Keeping America Safe, Or Instituting A Police State?
Bill Lindner
January 10, 2009
The concept of "Homeland Security" under the Bush administration is a misnomer that has done more to destroy human rights and freedoms under the guise of "keeping America safe" --- coupled with policies that have made us infinitely more vulnerable --- to justify instituting what could easily be construed as a police state.
For instance, being forced to strip while being humiliated before boarding an airplane does little to keep travelers safe. All it does is make racial profiling and harassment at taxpayer expense easier to justify.
Political corruption has turned the Justice system upside down. Lie after lie has been fed to the American public to justify extremely illegal activities while corrupted politicians, led by corrupted Congressional leaders, continue being impune. Those few who do their patriotic duty and tell the truth about all the illegal activities perpetrated by our goverment are treated like criminals.
While threats of terror are valid, much of the fear felt by the public was intentionally created by the corruption in Washington --- the true depths of which remain to be seen --- and constantly fueled by propaganda designed to intentionally mislead the public. "National Security" has been turned into an oxymoron utilized to cover up crimes and false flag operations have played an important part into scaring people into submission for decades, especially these past eight years.
Attacks that could have been prevented --- truthful details of which remain covered --- opened the door for the destruction of civil liberties and freedom that was planned long before President Bush was illicitly appointed to the highest office in the land by a politically corrupted U.S. Supreme Court.
Many of the 'leaders' in the Bush administration possess dual Israeli-American citizenship, which could help explain why "Homeland Security" sounds so unamerican. Does the Department of Homeland Security actually keep America safe, or was it created to institute a police state? Below are just a few examples that raise that question.
Maryland State Police Spied On Several Groups
Civil liberties groups have warned about illegal domestic spying since the attacks of 9/11. Records reportedly show that Maryland State Police surveillance of advocacy groups was far more extensive that previously acknowledged --- activists who were devoted to wide-ranging causes such as promoting human rights and establishing bike lanes --- were monitored by troopers and labeled as terrorists.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) were labeled a "security threat." Consumers fighting a 72 percent electricity rate increase were targeted. The DC Anti-War Network was designated a white supremacist group for no reason. "Civil rights" was one of the possible "crimes" in a file on Amnesty International.
Recently obtained police documents show that the groups were swept into a broad surveillance operation that began in 2005 with routine preparations for the scheduled executions of two men on death row.
Police monitoring was out of control. An undercover trooper spent 14 months infiltrating peaceful protests groups. 53 individuals were inappropriately labeled as terrorists by troopers. The documents reveal a far more expansive set of police targets and indicate that police did not close some files until late 2007.
The aggressive spying conducted by Maryland State Police was made public last July. Interviews, emails, public records and an independent state review revealed that police in Maryland were motivated by a query about death penalty activism directed to a police antiterrorism unit that was searching for a mission.
No one has been reprimanded or fired, and the undercover trooper has been promoted twice. The stated purpose of the operation is "to assess the threat to public safety by various protest groups, and identify high threat groups for continued monitoring" which, if the past eight years are any indication, means quelling political dissent.
No arrests were ever made and there is no evidence of violent sedition. Troopers are preparing to purge the files and are expecting lawsuits. A lot more information on the Maryland State Police spying can be found in the article from The Washington Post.
The Maryland State Police aren't the only law enforcement agency who has routinely conducted illegal spying on innocent 'activists.' It's quite clear that the US government has been engaging in massive operations that violate Democracy and Constitutional rights, and it's also quite clear that the illegal surveillance and spying on U.S. citizens began long before the attacks of 9/11.
Deploying the Military on U.S. Soil
Due to a bad case of Bush administration complicity, the attacks of 9/11 opened the door to implement the controversial, highly ineffective 'Global War on Terror,' making the whole world, including the U.S., a battlefield. Due to Bush's legal team illicitly (read illegally) interpreting laws, Bush issued signing statements, many of them loosely worded, giving himself delusional dictatorial powers, including - in Bush's eyes - 'constitutional' authority to suspend habeas corpus, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled is illegal. One example of Bush's fantasy of being dictator is evident in his National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive.
On Oct. 1, 2008, the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team (BCT), reportedly freshly redeployed from Iraq, began a year-long assignment as a domestic "chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force," or CCMRF ('sea-smurf). The 1st BCT is the first of three CCMRF teams to be deployed on U.S. soil. According to the Army, 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers will eventually be deployed. The other two CCMRF teams will come from the Army National Guard or reserves.
