Tag Archive: National Security


Hoping For Asylum, Migrants Strain U.S. Border

 

 

BORDER-jumbo-master1050

 

 

 

 

” Border Patrol agents in olive uniforms stood in broad daylight on the banks of the Rio Grande, while on the Mexican side smugglers pulled up in vans and unloaded illegal migrants.

  The agents were clearly visible on that recent afternoon, but the migrants were undeterred. Mainly women and children, 45 in all, they crossed the narrow river on the smugglers’ rafts, scrambled up the bluff and turned themselves in, signaling a growing challenge for the immigration authorities.

  After six years of steep declines across the Southwest, illegal crossings have soared in South Texas while remaining low elsewhere. The Border Patrol made more than 90,700 apprehensions in the Rio Grande Valley in the past six months, a 69 percent increase over last year.

  The migrants are no longer primarily Mexican laborers. Instead they are Central Americans, including many families with small children and youngsters without their parents, who risk a danger-filled journey across Mexico. Driven out by deepening poverty but also by rampant gang violence, increasing numbers of migrants caught here seek asylum, setting off lengthy legal procedures to determine whether they qualify.

  The new migrant flow, largely from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, is straining resources and confounding Obama administration security strategies that work effectively in other regions. It is further complicating President Obama’s uphill push on immigration, fueling Republican arguments for more border security before any overhaul.

  With detention facilities, asylum offices and immigration courts overwhelmed, enough migrants have been released temporarily in the United States that back home in Central America people have heard that those who make it to American soil have a good chance of staying.”

SECURE THE F***ING BORDER !!

   NY Times … Of course this wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that virtually no one gets sent back under Obama’s Border patrol policies or the impending immigration reform bill amnesty . Nah , only a cynic would think like that .

About these ads

Mexico Confirms Confrontation With Border Patrol Agents

Screenshot-2014-04-03-11.17.45

 

 

” Two heavily armed, camouflaged Mexican soldiers crossed 50 yards inside Arizona in January and drew their guns against U.S. Border Patrol agents who confronted them in a tense standoff, according to documents obtained by The Times/Tribune Washington Bureau.

  U.S. officials said it was one of nearly two dozen border incursions by Mexican soldiers into southern Arizona in the last four years.

  The Jan. 26 confrontation, described in a Border Patrol foreign military incursion report and confirmed in a separate letter from U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske, ended when the Mexican soldiers retreated back over the border after U.S. agents — who also drew their weapons — summoned assistance. The soldiers, who misidentified themselves to border agents, claimed to be pursuing drug smugglers, documents show.

  U.S. officials characterized the incident as one of the most serious incursions in recent years. Though gunfire was averted, the 35-minute confrontation underscored the continuing friction between the U.S. and Mexico when it comes to policing the often chaotic and violent Southwest border. It also raised questions among some U.S. officials about whether the Mexican soldiers were chasing drug smugglers, as they claimed, or protecting cartels as they used drug routes to Arizona.”

 

 

     Read more about our porous southern border and how heavily armed foreign soldiers were able to just walk into the US . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama Judge: Mexican Border Fence May Have “Disparate Impact” On Minorities

 

 

 

 

” A Homeland Security initiative to put fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border could discriminate against minorities, according to an Obama-appointed federal judge who’s ruled that the congressionally-approved project may have a “disparate impact on lower-income minority communities.”

  This of course means that protecting the porous—and increasingly violent—southern border is politically incorrect. At least that’s what the public college professor at the center of the case is working to prove and this month she got help from a sympathetic federal judge. Denise Gilman, a clinical professor at the taxpayer-funded University of Texas-Austin, is researching the “human rights impact” of erecting a barrier to protect the U.S. from terrorists, illegal immigrants, drug traffickers and other serious threats.

  The professor sued in federal court arguing that the public interest in how the fence will impact landowners outweighed any privacy concerns. The data will allow the public to analyze whether the government is treating property owners equally and fairly or whether the wall is being built in such a way that it disadvantages “minority property owners,” according to the professor. It will also help the public understand the actual dimensions of the wall and decisions related to where it’s placed.

  Judge Beryl Howell, appointed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by President Obama in 2010, agreed that the public interest is significant. Her 37-page ruling also seems to indicate that she bought the discrimination argument. “Revealing the identities of landowners in the wall’s planned construction site may shed light on the impact on indigenous communities, the disparate impact on lower-income minority communities, and the practices of private contractors,” Howell wrote.”

 

Judicial Watch has the story

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FBI Drops Law Enforcement As ‘Primary’ Mission

 

” The FBI’s creeping advance into the world of counterterrorism is nothing new. But quietly and without notice, the agency has finally decided to make it official in one of its organizational fact sheets. Instead of declaring “law enforcement” as its “primary function,” as it has for years, the FBI fact sheet now lists “national security” as its chief mission. The changes largely reflect the FBI reforms put in place after September 11, 2001, which some have criticized for de-prioritizing law enforcement activities. Regardless, with the 9/11 attacks more than a decade in the past, the timing of the edits is baffling some FBI-watchers.”

   Just another Statist tool to be used in forcing mass compliance on the citizenry . At least we are now getting truth in labeling . With this self-admission the FBI becomes just another arm of the DHS-TSA police state . Now , instead of upholding the rule of law , the FBI can join the law-breaking ranks of the NSA in spying on Americans and preparing “enemies lists” … something it has long experience with .

Read more at Foreign Policy

Mass Illegal Alien Amnesty Violates Our Founding Principles

 

 

 

” The Senate will continue debate on S.744, the Teddy Kennedy Memorial Open Borders Act, this afternoon. A vote on the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amendment is scheduled at 5:30 p.m. Eastern.

The bipartisan open-borders lobby bleats about “fairness” for the “11 million” living “in the shadows.” But America owes border violators and visa overstayers nothing. And it’s about time someone in Washington say it out loud.

repeat:

President Obama and the bipartisan Gang of Eight in Washington who want to create a “pathway to citizenship” for millions of illegal aliens have sent a message loud and clear to those who follow the rules: You’re chumps!

Have you patiently waited for months and years for the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to slog through your application? You’re chumps!

Have you paid thousands of dollars in travel, legal and medical fees to abide by the thicket of entry, employment, health and processing regulations? You’re chumps!

Have you studied for your naturalization test, taken the oath of allegiance to heart, embraced our time-tested principle of the rule of law, and demonstrated that you will be a financially independent, productive citizen? You’re chumps!

Unrepentant amnesty peddlers on both sides of the aisle admit their plan is all about votes and power. Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain continues his craven, futile chase for the Hispanic bloc. Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez is openly salivating at the prospect of millions of new illegal aliens — future Democratic Party dependents of the Nanny State — who could be eligible for Obamacare and a plethora of other government benefits despite clear prohibitions against them.

These cynical pols insist that the rest of law-abiding Americans and law-abiding permanent residents must support Washington’s push to “do something” because “11 million people are living in the shadows.”

To which I say: So? There are 23 million Americans out of work. Why aren’t they Washington’s top priority anymore? Didn’t both parties once pledge that j-o-b-s for unemployed and underemployed Americans was Job No. 1? Why is the very first major legislative push of 2013 another mass amnesty/voter drive/entitlement expansion?

If Washington is really concerned about people “living in the shadows,” how about prioritizing the jaw-dropping backlog of 500,000-plus fugitive deportee cases. These are more than a half-million illegal aliens who have been apprehended, who had their day in immigration court, who have been ordered to leave the country, and who were then released and absconded into the ether. Poof!

After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, pols pretended to get seriousabout fixing the broken deportation system and enacted absconder apprehension initiatives to track down these national security risks. But over the past dozen years, only 100,000 out of 600,000-plus fugitive illegal aliens targeted by the program have been found. Why isn’t the search and removal of these repeat offenders more important than giving “11 million people living in the shadows” a “pathway to citizenship”?

Question: If border security and immigration enforcement are truly a priority to our elected officials, why must these two basic government responsibilities be tethered to benefits for line-jumping illegal aliens? See whether any politician can answer without sputtering about “11 million people living in the shadows” or invoking the over-worn race card.

(By the way, we all know that moldy “11 million” statistic can’t be right. Open borders groups have cited it for nearly 15 years as amnesty measure after amnesty measure attracted new generations of illegal aliens to the country.)

You know who else deserves more attention and compassion than “11 million people living in the shadows”? The 4.6 million individuals around the world who legally applied for sponsored green cards and followed the established legal immigration process. They’ve been shunted aside while the Obama administration ushers illegal alien “DREAM” waiver winners to the front of the line.

As Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies points out: “It is clear that there is no way the roughly one million or more potential Dreamers can be accommodated by (the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service) without noticeably slowing down the processing of legal immigrants (emphasis added). The agency already processes six million applications a year without the amnesty add-ons.

There have been nearly a dozen major amnesty laws, affecting at least five million illegal aliens, passed since the Reagan 1986 amnesty. These beneficiaries and their families have crowded out legal immigrants and increased their application waiting times in untold ways. GOP Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas asked the Obama administration last summer to disclose data on how much the DREAM waiver amnesty alone has affected adjudication/processing times for everyone else. The White House has failed to answer the request.

Want a reality check? Not one of the past federal amnesties was associated with a decline in illegal immigration. Instead, thenumber of illegal aliens in the U.S. has tripled since 1986. The total effect of the amnesties was even larger because relatives later joined amnesty recipients, and this number was multiplied by an unknown number of children born to amnesty recipients who then acquired automatic U.S. citizenship.

Hopelessly naive (or stubbornly self-deluded) freshman GOP Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida insists that any new recipients of the Gang of Eight’s Grand Pander scheme will have to “go to the back of the line and wait behind everybody who applied before them, the right way.” Rubio emphasizes to conservative talk show hosts that there will be background checks and rigorous vetting.

But as I’ve reported for the past two decades, the background check process has been corrupted under both Democratic and Republican administrations. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration turned immigration policy into a massive Democratic voter recruitment machine through the Citizenship USA program. Naturalization officers simply abandoned background checks wholesale. In 2003, an INS center in Laguna Niguel solved the massive backlog problem by putting tens of thousands of applications through a shredder. And in 2006, I exposed how some high-immigrant regions rewarded adjudication officers with bonuses for rubber-stamping as many applications as possible without regard to security.

You want “comprehensive immigration reform”? Start with reliable adjudications, fully cleared backlogs, consistent interior enforcement, working background checks for the existing caseload, and efficient and effective deportation policies that punish law-breakers and do right by law-abiders.

And please don’t pretend that piling millions of new illegal aliens onto an already overwhelmed system is going to fix a darned thing. Chumps.

The lack of moral and constitutional clarity on this fundamental issue of national sovereignty is no accident. Open-borders obfuscation is calculated, deliberate, and treacherous. When you don’t stand for foundational principles, you will fall for anything.

Upholding the rule of law and the Constitution, not subverting it for electoral gain, is the sworn duty of our politicians in Washington.

That is the time-tested gold standard by which to judge the slush fund-packed, security-undermining pander package masquerading as “immigration reform” in the Senate today.

Tell your senators to abide by their oaths of office and act in America’s best interests, not George Soros’s or Grover Norquist’s or La Raza’s or the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s.

Tell your senators to stop making fools of themselves and our country.

Tell your senators to vote no on amnesty and get our house in order.

repeat: SchMcGRubio and Company want us to trust them with a thousand new pages of phony triggers, left-wing pork, and make-believe assimilation gestures. Trust them? Hell, no. There’s only one course for citizens who believe in upholding the Constitution and protecting the American dream: Stop them.”

 

CALL NOW: (202) 224-3121.

 

 

READ THE WHOLE THING … AND CALL … Make your voice heard 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

Political Appointees Helped bin Laden Filmmakers Over Objections Of Career Officials At Pentagon

 

 

 

Political appointees at the Defense Department, the CIA and the White House brushed aside concerns from career officials about helping two Hollywood filmmakers research their 2012 movie about the top-secret Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden, according to a report from the Pentagon’s inspector general.

CIA Director Leon E. Panetta, who had been nominated to take over at the PentagonMike Vickers, defense undersecretary for intelligence; and politically appointed public affairs staff in both agencies and the White House helped secure for the filmmakers a meeting with a participant or planner of the 2011 raid, the report shows.”

 

    This report confirms a post we had earlier in the week about the politicization of the bin-Laden raid and amply demonstrates that political expediency trumps national security every time with the thugs that presently occupy the White House .

 

” “At the direction of Director Panetta, the CIA is cooperating fully” with the filmmakers, Mr. Vickers wrote to Douglas Wilson, who was assistant defense secretary for public affairs. In reply, Mr. Wilson promised to “check with the [White House] to update them on status.”

Investigators said that, as a result of these efforts, screenwriter Mark Boal attended a June 2011 ceremony at CIA headquarters in which raid participants were honored and were clearly identified, despite efforts to keep their identities secret.”

 

      The next time you hear Obama prattle on about the need for secrecy to maintain “national security” keep in mind the fact that the term is actually meaningless to him and his staff . To them EVERYTHING is viewed through the PRISM of politics and how  the given situation/event can best be spun to make them look good . There is never any selfless consideration of what’s good for the country , only what’s good for Obama and his Statist agenda .

If you doubt that this could be the case just pause for a moment and consider , Fast & Furious , Benghazi , Sequestration , IRS , James Rosen , AP Phone Records , PRISM , War On Whistleblowers , et al . Observed with an eye towards Obama’s political survival the administration’s seemingly bizarre actions make sense .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Big Politically Correct Brother

 

 

” A few weeks after 9/11, when government was hastily retooling its 1970s hijacking procedures for the new century, I wrote a column for the National Post of Canada and various other publications that, if you’re so interested, is preserved in my anthology The Face of the Tiger. It began by noting the observation of President Bush’s transportation secretary, Norman Mineta, that if “a 70-year-old white woman from Vero Beach, Florida” and “a Muslim young man” were in line to board a flight, he hoped there would be no difference in the scrutiny to which each would be subjected. The TSA was then barely a twinkle in Norm’s eye, and in that long-ago primitive era it would have seemed absurd to people that one day in America it would be entirely routine for wheelchair-bound nonagenarians to remove leg braces before boarding a plane or for kindergartners to stand patiently as three middle-aged latex-gloved officials poke around their genitals. Back then, the idea that everybody is a suspect still seemed slightly crazy. As I wrote in my column, “I’d love to see Norm get his own cop show:

“Captain Mineta, the witness says the serial rapist’s about 5′10″ with a thin mustache and a scar down his right cheek.”

“Okay, Sergeant, I want you to pull everyone in.”

“Pardon me?”

Everyone. Men, women, children. We’ll start in the Bronx and work our way through to Staten Island. What matters here is that we not appear to be looking for people who appear to look like the appearance of the people we’re looking for. There are eight million stories in the Naked City, and I want to hear all of them.”

A decade on, it would be asking too much for the new Norm to be confined to the airport terminal. There are 300 million stories in the Naked Republic, and the NSA hears all of them, 24/7. Even in the wake of a four-figure death toll, with the burial pit still smoking, the formal, visible state could not be honest about the very particular threat it faced, and so in the shadows the unseen state grew remorselessly, the blades of the harvester whirring endlessly but, don’t worry, only for “metadata.”

As I wrote in National Review in November 2001, “The bigger you make the government, the more you entrust to it, the more powers you give it to nose around the citizenry’s bank accounts, and phone calls, and e-mails, and favorite Internet porn sites, the more you’ll enfeeble it with the siren song of the soft target. The Mounties will no longer get their man, they’ll get you instead. Frankly, it’s a lot easier.” As the IRS scandal reminds us, you have to have a touchingly naïve view of government to believe that the 99.9999 percent of “metadata” entirely irrelevant to terrorism will not be put to some use, sooner or later.” 

 

 

As Usual Steyn Is Required Reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Public Concerns Grow, Congress Spooked Over Spying

 

Government_Spying

 

The American people are growing increasingly concerned about reports of domestic spying. And Congress isn’t sure how to respond.

The public’s views have been evolving over the past week and a half. When news broke earlier this month that the National Security Agency could tap data from phone and Internet companies, most people accepted the tradeoff between security and privacy. Members of Congress routinely defended the programs.

Not anymore. By week’s end, polls suggested a groundswell of concern and lawmakers were hearing from constituents. Conversations at the Capitol had a new hue: Sure, the government says it has safeguards in place so it won’t listen to my calls and read my emails – but can it ever really control some rogue operator? And where is all that data? Who’s in charge?

 

    This is what happens when the MSM finally starts doing it’s job . People , even the “low info” people , become informed about the abuses being heaped upon them by a Statist government in the name of “national security” and , low and behold , they let their representatives have an earful . Good for them and good for US . We say Bring It On …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is The US An Authoritarian National Surveillance State?

 

To quote the Blogfather : ” Yes . Next Question” 

 

 

 

 

”  An article by Jack Balkin a Yale law professor discusses what he calls the new national surveillance state that is being created in many countries including the US.

 
Balkin describes the national surveillance state as follows: “In the National Surveillance State, the government uses surveillance, data collection, collation and analysis to identify problems, to head off potential threats, to govern populations, and to deliver valuable social services. The National Surveillance State is a special case of the Information State – a state that tries to identify and solve problems of governance through the collection, collation, analysis and production of information.”
Balkin suggests that the War on Terror is a familiar justification for the national surveillance state but there are other causes most notably the fast and accelerating developments in information technology that make more surveillance possible.
The question for Barkin is not whether we should have a surveillance state since the surveillance state is certainly here but what type of surveillance state we will have. He notes that there are a number of dangers posed by the surveillance state. With all the data collected there may be a move towards a parallel track of preventative law enforcement that may be contrary to guarantees of a bill of rights.”

Glenn Greenwald: We Have Several More Stories to Release on NSA Surveillance Scandal

HT/Fiscal Conservatives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just How Much Did Tech Companies Play Footsie With the NSA?

 

 

 

” How complicit are tech companies in the National Security Agency’s massive spying scheme? They certainly bear some responsibility, but the rules under which the surveillance is conducted make it unclear — perhaps deliberately — the extent to which companies have resisted or folded, and also limit the channels available to the more privacy-minded to put up a fight.

News reports make it clear that many companies not only cooperated with the NSA, but even modified their systems to allow government spooks easier access to data. Others are known to have been less willing to make life easy for snoops.

Make no mistake, even the Twitters of the world are required to surrender information about their users when ordered to do so under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And, they are forbidden to tell targeted users, civil liberties advocates or the public at large anything about such orders. Resistant companies can appeal, but only through the secretive process allowed them by the law. And we know that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved all but one of the 1,856 surveillance requests it received in 2012. One was withdrawn. None were disapproved. So, even the most privacy-minded tech executives have limited options when it comes to protecting their cutomers’ information.

From Reuters:

U.S. Internet companies that want to resist government demands to hand over customer data for intelligence investigations have few legal options, due to the classified nature of such probes and a court review process shrouded in secrecy.

Some of the complaints about government pressure from business executives are, no doubt, sincere. But take them all with a grain of salt.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here’s Why the Obama Administration Wanted the NSA Data-Mining Program Kept Secret

 

 

 

” I was reading up on the National Security Agency’s data-mining program when I came across this tweet by Matt Apuzzo of the Associated Press:

If the programs needed secrecy to succeed, will NSA shut them down now? If not, did they ever need be secret? Or did I just blow your mind?

— Matt Apuzzo (@mattapuzzo) June 7, 2013

Why does this program have to be kept secret? It’s not like American consumers will just stop using cell phones, or wireless networks, or social networks. (A person could do that, but who’s actually willing to? Much as I loathe government surveillance, I’m not giving up Facebook or Gmail or my account with Verizon. I doubt many people are.) It’s also not like Americans didn’t know something like this was going on. So why keep it secret that the government is mining data when Americans will continue to provide data regardless?”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Government Says Secret Court Opinion on Law Underlying PRISM Program Needs to Stay Secret

 

 

 

” In a rare public filing in the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), the Justice Department today urged continued secrecy for a 2011 FISC opinion finding government surveillance to be unconstitutional.  Significantly, the activities at issue were carried out under the controversial legal authority that underlies the National Security Agency’s recently-revealed PRISM program.

EFF filed a suit under the Freedom of Information Act in August 2012, seeking disclosure of the FISC ruling.  Sens. Ron Wyden and Mark Udall revealed the existence of the opinion, which found that collection activities under FISA Section 702  “circumvented the spirit of the law” and violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. But, at the time, the Senators were not permitted to discuss the details publicly. Section 702 has taken on new importance this week, as it appears to form the basis for the extensive PRISM surveillance program reported recently in the Guardian and the Washington Post.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama’s Agenda Scorched In Firestorm

 

 

 

” Republicans have long depicted Obama as an advocate of a big, dangerous and overreaching government, back to the federal bailout of the auto industry he undertook during the financial crisis that greeted his first inauguration.”

 

With a great deal of accuracy , we might add …

 

” In recent weeks, it has fueled outrage over the targeting by the Internal Revenue Service of conservative Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status, and over the use of secret subpoenas and search warrants against the Associated Press and Fox News in Justice Department investigations of news leaks.”

 

But as we are seeing , that is just the tip of the iceberg …

 

” Now the headlines are focused on governmental monitoring that touches not just reporters but, apparently, just about anyone who makes a phone call. Thursday began with explosions over a story in The Guardian in London of a broad secret U.S. warrant for phone records from Verizon. By midday, Senate Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein had confirmed the surveillance had been going on for years. By the end of the day, The Washington Post and The Guardian reported that a data-mining program targeting foreigners was tapping into such Internet companies as Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and Facebook.”

 

Can we call him “Big Brother” yet ?

 

” To be sure, Obama didn’t launch the data-mining initiatives, which were started during the Bush administration, though he has expanded them. He had defenders Thursday ranging from California Sen. Feinstein, a liberal Democrat, to South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a conservative Republican. “It’s called protecting America,” Feinstein said.”

 

   The American people are fast discovering that we are more in need of protection from our own government than from any foreign enemy .

 

 

” In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.”

 George Orwell

 

 

”  But his critics also spanned the political spectrum. “Is it just me, or is secret blanket surveillance obscenely outrageous?” former vice president Al Gore posted on Twitter. Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, an author of the Patriot Act that was used to obtain the court order, called it “excessive and un-American.” “

 

   Wonder of wonders , Obama has even managed to create agreement between this page and , of all people , Al Gore … We guess pigs really can fly , at least in Obama’s Amerika …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAPD Holds Downtown Counterterrorism Drill

 

 

 

 

” Gunfire echoed through downtown and law enforcement helicopters swooped low among office towers Thursday, but it was all a drill as the Police Department’s counter-terrorism unit demonstrated a response to a weapon-of-mass-destruction threat.

The late-morning demonstration began with an explosion of flash grenades, officers firing blank ammunition at pretend suspects, and police rappelling out of a county Sheriff’s Department helicopter and onto a hotel bridge on Figueroa Street.”

 

    Nearly as disturbing as the show of a militarized police force is the fact that the crowd was enthralled with this practice run for denying these same citizens their rights .

 

 

HT/Intellihub

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUH!

 

NSA_Quotes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bradley Manning Trial ‘Dangerous’ For Civil Liberties – Experts

 

 

 

” The trial of Bradley Manning, the US soldier who leaked a trove of state secrets to WikiLeaks, could set an ominous precedent that will chill freedom of speech and turn the internet into a danger zone, legal experts have warned.

Of the 21 counts faced by the army private on Monday, at his trial at Fort Meade in Maryland, by far the most serious is that he knowingly gave intelligence information to al-Qaida by transmitting hundreds of thousands of classified documents to the open information website WikiLeaks. The leaked disclosures were first published by the Guardian and allied international newspapers.”

 

 

 

 

” Laurence Tribe, a Harvard professor who is considered to be the foremost liberal authority on constitutional law in the US and who taught the subject to President Barack Obama, told the Guardian that the charge could set a worrying precedent. He said: “Charging any individual with the extremely grave offense of ‘aiding the enemy’ on the basis of nothing beyond the fact that the individual posted leaked information on the web and thereby ‘knowingly gave intelligence information’ to whoever could gain access to it there, does indeed seem to break dangerous new ground.”

 

 

Obama’s DHS Cannot Locate 266 Potentially Dangerous Illegal Aliens

 

 

 

” Rebecca Gambler, the director of the Homeland Security and Justice for GAO , testified before the House Subcommittee on May 21. According her her, 1,901 illegal overstays had been identified by DHS in 2011. These overstays were prioritized by DHS for further investigation because “the subjects of the records could pose national security or public safety concerns.”

Of those 1,901, nine have been arrested and 266 still cannot be located. 481 of the cases were given to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division, because they presented “potential public safety threats”.

The DHS has failed to report visa overstays to Congress, as required by law. Their excuse? A lack of “confidence in the quality of its overstay data”. Janet Napolitano said that the DHS will report on overstay rates by December 2013.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Official: Holder Approved Warrant For Fox News Reporter’s Emails

 

 

 

” A law enforcement official has told NBC News that Attorney General Eric Holder is the one who signed the search warrant for the private emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen. The warrant was signed under the guise that Rosen might be a “possible co-conspirator” in violation of the Espionage Act.”

 

 

 

 

 

White House Releases 100 Pages Of Benghazi E-mails

” The White House released more than 100 pages of e-mails on Wednesday in a bid to quell critics who say President Barack Obama and his aides played politics with national security following the deadly terror attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.

The e-mails detail the complex back and forth between the CIA, State Department, and the White House in developing unclassified talking points that were used to underpin a controversial and slow-to-evolve explanation of events last September 11.”

You can read all the e-mails here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senators Kill Amendments Tied To Bill On Immigration; Border Security Issue Put On Back Burner

 

 

 

” The Senate immigration bill survived its first tests Thursday as a core group of Republicans and Democrats held together, killing efforts to require full border security requirements before legalizing illegal immigrants.

Kicking off the first votes on immigration this year, the Judiciary Committee held a daylong session on border security where senators agreed to require that the entire southwestern border be secured to 90 percent “efficiency.”

But the committee defeated Republican efforts to put that requirement and others before legalization. Members also rejected following through on a 2006 law that ordered the government to build 700 miles of two-tier fencing on the 2,000-mile-long border.”

SEE RELATED: Senate bill doesn’t stop most illegal immigration: Fed study

 

 

The screwing of America continues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Wall Street Journal

 

The Fatalities

Officer Sean Collier , Martin Richard , Lingzi Lu and Krystle Campbell clockwise from upper left .

 

 

 

 

    Of course that’s not the way the WSJ put it , but face it , Tamerlan Tsarnaev was arrested for Assault & Battery in 2009 and could have been deported then . In 2011 the FBI , at the request of a foreign government , investigated him and allegations that he was an adherent of Radical Islam and again dropped the ball . Is that effective terror prevention ? 

 

 

” Late Friday, the FBI posted this statement on its 2011 interview ofTamerlan Tsarnaev, the suspected Boston bomber who was killed in a police shootout. Here is the statement:

 

2011 Request for Information on Tamerlan Tsarnaev from Foreign Government 

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was previously designated as Suspect 1, wearing a black hat. Dzhokar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, was designated as Suspect 2, wearing a white hat. Both were born in Kyrgyzstan.

Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.

In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. The FBI did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011. The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama Covering Up Saudi Link To Boston Bombing?

 

 

The attempt to cover up a possible Saudi connection to the Boston attack could explain why authorities are scrambling to get their official narrative straight after photos emerged yesterday on the Internet showing numerous suspects carrying large backpacks, some of them middle eastern in appearance and two of the individuals having been almost certainly identified as employees of private military/security firm Craft International.

The FBI had set a press conference for 5pm EST yesterday afternoon but the event was cancelled hours after the photos were seen by millions of people online. The federal agency blamed the media for erroneous reporting, stating, “these stories often have unintended consequences.”

CNN also had to backtrack after they announced that a suspect had been arrested, a report that was subsequently denied by authorities. Reports of a “dark skinned man” being arrested were later mothballed.

According to terrorism expert Steve Emerson, 20-year-old Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, the Saudi national first suspected of being involved in Monday’s twin bomb attack, is being hastily deported. Alharbi was put under armed guard in hospital after the bombing, was visited by Saudi diplomat Azzam bin Abdel Karim, and later had his apartment raided by federal and state law enforcement agents.

“I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Emerson told Fox News last night.” 

RELATED: Source: Government Trying to Make Boston ‘Lone Wolf Terror’ To Spare Saudis

      While we are not prone to rumor-mongering and fomenting conspiracy theories we must admit that an awful lot of things smell fishy here and deserve to be further explored , especially given the “transparent” nature of our present administration and our government’s past dealings with the kingdom of Saudi Arabia . Questions need to be put forth … and answered .

Why Does The U.S. Have Immigration Laws?

 

 

 

 

” Why does the U.S. have immigration laws?  I ask not over exasperation that a Senate gang-of-eight is once again considering a blanket amnesty for people who have been living in the U.S. illegally as part of comprehensive immigration reform, but from a purely practical perspective.  It stands to reason our immigration laws are there as guidelines to enforce our immigration policy.  So at some level we must have an immigration policy, right?

Think of it in the context of admission to an elite university.  Every year there are tens of thousands of high school graduates who would benefit greatly from being accepted to Harvard or Yale or M.I.T..  Yet those schools don’t just let anyone who manages to wander onto their campuses attend classes and, after hanging around campus long enough, deem the folks who self-admitted themselves worthy of a diploma.  Nay, those institutions have a rigorous screening process through which they identify a select few students who meet their standards for admission.

If those elite institutions were bound by the same principles as our immigration policy then anyone who took it upon themselves to enter onto the campus would be tolerated, sanctuary dormitories established, and their uninvited presence welcomed until such future time when a diploma is bestowed upon them for their plucky indifference to the rules.”

 

 

 

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,508 other followers