1. The US Senate recently spent 8 months studying one of the major parts of the American government. They said the study revealed that "The __________________ Agency is demoralized and dysfunctional, It is beyond repair, Just tweaking the organizational chart will not solve the problem. It should be abolished and a new agency created. We found clear evidence of failures in planning, failures in decision-making, failures to create an effective, coordinated national response system and most of all a failure of leadership at all levels of government,''
Name the agency that best fits their description::
a) FEMA
b) The Central Intelligence Agency
c) The National Security Agency
d) The Department of Homeland Security
e) The Department of Defense
f) The Department of State
g) The Office of the President
h) The Office of the Vice-president
i) The US Senate
j) The US House of Representatives
k) All of the above
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Sneak-and-Peek
What’s wrong with the “sneak and peek” operations that President Bush is claiming is his right to do?
The person or people doing the sneak and peek will be some permanently unidentifiable person, perhaps a CIA employee, perhaps a lower level FBI person. . . more and more, perhaps a private company employee.
They will be searching for “evidence”.
Their search will not be a legal search for only certain specified items, authorized by a judge after seeing a “justification” for such a search.
The Sneak and Peek will be a clandestine probe for any possible evidence that could be used for any purpose.
You will have no right to know what “evidence” was found, or to challenge it or confront it or to even see if it really was yours.
Such “evidence” could lead not to your legal arrest, but to your abduction.
More and more, public officials as well as private company employees, are working under terms of program measures and performance standards. Such employees, whose job is to produce “evidence”, will find that the more “evidence” they produce, the more secure their employment, the better their chances for retention and promotion.
These people will have no need to restrict their search to a certain category of “evidence”, either because there is no search warrant. They can sneak in and peek at whatever they wish, copying, photographing, even taking whatever seems likely to be “evidence” of one possible crime or another. “Evidence” could actually be found in your place, or brought into your place by the Sneak and Peekers - they could “certify” later that they were looking for some relatively minor item and “find” this damning stuff instead - stuff they actually brought into your place - or - simply “swore” that they found it there. You would never know what that “evidence” was, and neither would your lawer be able to find out.
Why would anyone want to find “evidence” against you or me? If we are not doing anything wrong, why should be even be concerned about it? Mistaken identity, stolen identity, bureaucratic bungling, a careless mistake either on our part or on theirs, their fear of admiting they made a mistake, a settling of old scores, racial, sexual or religious predjuices, someone needing to make a name for themselves. How’s that for a start?
The person or people doing the sneak and peek will be some permanently unidentifiable person, perhaps a CIA employee, perhaps a lower level FBI person. . . more and more, perhaps a private company employee.
They will be searching for “evidence”.
Their search will not be a legal search for only certain specified items, authorized by a judge after seeing a “justification” for such a search.
The Sneak and Peek will be a clandestine probe for any possible evidence that could be used for any purpose.
You will have no right to know what “evidence” was found, or to challenge it or confront it or to even see if it really was yours.
Such “evidence” could lead not to your legal arrest, but to your abduction.
More and more, public officials as well as private company employees, are working under terms of program measures and performance standards. Such employees, whose job is to produce “evidence”, will find that the more “evidence” they produce, the more secure their employment, the better their chances for retention and promotion.
These people will have no need to restrict their search to a certain category of “evidence”, either because there is no search warrant. They can sneak in and peek at whatever they wish, copying, photographing, even taking whatever seems likely to be “evidence” of one possible crime or another. “Evidence” could actually be found in your place, or brought into your place by the Sneak and Peekers - they could “certify” later that they were looking for some relatively minor item and “find” this damning stuff instead - stuff they actually brought into your place - or - simply “swore” that they found it there. You would never know what that “evidence” was, and neither would your lawer be able to find out.
Why would anyone want to find “evidence” against you or me? If we are not doing anything wrong, why should be even be concerned about it? Mistaken identity, stolen identity, bureaucratic bungling, a careless mistake either on our part or on theirs, their fear of admiting they made a mistake, a settling of old scores, racial, sexual or religious predjuices, someone needing to make a name for themselves. How’s that for a start?