The 109th Congress passed controversial 'legislation' that struck down the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 that prohibited members of the federal uniformed services from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, coupled with the Insurrection Act limited the powers of the federal government in using the military for law enforcement.
This is the first time an active-duty unit has been mobilized under NorthCom, a joint command that was established in 2002, allegedly to provide command and control for federal 'homeland' defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
According to the Army Times, the unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control, or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive attack, but many questions have arisen as to why the troops are being actually being deployed on U.S. soil.
As noted in a guest column from The Orange County Register, neither the terrorist threat nor the hazards of bad weather require rethinking our traditional reluctance of using standing armies at home. We should worry about misusing our military for civilian tasks and developing a tendency to rely on the troops to answer every scare. President Bush's delusions that the Consitution allows a president to use forces as he sees fit, regardless of what Congress forbids raises more red flags. Pentagon spokespersons deny that the troops will be used for law enforcement purposes but that shouldn't placate us. The real trouble is what is legal, not what isn't.
There is not a good argument that domestic militarization is necessary to keep us safe and using troops at home undermines military readiness both at home and abroad. Few in the media and a repeatedly capitulating Congress have done little to object to the militarization of the U.S.
"Constitution Free Zone" Checkpoints
A fact sheet on the U.S. "Constitution Free Zone" is available from The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). According to the government, the "border" is a 100-mile wide strip that wraps around the "external boundary" of the United States. Consequently, as a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border are being stopped and harrassed in ways that are unconstitutional at checkpoints on highways in places such as California, Texas, Arizona and Washington State.
Problems have arisen because Border Patrol agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing. Almost two thirds of the United States' population lives within this "Constitution Free Zone." 197.4 million people live within 100 miles of the U.S. land and coastal borders. That includes nine out of ten of the nation's major areas. The fact sheet from the ACLU is worth checking out.
A reporter from The San Francisco Examiner has been stopped at various checkpoints more than once --- once in Arizona and once in California. Border Patrol agents set up temporary stations in the middle of nowhere, far from turn-arounds and exits to stop and quiz everybody who passes. According to him, if you don't raise their suspicions or tick them off, you go on your way. If you're less lucky, there's not a whole lot of shade out there while they interrogate you and toss your vehicle. He and his family have never been asked for proof of citizenship. Most people don't travel inside the U.S. with their birth certificates and passports. Reports of citizens being subject to demands that they allow a search, being interrogated, threatened and harassed are pretty common. Abusive attitudes toward 'suspects' from agents have caused controversy. People who have been taken into custody by the Border Patrol have told of being mistreated, including being denied food, water and medical treatment, physical and verbal abuse, separation from their families and not having their belongings returned.
Traveling by train does not make you any less prone to being stopped by the Border Patrol. It happened this past New Year's Eve in California. A Southwestern state legislator on an Amtrak train that was stopped in Imperial City, CA, well away from the Mexican border at 5:30 in the morning. One agent had a dog who 'hit' on a passengers backpack, which the Border Patrol then searched without asking for consent and found a pipe. The 'hit' suspect was pulled off the train, made to put his hands on his head and searched before being released, only having his pipe taken away.
When the State Rep. asked Border Patrol agents 'why the stop?', he had a bright flashlight directed at his head in a threatening manner for a while as he was told their view that 'we can stop any person, vehicle or aircraft any time for any reason anywhere within 100 miles of the border.' The State Rep. followed the agents to observe them and eventually identified himself as a State Rep. Once he identified himself, their behavior improved. Due to the unnecessary stop, his train ended up being about a half an hour late. The stop and search, without any reason, disrupted passengers, did not make them any safer, and delayed their trip.
The unnecessary delays also happen on buses and at ferry terminals. In Washington, searches at ferry terminals occur so often that Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) provided San Juan Islanders with a FAQ sheet that tells them what they can expect during these checks and their limited rights when encountering CBP agents, including what sort of treatment travelers who resent questions from uniformed CBP agents can expect:
Am I required to answer the agent's questions at the checkpoint?
No person can be required to give evidence that incriminates themselves - that is a constitutional right. Neither can any public official compel or coerce such a statement if the person being questioned refuses to give one voluntarily. However, the law is quite clear that agents can interrogate any person who is an alien or who the agent believes to be an alien as to his right to be or remain in the United States. A refusal to answer could be construed as an articulabel fact supporting a level of suspicion to further investigate and possibly to arrest, depending on the totality of the circumstances at hand.
