Archive | March, 2013

What’s Our (Maybe Not So) “Friendly” Department of Homeland Security Up To?

12 Mar

Prefatory self-disclosure: First, I think an armed citizenry is the best homeland security, not some large and now overgrown and overly bureaucratic government entity. Second, I don’t much trust the Obama Administration. After all, what president has lied, or changed his “story,” more times on camera and in more videos than Barack Obama? Entire carefully researched and heavily footnoted and annotated books have been written about our Liar-in-Chief’s liberal liberties with the truth. And then, there’s Fast & Furious, as well as Benghazi-gate, and all the Administration liars involved in those, just not to be too picky.

But, I especially don’t trust Obama’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under the mismanagement of Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano, or as I like to call her because of her ineptitude, Incompetano. Anyone who, for liberal, demagogic and idealistic reasons, contorts the English language into calling terrorist acts “man-made disasters,” just to avoid calling them what they are, is someone not to be trusted. It’s almost like she, AG Holder and Obama have a gag reflex about using the term “terrorist.” But, there are other reasons.

It was Big Sis Incompetano who, I think back in April 2010, published to all law enforcement (LE) agencies across the country a memo highlighting that military veterans (like me), previous LE personnel (like me) and conservatives who disagreed with Obama’s policies (like me) should be considered potential domestic terrorists. Rather than make me feel paranoid (because it’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you, you know), that made me feel “special,” as if I had somehow been included on Oblame-o’s “list.” (And I thought I might make Obama’s list just with all my right-wing blogging. Sigh.) Perhaps not as special as Dana Carvey’s Church Lady’s, “Well, isn’t that speee-SHUL?,” but I felt special to be a triple category “suspect” nonetheless.

Then, there were all those rumors, conspiracy theories, or possibly factual comments about FEMA building “camps” in remote locations and what such camps might be for (internment, re-education, national work programs, gulags?), and then about FEMA buying thousands of stackable coffins, one theory being that would be so much neater than mass grave pits in the ground, which is what the Nazis sometimes used in Germany and Pol Pot used in Cambodia.

But, back specifically to the DHS. It was Incompetano who said, before the sequester even took effect, that thousands of already arrested illegal aliens had to be released back onto American community streets because the sequester meant she wouldn’t have enough money for beds for them, yet she had time, and there were evidently enough funds available, for her to sneak a $50M contract under the wire just before the sequester for 5,000 TSA employees to get new uniforms, which strangely, given TSA’s job to provide security services in our nation’s airports, included helmets and protective gear. Hmmm, helmets and protective gear to do pat downs and check carry-ons of air travelers? As my granddad used to say, with a twinkle in his eye, “That’s a puzzlement.”

It was also Big Sis who, since the sequester began, said that major airports were seeing lines “…150 to 200 percent as long as we would normally expect” as a result of the federal spending “cuts” (read: slow down in federal spending) that went into force with the sequester. However, when contacted by The Daily Telegraph, spokespeople for both O’Hare and LAX, as well as representatives from the travel industry in general, denied that airports had been hit by delays. “We haven’t had any slowdowns at all,” said Marshall Lowe, a spokesman for LAX. Mr. Lowe said that he had been on duty over the weekend and received no reports of unusual security delays at all. So, Big Sis is either lying or is, as I’ve nicknamed her, Incompetano, or both.

In more nefarious DHS news, a TEA Party report recently described how the DHS has redacted portions of government documents dealing with its massive purchases of ammo and firearms from Remington Arms Company, Inc., in sole-source, no-bid contracts (so much for liberal complaints about no-bid contracts for Big Oil). Normally, government agencies are only allowed to redact documents which are classified, which these contracts weren’t, and/or those dealing with national security, so what is DHS trying to hide from the American people?

According to one estimate, just since last year, the DHS has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion (that’s with a B) bullets, mainly .40 caliber and 9mm, including many hollow point rounds, which are not, as alleged by the DHS, used for “target practice” but which are highly lethal kill rounds which expand inside the body, for those of you who don’t know.