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Zacarias Moussaou: Scape Goat
Zacarias Moussaou
(zack ah REE us Miss SOW wee)
Scape-goat
One who bears the sins of others for them
Diversion of attention from the real causes of a problem.
The blindfold that the goddes Justice normally wears over her eyes has become a full face mask to hide her shame.
The age-old search for legal impartiality has been turned into an emotional caldron over the air crashes of September 11, 2001. More help for a beleagured presidential administration as they try to rally citizens for the administration’s War on Terror. This “war” can only be continued by maintaining a pit of terror in the consciounsess of the American people.
Such events sometimes lead people to ask others, DuKakis-like, how they would feel if such a thing had happened to their loved ones. I can answer such a hypothetical question only for myself - and I am totally against the dealth penalty - see my blog “What Does the Death Penalty Really Kill”
My answer to the question of how would I feel if that had happened to a loved one of mine is that I would probably be furious. I would probably want to kill - maybe even want to torture the guilty one - I would gladly pull the trigger, drop the gate, throw the switch or whatever.
But I also know that would not satisfy me, and I would later regret those actions. It would be revenge - it would not only not be justice, it would be a defeat for justice.
Zacarias Moussaou is not a good person, he is not nice, he is bad and probably can never be turned loose again. He appears to be a very sick person. But the legal question is this: Did he cause the attacks on the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93?
It is alleged that if he had told the truth after he had been captured that the FBI could then have averted those attacks.
But in light of all the information the FBI, CIA, NSA, DOD, and the State Department had already been fed - by their own operatives - in whom they completely trusted - and how they purposefully interpreted the other information about WMD in Iraq, etc. It seems doubtful that anybody in authority would have paid any attention to anything. They already knew all they needed to know, therefore they knew all they would ever know. It seems obvious, to this writer at least, that Zacarias' words would have fallen upon ears that “knew better than that.”
Long after Moussaou has been put to death - executed for lying - the American public will still not have even asked the most important qestion of all: “Why? Why did they do it?”
(zack ah REE us Miss SOW wee)
Scape-goat
One who bears the sins of others for them
Diversion of attention from the real causes of a problem.
The blindfold that the goddes Justice normally wears over her eyes has become a full face mask to hide her shame.
The age-old search for legal impartiality has been turned into an emotional caldron over the air crashes of September 11, 2001. More help for a beleagured presidential administration as they try to rally citizens for the administration’s War on Terror. This “war” can only be continued by maintaining a pit of terror in the consciounsess of the American people.
Such events sometimes lead people to ask others, DuKakis-like, how they would feel if such a thing had happened to their loved ones. I can answer such a hypothetical question only for myself - and I am totally against the dealth penalty - see my blog “What Does the Death Penalty Really Kill”
My answer to the question of how would I feel if that had happened to a loved one of mine is that I would probably be furious. I would probably want to kill - maybe even want to torture the guilty one - I would gladly pull the trigger, drop the gate, throw the switch or whatever.
But I also know that would not satisfy me, and I would later regret those actions. It would be revenge - it would not only not be justice, it would be a defeat for justice.
Zacarias Moussaou is not a good person, he is not nice, he is bad and probably can never be turned loose again. He appears to be a very sick person. But the legal question is this: Did he cause the attacks on the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93?
It is alleged that if he had told the truth after he had been captured that the FBI could then have averted those attacks.
But in light of all the information the FBI, CIA, NSA, DOD, and the State Department had already been fed - by their own operatives - in whom they completely trusted - and how they purposefully interpreted the other information about WMD in Iraq, etc. It seems doubtful that anybody in authority would have paid any attention to anything. They already knew all they needed to know, therefore they knew all they would ever know. It seems obvious, to this writer at least, that Zacarias' words would have fallen upon ears that “knew better than that.”
Long after Moussaou has been put to death - executed for lying - the American public will still not have even asked the most important qestion of all: “Why? Why did they do it?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)