In other words, if you exercise your right to remain silent, Border Patrol agents can construe that as grounds to haul you off in handcuffs.
A U.S. Senator has also been stopped at a Border Patrol checkpoint in New York about 125 miles from the border --- in a car with license plate one on it from Vermont with letters underneath it that said US Senate --- and ordered to get out of the car and prove his citizenship. When asked by the Senator what authority he was acting under, one of the agents pointed to his gun and said that it was all the authority he needed.
More horror stories of the grossfully negligent abuses of authority are available from The Daily Kos and Check Point USA.
Liberty has been Brutalized by Corrupted Politics
As noted by J.D. Tuccille --- who has repeatedly warned that the folks tasked with protecting us may be just as worrisome as the people they're protecting us from --- unfortunately, all too many of our friends, neighbors and relations have come to relish acting like bit players in a bad Cold war film. They're more than happy to bow down to the nearest uniform so long as somebody assures them it will "keep us safe' - from whom, it doesn't matter, though it's certainly not from overbearing authorities. Some of that sad reality can be seen in his "Many Americans do love their police state" article from The San Francisco Examiner.
Congress needs to start looking out for the American public they're elected to serve. Instead of intentionally hiding treasonous crimes because of their involvement Congress, as noted by The Daily Kos, needs to hold hearings to investigate these egregious violations of Americans' civil liberties, and then pass new laws protecting Americans' rights. Congress also needs to actually hold the perpetrators of this illicitly utilized "Global War on Terror" responsible for their illegal power grabs and treasonous actions.
This isn't Nazi Germany or Gaza. This is the United States of America. If these powers are not challenged and the American people don't wake up and push back, sooner or later Americans will lose their rights to go about their business, and travel around inside their own country, without interference from the authorities. As noted by Glenn Greenwald from Salon News, 2008 was another brutal year for liberty. Until the people demand justice for all the atrocities that are attributable to politics in Washington, nothing is going to change.
Under the guise of protecting America from terrorists, Americans have been repeatedly treated as terrorists and criminals. Due to illicitly circumventing the rule of law, Constitutional protections have been quietly --- albeit it, many of them illegally and unconstitutionally --- removed. If the government can illicitly remove your rights once, what's to stop them from doing it again?
For instance, being forced to strip while being humiliated before boarding an airplane does little to keep travelers safe. All it does is make racial profiling and harassment at taxpayer expense easier to justify.
Political corruption has turned the Justice system upside down. Lie after lie has been fed to the American public to justify extremely illegal activities while corrupted politicians, led by corrupted Congressional leaders, continue being impune. Those few who do their patriotic duty and tell the truth about all the illegal activities perpetrated by our goverment are treated like criminals.
While threats of terror are valid, much of the fear felt by the public was intentionally created by the corruption in Washington --- the true depths of which remain to be seen --- and constantly fueled by propaganda designed to intentionally mislead the public. "National Security" has been turned into an oxymoron utilized to cover up crimes and false flag operations have played an important part into scaring people into submission for decades, especially these past eight years.
Attacks that could have been prevented --- truthful details of which remain covered --- opened the door for the destruction of civil liberties and freedom that was planned long before President Bush was illicitly appointed to the highest office in the land by a politically corrupted U.S. Supreme Court.
Many of the 'leaders' in the Bush administration possess dual Israeli-American citizenship, which could help explain why "Homeland Security" sounds so unamerican. Does the Department of Homeland Security actually keep America safe, or was it created to institute a police state? Below are just a few examples that raise that question.
Maryland State Police Spied On Several Groups
Civil liberties groups have warned about illegal domestic spying since the attacks of 9/11. Records reportedly show that Maryland State Police surveillance of advocacy groups was far more extensive that previously acknowledged --- activists who were devoted to wide-ranging causes such as promoting human rights and establishing bike lanes --- were monitored by troopers and labeled as terrorists.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) were labeled a "security threat." Consumers fighting a 72 percent electricity rate increase were targeted. The DC Anti-War Network was designated a white supremacist group for no reason. "Civil rights" was one of the possible "crimes" in a file on Amnesty International.
Recently obtained police documents show that the groups were swept into a broad surveillance operation that began in 2005 with routine preparations for the scheduled executions of two men on death row.
