Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

'A Comedy of Errors': Why It's Time to Get Rid of the So-Called Terrorist Watch List

By Liliana Segura, AlterNet. Posted June 27, 2009.


A new report finds people on the terrorist watch list can more easily buy guns than board planes. But the real problem lies deeper than that.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Are the "New Atheists" As Bad as Christian Fundamentalists?
Frank Schaeffer

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
How a Public Jobs Program Could Put America Back on Track
Julianne Malveaux

DrugReporter:
Pot Is More Mainstream Than Ever, So Why Is Legalization Still Taboo?
Steven Wishnia

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Will the Fight Over Raw Milk Become the Civil Rights Movement of Food?
Makenna Goodman

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Are an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
The Victims At Fort Hood Are Casualties of War: Why Won't the Government Count Them Among the Dead?
Aaron Glantz

More stories by Liliana Segura

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

If the recent outbreak of right-wing gun violence wasn't alarming enough, this week brought news that people whose names appear on the U.S. government's terrorist watch list have somehow managed to purchase firearms at a frighteningly steady rate.

Just how steady? According to a new report by the Government Accountability Office, folks on the list bought guns 865 times -- in 963 attempts -- over a five-year period. And not just guns -- at least one person purchased more than 50 pounds of explosives.

Scary, right? But don't seek out a Dick Cheney-style bunker just yet. Although some media outlets were quick to announce that "terrorists" can now buy guns more easily than they can board planes, these alarming headlines should have carried a pretty bold disclaimer: If the bad news is that people on the terrorist watch list can buy guns as easily as any law-abiding hunting enthusiast, the good news is that the so-called terrorist watch list is a total sham.

The 'Terror Gap'?

But first, the guns.

It may come as a surprise to most Americans that having your name on the government's terrorist watch list is not enough to render you unqualified to own dangerous weapons. Yet, according to the GAO study: "Under current law, there is no basis to automatically prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives because they appear on the terrorist watch list.

"Rather, there must be a disqualifying factor (i.e., prohibiting information) pursuant to federal or state law, such as a felony conviction or illegal-immigration status."

Of the 10 percent of unsuccessful attempts to purchase guns documented by the GAO, these factors -- and not the person's place on the watch list -- were to blame.

The GAO study was carried out at the behest of Democratic Reps. John Conyers of Michigan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Robert C. Scott of Virginia, chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, as well as New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg. The men had requested an update to a 2005 report, "Gun Control and Terrorism: FBI Could Better Manage Firearm-Related Background Checks Involving Terrorist Watch List Records," whose conclusions pretty much speak for themselves.

The disturbing findings of the new study were met with predictable political outrage.

"The special-interest gun lobby has so twisted our nation's laws that the rights of terrorists are placed above the safety of everyday Americans," Lautenberg declared in a written statement this week. "The current law simply defies common sense."

Lautenberg called the GAO report "proof positive that known and suspected terrorists are exploiting a major loophole in our law, threatening our families and our communities."

"This 'terror gap' has been open too long, and our national security demands that we shut it down," he said.

This week, Lautenberg introduced legislation to close the "terror gap." The "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" would "provide the attorney general with discretionary authority to deny the transfer or issuance of a firearm or explosives license or permit when a background check reveals that the purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist, and the attorney general reasonably believes that the person may use a firearm or explosives in connection with terrorism."

On its surface, this might seem a legitimate counterterrorism measure as well as an important check on the out-of-control gun lobby (which, let's face it, wants to see firearms in churches, on school campuses and just about everywhere else). But for those who are stoking Americans' fear over "known and suspected terrorists" buying guns, an inconvenient fact remains: the government's so-called terrorist watch list -- an initiative of the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center -- is, not-so-technically speaking, a complete joke.

'A Comedy of Errors'

Chris Calabrese is counsel for the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project in New York. He recently called the TSC watch list a "comedy of errors."

The occasion, just last month, was an audit by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice. Among its findings: Of more than 68,000 names on the terrorist watch list, the DOJ found that 35 percent were outdated.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: fbi, barack obama, aclu, department of justice, guns, terrorist watch list, chris calabrese

Liliana Segura is a staff writer and editor of AlterNet's Rights & Liberties Special Coverage.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hey, I Know...
Posted by: RevolutionNet on Jun 27, 2009 1:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's build a website that will send a polite and respectful letter to President Obama asking him to decommission the Terror Watch List. But we'll set it up so that we can sign the letter anonymously so that if he gets angry no one will get in trouble.

FREE AMERICA

REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No joke-even Teddy Kennedy's on the watch list!
Posted by: Woodpecker on Jun 27, 2009 2:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is no joke- even Massachusetts Democratic Senator Teddy Kennedy's name is on the "terrorist watch list"!

Terry

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Surprisingly Posted by: EinMD
» Sure we do Posted by: EinMD
The only people who SHOULD be on the watch list is our highest officials...for the 911 attacks.
Posted by: pfgetty on Jun 27, 2009 2:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is our highest officials, like Bush/Cheyney, Richard Meyers, Wolfowitz and Perle, and even Obama, that should be on the terrorist watch list.
These are the people who planned, executed, and/or covered up the 911 attacks.
In fact, most of Congress knows that the government was complicit in the attacks.
And in that case, a lot of the press should be on the list too.
These are real criminals.
The evidence that the official story is a lie, and the real facts covered up, is overwhelming.
But the media, msm and alternative media like Alternet, refuses to present any of it. They are complicit in the 911 crimes for censoring the information.
I can't imagine what the people actually on the terror watch list could have done that is so much worse than being complicit in the 911 attacks, or the coverup.

When will one part of the media, one venue, one well known journalist, finally make the bold and responsible move to publish the evidence? It will change the world. The wars and occupations will stop, torture and rendition will be a thing of the past, and the aggressive imperial goals of the US/Britain will be clipped.
And back home we could shut down the terror list as we prosecute those criminals that knew about 911. The Patriot Act would be only history. Homeland Security could be dissassembled.
A dream? No, reality, if the American people demand to know the truth, and they could get the truth if Alternet or some other brave site would begin to do what we expect of them: give us the real story regardless of the consequences.

In the meantime, those who are searching for the truth should go to sites such as www.911truth.org, www.ae911truth.org, patriotsquestion911.com, http://911blogger.com/blog
and other links you can find at these sites.
Learn all you can, keep an open mind, and soon you will wonder how in the world you could have ever believed such a fairytale as the official story.

It is just too bad that Alternet could not be part of this search for truth.
It would truly change the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» EXTORTION of Congress, Courts Posted by: whole2th
makes sense to me
Posted by: kungfuma on Jun 27, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
they're taking names for those nice detention facilities they're building all over. It'll be easier after the guns are taken and the right blames the left for it; when all the while cronies are sitting back watching as we fuss and fight each other.They'll be sending their goons to getcha then when their finished -watch out goons! y'all disposable too.
amerikkka is fucked

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about a "no bank" list...
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Jun 27, 2009 4:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I never could understand the idea of a No Fly list. If the guys on it are a genuine threat, why not just arrest them when they show up at the airport? Instead they have to take the train or rent a car?

As an analogy let's suggest the government make a list of potential bank robbers who are forbidden from ever entering a bank. That oughta solve the problem of bank robberies forever, and will make us all feel safer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Improve the security - but terrorists will still get in
Posted by: LeonBNJ on Jun 27, 2009 5:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One can attempt to improve the security at airports - look at Israel and the intense procedures they use to keep off terrorists from their air flights. Problem is that lists are easier and less costly but horribly innacurate. Still, terrorists can and will enter the USA via third countries and over land borders from Mexico or Canada or by sea by bootleg boats like many illegal immigrants do.
Yes people on the terror lists can get guns, but let's face reality, they can get straw buyers or buy weapons in private deals from people more despirate for money than the security of the country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Define terrorist. Posted by: rafaeltoral
Homeland Jokeurity
Posted by: AAWeeble3 on Jun 27, 2009 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL, what a joke. Homeland Jokeurity is a waste of taxpayers money. ALmost as useless as the TSA.


Riff
Absolute Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe try something new? Posted by: rafaeltoral
If it's anything like local police
Posted by: james108 on Jun 27, 2009 7:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Denver police spy files included peaceful protesters, an 85 year old Quaker pacifist group and an outspoken nun as "criminal extremists".

Thank goodness for the ACLU. They were one of the protective watch groups that didn't go Obamaniac this last election and stayed pretty objective.

These "law enforcers" should have been fired and held accountable to the people. Since it's condoned and guided by the FBI, things seem to have just moved on for many. No alarm, that's crazy. The FBI just made a mistake understanding things in coordinating local police to monitor expressive activities by peaceful dissenters. I love the last one. If you like Ron Paul, prefer State government to Federal, or if the vicious fascist civilized mass murdering government freaks you out a little, you just might be a terrorist. This is how they divide us, painting a broad brush to stifle conservatives, and then do the same with liberals who see past the lies. Supporting suppression on one side always comes back to bite society.

Some constitutionalists are about as crazy as some ultra liberals in different ways, but many of us have valid points on the fast creeping fascism that seems hidden to some. They want to systematically monitor bloggers which I hope we take a stand against for the sake of sites like Alternet and others. Forget what they say it's for, the question is would that be abused by the same system that monitors protesters and outspoken nuns, if they happen to have an add posted to pay for expenses?

Meanwhile, the real criminals get promotions and severance packages or continue their terms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

call me old-fashioned ...
Posted by: DrXyzzy on Jun 27, 2009 7:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but a secret government list of suspicious people is the sort of thing I heard about as a child as the bad stuff going on behind the Iron Curtain. Here in the USA, we had democracy and freedom and due process.

As a teen, I read 1984, Animal Farm, Darkness at Noon and Brave New World. Fortune had smiled on me; I was growing up in America. I wondered if people laboring under a police state would ever be free.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: call me old-fashioned ... Posted by: kettleblack
What is your obsession against people buying guns?
Posted by: JohnTruth2001 on Jun 27, 2009 8:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our founding fathers specified the 2nd Amendment for damn good reasons!

Firearms are a necessary check-and-balance against tyrannical & fascist government!

Do you think there may have been a reason why Hitler kept the German populace disarmed??? (That was merely 70 years ago, so don't tell me it was like ancient Greek history or something!)

Do you think in Orwell's all-to-realistic novel 1984, Winston Smith, the Outer Party, & the Proles were unarmed for a reason???

Please think before you write!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE NEED FOR TERRORISTS
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 27, 2009 10:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's important they we be forced to live in fear of something greater than: losing a job, getting sick, losing a home, getting arrested for no reason, etc. The terrorist list never served its stated purpose. If it kept people away from taking planes, they took other transportation. Greyhound Bus became popular. I think the problem is that it was thrown together in haste and is almost impossible to sort through. As the author points out, it's an embarassment. But in the meantime, it's still useful as a tool to frighten the American people on short notice. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Turf wars...
Posted by: frank69 on Jun 27, 2009 4:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Homeland Security is just another practitioner of the age old Washington turf wars. The military services have long been at it hot and heavy. The longer a Department has been in existence, the better they are turf war. DOD, State, Agriculture, Interior, etc. All huge entities. "My Department is more important than yours. Reminds me of kids on the playground: "Nah, nah, nah, nah, I'm bigger than you."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Motivation to Buy Guns
Posted by: artie on Jun 27, 2009 7:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The NRA's point is well taken. Unfortunately, we can expect the farcical nature of the list to be advanced as proof of the NRA's ad nauseum argument that we need to purchase guns because the government is becoming too powerful .... In fact, might this be one of the reasons that people on the list have been buying guns?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

End the joke that is called the "Department of Homeland Security"!
Posted by: Bearzerker on Jun 27, 2009 8:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a nice boondoggle Dubya created when his brain "Turd blossom" dreamed that up as a way to fear monger the lil people in to giving him a second term through an illegal war with Iraq!

now we all know where all the moronic republicans that Dubya had owed political debts too went... and know that they've have this scary yet secure job... for life... because if anybody ever even thought about tossing this freak show aside or even just defunding it, they'd be hammered on as unpatriotic terrorists and be instantly added to this watch list and then be harassed for the rest of their rather shortened uninsurable lives!

Get the picture yet?
...end this charade before this idiocracy ends you!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wish I could get on the list
Posted by: slydad on Jun 27, 2009 11:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm feeling left out

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blacklisted American artists listed as "medium security threats'
Posted by: olenska on Jun 28, 2009 5:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The composer, John Adams, in an interview for The Guardian, stated that he had been blacklisted by the Bush White House (ie Karl Rove) for failure to support cheney policies . He reported being regularly strip searched at US airports. As a choreographer I have also been strip searched, and also denied corporate funding for projects that would have been produced by ballet companies. I have been unable to obtain the list of artists designated by Rove for blacklisting and would appreciate any help possible

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think Alternet needs to consider something...
Posted by: clvngodess on Jun 28, 2009 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... Like how the advertising gets placed on a page. And what that advertising actually is. Meaning is it relevant to the Alternet audience?

The two ads for firearms training is a bit offensive considering the content and intent of the article. Get your shit together Alternet Marketing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» According to the new rules... Posted by: james108
Comedy of errors?
Posted by: willymack on Jun 28, 2009 9:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WHAT errors? The whole schmear was written up, and ready to go BEFORE 911, which was either anticipated or planned outright.
We must never forget the pure, malevolent EVIL of the bush crime cartel, nor the necessity of prosecuting them for multiple capital crimes, but I have a sneaking hunch we'll never get around to it. America, the clueless and gutless.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

listless lists
Posted by: maxsmart on Jun 28, 2009 11:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is kind of like the sex offenders lists then...once everyone is on the list then you are back where you started except no one has any rights anymore...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a joke
Posted by: cahorton on Jun 28, 2009 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1.1 million people on a terrorist watch list - this is no joke, no matter how flawed. It fits with a pattern, and feeds on a pall of fear and inhibition that has settled over the country. The pattern includes:

* the growing ability of any employer to look up peoples' complete arrest records, whether or not there was a conviction;

* the growing ease with which Federal, state and local police share information in an uncontrolled way not just with each other but with private and semi-private security and investigatory firms;

* the ability of landlords and employers to look up privately-owned and notoriously flawed credit records;

* schools and employers snooping online - for example in Facebook, You-tube and personal email accounts;

* a blizzard of "keystroke-logger" spyware programs attaching to almost every computer in America and sending information on everything we write to God knows where;

* and a whole industry of computer-data-mining security and union-busting outfits and that can provide the complete dirt on anyone for $50 or $100. (Cheaper by the thousand no doubt.)

The "terrorist watch list" is particularly egregious, and because it is a governmental function we theoretically can do something about it. We need to go after it, hard. But to deal with it in isolation and not expand the effort to deal with the more general problem will be like playing Whack-a-mole! There's a huge amount of information out there in the hands of people whose business is to control, coerce and intimidate, and a more general solution needs to be found.

This emerging computer-based system for gathering and sharing damaging information and using it to discriminate and intimidate serves like a kind of vast, informal, public-private electronic Stasi operation. Nearly everyone is being hurt by it in one way or another. If we can formulate a program to address it that can catch the public imagination, and if we can find a way to bypass our atrocious corporate media and bring it directly to the people, we should be able to build a bandwagon of support.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good point Posted by: james108
Constitution a terrorist manifesto?
Posted by: kedikat on Jun 28, 2009 2:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From what I have seen in many news accounts, the terrorist list is a tool to suppress those who would want to practice free speech and right of assembly. Anybody opposing the status quo is a terrorist. Belonging to a group that is not in the corporate mold makes you a terrorist.
Reading things that are outside the mindless mass media norm, makes you a terrorist.
Basically, homeland security is a giant gag and blindfold. A tool for harassment. A wall between the citizens and participatory democracy.
Homeland Security is the core of a fascist goon squad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» EXACTLY!... thank you! Posted by: Bearzerker
But...But...but
Posted by: EinMD on Jun 29, 2009 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George W. Bush has kept us safe since 9/11!

Clinton got a blow job!

Democrats spend lots of money!

Earmarks! Pork! Democrats are soft on terror!

Fascism! Socialism! Communism!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Better yet...
Posted by: kogwonton on Jun 29, 2009 3:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's rid ourselves of the disease of hypocrisy by annihilating the legal fiction of 'terrorist' (illegal combatant) altogether. It makes us less safe from our own criminals within government and creates a class of criminal for whom there are no legal protections or due process. 'State secrets' privileges allow governments to conceal their own criminality, and use 'anti-terrorism' laws to incarcerate political enemies. We can never know whether those at Guantanimo are guilty of anything whatsoever without public disclosure of evidence, and the right of the accused to speak on their own behalf, present evidence, etc. The Global War on Terror conceals more than it reveals, and is a threat to freedom, law, and democratic institutions.

Our actions (and inactions) over the last eight years have proven the old saying true that "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". The U.S. Conservative wing within the government protects people like Luis Posada Carriles (Ex-CIA officer and Cuban terrorist convicted of blowing up a civilian airliner), ignores internal religious/political violence by the 'Christian' right-wing, while making political use of anti-terror laws domestically against political dissidents, environmentalists, and peace activists. We don't even have a consistent federal legal definition of 'terrorist', and there certainly is no universal internationally accepted definition. People are called guilty of something indefinite, thrown away indefinitely, and no evidence is presented before a public trial to prove anything at all.

If we were to have a universally accepted definition of terrorism we might have some legitimacy. My preferred definition of 'terrorism' is "The use of fear and/or violence by an individual, group, or government to coerce a person, group, or government into complicity with a political, religious, social, or economic agenda".

The problem is that we already have laws against criminal activity (terribly and unevenly enforced), and we have a separate set for criminal activity during war time (again, terribly enforced). Some say 'terrorism' is simply the peace-time equivalent of a war crime.

We cut our own throats by allowing the creation of a class of criminal for which there are no rights, and no due process. Who among you would like to step up and criticize a government who can call you a 'terrorist', toss you into a gulag, and throw away the key, without any legal rights whatsoever?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well put Posted by: ATH
The Missing 'DUH!'
Posted by: bookmonger on Jul 1, 2009 5:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am surprised that a tremendous "duh!" is missing from this article and especially these comments. The reason that people on the No Fly List can buy guns is that - DUH! - any one prevented from a gun purchase must be informed of the reason. If a person attempts to buy a gun and is turned down because they are on the No Fly List that person then learns a national secret !

The nation is made unsafe when ordinary citizens discover that they are on the No Fly List. In a safe country, it is only when attempting to board a flight that one's appearance on this list can be safely revealed. After all, if one cannot buy a gun one simply goes home angry. Only the buyer and seller are effected. But, if one is refused entry aboard an aircraft, one's life is turned upside down. The plans of many people are thwarted.

This point I make is a colossally resounding "duh" ! And besides, DUH!, it is the No Fly List, NOT the No Buy List !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some Thoughts
Posted by: ATH on Jul 1, 2009 6:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Ben Franklin said, "Those who would give up essential liberties for temporary [promised] safety, deserve neither safety nor liberty."

People who witnessed the change in Germany are often pointing to the extreme similarities between what has happened since 9/11 and what happened there after the Reichstag fire. Obama becomes more like GWB every day it seems. Now we're going to have "preventative detention? Thought police? "Minority Report," anyone? It is a Nazi axim that: The way to control a population is to make them believe there is an ever-present threat to their safety, and that the only way to be safe is to surrender privacy and rights. The fact is, the U.S. is run on war. We have a war economy; weapons are our #1 export. The MIC, in allegiance with their financiers of the Central, private, internation and Wall-Street "banksters" that finance both sides of all wars. This is why peace activists are put on terrorist watch lists, while known violent right-wing anti-choice "real" terrorists kill Doctors when they should have been stopped.

But, then again, 9/11 should have been stopped, too. In the previous year, 64 planes went off-course or turned off their transponders, in the Northeast area of the U.S. and every one of those planes was intercepted, from the time of it's deviation, to contact with fighters, within an average of 15 mins. Yet, on 9/11 4 planes flew around our skies for over 2 hours without interception! The first plane to hit the tower was off-course for over 20 mins, and the second plane was off-course for 40 minutes before striking the second tower. And all this took place before the Pentagon was struck, which shouldn't have been, since it has a surface to air missile defense system. The plane would have either had to be be squawking a military transponder code, or the MDS had to be manually over-ridden. Perhaps this was what the asian officer who was in the room with Cheney reported to Congress in his testimoney about an officer briefing Cheney on "the plane's" distance, and finally asking "if the order still stood," to which Cheney allegedly answered by whipping his neck around and snapping, "Of course the order still stands. Have you heard anything differently?"

Who knows? I don't claim to know what happened on 9/11, but anyone who swallow the offical conspiracy theory is, IMO, extremely closed-minded, naive, scared, and/or incappable of critical thought. Buildings simply do not act in the fashion of WTC#7, which wasn't even hit by a plane, by simply falling into their own footprints, through what should be the path of greatest resistance, at near free-fall speed..unless something has taken out core coulumns. Otherwise, collapses are asymetrical. Also, before or since 9/11, a steel framed building has never collapsed, period, from fire or structural damage or both, despite some buildings burning for 18 hours until one could see through them! But still, they remained standing, the steel frame.
WTC#7 was a 47 floor building, with a bomb proof command post for Guiliana, but we're supposed to believe it just collapsed straight down into its own footprint at free-fall speed from fires on a couple floors? Not just believe that, but believe both towers also collapsed in this laws-of-motion defying manner. 3 buildings collapsing all the same way, on the same day, coupled with the "coincidence" of complete failure of our trillion-dollar defense system, coupled with 11 to 25-times normal put-options on United and American airlines? If the probabilty is even possible to calculate, the odds of all this happening on the same day (don't forget the passport story, either)would be in the trillion to 1 range.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obsession, it's more than
Posted by: Romantic Violence on Jul 2, 2009 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
just perfume..What is this obsession with imaginary terrorists? I think that EVRYBODY should consult DSM IV for psychiatric disorders. Listen carefully and repeat after me: There are no terrorists other than the ones that exist only in my mind...

1789

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DON'T YOU ALL FEEL SAFER NOW?
Posted by: bryangalt on Jul 2, 2009 9:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm ashamed of our government and its completely corrupted behavior. When will it stop? Well, probably not until we find ourselves shackled to some sort of quasi-dictatorial system with a shiny paint job and the Uncle Sam logo tattooed on all of our asses.

Let's face it, there shouldn't be secrets in a democracy that can get as big and out of control as this stupid list. To you government blockheads that intercept your neighbors emails and phone conversations, and help put them on fucked up lists like the watch list, FUCK YOU.

YOU will be the reason that American national security is finally compromised because YOU are already the most dangerous and un-American people in the country.

To our joke of a Congress--FUCK YOU because you also are helping to break down our democracy by not putting your Congressional Powers to good use and outlawing this crap.

I guess you all are just tired of having a free society--I understand, it's a chore having to listen to your neighbor talk about his Christianity when you are devoted to your own deity ($$$). Who needs that kind of crap?

So what if the Supreme Court would rule against you even if 4 of your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS were violated by the state, you still had that joint in your mouth while ass-banging your boyfriend didn't you? LAWBREAKER!

Well, if the citizens of this country can't see the writing on the wall, then its going to be FUCK US...its just a matter of time...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not ONLY the Watch List
Posted by: weslen1 on Jul 2, 2009 2:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not ONLY do we need to get rid of the "Terrorist" watch list, but we need to do something about the terrorists right here at home. When the G-NO-P and/or their spokesboogymen go on national tv and call on our enemies AND their crazy minions to PLEASE, PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE ATTACK US AGAIN WITH A WMD, so they can SAVE the Republican Party, it's time to do some OVERSIGHT. These fruitcakes are putting us ALL in danger.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement