Newt Gingrich Political Ringer Pro Centralized FEMA Homeland Security

Newt Gingrich, in his own words, "centalized" government...

Alex Jones Infowars Nightly News 2011-12-05 video introduction of topic of Newt Gingrich hand in central role of government's FEMA and Homeland Security... at 2:02

... he's a ringer sent in to pose as a libertarian constitutionalist... but his actions, his fruits say the opposite here is Newt Gingrich just after 911... about how he had gotten Homeland Security set up...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayMpJfKz-xI&feature=related

U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century
Hart-Rudman Commission

...The United States Commission on National Security/21st Century, also know as the Hart-Rudman Commission, was chartered to review in a comprehensive way U.S. national security requirements for the next century. It began in Phase I by describing the future security environment this nation should anticipate, and in Phase II it delineated a strategy to address that future—to cope with the challenges and seize the opportunities that will constantly confront this great nation. Phase III was focused on changes to the national security apparatus, its structures and process, with an aim toward redesigning it as necessary to succeed in the security environment that lies ahead.

The Commission anticipated that it could not make credible recommendations to improve the national security apparatus without first understanding how that apparatus functioned. This document, Road Map for National Security: Addendum on Structure and Process Analyses, provides a thorough description of this country's national security organizations and processes as they existed in mid-2000.

Before institutional redesigns could occur, or before road maps could be constructed to get the national security apparatus headed in the appropriate direction, the Commission needed to understand how the government was structured and how it went about the business of national security. The seven volumes contained in the Addendum analyze key organizations and processes throughout the Federal government, to include the interagency and inter-branch levels. This Addendum provided a "baseline" of the national security apparatus, and was completed in draft form by the summer of 2000 as the Commission's main Phase III effort began in earnest. It thus laid much of the groundwork for Phase III. The first volume was updated and reedited in February and March 2001. The other volumes remain as originally written.To our knowledge no product has been previously produced that describes the national security structures and processes of the U.S. government in such detail. It should be useful to researchers and professionals seeking a detailed analysis of the national security system.


http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nssg/

Following is an excerpt from archives FEMAtraining.fema.gov

In 1998, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich petitioned Congress to form a 14-member panel called the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century (USCNS/21), also known as the Hart-Rudman Commission, to make strategic recommendations on how the U.S. Government could ensure the nation’s security in the coming years. The independent panel, created by Congress, was tasked with conducting a comprehensive review of American security with the goal of designing a national security strategy.

The Commission’s report, “Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change,” dated January 31, 2001, recommended the creation of a new independent National Homeland Security Agency (NHSA) with responsibility for planning, coordinating, and integrating various U.S. Government activities involved in homeland security. This agency would be built upon the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), with the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and U.S. Border Patrol (now part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) within the DHS) transferred into it. NHSA would assume responsibility for the safety of the American people as well as oversee the protection of critical infrastructure, including information technology. Obviously, the Commission’s recommendations were not heeded before 2001, but many of its findings would later be integrated into the justification and legislation behind the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Two other commissions were established to study the terrorist threat during these years: The Gilmore Commission and the Bremer Commission. The Gilmore Commission, also known as the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, produced a series of annual reports beginning in 1999 (with the final report released in 2003). Each of these reports presented a growing base of knowledge concerning the WMD risk faced by the United States, and a recommended course of action required to counter that risk.

The Bremer Commission, also known as the National Commission on Terrorism, addressed the issue of the international terrorist threat. The commission was mandated by Congress to evaluate the nation’s laws, policies, and practices for preventing terrorism, and for punishing those responsible for terrorist events. Its members drafted a report titled “Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism.” This report, issued in the year 2000, arrived at the following conclusions:

· International terrorism poses an increasingly dangerous and difficult threat to America
· Countering the growing danger of the terrorist threat requires significantly stepping up U.S. efforts
· Priority one is to prevent terrorist attacks. U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities must use the full scope of their authority to collect intelligence regarding terrorist plans and methods
· U.S. policies must firmly target all states that support terrorists
· Private sources of financial and logistical support for terrorists must be subjected to the full force and sweep of U.S. and international laws
· A terrorist attack involving a biological agent, deadly chemicals, or nuclear or radiological material, even if it succeeds only partially, could profoundly affect the entire nation. The government must do more to prepare for such an event
· The President and Congress should reform the system for reviewing and funding departmental counterterrorism programs to ensure that the activities and programs of various agencies are part of a comprehensive plan

Each of these conclusions and recommendations would take on great new meaning in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks, and would guide many of the changes incorporated into the Homeland Security Act of 2002. However, in the absence of a greater recognition of a terrorist threat within the borders of the United States, no major programs were initiated to combat the growing risk.

Presidential Decision Directives 62 & 63

As these commissions were conducting their research, President Clinton was addressing other recognized and immediate needs through the passage of several Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs). Terrorist attacks continued to occur throughout the world, aimed at US Government, Military, and private interests. In 1996, terrorists carried out a suicide bombing at the US Military (Khobar Towers) barracks in Saudi Arabia, and in 1998, simultaneous bombings were carried out at the U.S. diplomatic missions in Kenya and Tanzania.

In May of 1998, President Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 62 (PDD-62): Combating Terrorism, which called for the establishment of the Office of the National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism. The directive’s primary goal was to create a new and more systematic approach to fighting the terrorist threat. PDD-62 reinforced the mission of many U.S. agencies involved in wide array of counterterrorism activities. The new National Coordinator was tasked with overseeing a broad variety of relevant policies and programs including counterterrorism, critical infrastructure protection, Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMD) preparedness and consequence management.

Soon after this directive, President Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD-63): Protecting America’s Critical Infrastructure. This directive tasked all of the departments of the Federal Government with assessing the vulnerabilities of their cyber and physical infrastructures, and to work to reduce their exposure to new and existing threats.

Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan

In December 1998, as mandated by Congress, the Department of Justice (DOJ), through the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), began a coordinated project with other agencies to develop the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan. The FBI emerged as the Federal Government's principal agency for responding to and investigating terrorism. Congress had intended the plan to serve as a baseline for the coordination of a national strategy and operational capabilities to combat terrorism. This plan represented a substantial interagency effort, including goals, objectives, performance indicators and recommended specific agency actions to help resolve interagency problems. It clearly did not, however, tear down the walls that prevented interagency sharing of information, as evidenced by the failures that resulted in the success of the 9/11 terrorists.

General Accounting Office (GAO) Findings

The Department of Justice (DOJ) asserted that the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan, considered together with related PDDs as described above, represented a comprehensive national strategy to address the terrorist threat. However, after a thorough review, the General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress’s investigative arm, concluded that additional work remained, that would build upon the progress that the plan represented. The GAO contended that a comprehensive national security strategy was lacking.

In the GAO report GAO-01-55T: ‘Combating Terrorism: Comments on Counterterrorism Leadership and National Strategy,’ released March 27, 2001, it is stated that the DOJ plan did not have measurable outcomes and suggested, for example, it should include goals that improve state and local response capabilities. The report argued that without a clearly defined national strategy, the nation would continue to miss opportunities to focus and shape counterterrorism programs to meet the impending threat. It also made the criticism that the DOJ plan lacked a coherent framework to develop and evaluate budget requirements for combating terrorism since there was no signal focal point. The report claimed that no single entity was acting as the Federal Government’s top official accountable to both the President and Congress for the terrorism hazard, and that fragmentation existed in both coordination of domestic preparedness programs and in efforts to develop a national strategy.

The GAO released another report in early September of 2001 (GAO-01-822) entitled ‘Combating Terrorism: Selected Challenges and Related Recommendations,’ which it finalized in the last days before the terrorist attacks occurred in Washington and New York. The report stated that the Federal Government was ill-equipped and unprepared to counter a major terrorist attack, claiming also that from sharing intelligence to coordinating a response, the government had failed to put in place an effective critical infrastructure system. It further stated that,

“Federal efforts to develop a national strategy to combat terrorism...have progressed, but key challenges remain. The initial step toward developing a national strategy is to conduct a national threat and risk assessment...at the national level (agencies) have not completed assessments of the most likely weapon-of-mass destruction agents and other terrorist threats...”