Why does the DHS need millions of rounds of hollow point ammo and about 7,000 also recently purchased and fully automatic rifles, which they describe as “personal defense weapons”? Hey, I would also like a full auto, “personal defense weapon,” please — but liberals are trying to restrict the guns I already have and severely hamper my ability to buy any more of my choice. [But more about the liberal assault on the Second Amendment elsewhere, in another article I’m working on, called “Tyranny’s Creeping Incrementalism,” to be published soon.]

Thus, the DHS has amassed enough firepower to shoot every, single American at least five times and/or wage a 30-year war. Sarah Palin theorized it was in preparation for civil unrest over Obama’s policies and she was, as usual, excoriated by the curiously incurious mainstream media (AKA liberal, lapdog media), who seem to prefer simply accepting whatever lame excuses or explanations the DHS or other Obama Administration officials feed them, instead of really trying to find out if the DHS has something to hide.

And why is the DHS ordering and sponsoring that other LE agencies also buy so-called “no hesitation” targets of everyday, armed Americans for practice in not hesitating to shoot such people? It’s been confirmed that Law Enforcement in the DHS requested these “no hesitation” targets, which depict images of a pregnant woman, children and an elderly man holding guns, and that they are meant to train law enforcement to shoot at civilians holding firearms, when normally they would hesitate to shoot to kill pregnant women, children and elderly people.

It’s been confirmed and documented the DHS has ordered $2 million worth of these targets. Law Enforcement Targets, Inc. (, got the $2M contract and manufactures targets for the DHS, Justice Department, and apparently thousands of other law enforcement agencies.

The product description on LET’s website about these targets reads: “[H]elp the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time…[includes] pregnant woman threat… older man with shotgun… older man in home with shotgun…older woman with gun… young school aged girl…young mother on playground… [and finally]…little boy with real gun.”

Not really being all that much of a conspiracy theorist, I just provide you with this information and let you draw your own conclusions, but it does seem strange to me, to say the least. In all my years in military law enforcement, although we had live-fire training in mockups of buildings with both friendly and unfriendly pop-up targets, to train us to quickly ID “friendlies” from the bad guys, we never trained on any targets like these.

And there’s also this, from Liberty News:

“Recently uncovered government documents reveal that the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) unmanned Predator B drone fleet has been customize designed to identify civilians carrying guns and track cell phone signals.

“The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) obtained a partially redacted copy of Homeland Security’s drone requirements through a Freedom of Information Act request; CNET uncovered an unredacted copy.

“Homeland Security design requirements specify that its Predator B drones ‘…shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not’ and must be equipped with ‘interception’ systems capable of reading cell phone signals (emphasis added).

“The first known domestic use of a drone to arrest a U.S. citizen occurred last year in the small town of Lakota, North Dakota when rancher Rodney Brossart was arrested for refusing to return six of his neighbor’s cows that had wandered on to his property. Critics say the fact that domestic drones are being used in such minor matters raises serious concerns about civil liberties and government overreach.

“If that’s not bad enough, add a little execution from the sky without due process: Attorney General Eric Holder can imagine a scenario in which it would be constitutional to carry out a drone strike against an American on American soil. He wrote in a letter to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY): ‘It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.’ Holder was replying in a letter to Senator Paul’s question in an earlier letter about whether Obama ‘…has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a US citizen on US soil, and without trial.’

“Just to summarize: the DHS is basically performing stop and frisk searches from the sky, denying citizens their Fourth Amendment rights, and the main legal advisor to the President of the United States is telling him he can, in “extraordinary circumstances,” rain down fiery death on citizens, violating their Fifth Amendment rights.

“Meanwhile, the same people are waging a full scale war on the Second Amendment, because only the government can be trusted with ‘weapons of war.’ And the people (liberals in and out of the media) cheering them on are the same people who called Bush a dictator.”

That’s the end of the information from Liberty News but, by the way and just for a little comfort, Obama’s AG, Eric “Stonewaller” Holder, even more recently further “clarified” his position in an additional statement in which he told Congress that the federal government has “no intention” of using drones to strike at targets within the US, saying it’s easier to capture people here so that tool is not as important.

Well, Mr. Attorney General, at least you seem to have practical, even if not constitutional, reasons for not killing Americans with drone strikes, without due process, here at home, and at least have “no intention,” at least for now, of doing so. So, that’s, uh, supposed to be reassuring?

