culturemap.com]
Last I heard about the case the detective claimed that he lost the USB drive with subpoenaed evidence down a storm sewer on the way to work the morning of his court appearance. Even finding out that a detective from a fusion center had been assigned to infiltrate occupy was difficult.
One of the protesters and his lawyer was interviewed on Democracy Now, here's the transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/2012/9/10/infiltrating_occupy_austin_activists_face_charges [democracynow.org]
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
There are virtually no government ministries that are effective, why would this one be different?
I'm focusing on US agencies (I'm guessing you're from a country with a parliamentary system from your use of the term "ministry") since that's what's in question here.
As common a belief as it is that government doesn't do anything useful, it's simply not true:
* The VA demonstrably provides more health care bang for the buck than any other system in the US.
* The EPA has been quite effective at ensuring that we no longer have burning rivers, choking smog, serious levels of acid rain, and safe tap water.
* The FDA has been effective at ensuring that we can buy pharmaceuticals and know that we're getting what we think we're getting instead of quack remedies, and in ensuring that there's very very little chance of getting food poisoning from what you buy in a grocery store.
* The FCC does an excellent job of preventing one radio or TV station from interfering with the broadcasts of another.
* The NLRB has helped resolve lots of labor disputes before they turned into serious strikes or lockouts.
* The NHTSA does a good job of ensuring that you can drive down an Interstate Highway and be close to certain you won't hit a giant pothole or something and wreck just because of road conditions.
* State-level building codes do a pretty good job of ensuring that you aren't sold a new house where the roof is about to collapse, the wiring is about to catch on fire, or the plumbing about to leak sewage all over your floor.
* The FDIC ensures that if your bank collapses through no fault of your own, you won't lose your money, making bank runs a thing of the past (many folks who lived through the Depression can tell you stories about their dad coming home and announcing that their life savings were gone.)
I could go on, but the point is that most government agencies do a pretty good job of serving their original purpose. The problem is that they've done those things for so long that you take them for granted and stop thinking about them, and focus more on what they don't do than what they do do.
Now, in this case, I'm going to fault these agencies for being frauds, not for being ineffective.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
But! The EPA and the FDA have kowtowed to corporate interest by raising allowable limits for contaminants such as chloroform (more than +50ppb) and approving drugs which are tested by drug companies and determined to be 'safe' when in fact they're not even close when tested by independent third parties.
While I have no specifics on the rest of the agencies you list and certainly do not doubt their attempts at doing the right thing as often as they can, these are damaging issues which must not be ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not really. You have to use wide scope accounting.
The FDA universally prevents useful meds reaching the market, and the regulatory burden makes those that do prohibitively expensive.
The EPA has done nothing that advancing tech wouldnt have done anyway. In other words, it is not the EPA that is causal in your clean air.
The FDIC props up the fiat ponzi scheme and does not have sufficient funds to cover the next round of bank runs.
The FCC thru its regulatory capture has given us the.slowest most expensive In
Re: (Score:2)
The NHTSA created a system that by systematic error and poor design is responsible for two thirds of all driving related fatalities. Not to mention blind spot mirrors that with more advanced optics could be eliminated but car manufacturers are prevented from replacing by law.
I'm curious about this one. Any specific examples?
Re: (Score:2)
"Alas, you won’t see Hicks’s mirror on many cars any time soon. U.S. regulations require that driver’s side mirrors be flat, and this mirror is not flat. So if you want one, you will have to buy it and install it on the car yourself."
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed. From what I've seen, the reason we have expensive Internet service is because it is being provided by corporations who do not compete and, because of high overhead of moving into an area (which has little to do with the FCC), cannot effectively compete.
There's only one way to make Internet dramatically cheaper, and it requires the government to build the infrastructure and turn it over
Re: (Score:2)
I'm calling bullshit. The VA is incompetent and killed my father because of it. If that is what you call bang for the buck, god save us all from it and you. Fuck the VA
Re: (Score:2)
And I have several veteran friends for whom the VA was a life saver. Small sample sizes distort all sorts of things.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's what my dad would say before the Cincinnati Ohio VA killed him. Did us a lot of fucking good.