To prevent terrorist attacks, the GAO recommended:

· A national strategy to combat terrorism and computer-based attacks
· Better protection for the nation's infrastructure
· A single focal point to oversee coordination of Federal programs
· Completing a threat assessment on likely WMD and other weapons that might be used by terrorists
· Revising the Attorney General’s Five-Year Interagency Counterterrorism and Technology Crime Plan to better serve as a national strategy
· Coordinating research and development to combat terrorism

In a later report regarding Homeland Security, (GAO-02-610) ‘Key Elements to Unify Efforts Are Underway but Uncertainty Remains,’ the GAO called for more of the same in terms of needing central leadership and an overarching strategy that identifies goals and objectives, priorities, measurable outcomes, and state and local government roles in combating terrorism since the efforts of more than 40 federal entities and numerous state and local governments were still fragmented. It also called for the term Homeland Security to be defined properly since to date it had not.

September 11, 2001

The attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City, and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, could arguably be considered the first national disaster event, outside of wartime, in the history of the United States. It is the first disaster in this country that impacted all Americans, leaving all citizens and communities with an unrelenting sense of vulnerability. The economic consequences of these attacks, felt in all parts of our country and, in fact, around the world, make this disaster event truly global in scope.

The attacks involved the hijacking of 4 commercial airliners by 19 trained terrorists. Three of the four planes were flown into major American landmarks – the two World Trade Center Twin Towers, and the headquarters of the United States military. The fourth, whose target may never be conclusively known, was prevented from reaching its target by passengers on the plane that overpowered its four terrorist hijackers. Almost 3,000 people were killed, and billions of dollars in property damage resulted. The full economic impacts, which include everything from lost revenues to increased spending on terrorism preparedness, may never be known.

This was not a simple act, but one that required years of surveillance, funding, training, intelligence gathering, practice, and breaching of United States immigration law. There were many instances during this time, as were evidenced in the report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission) (created to investigate the causes of the 9/11 attacks and means to prevent similar attacks from occurring the future), where individual agencies involved in counter-terrorist activities recognized one or more of these activities. However, insufficient coordination between the agencies prevented the Federal Government system of preventing terrorist attacks from piecing together the larger picture of what exactly was occurring, and as such, the terrorists were ultimately successful in their mission.

excerpt from:
[DOC]
Case 7 - FEMAtraining.fema.gov/.../ ...
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
File Format: Microsoft Word - Quick View
Case 7.2: The Homeland Security Act of 2002: A New Emergency Management ... In 1998, President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich petitioned Congress to ...... but President Carter created FEMA to centralize this Federal emergency

Interesting

FEMA FOIA Requesters

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/foia/fema_foia_log_second_quarter_2011.pdf

Homeland Security Release Report Warning Claims Done All the Time

Fox News reporting on the 9-page Homeland Security document sent to the nation's police departments warning of right-wing extremists potential radical activities...

while the focus of the recent report is right-wing extremists... an agency spokeswoman noted these reports are done "all the time..."

Isn't that nice? While they're doing these domestic reports on "political" ideology, have they missed doing any thorough research about our borders currently in need of protection?

U.S. border with Canada vulnerable to terrorists
Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2007
By Les Blumenthal | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — Terrorists carrying radioactive materials could easily enter the United States from Canada undetected, government investigators said Thursday after they were able to cross the 5,000-mile border four times carrying a large, red duffel bag without being intercepted.

The crossings took place at unguarded and unmonitored sites in four northern-border states. The Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative arm, did not disclose the sites.

"Our work shows that a determined cross-border violator would likely be able to bring radioactive materials or other contraband undetected into the United States by crossing the U.S.-Canada border at any of the locations we investigated," the report said.

Even though the northern border is more than twice as long as the U.S.-Mexico border, it has less than one-tenth as many agents patrolling it.

Lawmakers from northern states blamed the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for the lax security on the U.S.-Canada border.

"This report is just as unacceptable as it is shocking," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who along with others have sought to secure more Border Patrol agents and high-tech surveillance and communications equipment for the northern border. "We simply cannot accept this level of vulnerability."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/20046.html

Iraqi terrorists caught along Mexico border
American intelligence chief confirms 'people are alive' as a result of capture
Posted: August 23, 2007

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57289

Fox News reports Homeland Security has produced two such reports, and the network has hold of both. One concerns right-wing extremists while the other concerns left-wing extremists. According to the Fox report, the studies were authorized during President George W. Bush's presidency.

Isn't that nice. the same question applies. How many studies have been completed about the insecure borders of the United States?

What is being done?

Factsheet: U.S. Customs and Border Protection Actions Taken Since 9/11

http://www.itintl.com/factsheet-us-customs-and-border-protection-actions-taken-since-911.html

August 15, 2006
Review of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Anti-Terrorist Actions
Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General, "Review of CBP Actions Taken to Intercept Suspected Terrorists at U.S. Ports of Entry," OIG-06-43, June 2006.

Results in Brief:


http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/08/review_of_us_cu.html

Net the Truth Online

Recession fueling right-wing extremism, U.S. says Tue Apr 14, 2009

...The April 7 report, which Reuters and other news media obtained on Tuesday, said such fears were driving a resurgence in "recruitment and radicalization activity" by white supremacist groups, antigovernment extremists and militia movements. It did not identify any by name.

DHS had no specific information about pending violence and said threats had so far been "largely rhetorical."

But it warned that home foreclosures, unemployment and other consequences of the economic recession "could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists."

"To the extent that these factors persist, right-wing extremism is likely to grow in strength," DHS said.

The report warned that military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with combat skills could be recruitment targets, especially those having trouble finding jobs or fitting back into civilian society.

The department "is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities," the report said.

DHS spokeswoman Sara Kuban said on Tuesday the report was one of an ongoing series of threat assessments aimed at "a greater understanding of violent radicalization in the U.S."

A similar assessment of left-wing radicals completed in January was distributed to federal, state and local police agencies at that time.

"These assessments are done all the time, this is nothing unusual," Kuban said.

The Department of Homeland Security was formed in response to the September 11 attacks of 2001 and has focused largely on threats from Islamist extremists.

The report said domestic right-wing terrorist groups grew during the economic recession of the early 1990s but subsided as the economy improved.

Government scrutiny disrupted violent plots following the April 1995 bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City by Army veteran Timothy McVeigh which killed 168 people.


http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE53D5SH20090414?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Federal agency warns of radicals on right
9-page report sent to police
By Audrey Hudson (Contact) and Eli Lake (Contact) | Tuesday, April 14, 2009

...The report, which was first disclosed to the public by nationally syndicated radio host Roger Hedgecock, makes clear that the Homeland Security Department does not have "specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence."It warns that fringe organizations are gaining recruits, but it provides no numbers.

The report says extremist groups have used President Obama as a recruiting tool.

"Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president, but stopping short of calls for violent action," the report says. "In two instances in the run-up to the election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement interceded."

When asked about this passage, Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said, "We are concerned about anybody who will try to harm or plan to harm any one of our protectees. We don't have the luxury to focus on one particular group at the exclusion of others."

Congressional debates about immigration and gun control also make extremist groups suspicious and give them a rallying cry, the report says.

"It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law; nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists," the report said.

The FBI was quoted Monday as saying that, since November, more than 7 million people have applied for criminal background checks in order to buy weapons.

The Homeland Security report added: "Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool."

The report could signify a change in emphasis for Homeland Security under former Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano. A German magazine quoted Ms. Napolitano as rebranding "terrorism" as "man-made disasters." Since its inception in 2003, the department has focused primarily on radicalization of Muslims and the prospect of homegrown Islamist terrorism.

In January, the same DHS office released a report titled "Leftwing extremists likely to increase use of cyber attacks over the coming decade."

