It's a tricky thing, trying to balance security against the rights of the individual. That Miranda waiver should raise a few flags though. Hopefully the negative publicity this case is bound to stir up with make them reexamine how they handle no-fly suspects.

Dracula,

The problem is, it doesn't "unbiasedly" raise red flags. Take a look at my picture, I could have flown to Lybia, danced the Virginia Reel with Gaddafi himself, flown home, and never raised a single red flag.

DISCLAIMER: FEDS THIS WAS A MADE UP STORY, USED ONLY TO MAKE A POINT. I'VE NEVER DANCED ANY DANCE, LET ALONE THE VIRGINIA RELL, WITH ANY GADAFFI, ESPECIALLY NOT MOMMAR HIMSELF. PLEASE DON'T START SPYING ON ME.

The greatest threat to America is currently the trampling of civil rights and invasion of privacy done by the Patriot Act and its proponents. We can make all the "No Fly Lists" and spy on Muslims all we want, we will never be 100% secure. It's a pointless endeavor that's leading to massive spending, bloated government, endless war, and unforgivable civil rights violations.

"Those who give up essential liberty for a little temporary security, deserve neither liberty, nor security." - Ben Franklin

More BS from the terror nazis

An American citizen is an American citizen, and being such no American should be barred from returning home.

Disgraceful.

I have some real problems with the government deciding which US citizens can fly. Any of us can end up on the list and they don't have to tell us why. The government has stepped too far.

some american citizens are spy's and wish you harm.

It's terrifying. I'm fairly young, though not as young as I look, so I often ponder whether this is how it's always been and it just seems so scary because I'm now old enough to realize the consequences of it, or whether we truly lost our damn minds on 9/11.

Coupled with things like the fake voter fraud scare, the attack on PP, the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the demonization of the poor, it seems as if we're literally regressing as a society.

Thefirst question to the attorney general is what is the FBI doing conducting anti-terrorist operations outsed of US borders. Someone from the State Department has some explaining to do. According to law they are only allowed to work outside US Terroritory if requested by a foreign nation, and only in an advisory capacity. They do not have complete autonomy outside of the United States.

We've learned from some very bad experiences, and many narrow escapes (some thanks to the vigilance of homeland security--yes, they do sometimes get it right--many times, in fact; but we don't hear so much about the horrendous terror attacks that they averted before the damage happened)--that we must be cautious.

All we readers know now are the selected facts chosen for inclusion in this story, which, with its lovely family portrait and picture in a hospital with an injured child, is designed to pull at our hearts. Maybe Homeland Security screwed up. Or maybe they didn't. There might be a lot more to the case than what we're being told in this all-leaning-in-one-direction story.

I see the Gov paid brainwashing is in full effect. You are denied rights...given by the constitution..without due process...

and you all are OK with this?

Balance of security and freedom...what hogwash. It is all cool till it happens to you. Then you will tell us how you really feel.

Sand, as I'm sure you know, there have been several American citizens who have fought with our enemies abroad and killed Americans, and other American citizens who have attempted--and in some cases successfully carried out--deadly attacks on Americans at home.

Not a single one of these--not one--has been an Israeli. So let's cut the anti-Israel sputtering.

Mark, I've been detained for extra security and questioning at an airport--and it was only because my previous flight had been delayed by bad weather, causing me to miss my connecting flight, so I had to stay overnight in Minneapolis and get a new flight in the morning.

And you know what? I'd rather have that happen a hundred times, than have a flight blown up by a terrorist.

This is the world we live in. You face reality and you make your choices.

So we have HIS side of the story, but not the government's side.

Of course, the government is not allowed to tell THEIR side because of 'privacy concerns'.

Somewhere in between is the truth, which we will likely never know.

Since he's going to Portland, Oregon, just fly into Vancouver, Canada and drive home.

Hey Sarah,

You had me with your first post, but lost me with your rant in the second post. This guy is an American citizen. Either the government has a case to prosecute him with, or it doesn't. If it does, then get to it. If it doesn't, then let him get on the plane and return to his family in the USA. But either way this should not be secret, this no fly list I mean, and the government should not be able to question you just for the heck of it, let alone demand you waive your rights (which is what we are told he was asked to do so we can't say for sure he was, but this is a typical tactic of the government).

But your other post? What rhetoric on immigrants is underway? Do you mean illegals in the USA? I hope to heck everyone would be upset that we have millions of illegals here and be willing to do something to lessen the problem. And what attack on PP? SGK is a private NFPC and can do as it wishes, but if you mean the congressional investigation into illegal actions taken by persons working for PP then I would hope even liberals would want criminality investigated. Particularly among those you call friend. I have no idea who is demonizing the poor, or causing a fake voter fraud scare, so I'm not sure I can even help there.

I'll just go with your first post. The rest is, well, kind of dumb, imo.

What rhetoric on immigrants? Are you serious? Even the most law-abiding American Muslims are viewed with suspicion at best and as terrorists at worst by many Americans. She didn't say anything about illegals yet you come on here with a rant about something completely off topic.

And you don't know who's demonizing of the poor? Don't even get me started on that one.

I question which out of you and her post is truly dumb. I also think I know the answer

Rich, that's how Sarah is. I agree with her on a lot of things but she's just as one-sided as the ultra-conservatives that claim terrorists are around every corner. Different orbit, same apogee.

1883: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

2012: "@!$%# 'em, let him find another country to populate."

papag - You got that right! The reality of 2012 sadly makes the words now seem very inappropriate.

@livia-779624

And you know what? I'd rather have that happen a hundred times, than have a flight blown up by a terrorist.

You certainly don't need the TSA for that to happen. By your logic, you should feel even safer if they delayed every flight for extra security. Is that what it will take to overcome your fear?

Thanks for giving the Police State exactly what they want, your freedoms in exchange for their authority.

that 1883 quote on the statue of liberty is the french sculptor making fun of the european class system. Its not a statement of US policy or attitude.

Really, UDUNNO, I didn't know we were well enough acquainted for you to speak about "How I am". If anyone's wondering how I actually am, I welcome direct questions, or feel free to click on my name and check out my posts. There are numerous one's that speak to what I think, feel, know, about everything from the economy, to gay rights, to immigration.

Socially, I'm a liberal, but if you take a look at the economic ones, or my hypothesis on what we need to fix in this country, you'd be surprised.

Until than, while I'm happy you agree with me on most things, UDUNNO, but I'd prefer to let my words speak to "who I am".

not cool jk. You are exhibiting racism and islamophobia. What can I say, you reek of ignorance and intolerance. So sad...

JK, I just can't believe you wrote this:

A Muslim shouldn't have been granted asylum in the US in the first place. Let him find another country to populate.

Our country was founded on the basis of freedom of religion--and that doesn't mean lily-white Christians, either. It means EVERY religion. While being a Muslim isn't my choice, I certainly respect those who choose it as their religion. People in this country should be able to choose to practice it if they want to.

Muslims are subject to unbelievable discrimination from Americans, just because of their religion (or is it their skin color?). Our American citizens are NOT responsible for 9/11, which has generated a large amount of this discrimination. It's meanness, not neighborly, and heartbreaking for those of us who believe we should not be discriminating against ANYONE in this country on the basis of their religion, skin color, handicap, or any other reason.

Papag, thanks for reminding us of this important statement:

1883: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

I hope that at least it will remind people not to be so discriminatory. Thanks!

I wonder what she means by demonization of the poor ? For the last few years, anyone with money has been demonized, any company that that help a 401 grow, has been demonized, and any company that makes large profits for their stockholders is "greedy".

Headhunter,

This is what I mean. Referring to the poorest among us as "the entitlement class". I mean the legislation being passed to drug test anyone who needs assistance. The rhetoric about "being lazy" or the beliefs that a life on government assistance is a preference or even enjoyable.

The reason there is a backlash against multinational corporations is because they continue to bring in record profits through their exploitation of our trade policies and tax codes. There's a backlash against Wall St because their interests aren't aligned with the tenets of Capitalism. Their profits are made, and their interests lay in dolling out debt, and than betting on it. They're not investing in innovation or manufacturing, which creates jobs and competition in a free market.

And really, I would have no problem being demonized if I was making billions. Even if, as you believe, it's unjustified. I'd take that trade.

Sarah,

There is no federal law that says one must pass a drug test to be on assistance. One was proposed, but it failed. Lots of things are proposed yet fail. What do you think causes poverty if not some of the many causes people identify, like drug abuse, like laziness, like lack of education, like single parent childhood (soory, but it is highly correlated to lots of social pathologies), like being born out of wedlock, and so on. Poverty will always be with us because it is a relative condition, that is, people who earn more will be regarded as wealthy, people with less as poor, regardless of the absolute condition one lives in.

The absolute worst thing our federal government ever did to the poor in this country was try to help them. Radical you might say, but it has an empirical foundation. But let's go with your claim that some people don't "prefer" to be on assistance, that they would rather be gainfully employed. The answer to that would be yes if the gainful employment substantially increased one's living standard, and this is perhaps where you hang your hat in this argument. But for the vast majority on assistance their "income" amounts to something north of what minimum wage pays. If minimum wage is what they could look forward to by working, then why work? So the question is, for those not inclined to work regardless of their situation, at what wage level are they willing to forego assistance and instead get a job? Put another way, what is their time worth?

And yet a better way to ask it, and to answer it for yourself, is to consider what amount of money you would demand in order NOT to work. So, say you make $20 an hour. It the full range of public assistance adds up to $11 an hour, then you are really working for $9/hr, less taxes (which could mean more if EITC kicks in). So would you work if the difference was $3, or $4, per hour? This is the analysis most leftists and liberals never make, but it is the real world too. To the extent out government closes the gap between assistance "income" and your income you are induced to work less. How we get there matters too.

We can lower assistance payments as an inducement to get people to want to work more, or we can increase incomes through tax policy, or even minimum wage laws. The latter always fails since income is relative.

Probably the larger mistake you make in your last post is in thinking that companies pay taxes. They are charged various taxes, true, but you as their customer, or you as their employee, or you as their own, pays the actual cost. I've never understood the liberal mind that thinks that by raising taxes on firms they will not be making themselves pay the cost. I guess it's one more of our educational system's major failures.

Being innocent is no protection against an oppresive government. Plenty of innocent people died in the gulag. Plenty of innocent people died in the cultural revolution. If due process is lost, then everyone is at risk.

Hey PEanut Gallery, wrong bud the poem is "The New Colossus" by Emma Lazarus an American Jewish woman from New York.

Emma Lazarus (July 22, 1849 – November 19, 1887) was an American Jewish poet born in New York City.

She is best known for "The New Colossus", a sonnet written in 1883; its lines appear on abronze plaque in the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty^[1] placed in 1903.^[2] The sonnet was written for and donated to an auction, conducted by the "Art Loan Fund Exhibition in Aid of the Bartholdi Pedestal Fund for the Statue of Liberty" to raise funds to build the pedestal.^[3][4]

Emma Lazarus was honored by the Office of the Manhattan Borough President in March 2008 and was included in a map of historical sites related or dedicated to important women.^[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Lazarus

Rich,

I think the overwhelming cause of poverty is an educational system that runs on property taxes. The poorest people live in the areas with the lowest property taxes, which means the least educational funding, which means the worst school systems, which means higher drop out/failure rates, which means few occupational choices, which means living in the poorest areas...

I'm sure you see where I'm going with that. Repeat this cycle enough times and you get ingrained hopelessness and cultural desperation. Now you mix into that a couple spices...

Ridiculousness drug laws that are overly punitive and lead violence. Which in turn leads to distrust of the law and outsiders. Which leads to limited insight into diversity and opportunity. Which leads to hopelessness.

Than comes the media, glorifying anything involving firearms, objectification of women, and places value where it isn't deserved, i.e. Lamar Odim and Khloe Kardashian.

The problem isn't necessarily government assistance, it's how that assistance is ran. The programs in place now do not allow for people to climb out of poverty, they simply keep the heat on and feed them. What if we did something with apprenticeships? What if we did exchange programs where inner-city impoverished children could spend time in elite private schools and than implement programs to improve their own? What if we focused on team teaching, which includes social workers in conjunction with teachers, group problem solving education and hot spotting the issues of each student instead of rote memorization?

Have you heard of Odyssey of the Mind? It's a critical thinking team problem solving competition, where the teams consist of members spanning different ages.

Hey Sarah,

Your premise is flawed. At least it is in my state. The Title 1 schools get far more money per pupil per year than any other schools. It has nothing to do with property tax as the revenue source, though I would agree with you that this is a bad way to fund schools. Not because it results in unequal outcomes--in California it sure doesn't--but because it's a clumsy way to finance anything, education included.

California has some of the worst-in-the-nation school results despite the much greater share of funding Title 1 schools get. Look at the differences between successful schools and failing schools in my state and you will find many differences. One is parent involvement. Another is what kind of family structure the child lives in. One not often talked about but I think is real is economic opportunity within the area the child lives--if he sees no hope then why study and do well, particularly in middle and high school. A great predictor of educational failure is also the rate of public assistance children in the school. But all of these, I submit, can be overcome to some extent with fantastic teachers. Yet that still leaves these kids in a worse place than kids going to schools without these various social pathologies present.

There are a lot of good ideas that exist. You've mentioned a few. I think looking to those schools that do work in those communities, and frankly do it with less money, is probably the most effective solution we could employ. Whether it's private or parochial or charter, in almost every case in the inner city they outperform the traditional public school. And with far less money too. The argument put forward by the left that only a traditional public school can do the job has proven a failure. So yes, let's think outside the box.

And as a former Odyssey coach I know exactly the program you mention, and the good it does for all involved.

A great predictor of educational failure is also the rate of public assistance children in the school.

This is a great predictor of where the child is going, because it shows where the child came from. Also, in addition to being based on property taxes, we have No Child Left Behind, which financially punishes failing schools, which are overwhelmingly impoverished to begin with, and it financially rewards succeeding schools, which I'm sure you can guess are already very well funded.

Now, of course failure shouldn't be rewarded, but here is where the issue lays... The methods of deciding who is failing and succeeding, why they are failing and succeeding, and screwed up union politics. Now I'm not for stripping unions or anything that drastic, but reform is necessary in order to fix this problem.

As a former Odyssey participant, I can say that it was the most educational undertaking of my life, which says a lot considering the fact that I'm working on degree number three. It beats any/all traditional education I received. If we implemented curriculum similar to that, I think that education will improve dramatically.

Hey Sarah,

I appreciate the dialogue. These are serious issues with often complex solutions and for the most part it usually looks like a debate among 6 year olds. I think you brush past my funding response without considering that it upends your fundamental premise that schools are unequally funded and that is a major cause for educational failure. Still, on to your main point of the last post.

The method of deciding which schools dail and which succeed should rest with the parents of the children in that school first, and performance data second. Most parents in a low-income situation can't vote with their feet though, and so for parents to have a better role in this area we need to allow the money schools get to be tied to the child, not to the classroom itself. If the child moves, the money moves. Everything else in life is a market and we ought to let market forces help correct failing schools.

The why question is best answered from the bottom up rather than from DC down. When a failing school sees enrollment decline, and so revenue declines, it will be an indication to administrators and teachers alike to re-evaluate their programs. Worrying about why little Bobby doesn't read at grade level is useful, but only at the local level. A major flaw in our educational structure in the USA has been a one-size-fits-all approach which is only lately being challenged by alternative formats, and the results are promising. So let's have more of it.

Union teachers will respond to market forces just like non-union teachers, or anyone else for that matter. Making it easier to fire teachers would help too, since at present teachers are fired at a rate that only those capable of walking on water would deserve. I'm sure most teachers are good or better, and dedicated to their craft, but this idea of protecting the rot is helping to destroy the whole structure. When schools that are failing see revenues drop my guess is that teachers that are capable will find a way to vote for a contract that helps shed those teachers that aren't capable.

If I could have my way I would end all federal involvement in public education but for the dollars it spends to educate federal employees, or money spent on research and development. I would end all food assistance--states can manage well on their own. And in my state I would eliminate virtually all current restrictions on alternatives, like charter schools. I trust that you and the people in your state are fully capable without DC intervention at educating the kids in your state. I read some of the other posts on sites like these and I question that sentiment, but at rock bottom I still believe it. And if those other people aren't smart enough to educate their own kids in their own state, well people can vote with their feet.

Rich,

I don't know about CA, in MI it's on property taxes. Detroit Public Schools are looking into getting charters, but it's Detroit, I mean, our city officials are getting tossed in the clink on a nightly basis so who knows.

I don't think the teachers/administrators will respond to market forces, if they have the protection of a union that doesn't respect competence or ethics. That's where the reform needs to come in.

I would have no problem with state funded education and keeping it out of federal hands, but there does need to be nationwide accountability. Otherwise we'll see economies collapse in the states without the necessary funding, or those which are more poorly run.

It has been interesting, Rich, thanks for the dialogue.

You all have to remember something. This 'No-Fly' list is just that--a list. A string of letters in a line, with the letters repeating thousands of times in different combinations.

The No-Fly list includes no demographic identifiers. No birthdate, no DL, no Social Security number, no photo, no fingerprint. Just a string of letters on a page.

A google search on Mr. Tarhuni's name turns up one Jamal Tarhuni on the white pages in the US. What are the chances that there could be another one, who doesn't have a listed number, or a Facebook page, etc? And then you look at the white page's suggested spellings if you don't find the person you're looking for. Tarhouni. Terhouni. Terhuni. Terheuni. Tarheuni. Terhumi. Tarhumi. Tarhini.

What are the chances that someone may have simply spelled the name of the actual person wrong? What if there is another Jamal Terhuni in the US somewhere who doesn't have a public profile or a paper trail on the internet? Someone who is a closet terrorist wouldn't be able to be searched via net. If the feds don't have any sort of identifier after the name, how would they know this Mr. Tarhuni isn't the one they are looking for?

Let me give you an example. I know someone who designs video games for a living. His work occasionally has sent him across the pond to London on business since another of the company's headquarters is in London. His last name is Gray, his first--well, let's say that three guys in my company have the same first name.

He found out that someone with the name R** Gray was placed on the no-fly list. Now all of a sudden he can't fly to London. Just because he has the same name. A Google search on his first and last name (no middle initial) turns up five pages 100+ profile results on whitepages.com. There are people who have the same first and last name he does in OR, UT, AL, OH, NC, AL, ME, FL, GA, IL, MS, MO, NY. A search of vital records turns up 11,391 birth records for R** Gray.

And every single one of those will be prohibited from flying because they have that name.

I don't have a problem with a no-fly list; it will keep people off planes who shouldn't be. But for Goddess's sake, can you PLEASE put some kind of identifier after the name? DOB, race, social Security number, even better, a thumbprint!

Now I know Homeland Security is working on a portable DNA scanner that they're planning on deploying in airports so that every person who wants to get on a plane needs to open their mouths to have a DNA swab done that will be stuck in a portable analyzer to make sure the traveler is who they say they are. I AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS. INVOLUNTARY DNA SAMPLING VIOLATES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. But a simple thumbprint, which most people need to give in order to cash a check, is not as invasive and could provide a good identifier. Frequent fliers could be issued a card by the airline that has a thumbprint on it and the print taken at the airport must match the flier's card so they can get on. Wouldn't that be easier than all this unecessary trampling of civil rights? Just like you have a drivers license, how about a flier's license?

Just a question here: Why is it that "my peers" collapse a post if it contains anything less that spectacular about Israel? When someone commented that spies come to our country, I replied with "There have been quite a few from Israel." (or to that effect). Personally, I believe that Israel is a terrorist state that has the US clean up their messes and we funnel tax dollars to them for aid. Pakistan is another. We pay a massive fee to use their air space and a few bases. Just as Israel does Palestine, Pakistan terrorizes it's neighbor, India. Iran is in the same category.

These countries are sold wars, nicely packaged with flag draped messages---just as our government does to us. The big difference is that our government succeeds in pimping one war after another to us better than the other countries.

and our government has spanked the hands US corporations doing business directly with Iran--KBR/Haliburton and Koch Bros Industries, etc. But---they never actually stop them.

Sandtrich:

Why is it that "my peers" collapse a post if it contains anything less that spectacular about Israel?

In this case, I rather suspect it is because it is off-topic. You used the flimsiest of excuses to bring Israel into the discussion.

Livia:

Maybe Homeland Security screwed up. Or maybe they didn't. There might be a lot more to the case than what we're being told in this all-leaning-in-one-direction story.

There is no "maybe" about it. He is a United States citizen and he is being denied his Constitutional rights. The only open question is the magnitude of how much they messed up.

Sandtrich: I agree with you on principal. The collasping and "let stand" posts on this vine are, at least to me simply hilarious. I see posts collasped with another 2 up or 3 down from them, comparatively, much more out of place than the collasped posts. It's much like the content of this article. Too many subjective hunches, with no facts, and way too much interpretive statistical data, which indicates at best, no more than; when one frats in a crowd, some are more likely to catch a noticeable whiff, and be offended, than the one who actually broke the wind.

some american citizens are spy's and wish you harm.

then when they do harm, you arrest them. why is that so difficult to comprehend?

Krestov said:

An American citizen is an American citizen, and being such no American should be barred from returning home.

Unless the government is just waiting for a certain bill to pass.

Currently working its way through the House of Reps is a bill nimbered HR3166, also called the 'Enemy Expatriation Act'. This little piece of legislation will allow the government to strip you of your citizenship if you are suspected of acting aganst, encouraging others to act againast, or even print/disseminate literature that advicates any action against the us, the governemnt of the US or any of the US's allies.

Feel free to look it up. Type 'Enemy Expatriation Act' in Google.

He'd better be careful, the American Government will classify him as an enemy combatant and he'll get a visit from a predator drone.

This type of thing is what we get when we give up our rights to due process!!! If there is a problem he should be arrested, brought back to the US, and tried in a court. If guilty then put him in prison. If innocent leave him alone since he is a US citizen!

Hey Sarah ever hear of the Robin Hood law. It's a neat little system where poor school districts get adopted by rich districts not by choice of course. The rich districts then are required to send their property tax money to the poor districts causing the rich districts to have to cut art and music programs. And a little clause in the law says that even if the people in the rich districts would be willing to raise their taxes to fund those programs they are not allowed to.I bet you'd just love this program in your area.

lonereb, that's not a federal law, its a state law at most. and WTF does that have to do with anything else on this thread? or are you just randomly spewing irrelevant nonsense?

livia-779624
<

em>Sand, as I'm sure you know, there have been several American citizens who have fought with our enemies abroad and killed Americans, and other American citizens who have attempted--and in some cases successfully carried out--deadly attacks on Americans at home.

Not a single one of these--not one--has been an Israeli. So let's cut the anti-Israel sputtering.

Were you aware of the USS Liberty incident, where Israeli planes sank an American ship because its crew not only saw that it was Israel, not the Arabs, that started the 1967 war, but because Israel intended for the sinking to blamed on Egypt. Israel then claimed the attack was a case of mistaken identity, and our Israel-owned Congress bought it.

"Fifteen years after the [USS Liberty] attack, an Israeli pilot approached Liberty survivors and then held extensive interviews with former Congressman Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey about his role. According to this senior Israeli lead pilot, he recognized the Liberty as American immediately, so informed his headquarters, and was told to ignore the American flag and continue his attack. He refused to do so and returned to base, where he was arrested."

"Later, a dual-citizen Israeli major told survivors that he was in an Israeli war room where he heard that pilot's radio report. The attacking pilots and everyone in the Israeli war room knew that they were attacking an American ship, the major said. He recanted the statement only after he received threatening phone calls from Israel."

"The pilot's protests also were heard by radio monitors in the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon. Then-U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Dwight Porter has confirmed this. Porter told his story to syndicated columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak and offered to submit to further questioning by authorities. Unfortunately, no one in the U.S. government has any interest in hearing these first-person accounts of Israeli treachery. [Washington Report]."

"Israel attacked the USS Liberty using UNMARKED AIRCRAFT. This is the single fact which proves Israel knew exactly who they were attacking. Israel's story is that they thought USS Liberty was an Egyptian ship and therefore a legitimate target of war. Were that true, there would be no reason to attack a supposedly Egyptian ship with unmarked aircraft. The only possible reason to use unmarked aircraft to attack the ship is that Israel knew it was an American ship and intended to sink it, then to blame the attack on Egypt." - What Really Happened, "Cover-Up Alleged in Probe of USS Liberty"

Were you aware of the USS Liberty incident, where Israeli planes sank an American ship

wow, you don't even know that the Liberty never sank. which throws the entire rest of your "hate Israel" rant in extreme doubt

danwill

Were you aware of the USS Liberty incident, where Israeli planes sank an American ship

wow, you don't even know that the Liberty never sank. which throws the entire rest of your "hate Israel" rant in extreme doubt

My mistake, as the article I quoted did not say the ship sank.

However, Israel did kill 34 American servicemen in the false flag attack; and the facts presented in the article still stand.

I've seen many takes, both good and bad. I still think it was a really bad mistake

I welcome your disproving anything in the article that you can, but I suspect you can't.

The blowing up of the King David Hotel by Israeli terrorists disguised as Arabs,  the Lavon Affair, where  Arabs were to be blamed for an Israeli undertaking and the USS Liberty were all false flag operations by the "by deception thou shalt make war" people.

There are also some who suspect that 9/11 was Israel's most successful false flag operation (we may not know for awhile, as Bush, who tried to prevent any investigation of 9/11, and who refused to testify under oath about it, even in private, classified everything having to do with some rather interesting Mossad activities that day--see What Really Happened, Five Dancing Israelis). Certainly Israel was a chief beneficiary of 9/11, with it getting the American war in Iraq that it had long pushed for and quite possibly a war with Iran, another on its wish list. Even Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, when asked what the 9/11 attacks would mean for Israeli-American relations, said, "It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)."

"Truthseeker" you call yourself. But everything you write above are distortions, outright lies, or absurd libels that have no connection whatsoever to fact--such as your Israel-911-conspiracy garbage. Israel has not benefitted from 911; Netanyahu never said anything like your lying quote.

I could take your examples point by point--and maybe someone else on here has the patience to do that--but really. Your irrational hatred has overtaken your mind, and there may be others of similar ilk who will jump on your scapegoating bandwagon. Believe what you need to believe to keep the flames of hatred alive in your heart. But for the record: it's a load of stench.

livia-779624

"Truthseeker" you call yourself. But everything you write above are distortions, outright lies, or absurd libels that have no connection whatsoever to fact--such as your Israel-911-conspiracy garbage. Israel has not benefitted from 911; Netanyahu never said anything like your lying quote.

Feel free to google, and try to disprove anything you feel to be "distortions, outright lies, or absurd libels that have no connection whatsoever to fact." For starters, you might check out this New York Times article: A DAY OF TERROR: THE ISRAELIS; Spilled Blood Is Seen as Bond That Draws 2 Nations Closer. In it, you will find the following:

"'Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, ''It's very good.'' Then he edited himself: ''Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.'' He predicted that the attack would ''strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we've experienced terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.'''"

Also, you will find the account at What Really Happened, Five Dancing Israelis to be extremely well documented with sources from mainstream media (including Jewish newspapers Jerusalem Post and Haaretz). Also included is reference to a Fox News series about the Mossad operatives who shadowed the alleged hijackers for months. (Bush, BTW, put off-limits to 9/11 commissioners any investigation into the support structure for the hijackers.) Not surprisingly, half of the commissioners, citing Bush administration lying and noncooperation, have called their own report a cover-up by that administration. Several of these commissioners have called for a new investigation; but I sincerely doubt that will occur under Obama who made sure, by executing bin Laden, that there'd be no trial which might risk revealing the 9/11 report to be fiction.

Rich281385

Sarah,

There
is no federal law that says one must pass a drug test to be on assistance. One
was proposed, but it failed. Lots of things are proposed yet fail. Yes one was defeated but this has been consistently
reintroduced. What do you think causes poverty if not
some of the many causes people identify, like drug abuse (I neither drink or use drugs), like laziness, like lack of education, (I educated myself, literally) like single parent childhood (soory, but it is
highly correlated to lots of social pathologies), like
being born out of wedlock, I was
born out of wedlock 72 years ago, and I guarantee that I had nothing to do with
that. However I did live my life working, bringing up 4 born in wedlock
children, and college graduates, parents and productive citizens. and so on. Poverty will
always be with us because it is a relative condition, that is, people who earn
more will be regarded as wealthy, people with less as poor, regardless of the
absolute condition one lives in. (this is the most arrogant,
self centered, egotistical, post I have ever read anywhere, people who think as
you do are the problem not the cure)

The
absolute worst thing our federal government ever did to the poor in this
country was try to help them. Radical you might say, but it has an empirical
foundation. But let's go with your claim that some people don't
"prefer" to be on assistance, that they would rather be gainfully
employed. The answer to that would be yes if the gainful employment
substantially increased one's living standard, and this is perhaps where you
hang your hat in this argument. But for the vast majority on assistance their
"income" amounts to something north of what minimum wage pays. If
minimum wage is what they could look forward to by working, then why work? So
the question is, for those not inclined to work regardless of their situation,
at what wage level are they willing to forego assistance and instead get a job?
Put another way, what is their time worth?
(Early in my working life I
was injured while working, it was going to affect me greatly long after this
injury, sir. I educated myself to become
proficient in many trades and fields, I carry a CDL “A” drivers license, became
a certified welder and claim proficiency in Mig, Tig, and stick, welding. Have professional certifications in Drinking
water distribution and treatment, Waste Water treatment, and collection, solid
waste management and Fire, Building, and Zoning Codes enforcement, plus lab
certifications. Can you even come close
to those accomplishments, born with your silver spoon in a world of
entitlements and privilege? Your whole hypothesis
is wrong and is exactly what is wrong with this country, and the WASPS who lay
claim to this country.) And yet a better way to
ask it, and to answer it for yourself, is to consider what amount of money you
would demand in order NOT to work. So, say you make $20 an hour. It the full
range of public assistance adds up to $11 an hour, then you are really working
for $9/hr, less taxes (which could mean more if EITC kicks in). So would you
work if the difference was $3, or $4, per hour? This is the analysis most
leftists and liberals never make, but it is the real world too. To the extent
out government closes the gap between assistance "income" and your
income you are induced to work less. How we get there matters too. (Few people ask the questions
you have just posed. Most do not even
consider such things they work because of their own simple pride of
accomplishment, and not much else, other that wanting to be able to live on the
fruits of their labor)

We
can lower assistance payments as an inducement to get people to want to work
more, or we can increase incomes through tax policy, or even minimum wage laws.
The latter always fails since income is relative. (You’re right income is relative, but when it
becomes unbalanced the products become out of reach, then there will be fewer
customers for the product. This is
massively counterproductive. When I started my work life the minimum wage was
$1, $40 a week, at that time while one had to be frugal, but they could
exist. As the cost of living raised so
did the minimum wage, which allowed people to seek to make further gains, so actually
the min wage doesn’t fail, it simply sustains a market base, which you tend to ignore,
in your arrogance.)

Probably
the larger mistake you make in your last post is in thinking that companies pay
taxes. They are charged various taxes, true, but you as their customer, or you
as their employee, or you as their own, pays the actual cost. I've never understood
the liberal mind that thinks that by raising taxes on firms they will not be
making themselves pay the cost. I guess it's one more of our educational
system's major failures. (The
company’s who do use the labor of others to accomplish their ends, also require
their investments are protected which govts. do for them. Taxes to governments guarantee that they can
operate in a lawful way, and they are protected from nefarious miscreants who
would steal their ideas or sell those stolen ideas on the open market. There are many things that this government
does for such businesses, including a certain degree of corporate welfare. You have obviously missed those real life
things that our taxes pay for. We do
know how those taxes are used and that it adds value to many of the products
produced in this country.)

Sarah: I find your comments, rants and tirades both disturbing and humorous. Yes you truly are a liberal - got those blinders firmly fixed around your rose tinted glasses.

Corporations exploitation of the tax codes and trade regulations?? Oh really who does a more thorough exploitation of the tax code than the average American citizen that cheats on their taxes? How about the 47% of Americans that pay no Federal income Taxes - how is that not an exploitation of the system and unfortunately our economy? How about the exploitation of the social services by our so-called disadvantage to the tune of over 280 billion per year??? Trade regulations are subject to international review to avoid international trade wars - we seem to be in compliance so not sure where that dumb comment came from?

How about the American public owning up to the their actions that have resulted in the exportation of millions of US jobs overseas??? No evil corporations did not cause this too happen - our own American consumer did that with their purchase decisions. Check out your closets - I bet there is not a single piece of clothing in there that was made in the United States by Americans. Where was your car made? How about the I-Pod, the Blackberry, your TV, your laptop, your washer / dryer, your refrigerator, your stove etc etc - let me guess China? South Korea? Japan? Philippines? Viet Nam? Malaysia? Anywhere but in the United States and yet this is all the fault of those bad old Corporations and those evil banks and those nasty Conservatives

Time to take those rose-tinted glasses off, remove the blinders and face realitiy you and yours are the root of the problem and certainly offer nothing toward a solution.

Ternan:

There are people who pay no Federal "income" taxes because they either can't get a job in this economy or can only get sporadic work that still keeps them in the 0% tax bracket. Of course, the ones with sporadic work still pay that "payroll" tax which is no less a tax on income. It's just put under another header so that people can whine about the poor paying no "income" tax. Even worse many still pay hefty State income taxes. You have to qualify a limited set of taxes because you know these people are still getting nailed by taxes.

The blowing up of the King David Hotel by Israeli terrorists disguised as Arabs

while it is true that the King David Hotel was bombed, what you and the anti-Israelis consistently fail to mention was the simple fact that the Hotel was garrisoned as a military command post at the time of the attack, therefore a legitimate target and quite unlike the bombings of civilian occupied hotels by current Arab terrorists. I'm no fan of irgun, stern gang or their tactics, but that attack was not against civilians

Danwill:

That still leaves it as a "false flag" operation, which still makes them terrorists even if the target was legitimate. It inspires a "retaliation" against a non-agressor.

inspires a "retaliation" against a non-agressor.

"non-aggressor" is stretching reality quite a bit

also, show me the suicide bomber that phones in warning of an impending attack

danwill

The blowing up of the King David Hotel by Israeli terrorists disguised as Arabs

while it is true that the King David Hotel was bombed, what you and the anti-Israelis consistently fail to mention was the simple fact that the Hotel was garrisoned as a military command post at the time of the attack, therefore a legitimate target and quite unlike the bombings of civilian occupied hotels by current Arab terrorists.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter; and, under international law, an occupied people have the right to resist, by force, their occupiers. Every adult Israeli is considered a member of its military, so targeting adult Israelis is targeting Israel's military. And under the definition the Israelis use and that we use in Afghanistan and Pakistan, any children who die in such an attack are considered "collateral damage." I don't favor terrorism of any kind, but since killing thousands of civilians from the air with F-16s, as Israel does, apparently isn't considered terrorism by our government, but killing a few dozen Israelis by suicide bombing is, one solution to the Palestinian terrorism problem would be to equip the Palestinians with F-16s.

Pvblivs wrote,

Danwill:

That still leaves it as a "false flag" operation, which still makes them terrorists even if the target was legitimate. It inspires a "retaliation" against a non-agressor.

Pvblivs is correct. In the case of both the USS Liberty and Lavon affairs, if all had gone according to Israeli plan, the US would have incorrectly blamed Egypt and possibly killed innocent people in retaliation. And while Israel has been caught red-handed in several false flag incidents, it has probably gone undetected in others. In the case of 9/11 (where there are unanswered questions about Mossad activities that day - What Really Happened, Five Dancing Israelis), innocent American Arabs, such as the Mr. Tarhuni in the article, have suffered greatly increased discrimination, and even death as a direct result.

From Foreign Affairs, "False Flag," is an example of an Israeli false flag operation that put American lives at risk:

"'Buried deep in the archives of America's intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush's administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives -- what is commonly referred to as a "false flag" operation.'"

"The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah -- a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children."

"'The report then made its way to the White House, according to the currently serving U.S. intelligence officer. The officer said that Bush "went absolutely ballistic" when briefed on its contents.'"

"'The report sparked White House concerns that Israel's program was putting Americans at risk," the intelligence officer told me. "There's no question that the U.S. has cooperated with Israel in intelligence-gathering operations against the Iranians, but this was different. No matter what anyone thinks, we're not in the business of assassinating Iranian officials or killing Iranian civilians."'"

"Israel's relationship with Jundallah continued to roil the Bush administration until the day it left office, this same intelligence officer noted. Israel's activities jeopardized the administration's fragile relationship with Pakistan, which was coming under intense pressure from Iran to crack down on Jundallah. It also undermined U.S. claims that it would never fight terror with terror, and invited attacks in kind on U.S. personnel."

Today's Rock Center story, "Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC," appears to me to be our government telling the Iranians not to target Americans, because we are not involved in the assassinations.

You are very right. The first question to the attorney general is what is the FBI doing conducting anti-terrorist operations outside of US borders. Someone from the State Department has some explaining to do. According to law they are only allowed to work outside US Terroritory if requested by a foreign nation and ten only in an advisory capacity. They do not have complete autonomy outside of the United States.

The right wing use fear as a method to control the ignorant masses. The Nazi party perfected this technic. Just change the name of the threat to the targeted people of your choice.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".

Benjamin Franklin

You're a fool for blaming it on "this administration." I don't think the President really runs the country anymore. George Bush prooved that any buffoon can occupy that office. Obama is just continuing practices that were started long before he took office, and he's probably doing what he's told to do by his "advisors".

The FBI has never been too concerned about the law or the Constitution. This isn't news, just more of the same.

Prooved is not a word but I'll give the benefit of the doubt to a duubble key punch.

He had already verbally agreed to waive his Miranda Rights when he agreed to talk and take a lie detector test. The document they asked him to sign was just a formality; he was so close to being able to fly to Portland, if he only knew what Miranda Rights are!! When you waive Miranda, all it means is that you are willing to talk to the authorities and that you don't need an attorney present.

This administration? Like the same thing wouldn't have happened under Bush lol. Ahhh people and their partisan politics...

It isn't just "this administration"....though they are continuing the laws set forth in Patriot Acts 1 and II. "This administration" is just a continuation of the last one. Obama has a chance every year to overturn the Patriot Act and he doesn't do it. Now we have the NDAA....

When you waive Miranda, all it means is that you are willing to talk to the authorities and that you don't need an attorney present.

Waiving Miranda is also waiving the RIGHT to have an attorney present. He might have been willing to talk, but perhaps he didn't want to waive his right to have his attorney present during the examination. Nothing wrong about that. People often think that if they're innocent, they don't need an attorney. In reality, that's when they need an attorney most of all. The FBI certainly isn't looking out for this man's rights. Its probably not even in their interest to remove someone from the no-fly list. The bigger the list, the easier it is to justify an increase in their budget to monitor all those no-flyers.

Black.Knight-48

The FBI in this case was not operating on foreign soil. All US embassies are considered sovereign US territory and protected by the US Marines.

They were dealing with a US citizen on US territory.

Styro said:

I don't think the President really runs the country anymore. George Bush prooved that any buffoon can occupy that office. Obama is just continuing practices that were started long before he took office, and he's probably doing what he's told to do by his "advisors".

When Bush was in office in 2001 right after september 11, he created Homeland Security as an offshoot of USCIS and ICE. Their budget was $49 million.

In 2010, the budget ballooned--in 9 years--to $89 billion. And Homeland Security is now a conglomeration of 187 government agencies who are now partially funded by, under the direction of, or accountable to, Homeland Security. agencies such as the Office of Civil Rights and Libertioes, the National Communications System, and the US Secret Service, the President's bodyguard force (and the bodyguard force for his family.)

I'm pretty sure that Homeland Security was behind pushing the NDAA through. President Obama was vehemently against it; he said he was not going to sign it. Then on Dec 31 2011 he signed it, although this final version of the bill says that detention for US citizens is 'discretionary', not 'mandatory'. The sudden flip-flop caught many by surprise, not the least of which the 13 senators who voted against it and the 100+ representatives who also voted against it. If President Obama had not signed it there is a chance it would not have been passed because Congress would not have had the two-thirds vote to override a presidential veto.

If the Secret Service, who protects the president and his wife and daughters, is answerable to Homeland Security and Homeland Security wants this to pass...It's not a possibility I want to entertain but it is a theory which happens to fit the available facts.

President Downgrade - you are exaggerating.

this administration???? You can thank W for Homeland Security and the Patriot Act

papag, "The FBI has never been too concerned about the law or the Constitution." Please provide reference!

tired, the FBI hasn't been concerned about the Constiutution since the 50s. J Edgar Hoover was proof enough of that

Thanks, @danwill.

@tired: I thought that was common knowledge. Have you never heard about how the FBI secretly burglarized and wiretapped the offices of the American Communist Party's offices? I thought that was common knowledge.

If you want reference go find any book about the FBI and its history. Start here (books.google.ca/books/about/The_Bureau.html?id=5Ge-rFNBhYsC&redir_esc=y) and then find your own damned sources.

He not being barred from his country just from a plane....take a boat and enjoy the ride!

Finite wisdom: So who do we blame for continuation of the Patriot act since we are starting the 4th year of the Obama Administration,keep in mind that 4 of the last 5 years both the House and Senate have been firmly under the control of Democrats and yet this is the Bush Patriot Act - amazing so it appears this Administration has no interest in changing it perhaps because there is a need for it to remain in place or more than likely just one more of many many many lies Obama and his "hood" told to the ignorant, foolish and gullible to get their votes. So which are you?

My My how the tables have turned. 70 years ago I remember how proud we were of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We would rather die to protect our rights of every American citizen, yet today, the new generation would rather live than protect our rights of every American. Fear is freedoms worst enemy - allow it to continue and fear will cage you. You won't have anything left to be proud of. Remember all Kingdoms are ruled by fear and we are now, by our will and weakness, giving up our freedom, if only a step or fraction at a time. So tell me, how far and deep does our Bill of Rights have to be destroyed before you will loose "fear" ?

What probably raised the flag was his multiple trips to Libya........Homeland Security and the FBI are box checkers and he had several boxes check so no brain work required and we KNOW he must be a very suspicious person, right?

Besides, why doesn't he just take them up on the offer and drive to the US from Libya...............how stupid was that offer?

it appears that the Department of Homeland Security is going to wind up with egg on their face (and possibly another count of ineptness as well)..

The problem though, is that the homeland insecurity gestapo should be disbanded, not just have egg on their face. Is this country filled with so many cowards that we have to allow this constitution breaking agency to even exist? It is past time to end both the TSA and the Homeland Insecurity jokes.

Any agency that has to break the law and subvert the Constitution, is worse than any criminal or terrorist could possibly be. Those agencies are the true terrorists, who can and have caused far more damage than any terrorist ever could. That people defend them so vehemently, shows that there are way too many people who are scared of every little shadow that someone tells them to be afraid of.

I hope this case opens up a investigation as to why intimidation by a federal agency should not be classified as the terrorism that it truly is. You could very well be the next one that this happens to if things don't change for the better soon.

Homeland Security is going to wind up with egg on their face

Between the snorting and grunting at the feed trough we hear Janet (would you like fries with that) Napolitano crying "off with his head". This guy just happened to be next. No doubt she will end up with egg, along with gravy, random KFC crumbs, mac and cheese, and several unknown condiments on her face. She doesn't need to worry since she keeps Barry off the list.

It still could be "mistaken identity" of a sort. Someone could have made a malicious accusation against him, or someone of the same name. Or, it could just be that "they all look alike to me."

there are a lot of cases of mistaken identities. The problem is the red tape trying to your a name off the list.

Roadhead said:

The problem though, is that the homeland insecurity gestapo should be disbanded, not just have egg on their face. Is this country filled with so many cowards that we have to allow this constitution breaking agency to even exist? It is past time to end both the TSA and the Homeland Insecurity jokes.

Homeland Security was formed in 2001 as an offshoot of ICE and USCIS. Their starting budget was $49 million.

In 2010 the budget has grown to $89 billion. In only 9 years. (no findable audit budget figures available for 2011.) And Homeland security has also grown from an offshoot agency to a conglomeration of 187 governemnt agencies including:

US Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Customs And Border Protection (CBP
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
The US Coast Guard (USCG)
The US National Guard
US Northern Command (US NorthCom)
US Southern Command (US SouthCom)
US Secret Service
Office Of The Inspector General
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
Federal Protective Service
National Communications System
Directorate for Science and Technology
Office of Health Affairs
Office of Intelligence And Analysis
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Office of Legislative Affairs
Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement
Office of the Executive Secretariat

To Amanda and all who tried to play the Nazi card : you have obviously NO IDEA what "Nazi" meant. It would be wiser to check your facts before you level such accusations. By using this label willy-nilly, you downgrade the atrocities and the memory of the victims. Did Jews ever have acess to an attorney before they were abducted ? To the press ? To humanitarian organisations ?

If you want to imply that our government treats Moslems they way Hitler treated the Jews, you only show your ignorance.

i'm tired of reading these digusting stories--allow the man to return home to his family. Immediately!

outin the woods said:

To Amanda and all who tried to play the Nazi card : you have obviously NO IDEA what "Nazi" meant. It would be wiser to check your facts before you level such accusations.

Excuse me. Where in my post did I ever once call our government 'Nazi'?

Did Jews ever have acess to an attorney before they were abducted ? To the press ? To humanitarian organisations ?

No to all of the above, and neither did I when I was put in a deportation camp by ICE/DHS. I was adopted legally as an infant by an IL-born Army vet and his wife, who never wanted me to find out that I was abandoned as an infant and so not only made sure I could never find out by not keeping any of the paperwork, and also never told me before they passed away in a car accident. 6 months after they died ICE found out they lost/misplaced/misfiled my adoption paper. Now, since one has to have an adoption decree in order to have a legal birth certificate issued, that meant that just the fact that I had a birth certificate meant I had been legally adopted. However, that wasn't good enough--they detained me as an illegal.

Since I had no original birth certificate--the country in which the orphanage I was adopted from believed girls were 'worthless' and so never bothered to try to track down whoever my birth parents were, I was legally 'stateless' and the country that had hosted the orphanage (the orphanage had been shut down a few years after I was adopted) refused to accept me. By law, then, I couldn't 'go back' and the US wouldn't let me stay, so I was looking at spending the rest of my life in that deportation camp, 'stuck'.

Indefinite detention is a violation of my constitutional rights.

Being assigned underwear still crusted with blood from another woman's period because it hadn't been washed before being given to me is a violation of my human rights.

Being subject to strip searches and body cavity searches by male guards because I was told I had no right to ask for a female guard is a violation of my human rights. Being left bleeding from soft-tissue tearing after such body-cavity searches is a DEFINITE violation of every human right.

Being given a plate of food crawling with maggots, then being told there is no budget to prepare another meal and you will have to do without the next day is a violation of my rights.

Being told they ran out of eating utensils and would have to eat with our hands is a violation of my human rights.

Having toilets in full view of the entire pod (50-60 women) plus whatever guards who wanted to watch is a violation of my human rights--there were no partitions separating the toilets from each other and no partitions separating toilets from living space. And yes, the guards watched us take off our jumpsuits and underwear (few bras, only those with very heavy breasts or who were lactating were allowed to have them) and urinate and defecate. Some of them got off on it--we could see them on the other side of the door fondling themselves through their clothes.

Listening to the guards tell us daily they would take us out and shoot us is a violation of my rights.

I spent 3 years in ICE detention. I never saw a lawyer. I was not given a phone call. As this was a privately-run deportation camp, the press were not allowed in and inspectors only rarely--I saw inspectors once in my time there. Complaints were punished with stints in solitary conv=finement--one woman who had her child taken away went into postpoartum depression, was confined to solitary for 'passive-aggressive resistance tactics' and committed suicide in solitary by taking off her jumpsuit and hanging herself with it.

Are you trying to tell me that the US will just bar any US citizen if they leave the country for more than 90-180 days?

I wonder if you are confusing this policy with green card holders or other visa's this man is an American citizen.

I'm wondering that too. If he had a visa to Libya for example, there is a time limit (say 90-180 days) that only Lybia would be concerned with. The US doesn't care about another countries immigration policies. Pretty common in any country where you need a visa.

There is no such thing. As a US citizen you can live outside for as long as you want. If 90-180 day rule were true half the Israeli population will leave Israel since they are all US citizens.

You seriously believe that the people that control these lists can't make a mistake, when they've had a history of them? Young children have been on the list. Why do you think they don't make the list public? There is no reasoin to hide the names if there are good reasons for the names to be there.

Did you also believe them when they said the images from airport security scans were never going to be distributed? How about "Fast & Furious"?

The Department of Homeland Security has an extremely tough job, as someone pointed out here they have to balance clamping down on terrorism vs individual rights. And I admire the men & women that tackle this enormous task. But to say they don't make mistakes because thjey're college-educated? Please.

These people aren't stupid?

That's not necessarily wrong, but given that this is a government agency we're talking about, I'm far more willing than you are to chalk it up as a mistake. Being college educated doesn't stop anyone from making mistakes, and these agencies are not known for stellar accuracy. I am far more inclined to give Mr. Tarhuni the benefit of the doubt before the FBI. The cruel thing is that these mistakes can cause damage that breaches people's Constitutional rights.

Whether a government agency is malevolent or just incompetent, giving them too much power ends up hurting innocent people and makes us all less secure as a result. I'd rather suffer persecution from some foreign lunatic than my own government.

The TSA and Department of Homeland Security should both be abolished.

What "balance between clamping down on terrorism vs individual rights"? The agents in Homeland Security take an oath to uphold the Constitution and that means the scales are always tipped in favor of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. That includes a citizen not being deprived of his liberty without due process. A secretive agency putting names on a secret list is not due process. IMO, just asking someone to sign a Miranda waiver is a violation of that oath.

TJ Said:

The agents in Homeland Security take an oath to uphold the Constitution and that means the scales are always tipped in favor of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Tell me what about the following feels 'constitutionally right to you, because I try and I can;t find any, yet it's a definite fact that DHS is doing this and is planning on using this technology:

1) DHS is using Nogales, AZ to test a surveillance system that will continuously monitor 4 square miles or provide scanning monitoring for up to ten square miles. The technology also includes retina scanners that are reportedly accurate up to 50 feet away with the person being scanned running. Its called 'Wide Area Surveillance System'. Plans are also underway to fit the system to those Predator drones and test-fly that over Nogales, AZ.

2) A nother bit of technology they are currently testing in an 'undisclosed location' in the Northeast is what they called a Future Attribute Screening Technology, FAST, which will scan a person as far as 50 feet away for changes in body temperature, respiration, heart rate, eye movement and other factors to determine if they are acting in a suspicious manner. Agents watching the scanners can then direct ground agents to arrest the person befoe they can commit an illegal act. Early tests utilizing DHS employees who were told to act a certain way indicated hat the machine was 70% accurate in detecting persons who were told to act suspiciously.

3) Also currently being tested are portable DNA scanners. Meant to be utilized at airports, it'll require that the person being tested open their mouth for an inside-the-cheek swab which will then be placed in a portable DNA analyzer and return results. Most of the initial results will be enrollment results but if the DNA submitted happens to be a match or partial match for someone on DHS's database who is, for instance, currently detained at Guantanamo Bay or currently detained as an illegal immigrant, that person can be detained as well. This is primarily for use on children coming through with parents/guardians, DNA analyzers will make sure the child is related to the guardian/parent and is not being smuggled or trafficked into the US.

If none of that bothers you because it's being used in the interests of national security, then think...is Homeland Security going to stop at exterior terrorism? When are they going to decide to use these technologies on American citizens? The FAST system in particular gets to me--it's too much like 'Minority Report'.

Why that only justifies what the govt is doing is correct. If there is any US citizen on no-fly list he must be prosecuted for the reason they are on that list or must be removed. If a non-US citizen is on that list well it makes you laugh, because who gave them the US visa in the first place.

This practice must definitely stop.

Josh11024072

Being on a "no-fly" list does not mean that you have committed a crime. Someone may be on the list because of a suspicion of wrong doing, their affiliates, travel patterns in the past, etc. It does not mean that there are grounds for prosecution.

Since there is no constitutional right to fly then their rights have not been violated. It is more of a "preemptive" tool pending investigation into the individuals activities.

Bruce-361175

There is no constitutional right to go to college and get a job, to buy a house and buy a car. So will you accept all of those if the govt were to impose those on you.

Putting a person on a "no fly list" has implications on their career, on their status and many more things. Why should a person sacrifice a certain thing just because the govt is suspecting something. If the govt has evidence then by all means prosecute them, if not leave them alone. This kind of semi-freedom is very dangerous, especially when the person doesn't even know about it.

Bruce:

There is, however a protection against the government taking liberty away. Being able to travel to a point within one's home country in a reasonable timeframe is certainly such a liberty. This is more a collection of court decisions than an explicitly enumerated right (much like the right not to be detained indefinitely without charge.)

Anyone who submits to an augmented "interview" with federal agents and doesn't take a lawyer with them is a fool. Any misstatement of fact to a fed is a felony.

sloppy joe-3632629

Makes you wonder......

About him? Nah...I'd do the same thing and I don't have anything to hide.

It does make me wonder why the FBI is asking a citizen to give up his rights without charge though...

Doesn't make me wonder. It's called intelligence. You don't just sign away your Miranda rights, unless you want to end up in a dark cell somewhere, never to be heard from again.

Without those rights in place they can ask, say and pretty much do anything to you and only have to answer "he waived his rights...". No thanks.

I have to ask you folks that think if you don't take a lie detector test that you must be lieing..... The questions they ask you can make your blood pressure or your heart beat go up... that means you lied?? For something that you can't use in court alot of people take stock in it... I would never take a lie detector test for any reason.. you think i have something to hide then prove it by evidence not by my B/P or heart beat do it by real hard evidence..

The Attorney General had a secret list of Communist and Fascist organizations in the US in the 1940s. This kind of secret blacklisting is nothing new, but it wasn't right then and it isn't right now. At least that list was made public. I doubt the same will ever be said for the no-fly list. Your government is becoming very worrisome.

There was someone on a message board yesterday who said his parents went through an acrimonious divorce. One parent called Homeland Security and reported the other parent as a possible terrorist. When the other parent found out they were now on the no-fly list, they then called and had the first parent also put on the list.

And with everything you went through, it looks like you turned out okay. Propos f or you.

Don't be so naive to think that one group of politicians, or even one party, is the cause of this. Obama either fell under the spell of all the security freak and hawks that think hunting terrorists is more important than our rights, or he simply enjoys the nearly unrestrained executive power. It didn't end when Bush was gone and I doubt it will end if a different guy moves into the White House next year.

It will only end when people give such topics as much weight as their immediate financial situation. But the economy is important, after all...

Betty:

When Homeland Security was created in 2001 it was an offshoot of USCIS and ICE and their budget was $49 million.

Nine years later in 2010 Homeland Security's budget is now $89 billion and they are now a conglomeration of 187 government agencies who are either under the direct control of, answerable to, or under partial control of or partially funded by DHS.

Very, very few people remember that when the Nazi SS were first created, they were called the 'Saal-Schutz'--Home Protection. As they got bigger and gained more influence, they changed their name to 'Schutz-Staffen'--Protection Corps.

If I were him I wouldn't want to go back. He should've called up his family and moved them all to a less fascist country. If my government treated me this way I would have zero tolerance for it.

or he can fly to canada or mexico and then just bus it back to the states

The Nazis were fascists. It's hard to place that on the political spectrum since it's a kind of "apolitical antiparty," although I would say they have many more right-wing leanings than leftist ones.

National socialism is not the same thing as socialism.

The Nazis were not socialists. Fascism is a militaristic, corporate backed totalitarian state.

Every day I think about how lucky I am to not be American. I just hope Canada doesn't get annexed.

We're lucky you're not American, too. Although we do tire of being your protector.

We don't need a protector. Nobody hates us enough to attack us.

Canada is already being invaded. Don't worry we don't want any chickens in our roost! Fend for yourselves!

American said:

Heil DHLS, TSA, NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI, Military, etc. and Heil GOP Congress because THEY created ALL of these organizations.

Half of the alphabet soup you just mentioned are all part of the same organization.According to Wikipedia, there are now 187 government agencies under the direction of or partially or completely funded by Homeland Security.

US Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Customs And Border Protection (CBP
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
The US Coast Guard (USCG)
The US National Guard
US Northern Command (US NorthCom)
US Southern Command (US SouthCom)
US Secret Service
Office Of The Inspector General
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
Federal Protective Service
National Communications System
Directorate for Science and Technology
Office of Health Affairs
Office of Intelligence And Analysis
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Office of Legislative Affairs
Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement
Office of the Executive Secretariat
National Cyber Security Center
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

The US had them then, too. The powers-that-be have been consolidating their power for a while. Only difference is they're starting to be really overt about it now.

Henrillis -

Nobody has ever laid it our more clearly than George have they?

Rome revisited, and still we haven't learned, so we are destined to relive it.