And the "oh sorry we killed you old man, here's $100k to divide between 5 people and your lawyers now go away" doesn't cut it,
Re: (Score:2)
I did not say they "let him die" or that he "passed away under their care", I said "the VA killed him". Look at the language, the VA through their incompetence "killed" my father.
And no, I do not care if they use their terrorist goon squads to get my IP and Name or whatever from Slashdot and My email provider I set when signing up. The VA has admitted to killing him. Saying the truth is not a crime. When it becomes one and they attempt to haul me away, I will remind them what a crime really is.
I have dealt
Re: (Score:2)
obviously, they didn't kill you from their complete incompetence. But if your situation was like my dad's care, you probably never would have needed the phenomenal care in the first place.
But since you posted AC, I doubt its worth getting into any real facts with you.
Re: (Score:2)
* The FDA has been effective at ensuring that we can buy pharmaceuticals and know that we're getting what we think we're getting instead of quack remedies.
Tell that to all the people hooked on psychaitric and pain meds taking recommended doses.
"* The FCC does an excellent job of preventing one radio or TV station from interfering with the broadcasts of another."
The also do a fine job keeping independent media off the air. They also do a fine job of cens
Re: (Score:2)
weren't you the same guy who said that Bill Clinton and Al Gore were great for the internet?
Clinton not so much, but Al Gore absolutely was. But don't believe me, believe Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn [nettime.org]:
Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development.
No one person or even small group of persons exclusively "invented" the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time.
Re: (Score:2)
He and clinton tried banning encryption in 1996 because "terrorists" used it. They all came out in support of the DMCA, which was the SOPA/PIPA of the late 1990s, and other draconnian anti-nerd anti-internet bullshit
I was on
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
There are virtually no government ministries that are effective, why would this one be different?
Effective at what? Catching terrorists? Yes, I agree, not very effective. Effective at sweeping up all kind of information about all kinds of people, for use later by who knows whom for who knows what? Very effective.
Re: (Score:3)
No government ministries that are effective.
Really? I love blanket statements like this, especially when they modded so high, which is ridiculous.
Here, I'll try some:
No lawyers have the best interests of their clients.
No mechanics can be trusted.
No one in the military cares about civilian casualties.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why the Democrats have been fighting so hard to shut it down, right?
*crickets*
DHS (Score:3, Interesting)
Aah, DHS, yet another delegation of Congressional power to an unelected office with officials that apparently have unlimited powers, yet another violation of Constitution by the Congress and all other branches of government that do not protect the Constitution and are not stopping this. Yet another manifestation of collectivism, rejection of individual liberties for the purpose of maintaining the planned economy and planned society, which eventually leads to destruction of economy and of society.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The fascists on the right are using terrorism to sneak in their police state policies. The socialists on the left are using economic collapse the sneak in their economic recovery policies.
Not just for terrorism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Don't forget providing handprint scanners they give to local police so that when you get hauled in for misdemeanor free speech, you end up in a centralized database for life...
Re: (Score:2)
And in what way are our lives better for all of that? Has there been any measurable success in any of those fields?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The worst part about all this is that it is EXACTLY what Osama bin Laden hoped would happen when he attacked us on 11 September not terribly long ago. He was not trying to destroy buildings, he was trying to manipulate the U.S. government and even clearly stated that was his purpose... and they did EXACTLY what he wanted despite knowing this? The world is just too crazy to be believed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What is really going on is hat these Fusion centers have found the ultimate workaround for those pesky little constitutional annoyances like Probable Cause and jurisdictional boundaries.and due process. Names just happen to turn up from anywhere and some tangential, half muttered possible connection to possible terrorists is given IF it's even requested and then the fishing begins. Another particularly frightening thing to consider is that the Fusion centers have become the destination spots for the super
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of these fusion centers do more than just work on terrorism-related issues. They deal with drug trafficking, kidnapping, organized crime...
A lot of extremely knowledge people believe that certain elements within the government have used their influence to carry out all sorts of black-market activities and other nefarious deeds... but don't you think you might be going a bit too far?
Okay, maybe not. :p
Re: (Score:2)
they provide for state governments what the CIA does for the White House
And do you think that's a good thing? Are you familiar [wikipedia.org] with what [google.com] the [google.com] CIA [wikipedia.org] does [wikipedia.org]? And you want that power given over the STATE authorities?
Are you sure you didn't mean FBI? Because they're at least able to work within our national borders. And state officials have that. We call them cops.
Re: (Score:2)
they provide for state governments what the CIA does for the White House
And do you think that's a good thing? Are you familiar [wikipedia.org] with what [google.com] the [google.com] CIA [wikipedia.org] does? And you want that power given over the STATE authorities? Are you sure you didn't mean FBI? Because they're at least able to work within our national borders. And state officials have that. We call them cops.
Do you really think I was saying that fusion centers give state goverment covert intelligence assets or specops/black ops capabilities? And no, I do not mean the FBI. I am talking about NIOs that come in and brief the president daily over security threatrs and related issues. This is a role that fusion centers provide to state governments. Fusion centers do not collect intelligence, they simply pass it along and analyze it.
Re: (Score:2)
Daily briefings. What? The chief of police can't talk to the governor?
Is the boss of the state troopers barred from interacting with officials?
Also, neither I nor Google know what you mean by NIO. Let's guess at: National Intelligence Officer. Is this a mystical role that the police department just can't fill?
I am talking about NIOs that come in and brief the president daily over security threatrs and related issues. This is a role that fusion centers provide to state governments.
Also, if governors need to be briefed daily about "security theatrs", then we have a NATIONAL PROBLEM. If the problem is localized to that one state
Re: (Score:2)
They deal with drug trafficking, kidnapping, organized crime, and other issues that concern both state and federal authorities and which require them to work together. Their primary role is really more of a clearinghouse, where state authorities can contact other state and federal agencies to share information, and they allow local state officials to work side by side with federal officials.
What does any of this have to do with their mission statement? None of that is DHS's job, and there are a handful of other alphabet soup agencies that should be doing that job.
DHS has 5 goals: fight terrorism, manage our borders, deal with immigration laws, safeguard cyberspace (WTF?), ensure resilience to disasters.
None of which have to do with drug trafficking, kidnapping, organized crime, or any issue dealing with both state and federal authorities.
Russian Cyber attack on Water Pump (Score:5, Informative)
And in other news, the Russian Cyber War attack on a SCADA system controlling a water pump that burned out the pump?
Well they decided it was an attack based on a Russian IP address for a control engineers login. He in turn points out that he was asked to check it when he was on holiday (in Russia), and that the pump burned out 5 months later due to simple wear and tear.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/dhs-false-water-pump-hack/
More over, the biggest part of this news is that the DHS already knew it wasn't a cyber attack when its press office was leaking details of the story.
As long as the DHS exists, and has a budget to defend it will do this. Just as the FBI has been equipping disgruntled individuals with terrorists garb (plans bombs weapons money) in order to arrest them as terrorists.
They'll keep leaking super secret terrorists plots that have Hollywood scenarios, but lucky they saved us from them, and can't tell us anything about them, other than they were DEFINITELY REAL.
Disband the DHS (Score:5, Insightful)
It was fishy 11 years ago when it was first created. It's still fishy now.
All the entities that were put under its umbrella (ICE, BCP, Coast Guard, etc) can and should go back to being seperate entities.
Re:Disband the DHS (Score:4, Funny)
Why do you hate the Homeland, citizen?
Re:Disband the DHS (Score:4, Insightful)
Because the Homeland looks more like a Prison Yard every day. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
More DHS reports, this one from Wired.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/dhs-false-water-pump-hack/ [wired.com]
Actual Fusion (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
i was actually getting ready to post something just like this lol.
Can you imagine... the govt actually supporting the greater good and advancement of society at the rate we're actually capable of. The gov't holds us back in so many ways in the name of the almighty dollar that we're at least 100 years behind the tech and societal curve we should/could be at.
Of course, i guess we're all to blame for allowing it to happen the past 80 or so years at least.
Re: (Score:2)
Man, can you imagine if those funds had been put into researching and building actual fusion centers?
It's throwing good money after bad no matter which sort of fusion center sponges the funding up.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it is harder to direct scientific research funds through a friend's business so that money can be skimmed from the top. So tell me again the short-term motivation for spending money on scientific research? I say short term because the people who are chasing the money appear to be devious and crafty but incredibly stupid in a big picture kind of way. Rather like crack or meth addicts.
Fusion? (Score:2)
Are they getting more energy out than they put in yet?
Re: (Score:2)
DHS.. They need more money! (Score:5, Informative)
Just last week, Janet Napolitano testified before a congressional committee about the state of terrorism in America. She was testifiying exactly how you would expect the head of a government agency with endless authority and no clear-cut goal to testify. She was.. asking for more money, saying the terrorist threat is greater than ever before, and saying the DHS has helped to curb the terrorist threat.
So.. the DHS:
- We need more taxpayer money
- The terrorist threat is greater than ever before
- The DHS does a great job
Hrm.. seems like bullshit.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:DHS.. They need more money! (Score:4, Insightful)
The DHP has two missions. The primary mission is to expand the budget of the DHP. The secondary mission is to intrude into every aspect of peoples lives. Mission two is a way to justify mission one. So far they have a 100% success rate. Note that security is not even on the list.
Re: (Score:3)
If you want to understand the DHS, all you have to do is change the name: Department of Homeland Pork. When you follow their activity, just think DHP instead of DHS, and it all becomes perfectly clear.
The DHP has two missions. The primary mission is to expand the budget of the DHP. The secondary mission is to intrude into every aspect of peoples lives. Mission two is a way to justify mission one. So far they have a 100% success rate. Note that security is not even on the list.
Very true, it is one large funnel, with taxpayers at the big end pouring in cash, and various cronies of those in power taking turns holding their money bags under the narrow end.
I'll put my name on the "watch list" by saying that DHS has a second goal: looking for citizens that would attempt to organize a revolt against those in power.
Foreign terrorists are way down the list of threats actually being considered.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that security is not even on the list.
Hm. They actually do indeed provide more security than nothing at all; however, I remain unconvinced that the price/security ratio is reasonable. I also remain unconvinced that the freedom/security ratio is reasonable either... but then, I am just me living amongst a HUGE number of people who all have different goals and priorities.
Apparently, their goals and priorities do not match mine... and it seems no country has a government that does. America is the best I can do for now. I do try very hard to make A
Re: (Score:2)
When you are the hammer, everything else is a nail. When you are a Department of Homeland security, everything is a terrorist threat.
I'm worried though that this will be classified as WONTFIX, WORKSASDESIGNED.
Government efficiency (Score:3)
If you want something done inefficiently, badly, at high cost and overly influenced by politics, have the government do it. :)
It seems like a good idea - share intelligence information between different agencies at the local level, in a way that was impossible previously. But the government fucked it up.
I'm sure this country could be run at a fraction of the cost if it weren't for the government.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want something done inefficiently, badly, at high cost and overly influenced by politics, have the government do it. It seems like a good idea - share intelligence information between different agencies at the local level, in a way that was impossible previously. But the government fucked it up. I'm sure this country could be run at a fraction of the cost if it weren't for the government. :)
Yea, just look at how much better the private contractors do at tasks like, say, protecting nuclear facilities from geriatric clergy... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
If you want something done inefficiently, badly, at high cost and overly influenced by politics, have the government do it.
That's the meme, and it's wrong. Take city-run power company CWLP for example. It has the lowest rates in the state, the highest uptime, and the best customer service.
In 2006, two strong F2 tornados decimated Springfield's east and south sides, it went right through my neighborhood. It took months to clean up the mess, there were blue tarps on roofs two years later. It was bad. It went
Re: (Score:2)
Also, contractors are sometimes guaranteed a profit.
People are really surprised by this??? (Score:5, Insightful)
After the 1st plane flew into the 1st of the twin towers I knew our world changed. Within mere weeks our civil liberties were being stripped in the form of the Patriot act. But it was justified. "If a few innocents get caught in the nets for the sake of millions...."
Well we have gotten what we've asked for, right? We're more secure now, right?
By accepting the Patriot Act, we've given away our rights to not get caught up in nets like this, and because we've sat back quietly and let it happen we are at fault as citizens, and we have no room to complain.
People forget that if you don't like your limited choices at voting time, they can write in their vote, and if you are doing that because you disagree with the limited choices then you are indeed making the first step in stopping this bullshit. But if you vote for someone on the ballot and don't agree with what they stand for because the other choices suck too, you're just as much at fault.
Stop voting party lines, break from the mold, write in your vote, you're not throwing it away, that is just republican and democratic fear mongering to get you to vote for one of their two parties.
Politicians hated / feared Ross Perot because he stressed real change in our Government. Ron Paul is hated / feared for his stance being against the norm.
If enough people wrote in a vote and took away any majority to the limited parties on the ballot, who knows maybe there will be an awakening in Politics that things need to change and citizens won't stand for their rights being squashed any longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Ron Paul is feared for his stance being against the norm.
That's not why I feared Ron Paul winning. His hard-line anti-regulatory stance is what terrifies me. If you thought consumer abuse and corporatism is rampant now, you're in for a troubling surprise if he gets elected and is allowed to enact his agendas. I like some of Ron Paul's ideas, but his regulatory views are very, very naive. However, I do like that he is shaking up things within his party.
write in your vote
Write-in candidates can never win - it's not possible with current election regulations. There have been ins
Re: (Score:2)
Well we have gotten what we've asked for, right? We're more secure now, right?
More secure in some ways. Less secure in others. These folks are not effectively manipulating the security situation to bring about more security. All they are doing is stirring the waters. I think a scientist would say something like, "For every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction.", and everyone is looking at prime causes but ignoring secondary effects.
One obvious situation is that we are (yes really) making it somewhat more difficult to attack us directly. The obverse of that is that we are c
Never give up on a bad idea (Score:2)
Never give up on a bad idea. Because, then, the terrorists win.
Ron Paul (Score:4, Interesting)
When fusion centers did address terrorism, they sometimes did so in ways that infringed on civil liberties. The centers have made headlines for circulating information about Ron Paul supporters, the ACLU, activists on both sides of the abortion debate, war protesters, and advocates of gun rights"
- make a mental note that DHS treats Ron Paul supporters as 'terrorists'. Apparently at the minimum 15% of population of USA are on this terrorist list just according to this little fact.
Also note that Republicans and Democrats always are very capable of 'putting their differences aside' when attacking a third party candidate, especially as it was the case with Ron Paul. The Republican primary debates were televised by various networks, Ron Paul was mostly ignored, in one debate, hosted by CBS, Ron Paul got a total of 89 seconds [youtube.com] of speaking time out of 90 minutes. Of-course there were 7 more people on stage, still, even if split evenly everybody could get almost 12 minutes of time. And that's with 'serious' people on stage like Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Gingrich and Santorum.
Why are Ron Paul supporters labelled as terrorists? Is it because Ron Paul wouldn't go to war with Iran [youtube.com]?
Is it because Ron Paul wouldn't authorise torture of prisoners [youtube.com]?
Is it because Ron Paul is against the federal government telling people how to live their lives [youtube.com]? Some will say that leaving things up to States is wrong, they are missing the bigger point, that leaving things like that to federal government is completely wrong and unconstitutional. As to allowing people to deal with these issues on State level does not mean that the State should in fact interfere with people either! At the minimum there should be competition among States for residents.
Is it because Ron Paul wants to audit and eventually get rid of the Federal reserve [youtube.com]? The Fed is the actual main tool of destruction of US economy with its inflationary policy.
Is it because Ron Paul actually wants to balance the budget and start working out the problem of debt [youtube.com]? Yes, it means cutting all sorts of programs and departments, but a government that you cannot afford will destroy [youtube.com] you.
Is it because Ron Paul is against bail outs, stimulus and any form of welfare including corporate welfare [youtube.com]?
Is it because Ron Paul is honest about Medicare and SS being bankrupt [youtube.com]? He offers a transition period off these programs by means testing people and cutting military spending, foreign aid spending and various illegal domestic programs first that are not Medicare and SS [youtube.com], and by allowing people to opt out of the system and save their money for themselves to take care of themselves.
Is it because Ron Paul is in general against government intervention into the economy [youtube.com]?