These types of reports are published all the time. There have actually been some done on the other end of the spectrum, left-wing," Ms. Kuban said.

A similar headline was used in a report issued in January, Ms. Kuban said, although she could not provide the content of the headline.
Ms. Kuban said she did not know how long the new report had been in the making.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/?page=3

Homeland Security on guard for 'right-wing extremists'
Returning U.S. military veterans singled out as particular threats
Posted: April 12, 2009 9:40 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily

WASHINGTON – A newly unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warns against the possibility of violence by unnamed "right-wing extremists" concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty and singles out returning war veterans as particular threats.

The report, titled "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," dated April 7, states that "threats from white supremacist and violent anti-government groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts."

However, the document, first reported by talk-radio host and WND columnist Roger Hedgecock, goes on to suggest worsening economic woes, potential new legislative restrictions on firearms and "the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

Are you ready for a second Declaration of Independence? Sign the petition promoting true freedom once again!

The report from DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines right-wing extremism in the U.S. as "divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

"[T]he consequences of a prolonged economic downturn – including real estate foreclosures, unemployment and an inability to obtain credit – could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past," the report says...

...Most notable is the report's focus on the impact of returning war veterans.

"Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists," it says. "DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities."

The report cites the April 4 shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh as an example of what may be coming, claiming the alleged gunman holds a racist ideology and believes in anti-government conspiracy theories about gun confiscations, citizen detention camps and "a Jewish-controlled 'one-world government.'"

It also suggests the election of an African-American president and the prospect of his policy changes "are proving to be a driving force for right-wing extremist recruitment and radicalization."

The report also mentions "'end times' prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as the violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement."

"DHS/I&A assesses that right-wing extremist groups' frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence," the report continues.

The report states the DHS will be working with state and local partners over the next several months to determine the levels of right-wing extremist activity in the U.S...

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94803

Homeland Security Liars

All the cable so-called news networks are incessantly and obsessively talking about the astronaut turned stalker. What a blockbuster novel that will make when the woman is tried, convicted for something, serves a minimum sentence, possibly serving no time in jail, and released on parole.

Fox News Network is tagging the situation Lust in Space! Really, and they want to be taken seriously for serious reporting. They just lost viewers for their morning and afternoon coverage, ok, except for the weather (and debates on global warming).

We'll have to see if John Gibson and Bill O'Reilly allow Lust in Space to remain the headliner on their programs. It's expected Hannity and Colmes will pack their program tonight with psychoanalists and the like who will pick apart every detail from every angle of the woman's life.

CNN reporting throughout the day the accused astronaut is to receive medical and psych evaluation today. NASA Love Scandal. Really, who cares. She'll likely get the evaluations at taxpayers' expense, go into rehab at taxpayers's expense, and then be taken back into the exclusive fold. She'll then take a sabbatical and write her book.

How'd the government miss a whacko given all the rigorous testing of their mental capabilities?

Meanwhile, what are the networks missing?

Homeland security's role in the case of the border agents Ramos and Compean - that's what they're ignoring. Details of their refusal initially to provide legislators with documentation are just coming to light.

President Bush has indicated he will not pardon the border agents, he's still reviewing the "government's case" against them.

that takes time, there's a process...

It's no wonder the Homeland Security Department Agency didn't want to release documents in the case of the prosecution of the two men.

Now that they have, they are shown to be nothing more than liars.

John Gibson gives some attention to the border patrol agents and asks Judge Napolitano about the case. The Judge says they were right to be prosecuted since they shot a man running away in the back.

Gibson failed to set the record straight, guess he just didn't know and doesn't read World Net Daily or Net the Truth Online, nor did he bother to have anybody on who was familiar with the entirety of the case at this time.

Meanwhile Lou Dobbs Tonight is coverning the matter in depth, and heatedly.

Dobbs says the men were prosecuted before the end of the investigation. Casey Wian reports. Culberson is interviewed!

Get the transcript...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html

Aired February 7, 2007 - 18:00 ET

Also tonight, the Department of Homeland Security now admits it lied in the case of two U.S. Border Patrol agents sent to prison for doing their jobs. One of those agents severely beaten in prison. Leading members of Congress are furious.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/07/ldt.01.html

Thanks Lou..

Dobbs Poll for the night results in a first time ever agreement of 100 percent that the Department of Homeland Security should be held accountable for lying about Ramos and Compean (border patrol agents)

Glenn Beck

Government Lies about Border Agent Shooting; Author Fears for Life from Islamic Extremists Aired February 7, 2007
GLENN BECK, HOST: I am sorry to report, but our government has been lying to us about the border. Wait until you hear the new details...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/07/gb.01.html

Process...

Justice reviewing border agents' transcripts
Snow says that's one step in process of evaluating pardon eligibility

The White House says that there are procedures to follow in considering any request or suggestion for a presidential pardon, and that's what is going on right now in the case involving Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, two U.S. Border Patrol agents sentenced to prison for shooting at a fleeing drug smuggler.

The comments came in response to questions from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House, about the case following a beating Ramos suffered allegedly at the hands of illegal aliens being held in the same prison where he is.

"The Fort Worth Star Telegraph quotes President Bush of Fox TV network as saying that he is bound by strict federal guidelines on pardons, and cannot immediately grant a pardon to Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean because, quote, 'there is a series of steps that are analyzed in order for the Justice Department to make a recommendation as to whether or not a president grants a pardon,'" Kinsolving said...

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54127

Government admits lying about jailed border agents
Inspector confronted on Capitol Hill, says promised 'proof' does not exist
Posted: February 6, 2007
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

A Department of Homeland Security official admitted today the agency misled Congress when it contended it possessed investigative reports proving Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean confessed guilt and declared they "wanted to shoot some Mexicans" prior to the incident that led to their imprisonment.

The admission came during the testimony of DHS Inspector General Richard L. Skinner before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, according to Michael Green, press secretary for Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas.

Culberson was questioning Skinner about a meeting DHS officials had Sept. 26 with him and three other Republican congressman from Texas, Reps. Ted Poe, Michael McCaul and Kenny Marchant.

WND previously reported that at that meeting the DHS Inspector General's office asserted it had documentary evidence Ramos and Compean:


confessed to knowingly shooting at an unarmed suspect;

stated during the interrogation they did not believe the suspect was a threat to them at the time of the shooting;

stated that day they "wanted to shoot a Mexican";

were belligerent to investigators;

destroyed evidence and lied to investigators.
Under questioning by Culberson, Skinner admitted DHS did not in fact have investigative reports to back up the claims: "The person who told you that misinformed you," Skinner reportedly replied.

This prompted a startled and angry response from Culberson, who charged Skinner's office with lying to the Texas congressmen and painting Ramos and Compean as dirty cops.

Ramos and Compean began prison sentences last month after their actions in the shooting of a drug smuggler who was granted immunity to testify against them.

Responding to Skinner's testimony yesterday, Poe said it "explains why DHS has been stonewalling Congress."

"DHS didn't turn over the reports to us to back up their September 26 accusations for one simple reason – the reports never existed," the Texas congressman said.

"Why did it take DHS four months to admit their error?" he asked. "I wonder how much more has DHS told the public and Congress about Ramos and Compean that simply isn't true?"

Poe said he's determined to get to the bottom of DHS's claim.

"I expect this new revelation will lead to a lot more questions before we're done," he said.

Andy Ramirez, who has been involved with the case as chairman of Friends of the Border Patrol, told WND the DHS's actions "represent obstruction of justice, and they should be held in contempt of Congress, and, if possible, prosecuted to the full extent of the law."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54132
Congress gets reports on jailed border patrol agents
By Sara A. Carter, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 02/01/2007 12:00:00 AM PST

clip

After five months of delays, the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General delivered the documents pertaining to the case of former Border Patrol agents Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, who were convicted last March of the nonfatal shooting of a Mexican drug smuggler.

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said last week that Homeland Security Inspector General Richard Skinner refused to deliver what he had promised House members since September.

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_5132071

Officials urged to resign for lie about border agents
Congressman calls for ouster of DHS deputies after IG admits agency gave false information
Posted: February 7, 2007

A Republican congressman is calling for the resignation of Department of Homeland Security officials who he says lied about the case of two Border Patrol agents imprisoned for their actions in the shooting of a drug smuggler.

As WND reported, at a congressional hearing yesterday, Rep. John Culberson of Texas confronted DHS Inspector General Richard Skinner about his agency's claim it had documentary proof of the guilt of former agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.

"Richard Skinner admitted yesterday under oath that his top deputies gave members of Congress false information painting Border Patrol agents as rogue cops who were not in fear for their lives and who were 'out to shoot Mexicans,'" Culberson said in a statement.

Culberson said he believes false information was given to congressmen to "throw us off the scent and cover up what appears to be an unjust criminal prosecution of two U.S. law enforcement officers whose job was protecting our country's borders from criminals and terrorists."

The admission came during Skinner's testimony before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. Culberson was asking questions about a meeting DHS officials had Sept. 26 with him and three other Republican congressman from Texas, Reps. Ted Poe, Michael McCaul and Kenny Marchant.

WND previously reported that at that meeting Skinner's office asserted it had documentary evidence Ramos and Compean:


confessed to knowingly shooting at an unarmed suspect;

stated during the interrogation they did not believe the suspect was a threat to them at the time of the shooting;

stated that day they "wanted to shoot a Mexican";

were belligerent to investigators;

destroyed evidence and lied to investigators.
Ramos and Compean began prison sentences last month of 11 and 12 years respectively.

Yesterday, under questioning by Culberson, Skinner admitted DHS did not in fact have investigative reports to back up its claims.

"The person who told you that misinformed you," Skinner reportedly replied.

This prompted a startled and angry response from Culberson, who charged Skinner's office with lying to the Texas congressmen and painting Ramos and Compean as dirty cops.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54142

Memo casts doubt on agency's assertions
Homeland Security won't release papers on border agents' case
By Sara A. Carter, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 01/29/2007 12:00:00 AM PST

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_5108915

Jan. 19, 2007, 12:24PM
Legislators want report on ex-agents
Its release could clear doubts about border shooting case, some say
By MICHELLE MITTELSTADT
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4481939.html

Another view

Report: Agents in Border Shooting Lied
Feb 7, 9:27 PM (ET)
By ALICIA A. CALDWELL and SUZANNE GAMBOA

EL PASO, Texas (AP) - A federal report released Wednesday on the shooting of a suspected drug smuggler by Border Patrol agents concurs with prosecutors that the men failed to report the shooting, destroyed evidence and lied to investigators.

Some members of Congress have criticized the case against Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, who were fired after their obstruction of justice convictions and have each been sentenced to more than a decade in federal prison.

Congressional critics, who say the men were doing their jobs when they injured Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila in 2005 near El Paso, had sought the release of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security report.

The report "has just emboldened our position because there is nothing in there that indicates these agents were not justified in shooting this individual," said Tara Setmayer, a spokeswoman for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. "This finally sheds some light on what these agents were thinking."

She pointed to a written statement by Compean in which she said reflects that he "clearly believed the drug smuggler had a weapon and feared for his life."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., agreed Wednesday to allow Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to hold a hearing on the case, as she requested.

"I strongly believe that the sentences in this case are too extreme, given the criminal nature of the defendant and his possession of large quantities of drugs," Feinstein said in a statement. "These men were given sentences that some individuals who are convicted of murder wouldn't receive."

The heavily redacted, 77-page report, drafted last year, offers few new details. It primarily outlines what Aldrete said happened on Feb. 17, 2005, as he tried to run from Border Patrol agents after trying to elude them in a van loaded with marijuana.

According to the report, Aldrete, who was given immunity and has filed a multimillion-dollar claim against the federal government, told investigators he was unarmed and was shot as he ran from Compean and other agents. He said he tried to surrender and ran again after Compean slipped while trying to hit him with the butt of a shotgun.

The report also notes that other agents on the scene that day could not confirm whether Aldrete was armed and initially lied about whether they were aware of the shooting. They later cooperated with authorities. Those agents, whose names were removed from the report, were not prosecuted.

In a statement issued Wednesday afternoon, Rep. John Culberson, a Texas Democrat, said Ramos and Compean "may not have followed proper procedure following the shooting, which at most should have resulted in their suspension from the force, but not criminal procedure."

A spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, whose office prosecuted the case and who has been widely criticized for pursing the agents and not the drug dealer shot, declined to comment...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070208/D8N58LF00.html

Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act

November 28, 2007
Civil Libertarians Warn of 'PATRIOT Act Lite'
by William Fisher

Civil libertarians are worried that a little-known anti-terrorism bill now making its way through the U.S. Congress with virtually no debate could be planting the seeds of another USA PATRIOT Act, which was hurriedly enacted into law after the al Qaeda attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, co-authored by the former chair of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman, a California Democrat, passed the House by an overwhelming 400-6 vote last month, and will soon be considered by the Senate.

The bill's co-author is Republican Congressman David Reichert of Washington state. The Senate version is being drafted by Susan Collins of Maine, the ranking Republican on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which is chaired by hawkish Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman. Harman is chair of the House Homeland Security Intelligence Subcommittee.

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/fisher.php?articleid=11968

also see

Renditions Clothed in State Secrets Mantle
by William Fisher

As the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency acknowledged it had erroneously denied using British territory to transport victims of "extraordinary rendition," a federal court bowed to pressure from the George W. Bush administration to dismiss a case against a Boeing subsidiary being sued for providing the aircraft that carried the suspected terrorists.

The U.S. and British governments revealed last week that two U.S. "extraordinary rendition" flights carrying terrorism suspects refueled on British territory on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in 2002. Both governments had repeatedly denied that the CIA had ever used British airspace or territory for the secret flights.

Foreign Minister David Miliband said he was "very sorry indeed" to have to correct previous denials by former Prime Minister Tony Blair and other top British officials. Prime Minister Gordon Brown expressed "disappointment" that the United States notified the British government of the flights just last week and called it a "very serious issue."

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/fisher.php?articleid=12420

H.R.1955 Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007

To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes.
Other Bill Titles

Official: To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes. as introduced.
Short: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 as passed house.

Short: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 as reported to house.

Short: Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 as introduced.
10/23/2007--Passed House amended. Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based viole more...nce to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives).

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h1955/show

H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007
To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes.
The following summary is provided by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan government entity that serves Congress and is run by the Library of Congress. The summary is taken from the official website THOMAS.

10/23/2007--Passed House amended.
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives).
Establishes within the legislative branch the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism to: (1) examine and report on facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States; and (2) build upon, bring together, and avoid unnecessary duplication of related work done by other entities toward such goal. Requires: (1) interim reports and a final report from the Commission to the President and Congress on its findings and recommendations; (2) the public availability of such reports; and (3) Commission termination 30 days after its final report.
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security officials, through training, education, and research, in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. Requires the Secretary to: (1) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and (2) report to Congress on lessons learned from survey results.

Prohibits Department of Homeland Security (DHS) efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Directs the: (1) Secretary to ensure that activities and operations are in compliance with DHS's commitment to racial neutrality; and (2) DHS Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer to develop and implement an auditing system to ensure that compliance does not violate the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and to include audit results in its annual report to Congress.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955&tab=summary

UK: Get Biometric ID or You Don't Travel

Coming to the United States of America, unless people wake up. Citizens of the United States of America still don't understand they possess unalienable rights which are inseparable from them. You have the right to travel, you have unenumerated rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Every time our Congress and President implement laws which go against the Constitution, they are ignoring the Constitution and breaking their own oaths of office. Our Real ID Act is unconstitutional. It goes against the 10th Amendment and usurps the sovereignty of the states. Beware of those who claim the mandated federal Real ID card won't be used for other purposes than so-called international travel/security purposes.

Chertoff defends Real ID mandate
By Audrey Hudson
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 14, 2007


Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff yesterday defended the federalization of driver's licenses and asked a Senate panel not to block the Real ID law, but he urged members to make security changes in the visa waiver program.
Mr. Chertoff said he is "pretty adamant" that the new identification for all U.S. citizens go into effect May 2008.
"We don't want to keep kicking the can down the road," Mr. Chertoff told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican and ranking member, will sponsor an amendment giving states more time to comply with the Real ID Act.
"It has been two years since the Real ID Act passed, and yet we don't have detailed regulations or guidance from the department setting forth the standards that the states are going to have to follow," Miss Collins said.
Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, said that if states are mandated to follow federal guidelines, the federal government should carry the cost.
"I can understand the need to get some delay if they were not going to fund it," Mr. Warner said.
The regulations will be issued later this month and will be subject to a comment period before being finalized.
"I do want to make it clear that one of the reasons it's taking awhile is we have actually done quite a bit of consultation even in the preliminary stage with state officials and privacy advocates and other folks," Mr. Chertoff said.
He also said the Senate should legislate changes in the visa waiver program to secure international flights and ensure foreign visitors are not terrorist threats or do not overstay.
"We are not going to sacrifice security for the sake of facilitating travel among our allies," Mr. Chertoff said.
The waiver program allows visitors from most European countries to travel to the U.S. without a visa for up to 90 days. About 18 million visitors enter the U.S. every year under the program.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070213-111641-9285r.htm

The Sun News
New Mexico Legislature Opposes Plan for National ID Card
Leland Lehrman

The Joint Memorial is Sponsored by Senator Michael Sanchez and Representative Ken Martinez

Editor’s Note: The happiest moment of New Mexico’s political life this year came when we found out that both houses of our State Congress will be sponsoring a joint memorial “opposing the creation of a national identification card, and the implementation of the Real ID Act of 2005.” A fascist-communist style internal passport law, the Real ID Act of 2005 calls for implementation by 2008, with all costs to be borne by the states. This confrontation, which is happening nationwide between the Federal Government and the States, represents the most important State’s Rights issue since the Civil War. In this case, the State’s Rights case is excellent, since the Real ID act is both unconstitutional and totally unamerican.

http://thesun-news.com/indexold.htm

It'll cost 11 billion. Sure it will. Expect cost to go up, and up, and keep on going up.

Study Says Real ID Act Will Cost $11 Billion, be Logistics Nightmare
September 21, 2006 By Gina M. Scott
A comprehensive analysis of the somewhat controversial federal Real ID Act by the National Governors Association (NGA), National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) revealed that the Act will cost states $11 billion over the first five years of implementation. At this point Congress has allocated only $40 million for the implementation of the Act. "States feel it is vitally important for Congress and the administration to understand the substantial fiscal and operational cost of altering state systems," said NGA Executive Director Raymond C. Scheppach.

According to the results, implementing the Real ID Act will be not only a tremendous cost, but also a logistics problem. There are 245 million drivers in America, and each one must physically re-enroll at a state DMV to verify their identity with the appropriate documents, all by May 2008. "It is impracticable for states to renew all 245 million drivers' licensees in five years," said NCSL Executive Director William T. Pound. Instead, the recommendation is to implement a 10 year, progressive re-enrollment schedule, which is similar to the British Identity Act 2006. "We think states should be provided the flexibility to delay revivifying certain populations in order to maximize resources," Pound added.

Another issue is the lack of definite statutes from the Department of Homeland Security, which in turn is delaying the implementation of the cards. The report recommends that the Department of Homeland Security recognize the technological innovation of the states, recognize that some states have already moved towards compliance with similar security measures and that the Real ID Act is hindering innovation in some states where they have had to put development on hold, waiting for the final statutes.

In regards to technology, some of the "electronic verification systems which are necessary to electronically verify an individual's identification documents do not exist or are not fully operational at this time," Pound explained.

http://www.govtech.net/news/news.php?id=101128

Do not miss Devvy Kidd article well researched

THE NATIONAL ID IS NOT MANDATORY
By: Devvy Kidd
August 21, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." --James Madison, Federalist No. 39, January 1788



http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd208.htm

Don't want national ID? Surrender your passport
People who opt out of 'voluntary' scheme must 'forgo the ability' to travel abroad
Posted: March 10, 2007
1:15 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

British citizens who refuse to provide personal details for the planned "voluntary" national identification card have been told they will be denied passports and be unable to leave the UK.

James Hall, CEO of the Identity and Passport Service, the agency charged with running the National Identity Scheme to provide ID cards to all residents of the UK, confirmed many privacy advocates' fears this week when he revealed those who opt out of the program will be unable to obtain or renew travel documents.

Hall made the revelation during a national "webchat" where questions were submitted by the public.

In response to a questioner asking what would happen to those who refused to join the nearly $11 billion program, Hall answered, "There is no need to register and have fingerprints taken - but you will forgo the ability to have a passport."

According to a government website:

The National Identity Scheme is an easy-to-use and extremely secure system of personal identification for adults living in the UK. Its cornerstone is the introduction of national ID cards for all UK residents over the age of 16.

Each ID card will be unique and will combine the cardholder's biometric data with their checked and confirmed identity details, called a "biographical footprint". These identity details and the biometrics will be stored on the National Identity Register. Basic identity information will also be held in a chip on the ID card itself.

Additionally, applicants for the ID cards, which will first be issued in 2009 to anyone seeking a passport, will be required to supply personal details, including second homes and driver's license and insurance numbers.

Phil Booth, of the privacy-advocacy group NO2ID, told the London Daily Mail, "The idea that ID cards scheme is voluntary, and people can opt out, is a joke.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54644

Excellent research

Biofuel More on Real ID
D. Mindock
Thu, 01 Mar 2007 07:57:39 -0800

Yeah for Maine. I hope we can get Illinois to opt out of this big step to a
police state.
D. Mindock
By Steven Yates
February 18, 2007
NewsWithViews.com


Last month, Maine became the first state to pass legislation declining
participation in the national ID system mandated by the Real ID Act of 2005.
State-level legislation either repudiating Real ID, asking Congress to
repeal its worst privacy-violating provisions, or asking for a delay while
states study the issue, exists in various stages (sometimes passed by one
House but not the other), or is being considered, in other states: as of
this writing, the list consists of Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Missouri,
Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont, Washington State, and Wyoming.
In other words, a state-led rebellion against Real ID is brewing. Let's
review the relevant history.

The Real ID Act of 2005 was passed by Congress not on its own (nonexistent)
merits but folded into the larger Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act
for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsumani Relief, 2005 (PL 109-13)
as its Division B. This bill, which included appropriations for the Iraq
War, was considered must-pass by Congress and signed into law by President
Bush on May 11, 2005. This means that the Real ID Act was passed as the
equivalent of a stealth measureland-mine legislation in a classical article. The Real ID Act does not just
federalize our driver's licenses but hand them over to the Department of
Homeland Security. It calls for the creation of mammoth databases of
information on law-abiding U.S. citizens. It places state Departments of
Motor Vehicles (DMVs) in the position of having to become domestic spiesit does so without any thought to the resources required, much less the
dangers (e.g., of identity theft). It was signed into law despite the
opposition of dozens of groups all across the political spectrum.

An impact analysis released last September by the National Governors
Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the American
Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators is devastating. These groups
show that efforts to implement Real ID will create a massively expensive
logistic and bureaucratic nightmare. State DMVs have neither the technology
nor the manpower to implement this gigantic unfunded federal mandatelegal means to compel compliance from those they must contact to secure
verification of documents. The cost to my state (personal correspondence
from the executive director of South Carolina DMV) could range from $25 to
$28 million, with recurring costs in the $10 million to $11 million range.
The study just cited estimates the total cost of implementing Real ID at
over $11 billion over a five year period, with upfront costs of around $1
billion! The costs to individual U.S. citizens attempting to obtain or renew
a driver's license? Unknown, although I have one estimate at $100!

This analysis overlooks a crucial point: the Real ID Act is
unconstitutional! The Constitution does not give any branch or any agency of
the federal government this kind of power! It should come as no surprise,
however, if no one associated with this thing has read our country's
founding document. Thus, as matters currently stand, unconstitutional or
not, Real ID goes into effect on May 11, 2008. When it goes into effect,
here is what we are looking at: without a Department of Homeland Security
approved conversion of one's driver's license or other personal ID into the
Real ID, law-abiding U.S. citizens will not be able to board an airplane,
open a bank account, collect Social Security, obtain a passport, enter
federal buildings or otherwise do business with the federal government or
other commercial endeavors requiring federally-mandated standards of
personal identification...

http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg68998.html

Big Flop Bill O'Reilly Homeland Security Janet Napolitano

The Factor's Bill O'Reilly as loud as is his norm as he faced Homeland Security director Janet Napolitano failed to deliver even one question that would bust Napolitano's all-is-better than-ever at the border lies.

O'Reilly Factor Wed. April 20, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRoYQ2G678Q

Better than when and what??? That question would have been a natural, but O'Reilly didn't ask it.

Napolitano's statement "border security is better than ever" is nothing new.

Janet Napolitano: Border security better than ever

By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 3/25/11 6:41 AM EDT Updated: 3/25/11 4:16 PM EDT
While the U.S.-Mexico border region has developed a reputation for danger, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stressed Thursday that protection of the border “is better now than it ever has been” and violence has not spilled into the United States.

Speaking in El Paso at the Bridge of the Americas, which connects Texas to Ciudad Juarez, Napolitano said that border is safe and that her department is working to further secure it. The department is planning to deploy 250 new border agents, and the agency’s proposed 2012 budget includes a request for funding an additional 300, The Associated Press reported.


“There is a perception that the border is worse now than it ever has been,” Napolitano said. “That is wrong. The border is better now than it ever has been.”

It’s also “wrong,” Napolitano said, that the drug-related violence in northern Mexico is spilling over into U.S. border cities. Violent crime rates in cities in the Southwest have stayed flat or fallen, she said. At the same time, she acknowledged, “there is much to do with colleagues in Mexico in respect to the drug cartels.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51925.html#ixzz1K9rTQO1s

O'Reilly has had quite a while to delve into its truthfulness and gather property owners, alive, but living in fear and armed for self-protection, to face-off on camera with Napolitano.

Napolitano might have claimed "unfair" but hey citizens of the United States are dying at or near their own property at the hands of criminals in drug cartels and human trafficking networks with no curtailment in sight.

While O'Reilly highlighted one such rancher armed for self-protection, the spot was taped, with no ability for the rancher, and others, to smack Napolitano with the clear truth.

O'REILLY: -- are you winning down there? Are you guys -- are you going to tell that rancher, look, we're winning this war against the Mexican intrusion of narcotics and human trafficking? We're winning it so you just hold on a little bit down there? Keep your shotgun handy but things are going to get better? Is that what you are going to tell him?

NAPOLITANO: Well, what I would say is not only are we putting more into that border but that more is on its way and we are very committed to a safe and secure border for a lot of reasons.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, ...

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

O'Reilly followed that with a question about violence moving further south into the United States.

Napolitano went on at length, basically saying nothing.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, the cartels obviously have got to be a concern to you because of all the tremendous violence that they -- that they cause and now we're getting reports that some cartels are moving into the south and southwest United States to set up shop. Are you hearing that?

NAPOLITANO: Well, let me -- you know, the cartels have always had distribution networks in the United States. I mean, that's where they make their money. They distribute drugs, you know, through virtually every state in the -- in the country.

What we are focused on in with Mexico right now is seeing if we can root out the cartels themselves and -- and really dismantle them. And that is what is causing a lot of the violence that's going on in Mexico right now.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

Which of the two are brain dead?

Both.

Addressing Napolitano's 'border security is better than ever before' theme, O'Reilly's parting comment to Napolitano was this:

"I'm hoping that you are right."

O'REILLY: All right. Good. You're painting a very optimistic picture, madam secretary. And I'm just hoping that you're right --

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

O'Reilly is hoping Napolitano is right?

Wouldn't she continue to claim she is right?

And doesn't O'Reilly presume in the remark that Napolitano has not convinced him she is right and the 'border security is better than ever before?'

The man could see for himself in his own investigative team's video, which preceded Napolitano's appearance, Janet Napolitano was not right.

She lied, and O'Reilly let her off the hook with his offering of hope on a platter.

SHOW: THE O'REILLY FACTOR 8:12 PM EST

April 20, 2011 Wednesday

O'REILLY: So you say you're winning --

NAPOLITANO: So our goal is to have a safe and secure --

O'REILLY: -- are you winning down there? Are you guys -- are you going to tell that rancher, look, we're winning this war against the Mexican intrusion of narcotics and human trafficking? We're winning it so you just hold on a little bit down there? Keep your shotgun handy but things are going to get better? Is that what you are going to tell him?

NAPOLITANO: Well, what I would say is not only are we putting more into that border but that more is on its way and we are very committed to a safe and secure border for a lot of reasons.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: All right. Now, the cartels obviously have got to be a concern to you because of all the tremendous violence that they -- that they cause and now we're getting reports that some cartels are moving into the south and southwest United States to set up shop. Are you hearing that?

NAPOLITANO: Well, let me -- you know, the cartels have always had distribution networks in the United States. I mean, that's where they make their money. They distribute drugs, you know, through virtually every state in the -- in the country.

What we are focused on in with Mexico right now is seeing if we can root out the cartels themselves and -- and really dismantle them. And that is what is causing a lot of the violence that's going on in Mexico right now.

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: Do you -- do you -- would you advice President Calderon down there to allow U.S. agents, drug agents and the Homeland Security agents, ICE agents to go into Mexico armed and help his guys? Because that's always the problem, he doesn't allow American agents armed down there.

NAPOLITANO: Well, I think we're getting into areas where we work on a case by case basis with President Calderon. And we are actually doing a lot together with the federal government of Mexico with ICE agents, with DEA agents and at times and in coordination with and at the request of Mexico even with some military assets.

O'REILLY: All right. Good. You're painting a very optimistic picture, madam secretary. And I'm just hoping that you're right --

(CROSSTALK)

NAPOLITANO: Right.

O'REILLY: -- on both the border intrusion and the more cartels.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1403050571&isRss=true

Border agents case puzzling

Ballistics data don't support charge against border agents
Investigator: U.S. attorney twisted evidence to fit case – 'guilty of malicious prosecution'
Posted: January 28, 2007
10:45 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Ballistics reports, used in the trial of Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, one of two Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting fleeing drug dealer Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, do not support the prosecution's claim the bullet was fired from Ramos' gun, according to documents provided to WND from Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Friends of the Border Patrol.

Despite the conclusion of a laboratory criminalist that he could not conclusively link the bullet removed from Aldrete-Davila with Ramos' service weapon, a Department of Homeland Security agent swore, in an affidavit of complaint filed against Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, that Aldrete-Davila was hit by a round fired by Ramos...

Homeland Security memos contradict U.S. attorney
Also reveal smuggler formed 'hunting party' targeting Ramos, Compean

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 31, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

In the high-profile case of two U.S. Border Patrol officers imprisoned after shooting and wounding a Mexican drug smuggler, two Department of Homeland Security documents apparently contradict the version of events put forth by the U.S. attorney who successfully prosecuted the case.

The internal Department of Homeland Security memoranda – which have been denied Congress despite repeated requests by two House members – show that within one month of the shooting incident involving Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, government investigators had identified the smuggler as Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila.

But this seems to contradict U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton's claim that Aldrete-Davila came forward through a Mexican lawyer who offered to identify his client in exchange for immunity.

A March 14, 2005, memo notes that Aldrete-Davila's mother had contacted the mother-in-law of a U.S. Border Patrol agent to talk about the shooting and a memo from four months later talks about an interview with that Border Patrol agent. Also, the immunity agreement offered to Aldrete-Davila promises no prosecution against him will result from his testimony and reveals that it was signed on March 15, 2005.

Andy Ramirez, chairman of Friends of the Border Patrol, says the documents raise questions as to why Sutton chose to prosecute the Border Patrol agents rather than the drug smuggler.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54027

Poe seeks 'public' documents on border agents
Congressman hasn't read classified version to keep private facts secure
Posted: February 1, 2007
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54046

MSNBC Report: Napolitano: Abdulmutallab was properly screened

Abdulmutallab was properly screened...

Keep repeating that Janet and maybe everybody will believe you and you won't be given the boot by President Barack Obama.

How is it the man was properly 'screened' before boarding the plane from Amsterdam to Detroit? What is the definition, yours, of 'screened?' Of 'properly screened?'

The man was or was not on some sort of a terror or person of interest watch list.

Which is it?

Was he?

Wasn't he?

Was the man's name on a list that should have raised a concern when correlated to the same name being on a flight manifest before takeoff?

Which is it?

Detroit terror attack: Plane bomb suspect was barred from Britain
Former London student Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab who was charged with attempting to blow up a transatlantic airliner carrying 278 passengers, had been barred from Britain...

Abdulmutallab finished an engineering course at the University College London last year, but a fresh visa request was refused in May after he applied for a bogus course, Whitehall sources said.

The 23-year-old son of a wealthy Nigerian banker was charged in hospital last night with attempting to destroy the aircraft during its final approach to Detroit airport on Christmas Day, the US Justice Department said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/6893996/Detroit-terror-attack-Plane-bomb-suspect-was-barred-from-Britain.html

And did the man produce a passport at any time before the flight took off?

Metro Live report Dec. 26, 2009

Flight 253 passenger: Sharp-dressed man aided terror suspect Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab onto plane without passport (MLive.com exclusive)
By Sheena Harrison | MLive.com
December 26, 2009, 2:22PM

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/flight_253_passenger_says_at_l.html

Where in the world was Janet at 2:22 PM December 26, or before that she didn't get this fed to her blackberry?

Imagine a United States citizen trying to board a plane in the U.S. to anywhere else and not producing a passport? Think it would be properly screened for such a no-passport person to board and leave the U.S.?

Search results

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1R2SKPB_enUS349&q=terror+plane+amsterdam+no+passport&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

For her negligent remarks, alone, Napolitano should be fired, immediately, effective today.

We net users and bloggers have acquired more info in a couple of days just from a variety of reports than Napolitano could have and should have had in a few hours with access to international law enforcement info and a team of investigators scouring news feeds and the like which are able to be tapped within hours of any incident anywhere in the world.

Right, he possessed a valid U.S. Visa, though. Guess that qualifies as all one needs to get into the USA.

Members of a wealthy Nigerian family have confirmed to journalists that he is the son of the former chairman of First Bank of Nigeria, the BBC's Caroline Duffield reports from Lagos.

The Dutch counter-terrorism agency NCTB said the suspect boarded a KLM flight from Lagos to Amsterdam's Schiphol airport, then connected to the Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit.

A preliminary investigation found that security procedures were followed correctly, and the man had a valid US visa.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8430699.stm

Uhhuh. The same type of Visa as some of the reportedly 19 September 11, 2001 hijackers had in their own names which were also on a watch list back then.

Sound like a repeat. Except for the fact the device was not detonated?

My goodness, what process is used to deter drug smuggling? Is there nothing to detect drugs being smuggled into a country by hiding it in underwear?

Howard Safir reporting there is technology to detect explosive substances... well really now we have to search everybody when this man's name was ON A WATCH LIST and his own father made a claim he was a danger and potentially plotting something yet nobody checked out the father's story? Nobody coordinated data from any other data gathering intelligence system?

We don't need more intrusive screening at airports. Full body scanners, right. What we need are the watch lists shared with airport security and international VISAs checked minute-by-minute.

So the man's name didn't appear on a no-fly list. What do we have to hold the hands of airport security and tell them, uh hey, he doesn't have a passport, so, uh check out and verify why not?

Nigerian accused of attacking US passenger jet

...The suspect's name was in a database indicating "a significant terrorist connection" although it did not appear on a "no-fly" list, said New York congressman Peter King, a member of the US House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8430699.stm

Net the Truth Online

Must read, we just don't use the same language to convey our disgust at Napolitano, but have to say, well said.

Privileged Terrorist Allowed On Plane Without Passport... (WTF Janet ???)

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/cph/rnr/1526824188.html

We agree. So many 'mistakes' sounds familiar. Everything that could go wrong, did, but for the so-called defective detonation of the material. UHUH. How about determining where the substance (incendiary) originated? How about checking what is needed to ignite the substance? How about... but that's too much for Napolitano, who claims "properly screened" so she'll be collecting her paycheck as the rest of us ask the pertinent questions.

Peter Santilli

Northwest Flight 253: They Would Have To Conspire To Make So Many Mistakes
Let’s take a look at the facts thus far regarding the attempted bombing of the Northwest flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit by self confessed Al-Qaeda associate Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

... Homeland Security has a budget of $55 billion dollars per year to provide security to the American public. They focus so heavily on harassing old ladies in wheel chairs; making them take their shoes off & throw away their hand sanitizer. They also treat former US Marines (like myself) as if they’re terrorists; they shake down millions of innocent Americans at security check points, and force everyone to discard their $4 water bottles.

In my opinion, the whole system is yet another scam to bilk and deceive taxpayers. Equipment & systems are expensive, therefore, there’s a lot of financial incentive to keep terrorism in the minds of the taxpayer. Look around you at the airport, and ask yourself whether its possible that the entire scam is designed to make passengers feel “comforted” by the grueling screening process. For me, I now realize that all the commotion at security checkpoints is also designed to make taxpayers comfortable about spending $55 billion on “Homeland Security”.

The so-called system not only failed, but it failed so miserably, that one could think seriously about the possibility of a conspiracy to keep the money flowing. Think about it, what better way to keep $55 billion flowing than to help a radicalized, brainwashed 23 year old onto a plane with a bogus bomb. On top of that, just imagine how much more money could be siphoned from American taxpayers if the war on terror could be expanded to Yemen.

As to my personal opinion, I believe deep in my heart that our entire system is ruled & governed by the military/industrial complex. There is no direct, personal accountability for security failures — watch, an investigation will be performed, but no individual will accept blame or be fired; it’s designed that way.

Our system is not designed to serve people, it’s designed to feed corporations. If the people are disgruntled, disappointed, or demand accountability, the “machine” deflects from human responsibility & fabricates yet another method of preventing future occurrences; by spending more taxpayer money...

http://petersantilli.com/tag/amsterdam

/

We'd like to see a more in-depth treatment of Santilli's opinion.

Who's OK with biometric Citizenship ID Card

Few and far-between discussions on networks about the Real ID Card program soon to be imposed on citizens of the United States of America by a traitorous Congress. we'll have to see if the new Congress with a Democrat majority rescinds this travesty on American values since the nation was founded on individual freedom, limited government, and the rule of law, constitutional law. The Real ID/Pass Card infringes on guaranteed rights of U.S. citizens. The measure is part of a North American "agreement" with Mexico and Canada which was not ratified as a treaty by the Senate.

Today, C-Span featured a rebroadcast of a panel that discussed the Real ID Card. I didn't catch everyone's name. Members of the panel included a male assistant to Rep. Louise Slaughter and others who appeared to be company representatives.

It was unclear whether Rep. Slaughter is OK with some sort of Pass card ID system for re-entry to their own country by U.S. citizens.

So searching for what the heck is going on... According to this list H.R. 417 - REAL ID Act Slaughter (D-28): Nay

H.R. 417 - REAL ID Act
Passed: February 10, 2005
House

http://www.bordc.org/involved/concerned/votingrecords_detail.php?bill=9

A chronology of Rep. Slaughter's actions on behalf of border communities

This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-741R
entitled 'Observations on Efforts to Implement the Western Hemisphere
Travel Initiative on the U.S. Border with Canada' which was released on
June 1, 2006.

http://www.gao.gov/htext/d06741r.html

SLAUGHTER, McHUGH UNVEIL NEW BI-PARTISAN LEGISLATION ADDRESSING WHTI CONCERNS RAISED BY GAO
PACT Act Will Delay Implementation, Help Fix Major WHTI Problems

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-Fairport) and Rep. John M. McHugh (R-Pierrepont Manor) today announced new bi-partisan legislation that will delay implementation of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) and correct many of its inherent flaws. The legislation is known as the Protecting American Commerce and Travel Act, or PACT Act...

http://mchugh.house.gov/pr2006/060106_WHTILegislation.html

GAO

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06741r.pdf

Members of Congress Forced to Swallow Poison Pill

Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY-28), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Rules, today led debate on the rule concerning the supplemental Iraqi War Appropriations Bill. Citing the Republican Majority’s decision to include the unrelated and controversial “Real I.D.” immigration legislation in a bill intended to help our troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, Rep. Slaughter delivered the following remarks focusing attention on yet another Republican abuse of power

http://www.votelouise.com/news/63/rep-slaughter-addresses-republican-abuse-of-power-in-iraq-spending-bill

From the Liberty Coalition piece, Are You Ready for Your North American Union ID Card?... The PACT Act, introduced by Reps. Louise Slaughter and John McHugh would also require the U.S. and Canada to develop identical documents for use under WHTI.

What all this means is that we are facing a situation where U.S. and Canadian drivers’ licenses, which Americans need to drive to work, go to a tavern, and generally navigate day-to-day life, will contain sensitive personal biometric information, interlinked and readable by the governments of Canada and Mexico. And depending on the standards decided upon by Homeland Secretary Michael Chertoff, our drivers’ licenses could contain more information than the documents Mexicans use to cross into the U.S. legally; nevermind those who cross our insecure southern border without permission...

http://libertycoalition.net/nau-id

Group warns bill contains national ID

While a section of the bill says no provision in it "shall be construed to authorize, directly or indirectly, the issuance or use of national identification cards," Liberty Coalition officials point out another section requires Social Security Administration, the Treasury Department and the Department of Justice to submit a report to Congress about creating a machine-readable photo ID based on social security numbers.

"This action is a clear move towards constructing a National ID program, a concept rejected by most Americans," said the group, in a statement.
James Plummer, the coalition's policy director, described the bill's language about a national ID as "Orwellian doublespeak."

"A real border security law would secure the borders, making this kind of police-state 'Big Brother' tracking of Americans unnecessary," he said.
Liberty Coalition includes such politically

Group warns bill contains national ID

Slaughter Says Alternative Travel Card is a Step in the Right Direction

Also States that More Work Must be Done for Card to Work for Western New York

Washington, DC - Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-Fairport), Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee, today responded to the announcement by Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that their departments will produce an alternative passport card for travel to and from Canada.

"Today's announcement is a step in the right direction, but DHS and State have a lot of work to do if they are going to make this alternative travel card work for border communities," Rep. Slaughter said. "We need to know how much this travel card will cost, how long it will take to process an application, and where people can apply and receive this document," she added.

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 2004 will require all individuals to present a passport or comparable documentation when entering the United States from Canada. This requirement, referred to as the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), is set to go into effect on December 31, 2007. The announcement made today by Secretaries Rice and Chertoff states that they will be creating a secure alternative passport card that will meet the security requirements of the IRTPA, but provided few details on the program.

"I am afraid that the current vision for this card does not address the spontaneous travelers who pump millions of dollars into the Western New York economy," Rep. Slaughter said. "If these individuals are unable to easily acquire this travel card, or if the card is prohibitively expensive, then spontaneous trips to and from Canada will dry-up," she added.

Rep. Slaughter also commented that drivers' licenses should not at this time be eliminated as an acceptable border-crossing document.

"Drivers licenses pose the least burden on cross-border travelers, and so they shouldn't be prematurely excluded from consideration," she said.

http://www.louise.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=379

Are You Ready for Your North American Union ID Card?
Human Events Online has been leading the coverage of the so-called “Security and Prosperity Partnership,” a unilateral program implemented by the Bush Administration designed to set the course for a North American Union that would subsume our national sovereignty. A de facto treaty signed by the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the U.S., the agreement was never submitted to the Senate for ratification. Now it can be revealed that plans for the North American Union include a tri-national “North American Union” ID card.

Recent testimony to Congress by a Homeland Security official reinforces the point. At a June 8 hearing before an immigration subcommittee, DHS counselor and acting assistant secretary Paul Rosenzweig touted something called the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI). In doing so, he cited the SPP and bragged that under the SPP, “Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers convened trilateral working groups to develop concrete work plans and specific timetables for securing North America and ensuring legitimate travelers and cargo efficiently cross our shared borders.”

The WHTI was established to implement legislation passed as part of the 2004 intelligence reform bill, which was in turn spurred on by the findings of the federal government’s ad hoc 9/11 Commission. A provision in that legislation required that everyone entering the United States, including Americans, present identity documents -- but all of the details were left to the Department of Homeland Security. The result was the WHTI, which aims to require that people entering the U.S. from Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, or Bermuda present either a new document called a “Passport Card” or other documents to be named which will meet certain standards to be determined. This requirement would also apply to Americans, who currently do not need a passport to travel to those countries but would need a document compliant with WHTI to return home.

By folding the WHTI into the SPP’s agenda for a North American Union, the Bush Administration is brazenly laying the foundation to turn WHTI into a backdoor tri-national ID system. And Americans may have little choice but to be integrated into it...

http://libertycoalition.net/nau-id

UK TOO

CNET News.com reports what we have knowns for some time...

Microsoft has warned that the U.K.'s national identity card plans pose a security risk that could increase the likelihood of confidential data falling into the hands of criminals.

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+exec+ID+cards+pose+security+risk/2100-7348-5900411.html?part=dht&tag=ntop&tag=nl.e433

http://whiterose.samizdata.net/archives/identity_cards/

UK Say NO to ID cards and the database state!

http://www.pledgebank.com/refuse?showall=1

U.S. opposition

http://www.google.com/search?q=real+id+card+OPPOSE&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=

state groups oppose

http://www.ncsl.org/statefed/GRPLtrRealID.htm

Living the outlaw life: National ID — Our Line in the Sand
By Claire Wolfe Backwoods Home

Excerpt

Where did the government acquire the authority to freely inspect your life? What legitimate law enforcement or security purpose is served by surveiling the innocent?

The question isn’t what do you have to hide but why is the government so persistently determined to find out everything about you.

The third big deal is that national ID violates your rights

When you have to prove your identity to government agents on demand, you’re being treated as a criminal -- and your Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights are being trashed.

When you have to produce identity papers on demand, you’re being searched illegally. If you’re “detained” until you prove your identity, you’re being seized illegally. Both are violations of the Fourth Amendment.

If you must give information that could get you prosecuted (for instance, the information that you’re not carrying your national ID), you’re being forced to provide evidence against yourself -- a Fifth Amendment violation.

If your religion forbids universal numbering, your First Amendment rights are being broken by national ID.

And by extending its authority into areas forbidden to it by the Constitution, the federal government violates the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

Is it worth it to you, to gain national ID and lose all these historic protections?

Worse. Your loss of freedom won’t do anything to make you safe

http://www.backwoodshome.com/columns/wolfe0111.html





Resources:
Senate approves electronic ID card bill
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: May 10, 2005

http://news.com.com/Senate+approves+electronic+ID+card+bill/2100-1028_3-5702505.html

Scorecard

http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgradescategory.php3?District=NY28&Category=1&Status=Career&VIPID=611

110 Congress United States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress

Aaron Russo's America: from freedom to facism

Are you aware by May of 2008 the law will require you to carry a national identification card? ...

Includes trailer of movie

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/