by Dave Mejias for Congress, Mon Aug 28, 2006 at 07:59:22 AM EDT
In a recent Newsday article, Peter King endorsed a proposal to base our airport security on a full-scale racial profiling program. This is a cheap election year stunt aimed at motivating King's ultra-conservative base, NOT at increasing security. The security of our country is a serious problem that requires significant thought and practical answers. King has repeatedly shown that he cares little for coming up with a real solution.
Then, Peter King (probably stung by the criticism he received) dramatically reversed himself. During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, King's new opinion was that airport screeners should merely take into account a person's ethnicity as part of the threat equation in combination with displayed behavioral characteristics. His initial position followed by his subsequent flip-flop further proves that King, the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has no serious solutions for our nation's flawed security procedures.
by goldkey, Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 05:39:29 PM EDT
Well, we have a new system of justice in the west. "Terrorists" are guilty until proven innocent.
by Jonathan Singer, Fri Aug 04, 2006 at 10:01:05 PM EDT
On Monday night, I had the distinct pleasure of spending eight hours with one of Oregon's finest -- a state trooper based in the Portland area. That evening, I rode in one of just four cars from the Oregon State Police patrolling the corridor of Interstates 5 and 84, as well as the array of US and Oregon highways in eastern and southern portions of the metropolitan area. Apparently, the patrol that night was "fat"; usually, there are about half that number of cars covering the four-county area.
True, there were also countless city police and county sheriffs on the roads trying to maintain the peace and making sure the roads, highways and freeways were safe.
by schroeder, Thu Jun 01, 2006 at 05:57:57 AM EDT
The NY Daily News ran that headline back in the 70s, when Gerald Ford denied federal aid to the then-bankrupt city. They're using it again today, and this time it's much worse. Bush's cronies have cut already-inadequate anti-terror funding by 40%, while raising it in such high-profile targets as Louisville, KY and Omaha, NE.
One of the first things Bush did after 9/11, after he finished reading his children's book (the goat does make it to the top of the hill, for those of you who were worried), was cut funding for NYC first responders - our police and firefighters. So, what's the explanation here? Bush has done nothing but undermine our response to terrorist attacks. Does he want the terrorists to win? Or does he just hate America?
by Pravin, Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 12:45:16 PM EDT
After seeing people like Nancy Pelosi feel the need to declare her strong disapproval in no uncertain terms over Cynthia McKinney, I wondered why she doesn't express with more outrage much bigger crimes by Bush and Cheney cronies.
Well, now there may be three people in the Homeland Security Department who may be sexual predators of young teens and Tom Delay is worried about McKinney? Even if one hates McKinney, the imbalance in attention is outrageous.
Courtesy of Crooks and Liars: