The Dangers of Homeland Security

by FreeMan, February 10, 2012 •

 

Is the DHS going the way of the CIA?

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was created during World War II as the central hub for foreign intelligence operations (hence the name). Under its original moniker, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the goal was to gather information and coordinate covert tactics (read: espionage and sabotage) against the Axis Powers for the U.S. military.

As combat and clandestine missions were winding down with the end of the war, the assorted spec-ops tactical groups were technically out of work. Yet before the ink was dry on the Japanese surrender papers, the western powers that be (PTB) identified a new threat: an aggressive communist Russia. The OSS quickly had a new mission, shifting its focus and filling any “peacetime” foreign intelligence void as the new CIA.

Before long the CIA had in a way become its own secret army, tasked with carrying out everything from spying on foreign governments to instigating uprisings where deemed appropriate. It is an open secret that the CIA is also capable of assassinating foreign leaders, when necessary, to achieve regime change more suitable to the PTB.

This is not to suggest that the CIA is rogue to the core. Indeed there are many brave men and women who put their lives on the line every hour of every day in service to their country. But who exactly is calling the strategic shots at the top? We’re not so sure anymore.

It is this writer’s opinion that we’ve been witnessing varying degrees of these tactics with the so-called Arab Spring. It is highly doubtful that a spontaneous third world Internet social site triggered the overthrow of regimes throughout the Middle East and North Africa region.

Whatever the catalyst might be, the vast majority of Americans continue to look the other way when it comes to this very undemocratic behavior, as readily as the PTB justify the invasions of independent nations. To wit:  Muammar Gadhafi was a murderous terrorist. Saddam Hussein was a genocidal sociopath. Hosni Mubarak is a tyrannical thug. Bashar Assad is a dynastic despot, and so on and so forth.

Screw national sovereignty and the Peace of Westphalia, these are “bad guys.”

This populist argument is now apparently “principle” enough for the PTB (and its global agent, the United Nations) to play interventionist in this new era of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). It’s all in the name of freedom and human rights, right?

As for the American public at large, we are content to believe that this sort of thing only happens “over there.” It could never happen here. Heck, we’re already a free nation, right?. We’re the “good guys.”

Our national sovereignty undermined by the PTB? Our individual liberties compromised? Impossible.

 America’s domestic central intelligence agency

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the Office of Homeland Security (OHS) was supposedly created for similar purposes as its OSS (CIA) counterpart, a central clearinghouse for intelligence that could coordinate all tactical operations against any domestic threats.

Remember that the attacks were viewed by many as a failure on the part of American domestic intelligence for not having “connected the dots” that may (or may not) have thwarted al Qaeda that day. In other words, the many parts of our intelligence community weren’t playing well together in the sandbox. And it cost nearly 3,000 American lives.

The Bush administration desperately needed a very public fix for this very public intel disaster. Naturally, they decided yet another layer of bureaucratic security was required to save the day—and the OHS was formed three weeks after the attacks.

The 107th Congress dutifully followed on with the Patriot Act, demonstrating that they, too, were on top of this new crisis. By golly we’re going to protect the American people’s freedom—even if that means taking freedoms away from the American people.

In reality, it was part public relations and part power grab. Apparently it has always been conventional wisdom at the federal level to ‘never let a crisis go to waste.’ A year later in November 2002, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was hatched, with an even bigger, badder budget and a mandate to match

Screw the Fourth Amendment and civil liberties. We’re chasing “bad guys” here. Besides, it’s not like America is a police state, right?

But that’s exactly what’s been developing here in the homeland in the decade since 9/11. Under the Bush administration, the DHS erected a federal information network that linked the CIA, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice (DoJ), and United States Military. There are about a hundred of these so-called ‘fusion centers’ operating right now, which also tie into state and local government data banks.

Now a federal security force operating at the behest of the DHS is just around the corner.

 

On the 2008 campaign trail, then-Senator Barack Obama called for a national police force to rival our military:

We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded,” he said.

What national security objectives did Mr. Obama feel warranted such a grossly unconstitutional maneuver as a national security force?

In case you hadn’t noticed, the bad guys today are suddenly no longer Islamic sleeper cells waiting to wreak havoc once we’ve let down our collective guard. In fact, the Obama administration (with its lockstep DoJ and DHS) has continually gone out of its way to downplay any Islamic threat; the word Islam is rarely mentioned anymore if at all. No, the domestic threat today is you and me, friend.

It is We the People who are in the federal security cross hairs.

According to a December 2011 report from The Daily Bell, a national police force (read: DHS army) is still a big agenda item for Obama:

“…Obama is now advocating an expansion of the U.S. Marshal’s Service into a “stability police.” He is being assisted by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). The group has convinced many local police and sheriff’s officials that conservatives are the enemy…”

I stand corrected: this isn’t your average a police state—it’s far worse. If the claims against the SPLC are true, we’re talking about a bona fide political police state. The only possible thing worse would be if the U.S. military were out traipsing around our neighborhoods—oh, wait—that’s already happening in the friendly confines of California, where federal troops have been  training for urban warfare in Los Angeles.

Then I suppose the only thing really, really worse would be if the military started rounding up American citizens and detaining them indefinitely without warrant. Oops, too late—Congress just passed the National Defense Authorization Act that will give our military the unconstitutional power to do just that at the president’s whim.

And who will be identifying these threats and coordinating all this domestic bliss here at home? Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security is a good bet.

Surely Secretary Napolitano is an honest American who takes the security of the American people seriously; she would never be given to abuse of power. Never mind the blatant abuses of civil liberty that occur ever day, including digital strip searches and the outright theft of personal property at the groping hands of the boorish Transportation Security Administration. That’s just a small anomaly within Ms. Napolitano’s federal domestic security apparatus.

And pay no attention to the partisan enemies list she cobbled together for an official 2009 report, which incredibly maligns everyone from TEA Party members to libertarians to Ron Paul supporters to brave war veterans returning from overseas.

And think nothing of the hundreds of refurbished FEMA camps stretched out across the nation featuring new security fences crowned with cantilever barbed wire that leans inward. (Heck of a job, Brownie!)

Do you see a pattern here? What’s next?

Lest we forget, this current pack of Neo-Federalist overachievers also wants to relieve you of your guns. Was the DoJ’s ‘Fast & Furious’ project really designed to ensnare bad guy gunrunners on our southern border? Or was the intention to escalate violence along said border and bolster the argument for this administration’s anti-gun agenda? The best way to get weapons out of the hands of law-abiding citizens is to demonstrate that the risk outweighs your right to bear arms.

2012 ushered in renewed assaults on gun ownership at the state level, too. The Democrat-controlled New York State Assembly, for instance, has resurrected their microstamping campaign for the fourth consecutive year. This deeply flawed piece of legislation would ultimately render illegal all exisiting guns owned by responsible resident gun owners.

But that’s the whole, hollow point, isn’t it? Anyone with the most rudimentary appreciation for history knows that tyrants always need to take the guns away from the people first. And that is exactly the point that George Washington was making when he said: “Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself.”

Welcome to the fundamental transformation of America, my friends.

Americans tolerate a lot. It must be that turn-the-other-cheek thing so deeply rooted in a lot of us. But if you decide to turn your back on the very real facts presented in this humble post, consider yourself warned.

At best we live in a society very different from the one cultivated 250 years ago and born of the Enlightenment. The progressives among us today will try to convince you that you don’t understand what’s best for you, that you’re not evolved enough, that you’re clinging to a part of the past that America has outgrown.

They’ll try to tell you that there’s a New America at hand. Indeed there is: a nation with a General Government that knows your every move you make through the tracking devices in your phone and car GPS. A Government that knows your comings and goings and household habits via the utility smart meters they’ve screwed to your house.

But it’s all for our own good. What could possibly go wrong?

FEMA camps? Fusion centers? Indefinite detention? Urban warfare? The stability police? Really, the stability police? Um, is President Obama maybe expecting some instability? He may well be; his boss, George Soros, recently predicted “blood in the streets.” Yet the only street violence in this country of late has been at the hands of the left’s own ‘occupy’ movement.

Coincidence? I think maybe not. How’s that for ‘connecting the dots’?

Let’s indulge the doubters among us, and agree that there are no malevolent forces or illicit agendas at work here. Let’s further accept that Presidents Clinton and Bush and Obama, and Secretaries Ridge and Chertoff and Napolitano have only had our best interests at heart all along.

But what about the next person? Or the one after that?

Future elected leaders (as well as the unelected political appointees that run these federal agencies) will inherit all sorts of remarkable powers by decree; mandates enacted via Executive Orders or Presidential Directives. It is now commonplace for administrations of both major parties to simply create agencies or cabinet positions to push through federal policies that otherwise would not get through Congress. And there’s no expiration date on these orders.

Moreover, all the “good intentions” in the world do not excuse the fact that these acts and mandates are unconstitutional. This type of non-congressional “legislating” is exactly the reason we have a constitution in the first place. The founders well understood political corruption, along with the weakness of men. It was the basis for the creation of our Republican form of self-government.

Yet today the legislative branch and executive branch (with its political lapdog federal agencies) are more and more inclined to bend the Rule of Law and leave it to the judicial branch to decide what is and is not constitutional. The danger here is that modern jurisprudence gives so much weight to precedent. It’s virtually tantamount to a first grader’s argument that “so-and-so did it” and that makes it okay for everyone else to do it, too.

This monster of our own making was born a long, long time ago. I wonder if the American people are now ready to hand over to it the keys to our front doors.

# # #

Subscribe


This entry was posted in Learn Liberty, Progressivism, The Constitution, The Crisis and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.