TresSugar

Cheney Warns of Attack - Bring Him Back or Put Him Away?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 03:00:17 -0800

Ignoring accusations of torture, Dick Cheney wants to make sure everyone knows he still supports "enhanced interrogation techniques" because they keep America safe. In an interview with Politico yesterday, Cheney predicted that the Obama administration will either backtrack on their softy views, or put Americans at grave risk. He said:

When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry. . . These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek.

To imagine how President Obama would respond to Cheney's critique, we only have to look as far as his inauguration speech when he said:

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.

Whose view of national security do you agree with more?

Source

On-Demand Fingerprint Machines Let Police ID in the Street

LibertySugar — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:00:00 -0700

Mobile fingerprint scanners are hitting the beat in the UK, helping police officers issue identity checks on the street. Right now, police must take a suspect into custody to issue fingerprint checks.

Thanks to the scanner, the size of a cell phone, the time of checking identity would go form from 67 minutes, to five, thus reducing the number of police needed by 366 officers. The next step would be to transfer mugshot images to verify identity when fingerprints are not available. To see why some worry that the government is overreaching with this technology, read more.

Officials insist that the prints will be deleted once checked. Proponents also believe that the procedure would reduce the number of mistaken arrests. Yet, others worry that the pricey gadgets could violate civil liberties by increasing surveillance and paving the way for an expansion of powers toward totalitarianism.

Do you worry that governments may collect too much biometric information about citizens? Is the UK asking people to give up their freedom and identity for the illusion of security?

Source

TSA Puts ID-less Travelers on Terrorist Watch List?

LibertySugar — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:15:23 -0700

Recently domestic airline passenger Sherri Davidoff wrote about her experience boarding an airplane without ID. Security required only basic information before Sherri could board the plane: she provided her name and the street and a state where she had lived previously. Sherri later said that she probably could have skipped even that much questioning by printing two boarding passes at home, and tossing the first one marked for further screening.

Sherri may have arrived at her destination, but the Transportation Security Administration has not forgotten that she showed up ID-less. The TSA has been adding ill-prepared passengers to their database of individuals who have violated security laws or were questioned for suspicious behavior. To see why the TSA wants to keep all the info on hand, read more.

The head of the TSA said keeping a list of those who say they left their identification at home helps the TSA track potential terrorists who might probe the system for cracks. Starting today, the TSA will only keep information for individuals that were unable to be sufficiently identified upon further questioning.

For 15 years, the same database retains the name, address, social security number, nationality, race, physical features, and information about traveling partners for those simply questioned by police for suspicious behavior. Last week the TSA misplaced a laptop that contained unencrypted identification data for 33,000 people. Could keeping databases of extensive identification information actually make us less safe?

Source

Life After 9/11: One Young Arab Gets Thrown in US Jail

LibertySugar — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 03:00:18 -0700

A recent piece in the New York Magazine chronicles the nightmarish journey of a young Arab immigrant. After September 11, Rasha found herself in jail with her family. Rasha's story sheds light on a darker side of national security.

At five-years-old Rasha moved with her family from Syria to the United States on a tourist visa. When she was in the sixth grade, after years of trying to get permanent residency, and failing, Rasha and her family moved back to Syria. Eventually she would get her Brooklyn life back, after her family was finally granted their green-cards. But the joy didn't last forever.

In February 2002, fifteen US officers awoke Rasha and her family in the middle of the night - Rasha's family was being investigated for terrorist connections. Once in a holding cell, officials questioned each family member in a separate room. To find out what happened next, read more.

After a few days of this treatment, Rasha's father begged the FBI agent to deport the family. Instead, INS detained the family until they completed their investigation. After three months of detention, the family was unexpectedly and quickly released, allowed to live their lives as before, but with new fears. Rasha, having missed school, received Fs on her report card, and having missed mortgage payments, the family had to sell their home. The New York Magazine gives a detailed account of the family's stay in prison and the recovery process after their release.

Lucky for Rasha and her family, their lawyer and other family members advocated for their release. But many others, who were arbitrarily detained, stayed longer or were deported following September 11. Without an understanding of what people like Rasha have gone through, can we accurately assess America's national security policy?

Source

Fully Loaded? Britain Brags, Sells Most Weapons to the World

LibertySugar — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:45:21 -0700

Britain saw £9.7 billion in new business last year, thanks to its role as the world's biggest arms exporter. The country's Minster for Trade and Investment boasted that the achievement highlights that the UK has "some of the world's most technologically sophisticated companies." Britain beat out the US, who was the five-time defending defense champion, as well as Russia.

One British citizen offered his two pence on the London Times website: "It is a sorry state of affairs that a country that sent its own troops into Iraq on the premise of removing 'weapons of mass destruction' is the largest exporter of those weapons around the world." Do you see any hypocrisy?

Meanwhile, Barack Obama seems content on letting Britain win the weapon crown from now on. In a video for the Caucus4Priorities, Obama says he will slow the development of new combat systems and will not weaponize space. Obama explains that as president he would set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons; America would lead the way by not developing any new nukes itself. Obama says his sole priority for defense spending would be protecting Americans, not defense contractors.

Do you think Obama's attitude toward defense will protect or endanger America? Is he brilliant or naive?

To see a very pacifistic Obama explain his views, read more.

Source and Source

Frisky? Airport Security Going Underneath Your Clothes

LibertySugar — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 09:00:31 -0700

If you're a modest person, you might want to avoid 10 US airports this summer. Cities including Los Angeles, Baltimore, Denver, Albuquerque, and Las Vegas have installed scanning devices, which reveal images of randomly selected passengers underneath their clothing. If you always wished you had X-ray vision so you could see everyone naked, you might want to get a job with airport security.

Those selected must stand inside a portal, raise their arms, and let harmless waves transmit an image of their body unclothed. Security personnel will be looking for plastic or ceramic weapons, undetectable because they are not metal. Faces will be blurred and images deleted.

The ACLU worries that the whole-body scanners could soon be used in office buildings or sports arenas. Are you willing to bear all if it increases airport security? Do you think there is a risk of abuse? Can all privacy be compromised in the name of security?

Source

Layoffs at US Nuke Plants Could Hurt National Security

LibertySugar — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:00:40 -0700

Hundreds of scientists working in a top US nuclear weapons lab have been laid off. This year Congress cut $100 million from the California lab, which was simultaneously hit with $180 million in unexpected costs.

US Senator Dianne Feinstein says the employment issue is a "serious national security danger point." All of the 440 scientists most recently laid off had put in at least 20 years of work at the location. Some fear that these highly trained specialists, in need of a livelihood, could go work for other countries, and potentially those hostile to the US.

You can rest a little easy for now. The National Nuclear Security Administration, the agency which keeps up on all current and former employees of the US nuclear program, does not know one instance in which a former employee went to work for another country.

Still, even if they don't go work for a foreign friend or foe, replacing humans with computer nuclear experts might still threaten US national security. Representative Jerry McNerney explains that the US needs the human expertise to help put together clues from other countries' nuclear programs.

In this case, will you lose sleep over someone else's pink slip?

Source

On the Newsstand: McCain vs. McCain

LibertySugar — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:00:02 -0700

The current issue of Newsweek critiques a speech John McCain gave over a month ago. Old news, right? Well, apparently not - no one seemed to talk about the comprehensive, yet confused, speech made by a would-be president.

McCain proposed expelling Russia from the G-8 (the council of world economic powers), and adding India and Brazil, while rebuffing China. This active exclusion of two major world powers would undo the work of two of McCain's GOP predecessors - Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

The article's author, Fareed Zakaria, lamented McCain's betrayal of pragmatism:

I write this with sadness because I greatly admire John McCain, a man of intelligence, honor and enormous personal and political courage. I also agree with much of what else he said in that speech in Los Angeles. But in recent years, McCain has turned into a foreign-policy schizophrenic, alternating between neoconservative posturing and realist common sense.

McCain's position actively opposes all non-democracies, at the expense of US strategic allies and national security.

McCain isn't the only one making extreme foreign policy statements. For some democratic comparison, read more.

Last week, Hillary Clinton told Good Morning America that she would "totally obliterate" Iran if it foolishly considered launching an attack on Israel. Countries around the world took notice, and critics called the Clinton statements foolish and dangerous.

Barack Obama's openness to communicating with adversaries has been considered radical; yet, it seems the other candidates are over compensating with dangerous rhetoric. Do you think it's smart for the US to pursue a "with us, or against us" foreign policy? Can the US afford to actively exclude non-democratic powers?

Source and Source

Face Screening Coming to UK Airports For Summer Travel

LibertySugar — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:00:40 -0700

This summer, airline passengers in the UK will be screened with face recognition technology, instead of being checked out by passport officials. The hope is that widespread use of the technology will improve security and speed up travel time.

So how will it work? Unmanned gates will screen passenger faces and match images to those stored on computer chips in biometric passports. Anyone on a police list will not be let though, along with an unknown number of "false negatives." The lines will be open to those with EU and UK biometric passports.

Can machines do a better and faster security job than humans? Even if they can, I'm not sure whether biometric identification is the "silver bullet" to terrorism, or a risk to civil liberties. Also, unlike a regular passport number, if you lose a biometric id you've lost it for life.

Do you trust unmanned clearance gates? Are you worried that this technology could be breached? And on a whole other level, do you think a significant number of airport personnel will eventually lose their jobs?

Source

Barack: Hillary Already Had Red Phone Moment

LibertySugar — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:00:18 -0800

Hillary Clinton's latest ad flashes images of children sleeping. The White House phone rings in the background to announce to the president that something bad has happened in the world. Hillary Clinton is there, in her Clark Kent glasses, to pick up the phone. The message: Hillary has the experience needed in dangerous times.

Barack Obama's campaign wasted no time in responding. The message of his ad, which lifts the images from Hillary's, repeats Barack's trump card: Hillary already had the chance to answer the phone, and made the wrong call on Iraq. Obama touts judgment over experience.

Regardless of where you stand on the experience debate, these ads demonstrate the skill and sharpness of the Obama campaign. Hillary tries one more time to frame the debate as one over experience, but Obama brings it back to change. Watch the ads, and tell me what you think. Are you more persuaded by one? Is back-and-forth on this topic a preview of the general election?

To see the videos, read more.
Hillary's Original:

Barack's Response:

Source