It was a little more encouraging when, just last week, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), after one-and-a-half months of asking and an almost 13-hour filibuster, which no doubt embarrassed the White House, finally got Holdout Holder to send him a letter saying Obama as president didn’t have the right to drone strike unarmed Americans on American soil. Holder’s terse letter said: “”It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.”

Remember, folks, arrogant attitude and Columbia law degree notwithstanding (if not questionable), Holder is the same guy who at one point wanted our soldiers to Mirandize captured, enemy terrorist combatants on the battlefield (showing he knows nothing about battlefield conditions), who had the Underwear Bomber Mirandized and told all his “rights” under our Constitution (even though the bomber was a terrorist and not an American citizen), and who also wanted to bring Guantanamo terrorist detainees to the US to be tried like regular criminals in federal court, instead of being tried by military tribunals at Gitmo (until too many liberal Democrats yelled NIMBY).

Oh, but also last week, we learned that Team Obama-Holder sneaked a captured key terrorist, Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law, into the US, not to Guantanamo to be questioned and tried by a military tribunal but to New York City to be tried as a common criminal in federal court, with Miranda rights and all the protections of an American citizen. I’m now waiting for those same liberal New York Democrats in Congress to cry foul at this being done, this time behind their backs and without their chance to even yell NIMBY once again. I sometimes wonder if Holder’s clock even goes all the way around the dial.

Meanwhile, back at the ole DHS ranch: The DHS has also purchased 2,700 Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAP). These are massive, armored trucks. What do you think the DHS needs these for? Most views of them I’ve seen don’t show them very well, but these armored monsters have gun ports as well. Hmmm, armored vehicles, with gun ports, just for crowd control? My 25-plus years in the military, in law enforcement and specializing in security, tells me — no, they’re for intimidation, for suppression, just like Hungary’s or China’s tanks in the streets were during their own popular uprisings against tyrannical government — and I think that may be what the DHS is gearing up for.

What do you think? Feeling safer now?


Obama’s Sequester, Obama’s Economy, and Then Some Seriously Scary Stuff

5 Mar

The New York Times just ran an article talking about the “painful and stupid” sequestration. If the NYT is going to talk about the “painful and stupid” sequestration, maybe they should also talk more about whose “painful and stupid” sequestration it is, i.e., President Obama’s.

It was his idea in the first place and he’s the one who signed it into law to give him leverage over Republicans in the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations, which worked.

After campaigning for reelection on wanting $800B in taxes (which, unlike Team Obama, is what I call them, instead of using the euphemism “revenues”), the Republicans gave Obama that increase in taxes right after he won reelection. But then, in typical Obama fashion, he moved the goal posts again and wanted almost double that, or about $1.3T in taxes, and offered no substantive cuts in federal spending in return.

Obama tried to use the threat of the sequester a second time to extract even more taxes from Republicans, while still offering no cuts in return, and went on another campaign tour (because campaigning is his strong suit, not governing), acting like Chicken Little and predicting gloom and doom, in addition to having his minions (Lying Ray LaHood from Transportation, Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano from Homeland Security and Arne Duncan-the-Dunce from Education) all come out with dire predictions of the Armageddon that sequester would bring, all of whom since have had to either recant or severely modify their initial comments after some fact checkers did their work and revealed teachers and first responders weren’t going to be laid off, school children would not be running naked in the streets with nothing to eat, our borders would be no more porous than they already are, Y2K never happened, the Mayans were wrong, and the sky was not really falling.

And, of course, the most egregious thing which happened, allegedly in response to or in anticipation of the sequester, was the release of hundreds, if not thousands (hard to get straight info from the DHS), of already locked up illegal aliens back onto the streets of America — and this was even before the sequester went into effect.

It’s alleged by Team Obama that some career, unknown and faceless, mid-level manager at ICE ordered this and then almost immediately either resigned or retired. As Dana Carvey’s Church Lady would say, “How con-veeeen-ient.” Besides, if that’s the case, instead of the White House ordering it as another scare tactic about sequester, then take your pick between (a) the Obama Administration really being behind it to scare people over the sequester and lying to the American people about how it happened (a la Fast & Furious and Benghazi), or (b) the Obama Admin not knowing what one of its major agencies was doing, and possibly illegally, until after it happened. So, lying to us or just incompetent? Choose one…..or, in the case of the Obama Amateur Hour Administration, possibly both.

But it’s also odd, don’t you think, that DHS’s Janet Incompetano (I just changed her last name to reflect her incompetence) claimed she had insufficient funds, or would have had insufficient funds if ICE hadn’t jumped the gun, for enough beds for illegal aliens at the same time she ensured a $50M contract for 50,000 new TSA uniforms made it under the wire before the sequester took effect? That’s $1,000 per person for uniforms for our airport shakedown artists, while when I served in our military, I had to buy my own uniforms. Just sayin’.

Obama, recently doing what’s called “walking it back” (read: politi-speak for telling something closer to the truth only when you must), has since admitted that the sequester was not the fearsome fiscal cliff and scary scenario he and his handmaidens and henchmen had tried to frighten the American people with but was more like a “tumble.” I would suggest, Mr. President, that sequestration is not a “tumble” but instead your “stumble.” You used it first as a cudgel to get your way on the 2011 debt ceiling, you never thought it would really happen, yet you tried to use it again to get your way on more taxes — and the first time it worked but the second time it didn’t.

And, for once, and to their credit, Republicans didn’t blink and so here we are. I guess, dealing with a president who would rather play political poker and bluff to get his way on taxing the 1% while millions of Americans are out of work and our economy is still suffering, instead of leading and meeting with congressional leaders to mange the sequester of his own making, the Republicans realized Obama was overplaying his hand and called his bluff, deciding to at least take what they could get, which is merely an $85B (a near rounding error compared to overall federal spending) slow down in government spending and not even a real cut at all — and it’s spread out over months and years, to boot.

Oh, but, again unlike Team Obama, in all fairness, I misspoke. Obama did meet with congressional leaders over the sequester — but it was not until after he finished his latest campaign tour and on the day on which it was to go into effect. Much too little, much too late, Mr. President. Leading from behind obviously makes one trip over one’s own feet sometimes.

Anyone who doesn’t see what’s really going on is simply not paying sufficient attention, or they’re just drinking too much liberal Kool-Aid. Now, five years into a presidency for which he campaigned in 20o8 that he knew how to fix the economy and, after being elected, said he would do so by the middle of his first term or be a one-termer, and after blaming Bush for everything under the sun, especially the economy, time and time again, it is now not only Obama’s sequester but also Obama’s economy. There is a point of diminishing returns, when it cannot plausibly still be all Bush’s fault any more. Obama has to finally, and for once, take some responsibility for his own bad choices — and there have been many, from the stimulus which didn’t stimulate, to Solyndra, et al., to the sequester.

And, make no mistake, some of the really scary stuff is that what you have going on now is a president more willing to continue to play politics rather than join in the hard work of fixing a broken immigration system, reforming a burdensome and loop hole-ridden tax code, helping create jobs for a flagging economy, or cutting federal spending or its ever-epanding size and who, seeing some splits among the House Republicans, is more hellbent on being a demagogue and destroying the Republicans’ chances in the 2014 mid-term elections than he is on fixing the economy, or anything else, for the benefit of the American people.

Obama is a lousy president, has never been a president for all the people and is as worse about cronyism as any in modern times, but he is sometimes a masterful politician. And if he can split the Republicans enough to retain the Senate majority and regain the House majority, he will have what he had during his first two years in office — him in the White House and Democrats in charge of both chambers of Congress. Liberals will once again “own” the federal government and the most liberal (and unaccountable) president in our history will be even more unleashed and unfettered than ever, not having to worry about reelection again, having that “flexibility” he whispered to Medvedev to tell Putin about, and if ObamaCare is the hallmark of him and Democrats being totally in charge for his first two years, one can only wonder — and worry — what else might be forthcoming after 2014 in his last two years.

And THAT, my friends, not the sequester, is the seriously scary stuff you should really be worried about.

Well, that and whatever Janet “Big Sis” Incompetano’s DHS is up to — but that’s for another article. Stay tuned.

%d bloggers like this: