BIG SIS WANTS TO SEE UNDER YOUR CLOTHES

[bbk 188]

Am I missing something?

 

Yes, do the Israelly thing for screening.

 

Bring the kids home from Afganistan and post then on the US borders and on flights coming into the states.

 

Beef up out intelligence and take the bad guys out surgically.

 

Killing a whole family with a missle off a drone is bad press. We have the best snipers and spooks. Both GI and contractor.

 

Ahh! Just call me crazy.

I agree for the most part with what you're saying. However, for the most part, even if we wanted-- we couldn't deploy military to the border in any other function other then engineers or oversight (which is what the Army does currently). For the better, military personnel are not deputized, and do not have any law enforcement authority... unless Posse Comitatus is lifted and the Insurrection Act is limited as well. However, those incidents are far and few between. Now, sending the National Guard, that's a different story I believe.

 

As for everything else, I would support taking a more pro-active approach that involved some profiling. Not necessarily just looking at a person or their passport and saying 'yay' or 'nay.' But fusing the profiling with a more robust and deeper involvement of intelligence assets and homeland security (not necessarily just the department though)... sounds obvious, right? However, I think human intelligence has become pretty shoddy and the other forms of intelligence have been neutered a bit; which all leads to a lack of complete actionable intelligence.

[Old School 611]

Am I missing something?

 

Yes, do the Israelly thing for screening.

 

Bring the kids home from Afganistan and post then on the US borders and on flights coming into the states.

 

Beef up out intelligence and take the bad guys out surgically.

 

Killing a whole family with a missle off a drone is bad press. We have the best snipers and spooks. Both GI and contractor.

 

Ahh! Just call me crazy.

I agree for the most part with what you're saying. However, for the most part, even if we wanted-- we couldn't deploy military to the border in any other function other then engineers or oversight (which is what the Army does currently). For the better, military personnel are not deputized, and do not have any law enforcement authority... unless Posse Comitatus is lifted and the Insurrection Act is limited as well. However, those incidents are far and few between. Now, sending the National Guard, that's a different story I believe.

 

As for everything else, I would support taking a more pro-active approach that involved some profiling. Not necessarily just looking at a person or their passport and saying 'yay' or 'nay.' But fusing the profiling with a more robust and deeper involvement of intelligence assets and homeland security (not necessarily just the department though)... sounds obvious, right? However, I think human intelligence has become pretty shoddy and the other forms of intelligence have been neutered a bit; which all leads to a lack of complete actionable intelligence.

 

 

Help me out here. Do Posse Comitatus and Insurrection Act prevent US troops from being in the US protecting our borders from foreign invaders? I've read them both and really they are legaleze to me. What's the interpretation?

[GoNRA 12]

I gotta go with old school on this... we need to protect our own country in ever way possible, and give the rights back to the citizens... cause this taking away citizens rights to appease other cultures is bs... we should stop getting involved with other peoples business, mind our own and beef up national security. I dont think we can just keep going from country to country to country to country... tracking these guys down it's impossible. We are stirring up a shit storm by doing so...

 

I think our troops should be brought back home to there families after being over there forever... We dont have the money nor the resources to keep fighting this war, it's gonna drag on through every muslim country. Now we are in talks about going to Yemen, and now with this nigerian guy who knows where else we plan to go... I think we should beef up the security on all planes flying over U.S. Soil, and guard the borders with national guard + INS ...

 

it's impossible to fight this al queda or whatever they call it.. if they have crap all over the eastern hemisphere... we cant just go through all these countries that have a few of these guys in it... some of the leaders will eventually tell us no you cant come through out country and who knows what will happen then.

 

I'm just calling it like I see it... but I agree with old school on this one..

[bbk 188]

Sticking to our own seems like the logical answer, but I think if we were to be naive about what was going on, the chances of getting nipped in the butt are pretty good. I think it would be the case because if we don't take a pro-active stance of "policing" the world, who will?

 

I know, that is the root of the problem as it currently stands. And the question that follows that is probably something along the lines of, "who cares about the rest of the world?" Truth is, after the Spanish-American war, and, later, after WWII and really after 1989, when the US finally emerged as the leading world power-- we made it our responsibility... whether we wanted it or not. Sure, its not a glorious position, being at the top, but without defined leadership, the rest of the world would probably be far worse... and then it would sooner or later cause problems that we couldn't even imagine for the homeland.

 

To me, globalism works two-fold. The more obvious reason for spreading our influence is because it is what fuels the economy. The other hand? By creating so-called "spheres of influence," it helps protect the homeland by a means of "buffer zones" of sorts. While these buffer zones are not literally contiguous, the effects of globalism in a sense make them so. Its an abstract theory, but it makes sense... and is the reason why most terrorist (I will never call it "man made disasters," sorry) attacks are US assets (USS Cole, Bosnia, embassies in Africa, military bases in Ghan and Iraq); and not necessarily targets on US soil. Now, the fact that more and more incidents are happening on US soil is troubling, and a different topic in itself-- this thread topic.

 

I agree with Old School that more has to be done to protect the homeland, but without bending the laws that protect the rights of the citizen. Take for example, former President Bush amended parts of the Insurrection Act that would allow him to use US troops more readily. While it had good intentions (the Katrina cleanup was to have been the main reason why), the move was later repealed back to what the Insurrection Act had been because it was giving the President too much power.

 

As for the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus, I'm not a legal advocate or JAG, but my understanding is that there are incidents that can trigger a lifting of the two policies. For example, I believe in the case of martial law, the restrictions can be lifted. So, if the mainland were being invaded, I don't know what legal steps have to be taken, but you could bet the BCTs would be rolling.

The main reason for the two policies is to protect the country from the President having too much power... a check and balance. Seeing how the President is also the Commander-in-Chief, its natural that he would hold the reins to the military. This limits his ability to use the military for domestic issues. National Guard is a different thing all together.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

To get back on topic, body scanners rule if your working one and some hot chicks come by!

[tbtrout 141]

To get back on topic, body scanners rule if your working one and some hot chicks come by!

And Ray is the reason why I do not like the idea. There are a lot of security guards like him.

[XDJohnTact 49]

Tim, I am afraid you are right on! :laughing-rofl:

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I was just trying to get back on topic, but unfortuneitly, I'm right. Who are they gonna hire to run these things. If they hire the same crew that works at Newark airport, we are in big trouble.

[Wolfy 51]

Who wants to see pics of Hillary!!!!! :twisted:

[docwalt 1]

Hey GoNRA. It happened already. The country that refused us to cross was France.

[average joe 5]

Work for the TSA, what a great job, you get $8 an hour, and get to look at all the naked girls you want....On company time !

[rscalzo 3]

It's actually about $14 plus benefits.

[djg0770 481]

It's actually about $14 plus benefits.

 

Even BETTER!

[KpdPipes 388]

To get back on topic, body scanners rule if your working one and some hot chicks come by!

And Ray is the reason why I do not like the idea. There are a lot of security guards like him.

 

the monitors are in a different area than the scanner, the person running the monitor CANNOT see who is entering the scanner, nor is it supposed to store any images routinely, although i believe there is a provison for a "Screenshot" storage for a suspicious item seen in the scanner. Now, that said..i've also seen the wuality of people TSA hires, and unless they're goign to take the monitor people from a different pool.....

[GoNRA 12]

working there you can just take snapshots and open up your own porn website....

[XDJohnTact 49]

So if you work there, you sit in a little cubicle somewhere looking at women with no clothes on them? Isn't that what the Porn Shops on 42nd street used to do?

[djg0770 481]

So if you work there, you sit in a little cubicle somewhere looking at women with no clothes on them? Isn't that what the Porn Shops on 42nd street used to do?

 

No - they CHARGED for that.

[docwalt 1]

Yea...but thet don't have to put up with those annoying doors closing on you when the going gets good...