Police monitoring was out of control. An undercover trooper spent 14 months infiltrating peaceful protests groups. 53 individuals were inappropriately labeled as terrorists by troopers. The documents reveal a far more expansive set of police targets and indicate that police did not close some files until late 2007.
The aggressive spying conducted by Maryland State Police was made public last July. Interviews, emails, public records and an independent state review revealed that police in Maryland were motivated by a query about death penalty activism directed to a police antiterrorism unit that was searching for a mission.
No one has been reprimanded or fired, and the undercover trooper has been promoted twice. The stated purpose of the operation is "to assess the threat to public safety by various protest groups, and identify high threat groups for continued monitoring" which, if the past eight years are any indication, means quelling political dissent.
No arrests were ever made and there is no evidence of violent sedition. Troopers are preparing to purge the files and are expecting lawsuits. A lot more information on the Maryland State Police spying can be found in the article from The Washington Post.
The Maryland State Police aren't the only law enforcement agency who has routinely conducted illegal spying on innocent 'activists.' It's quite clear that the US government has been engaging in massive operations that violate Democracy and Constitutional rights, and it's also quite clear that the illegal surveillance and spying on U.S. citizens began long before the attacks of 9/11.
Deploying the Military on U.S. Soil
Due to a bad case of Bush administration complicity, the attacks of 9/11 opened the door to implement the controversial, highly ineffective 'Global War on Terror,' making the whole world, including the U.S., a battlefield. Due to Bush's legal team illicitly (read illegally) interpreting laws, Bush issued signing statements, many of them loosely worded, giving himself delusional dictatorial powers, including - in Bush's eyes - 'constitutional' authority to suspend habeas corpus, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled is illegal. One example of Bush's fantasy of being dictator is evident in his National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive.
On Oct. 1, 2008, the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team (BCT), reportedly freshly redeployed from Iraq, began a year-long assignment as a domestic "chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force," or CCMRF ('sea-smurf). The 1st BCT is the first of three CCMRF teams to be deployed on U.S. soil. According to the Army, 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers will eventually be deployed. The other two CCMRF teams will come from the Army National Guard or reserves.
The 109th Congress passed controversial 'legislation' that struck down the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 that prohibited members of the federal uniformed services from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, coupled with the Insurrection Act limited the powers of the federal government in using the military for law enforcement.
This is the first time an active-duty unit has been mobilized under NorthCom, a joint command that was established in 2002, allegedly to provide command and control for federal 'homeland' defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
According to the Army Times, the unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control, or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive attack, but many questions have arisen as to why the troops are being actually being deployed on U.S. soil.
As noted in a guest column from The Orange County Register, neither the terrorist threat nor the hazards of bad weather require rethinking our traditional reluctance of using standing armies at home. We should worry about misusing our military for civilian tasks and developing a tendency to rely on the troops to answer every scare. President Bush's delusions that the Consitution allows a president to use forces as he sees fit, regardless of what Congress forbids raises more red flags. Pentagon spokespersons deny that the troops will be used for law enforcement purposes but that shouldn't placate us. The real trouble is what is legal, not what isn't.
There is not a good argument that domestic militarization is necessary to keep us safe and using troops at home undermines military readiness both at home and abroad. Few in the media and a repeatedly capitulating Congress have done little to object to the militarization of the U.S.
"Constitution Free Zone" Checkpoints
A fact sheet on the U.S. "Constitution Free Zone" is available from The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). According to the government, the "border" is a 100-mile wide strip that wraps around the "external boundary" of the United States. Consequently, as a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border are being stopped and harrassed in ways that are unconstitutional at checkpoints on highways in places such as California, Texas, Arizona and Washington State.
Problems have arisen because Border Patrol agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing. Almost two thirds of the United States' population lives within this "Constitution Free Zone." 197.4 million people live within 100 miles of the U.S. land and coastal borders. That includes nine out of ten of the nation's major areas. The fact sheet from the ACLU is worth checking out.
A reporter from The San Francisco Examiner has been stopped at various checkpoints more than once --- once in Arizona and once in California. Border Patrol agents set up temporary stations in the middle of nowhere, far from turn-arounds and exits to stop and quiz everybody who passes. According to him, if you don't raise their suspicions or tick them off, you go on your way. If you're less lucky, there's not a whole lot of shade out there while they interrogate you and toss your vehicle. He and his family have never been asked for proof of citizenship. Most people don't travel inside the U.S. with their birth certificates and passports. Reports of citizens being subject to demands that they allow a search, being interrogated, threatened and harassed are pretty common. Abusive attitudes toward 'suspects' from agents have caused controversy. People who have been taken into custody by the Border Patrol have told of being mistreated, including being denied food, water and medical treatment, physical and verbal abuse, separation from their families and not having their belongings returned.
Traveling by train does not make you any less prone to being stopped by the Border Patrol. It happened this past New Year's Eve in California. A Southwestern state legislator on an Amtrak train that was stopped in Imperial City, CA, well away from the Mexican border at 5:30 in the morning. One agent had a dog who 'hit' on a passengers backpack, which the Border Patrol then searched without asking for consent and found a pipe. The 'hit' suspect was pulled off the train, made to put his hands on his head and searched before being released, only having his pipe taken away.
When the State Rep. asked Border Patrol agents 'why the stop?', he had a bright flashlight directed at his head in a threatening manner for a while as he was told their view that 'we can stop any person, vehicle or aircraft any time for any reason anywhere within 100 miles of the border.' The State Rep. followed the agents to observe them and eventually identified himself as a State Rep. Once he identified himself, their behavior improved. Due to the unnecessary stop, his train ended up being about a half an hour late. The stop and search, without any reason, disrupted passengers, did not make them any safer, and delayed their trip.
The unnecessary delays also happen on buses and at ferry terminals. In Washington, searches at ferry terminals occur so often that Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) provided San Juan Islanders with a FAQ sheet that tells them what they can expect during these checks and their limited rights when encountering CBP agents, including what sort of treatment travelers who resent questions from uniformed CBP agents can expect:
Am I required to answer the agent's questions at the checkpoint?
No person can be required to give evidence that incriminates themselves - that is a constitutional right. Neither can any public official compel or coerce such a statement if the person being questioned refuses to give one voluntarily. However, the law is quite clear that agents can interrogate any person who is an alien or who the agent believes to be an alien as to his right to be or remain in the United States. A refusal to answer could be construed as an articulabel fact supporting a level of suspicion to further investigate and possibly to arrest, depending on the totality of the circumstances at hand.
In other words, if you exercise your right to remain silent, Border Patrol agents can construe that as grounds to haul you off in handcuffs.
A U.S. Senator has also been stopped at a Border Patrol checkpoint in New York about 125 miles from the border --- in a car with license plate one on it from Vermont with letters underneath it that said US Senate --- and ordered to get out of the car and prove his citizenship. When asked by the Senator what authority he was acting under, one of the agents pointed to his gun and said that it was all the authority he needed.
More horror stories of the grossfully negligent abuses of authority are available from The Daily Kos and Check Point USA.
Liberty has been Brutalized by Corrupted Politics
As noted by J.D. Tuccille --- who has repeatedly warned that the folks tasked with protecting us may be just as worrisome as the people they're protecting us from --- unfortunately, all too many of our friends, neighbors and relations have come to relish acting like bit players in a bad Cold war film. They're more than happy to bow down to the nearest uniform so long as somebody assures them it will "keep us safe' - from whom, it doesn't matter, though it's certainly not from overbearing authorities. Some of that sad reality can be seen in his "Many Americans do love their police state" article from The San Francisco Examiner.
Congress needs to start looking out for the American public they're elected to serve. Instead of intentionally hiding treasonous crimes because of their involvement Congress, as noted by The Daily Kos, needs to hold hearings to investigate these egregious violations of Americans' civil liberties, and then pass new laws protecting Americans' rights. Congress also needs to actually hold the perpetrators of this illicitly utilized "Global War on Terror" responsible for their illegal power grabs and treasonous actions.
This isn't Nazi Germany or Gaza. This is the United States of America. If these powers are not challenged and the American people don't wake up and push back, sooner or later Americans will lose their rights to go about their business, and travel around inside their own country, without interference from the authorities. As noted by Glenn Greenwald from Salon News, 2008 was another brutal year for liberty. Until the people demand justice for all the atrocities that are attributable to politics in Washington, nothing is going to change.
Under the guise of protecting America from terrorists, Americans have been repeatedly treated as terrorists and criminals. Due to illicitly circumventing the rule of law, Constitutional protections have been quietly --- albeit it, many of them illegally and unconstitutionally --- removed. If the government can illicitly remove your rights once, what's to stop them from doing it again?
Print
Email