----
Of-course no MSM outlet is reporting on Gary Johnson being in the race, being on 47 ballots (and Washington DC) out of 50 in USA. He is not on all 50 yet because of lawsuits by Romney campaign. Gary Johnson is trying to prevent the debate between Romney and Obama with a court order or to be in that debate. [usnews.com] Gary Johnson is also trying to get documents released that would show whether th
Re: (Score:2)
Now, prepare to be modded into oblivion for doing the one thing the unwashed masses fear and loathe the most - telling them the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
DHS treats Ron Paul supporters as 'terrorists'. Apparently at the minimum 15% of population of USA are on this terrorist list
Not crazy. These are good things to point out setting up your argument. The failings of DHS and Ron Paul are even on topic.
Also note that Republicans and Democrats always are very capable of 'putting their differences aside' when attacking a third party candidate,
Still on topic. And it's true. The two-party system is pretty busted and it protects the two-party system.
Is it because Ron Paul wouldn't go to war with Iran [youtube.com]?
Whoa there. That's kinda crazy. It's even said in that "I'm not going to say it, but leave it as a question" sort of way that Glenn Beck uses. At least you didn't end with "No, I don't think so. But it makes you think, doesn't it?".
Is it because Ron Paul is against the federal government telling people how to live their lives [youtube.com]? Some will say that leaving things up to States is wrong, they are missing the bigger point, that leaving things like that to federal government is completely wrong and unconstitutional. As to allowing people to deal with these issues on State level does not mean that the State should in fact interfere with people either! At the minimum there should be competition among States for residents.
Not that crazy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think you're consistently "modded into oblivion"?
Re: (Score:3)
Also note that Republicans and Democrats always are very capable of 'putting their differences aside' when attacking a third party candidate, especially as it was the case with Ron Paul.
Ron Paul isn't a third-party candidate, and hasn't been since 1988. One way of looking at it is that Ron Paul is as marginalized by his party's machinery as Dennis Kucinich has been marginalized by his party: both have been basically ignored in debates for decades, and both have had their districts gerrymandered into non-existence with what appears to be support from their party.
You're right that there should be more discussion of the other candidates. I was chatting with a local Libertarian congressional c
Re: (Score:2)
No, you are right, Ron Paul was running as a Republican, that's because nobody actually reports on anything related to third parties. Ron Paul had enough following and electoral machinery in place to be able to get the nomination, but in the very first primaries he got screwed by the Establishment (I don't care Republican or Democratic), it was reported that somebody else won, I think it was reported that Romney won, then Santorum and finally, many months later that in fact Ron Paul took all of the delegate
Re: (Score:2)
Because beating Obama is EASY for Ron Paul, that's the crazy part.
Probably not [realclearpolitics.com] (that's not to say it couldn't happen, but it's not "easy")
Re: (Score:2)
Also FYI, your rants are only serving to prove me right - you (as the self-styled representative of said masses) don't want to hear the truth, hence your vehement denial of reality.
Re: (Score:2)
On the bright side, at least you have a Libertarian congressional candidate. For all the talk of voters blowing off their responsibility, in most races, there are no names on the ballot except those within the status quo parties. This November all I've got to vote for is a president. The rest wi
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, most of his ideas about economics are incredibly naive, and would be destructive as hell.
Holy citation needed, batman! (Score:3)
- make a mental note that DHS treats Ron Paul supporters as 'terrorists'. Apparently at the minimum 15% of population of USA are on this terrorist list just according to this little fact.
And provided not one iota of evidence to support it. You linked to a bunch of biased youtube clips to somehow make an argument for your cult leader being the greatest thing since air itself.
And for that matter, even your claim of 15% of the US population being either on the terrorist list or supporters of ron paul is bullshit.
You ar
Re: (Score:2)
You got the cart before the horse. You said:
A person with no real power can afford to be honest.
And you are saying:
Gingrich and Pelosi have power. Ron Paul doesn't, and never did.
.
It's not about having power and then selling out, it's about selling out to get power.
Then all of a sudden you get it right:
If he wants it, he will have to sell out.
thus your comments are confusing.
----
However you said all of that as a response to my comment, where I was noting not only that the system decided to list Ron Paul supporters as terrorists but also that the MSM outlets are colluding with the power in this endeavour by blocking all alternatives at the source.
What I am talk
Re: (Score:2)
And I am saying that the system is corrupt in a systemic way, that the reason that a politician can sell out in the first place is because he can take what is not his to take.
A politician can take your individual freedom away from you and that is what he is selling. He is taking your freedoms away from you and he is selling them. The Constitution was supposed to prevent the politicians from doing that exact thing, becoming a Senator, a Congressman, a judge or POTUS wasn't supposed to make that person wealt
This makes me happy (Score:2)
As someone who watches our rights erode, and even though this government is behind it. I am very happy to be living in a country where such a report is generated by the government it self and is publicly available. Given all the bad stuff going on (real and in theory) I'm glad we're open enough to openly criticize ourselves, particularly in a matter that is seen as something the government would be interested in continuing (if those conspiracy theories are right).
Re: (Score:2)
yeah unfortunately those in power are perfectly fine with it being a broken money bleeding bloated wreck because being for it gets you a couple anti terrorism point on the next election.
Looking for WHAT? (Score:2)
They've spent a large quantity of money (ooh, stimulus package by another name) in searching for terrorist threats and have found nothing. Not a shock, as there really isn't much in the way of a terrorist threat to find.
Essentially, they've been pouring money into offices, staff, systems, software, all in searching through an abandoned coal mine at midnight searching for a black cat THAT ISN"T THERE!
Unfortunately, the paranoia of those in power is such that they feel they have to be on the lookout for the
Just get rid of the f*cking DHS, ok? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the greatest expansion of Federal power since the New Deal, and it's 100% crap.
Yes, I know this is a troll.
Perhaps it's better to have terrorists? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this might sound crazy, but perhaps the DHS should be given up entirely. Perhaps it is better to accept that terrorist attacks can and will happen occasionally instead of giving up civil liberties and spending billions of dollars trying to prevent them. What if some day civil liberties will have been undermined so much and there will be so much oppression that terrorists become freedom fighters? Shouldn't there be a balance of power between the people and the government, such that by risking their lives people fighting against an oppressive and undemocratic government could still stand a chance?
DARE (Score:2)
* - D.A.R.E. stands for Drug and Alchohol Resistance Education, a US program known to accomplish jack shit other than the purchase of Camaros and Corvettes for cops.
It's just all part of the overall scam (Score:2)
‘He said he wanted to expose something at work’
In his $5 million mansion, Robert McKeon, head of private equity firm, Veritas Capital, commits suicide by strangling himself.
Strangling himself ???????
Awhile later, the news reports or claims that Albert Peterson, a wealthy defense contractor, formerly with Northrop Grumman, and presently employed as a Senior Subcontracts Administrator with BAE Systems Information Technology, murdered his wife and c
Fusion power is also vaporware (Score:2)
The security industrial complex is like locusts stealing our money and scaring us into being happy about turning this country into an extra-constitutional police state.
I personally don't give a damn to hear they are ineffective. Even if their illegal activities were effective it would not change my opinion in the slightest.
To assume ends justify the means is admission of moral bankruptcy.
An electon is coming up soon.. tell your representitives "Nuke em .. Let's nuke the bastards".. do your part to
Not a surprise (Score:2)
And inefficient government fix that actually causes more problems then what they are supposed to protect us from?
Guess what, government? Spending money doesn't always fix problems, mainly when the problems are making the laws.
I'm going out on a limb here, but our government isn't fix able, it's going to get worse, until we have no rights, or we have a new government installed.
I am more scared of my own government then I am of any terrorist group. I'm not scared to ride public transport, I'm scared that
The irony of large scale data collection (Score:2)
Just sounding like a broken record, sorry: http://www.pdfernhout.net/recognizing-irony-is-a-key-to-transcending-militarism.html [pdfernhout.net]
"Likewise, even United States three-letter agencies like the NSA and the CIA, as well as their foreign counterparts, are becoming ironic institutions in many ways. Despite probably having more computing power per square foot than any other place in the world, they seem not to have thought much about the implications of all that computer power and organized information to transform t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Please explain your Constitutional justification.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't catch a fictitious enemy. Watch Loose Change on youtube - that will tell you who we should catch.
Sure you can. Just round up the Usual Suspects and provide them with a handy dandy membership card and decoder ring.
Al Qaeda was created out of gossamer by the FBI to try to get bin Laden indicted as a co-conspirator for the first round of WTC bombings.