Democratic leaders came out in force on Wednesday in favor of a proposal to prohibit Americans who are on federal government terrorist watchlists from purchasing firearms. A group of Democratic senators waged a filibuster on the Senate floor. And after presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump announced that he intends to meet with the powerful National Rifle Association to discuss a similar restriction, presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton welcomed him to the cause.
For Democrats, however, the move amounts to a strong endorsement of a system that civil liberties advocates have called a “Kafkaesque bureaucracy,” and which some Democrats have previously criticized for being secretive, unaccountable, and discriminatory.
Getting your name on a watchlist is much easier than getting it off. According to interagency watchlisting guidelines The Intercept published in 2014, it takes neither “concrete facts” nor “irrefutable evidence” to add someone’s name as a terror suspect. The guidelines allow the administration to name individuals as representatives of terrorist groups they have no demonstrable connection to and to put entire “categories” of people on the no-fly list.
There was no way for anyone to know ahead of time if they were on the no-fly list until 2014, when a federal court ruled that the government had to inform citizens when they were placed on it. But the Department of Homeland Security still refuses to tell people why, or offer a form of judicial redress.
Before the September 11 attacks, the U.S. government only banned 16 people from flying on planes for their connections to terror groups. During the George W. Bush administration, that number swelled dramatically, leading to some high-profile embarrassments.
In 2004, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., told a congressional committee that he had been stopped and questioned at airport security five times because his name appeared on the watchlist. A Bush administration official told the Washington Post anonymously that “T. Kennedy” was a common terrorist alias.
On the same day, former civil rights activist Rep. John Lewis, D.-Ga., announced that he had been “held up” more than 35 times that year while trying to fly.
But placement on a terror watchlist can have far worse consequences than harassment at airport security. Lyman Latin — a disabled U.S. Marine veteran who was wrongly placed on the list and later joined an ACLU lawsuit in response — was unable to get a Veterans Administration disability evaluation completed because he was blocked from flying from Egypt to the United States. As a result, his disability payments were reduced, and he had to move into lower-cost housing, exacerbating the impact of his disability. Another Army veteran represented by the ACLU was stuck in Colombia for years due to his inability to fly home.
Individuals who have been placed on the government’s watchlists have even been subject to extra scrutiny in court for cases completely unrelated to terrorism — as their designation on the watchlist can end up on their rap sheets for judges to see.
“The federal watchlists that the compilers of rap sheets draw on for these notations are notoriously arbitrary and inaccurate. People are placed on these lists without ever being told why or given an opportunity to contest their listing. And the lists appear to focus disproportionately on individuals with Muslim-sounding names,” Ramzi Kassem, an associate professor at CUNY School of Law, told The Intercept in March.
In 2014, the Associated Press reported that more than 1.5 million names have been added to various watchlists in the five years after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, colloquially known as “the underwear bomber,” failed to blow up an airplane over Detroit in 2009.
Documents published by The Intercept in 2014 showed that nearly half of the people on the government’s shared list of terror suspects are marked as having “no recognized terrorist group affiliation.”
In April, the Council of American-Islamic Relations in Michigan filed a class action lawsuit alleging that the sweeping watchlist system is arbitrary and discriminatory against Muslims. One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit was a 7-month-old infant whose mother was stopped at airport security while he was patted down, subjected to “chemical testing,” and had his diapers searched — all because the baby’s boarding pass labeled him a “known or suspected terrorist.”
In the past, some Democrats recognized these problems. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, chaired a hearing on the watchlist in 2008, saying that she was “not very happy” with a list that misidentifies individuals “who innocently come to use the airlines and to visit Grandma, to go on a family vacation, to try to make deadlines to a funeral, and whatever else the airlines are used for.” By December of last year, she was pushing the list’s use to bar gun purchases. “We’re just asking for terrorists not to be able to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun,” she said.
“Over the years, this list has grown to have over 1.1 million entries. With so many different names on the list, it is not surprising that every single day countless Americans are misidentified as terrorists,” Rep. Yvette Clark, D-N.Y., said in February 2009. But after the San Bernardino massacre, and when House Republicans blocked action on a bill to bar gun purchases from those on the list this past December, she tweeted out an article about House Democrats excoriating the move.
Top photo: Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., speaks next to a display of assault weapons during a news conference Jan. 24, 2013, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
How about we fix the lists? Then they would be a useful tool, right? Should be easier than fixing “the hate in people’s hearts” or placing a “good guy with a gun” everywhere chaos ensues.
One of the biggest problems, which was only recently addressed (and only addressed because of lawsuits) is that there was no way to challenge ones placement on the list. That was the biggest problem. There was no due process. There needs to be something in place to deal with guns and terrorists though. The NRA is so powerful that until last week it wouldn’t make the smallest accommodations.
Let’s say hypothetically that you were required to show an ID to enter a gun store and the store had to record that. Then when the Orlando guy tried to buy the body armor they would have been tipped off. But because he didn’t show any ID when he asked about the body armor, the store could only tell the FBI that some random guy showed up trying to buy body armor and they had no idea who he was.
If a person can’t fly because of links to terrorism, they shouldn’t be buying semiautomatic guns with 30 round clips. To mitigate this, people on the list should be able to challenge it in court like they can now do for the no-fly list. The old problem with the no fly list was that you couldn’t challenge it in court so if you were on there by mistake then there was no way to correct the problem. These government programs go south when there is no due-process and no system of checks and balances. But if done correctly, it is entirely reasonable to take steps like banning terrorists and requiring ID to enter the store. I mean you need ID to enter a bar. And you need ID to buy the gun.
Eventually, even your 80-year-old grandma will be on it. Our guns are for protection against a tyrannical government. Government is getting more and more tyrannical. Following the money and link the dots.
I doubt that you’re going to use your guns against any “tyrannical government.”
Some of you have watched movies like “Red Dawn” too many times.
This just in from cbsews.com :
The co-owner of a Florida gun store says his employees contacted law enforcement before the Orlando shooting after gunman Omar Mateen attempted to purchase body armor and ammunition.
Robbie Abell, co-owner of Lotus Gunworks, said Thursday his workers had a gut feeling about Mateen when he came to the store four or five weeks ago.
More evidence the F.B.I. DROPPED THE BALL! Spectacularly!
Comey should resign immediately.
Can he show the video footage?
Great post.
I said it before, but is worth repeating. The Failure here is NOT that the FBI had too little information, but rather could NOT come to the proper conclusion having a more-than reasonable amount of information in its hands.
The FBI said that the store did not have any data on who the guy was. I just made the point in my own comment that if gun stores were required to get ID at the door coming in (like a bar) then they would have had the guys name to give to the FBI. Gun buyers (NRA) might not like this but you know what: they have to show ID anyway when they buy the gun for the federal background check.
Mea culpa on one point…
The gun store owner now says that in fact the guy DID NOT buy a gun or ammo from his store (so they didn’t have an ID to put on the F.B.I.’s lap) and that the video that they had on the guy is too grainy to identify and has since been taped over. Leaving the F.B.I. off the hook.
However the owner also says that the only followup by the F.B.I. was a phone call -no agent actually showed up at the store to take an in person report, interview the employees, or get a description of the individual (maybe it’s just me but I hear nearly all large police agencies have very good sketch artists that can create amazing likenesses from witness descriptions -again maybe it’s just me.. Maybe the F.B.I. should look into getting one of their own?).
That by itself (I believe) is somewhere in the neighborhood of “dropping the ball” .
You mean they couldn’t have drawn a (say) 40 mile radius from that gun store and contacted all the gun stores within that radius to give them a heads up on the potential bad guy/shooter? Would that have been too much to ask for from a federal police agency that has the word “Investigation” in its name?
It seems that the only time the F.B.I. gets up off their ass to “investigate” something is after the fact of some horrific event or if there is an entity threatening “their” very existence. Pretty lazy & pathetic.
Next, will anyone who has bounced a check be prohibited from buying a firearm beacuse they’re on a Potential Bank Robber Watch List?
People who bounce checks should be required to live at least 100 miles from the nearest bank.
Since this horrible shooting, at which they must have jumped for joy after a decent interval of an hour or so, just as soon as they saw the political opportunities it might provide them with,
Hillary Clinton & Her Band of Zanies has jumped on a
high-speed rail train pointed RIGHT—–>
As usual, as if on a steroids and Red Bull binge, these power-mad freaks can’t control themselves. The same perceived hysteria that led Hillary to both stupidly and confidently endorse the invasion of Iraq leads her to calculate that saying insane shit, such as her call to bring back the spirit of 9/12 —- a phrase that,
I’m not kidding here,
literally was first popularized by Glenn Beck! Glenn Beck, one of those people liberals were most likely to invoke during the early Obama years as a Reason To Feel Comparatively Good About Yourself.
Glenn Beck 2009 talking points now featured
by Hillary Clinton 2016.
Please ridicule this as much as possible, everybody.
Ah, 9/12. I remember those days. The urge to strike out and bomb anyone, anything. The outpouring of sympathy from Iran and China. Good times.
…..yahoo*com/news/paul-ryan-says-americans-lose-000000033.html
Paul Ryan now concerned over separation of powers and the Bill of Rights if Trump is elected. This is another good reason to vote for Trump.
If Trump does what he says, Congress will have NO choice but to restrict him or take action against a sitting president. Thereby, having a debate about what IS and what IS NOT allowed powers by the president.
Seems like I heard this before somewhere…oh yea…it was me about 10:30pm last night in a post that was temporarily blocked by government intervention of my right to free speech.
NSA/CIA buries threads
Democrats will embrace anything to end gun violence except one of the following: a) a moratorium on illegal and undeclared wars overseas; b) a moratorium on military actions overseas; c) a moratorium on weapons shipments overseas; d) a moratorium on drone warfare and other forms of robotic warfare; e) a moratorium on all forms of warfare; f) a moratorium on the manufacture of assault weapons; g) a moratorium on the manufacture of handguns; h) a moratorium on the manufacturing of all weapons of all forms and varieties including biological, chemical, and nuclear. No, democrats would never consider any of those options.
good post
In 1980 John Van de Kamp (the Los Angeles County District Attorney) destroyed 4 tons of citizen complaints of police brutality against the L.A.P.D.’s officers, because they were “unsubstantiated”.
The 40% of the 680,000 people on the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) should get the same courtesy that is extended to “the club” (police, politicians, military, navy seals, army rangers, special forces, FBI, CIA, DIA, & NSA).
Correction:
Bullet point 4 should read:
4 1.5 million names added to the watchlist over the past five years. -Associated Press, citing federal court filings
Not 41.5 million…
TERRORIST WATCH LISTS:
Let’s review…
As of Aug. 5 2014,
1 Of the 680,000 people caught up in the government’s Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB)… 40 percent …“no recognized terrorist group affiliation.”
NO FLY LIST:
2 In 2006 included 44,000 names; cut down to 4,000 names by late 2009… boosted to an all-time high of 47,000 people by Obama by 2013.
TIDE
3 The Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE) is the U.S. government’s central database on known or suspected international terrorists, and contains highly classified information provided by members of the Intelligence Community such as CIA, DIA, FBI, NSA, and many others. -wikipedia.org) ) The government’s “central repository” of international terrorists and suspected terrorists. Contained over 740,000 persons
4 1.5 million names added to the watchlist over the past five years. -Associated Press, citing federal court filings
5 In the summer of 2013, officials celebrated what one classified document prepared by the National Counterterrorism Center refers to as “a milestone”—boosting the number of people in the TIDE database to a total of one million, up from half a million four years earlier.
And what is the United Secret Police State of America (CIA, DIA, FBI, NSA & others) doing about all those “suspected terrorists”? Absolutely diddily SQUAT!
So much for your right to be faced by your accuser, so much for your right to seek redress!
For all you know, if you are a supporter of this latest hysterical overreaction to gun violence by a criminally insane American, YOU might be one of the unintended people to end up on a government watch/no-fly/suspected terrorist/subject to additional screening list.
Let’s remember one thing about guns & this massacre in Orlando:
When a handgun is purchased, the application to purchase the gun has to be sent to the F.B.I. who vetts the purchaser (to see if he has any warrants, felony convictions, violent crimes, or anything else that might be a red flag to refuse the transaction). It was the F.B.I.’s “job” to do this. If anybody dropped the ball in the whole chain of events, IT WAS THE F.B.I.!
More watch lists are NOT the answer. Adding more names is not necessarily the answer. There are (I believe) way too many names on the existing TIDE lists as it is.
The answer (I believe) is to resolve the name of everybody on the list that they can contact and determine once and for all if the person is some kind of threat or not -and remove the names from these secret lists.
Remember the saying about child abuse: “Abuses thrive in an environment of secrecy”
Also remember the F.B.I. DROPPED THE BALL! So much for watch lists, how did they help?
Yeah try watching more people with bigger lists. Just more fumbles by the F.B.I.
“Determine once and for all, if the person is some kind of threat and remove the names”
This statement presupposes that the only kind of threat on the Watch list is from terrorism. The term “threat” can also mean anyone who might be in a position to expose their wrong doing or their secrets.
Good point.
The central problem with the watch list concept is that it is another unConstitutional power grab by the executive branch that bypasses judicial and legislative oversight. A good overview of the problems is available from the ACLU, including these suggestions for change:
This means bringing in the judicial system, i.e. a clear process for challenging inclusion in the lists that is not financially onerous, and legislative oversight as well, so that inclusion isn’t just an arbitrary choice by some federal bureaucrat based on personal biases. Otherwise the terrorist watch list is just another component of domestic mass surveillance and political repression.
An update on the ongoing case of Latif vs. United States, aimed at forcing the federal DOJ to take such issues into consideration, is here:
http://www.law360.com/articles/777161/doj-met-most-due-process-needs-in-no-fly-suit-judge-says
As far as gun ownership, the solution seems obvious – treat guns like motor vehicles, i.e. people should get a license for owning guns, just like a driver’s license, and should have to register their gun(s), just as with motor vehicles. That’s not onerous, and it could be handled at the state level (funded via taxes on gun and ammunition sales).
This would not prevent all gun deaths, any more than the DMV system prevents all vehicle deaths, but at least (as with drunk drivers) it would allow for suspension of licenses and confiscation of weapons from people with a history of mental instability, violent domestic assaults, etc.
Illinois has a good system. The state has a Firearm Owners ID (FOID). While I’m not fond of being charged to exercise a basic right (we don’t charge to register to vote, or to vote, even though it costs the state money to offer voting), the FOID is somewhat reasonable. It is $1.00 per year ($10 for a 10 year card). Anybody who can pass the background check to purchase a firearm can get a FOID, as can minors (due to the fact that one cannot legally handle a firearm without a FOID). The state runs background checks on FOID holders daily. The state has used the FOID to implement “universal background checks” the right way — a seller must verify that a buyer’s FOID is valid, via a web site or phone to the State Police. There is no attempt to shut down private sales, no requirement to travel to a dealer. The background check is purely a buyer background check — no information about the firearm is collected by the state. Registration of weapons, there is no reason for that.
“Otherwise the terrorist watch list is just another component of domestic mass surveillance and political repression.”
Bingo.
Also, I would be cautious about taking away people’s constitutional rights on the basis of medical conditions.
You’re making an argument that we should improve how the list is governed. That’s not incompatible with banning those who are on the list from buying firearms. We should do both. Also, it’s worth pointing out that only a tiny minority of those on the list are U.S. citizens or permanent residents–2.3%, according to factcheck.org.
“it’s worth pointing out that only a tiny minority of those on the list are U.S. citizens”
So, it is acceptable to you to deny American’s rights under the constitution? What about rights to a jury trial? How about we deny them that as well. While we are at, let’s deny them work to make a living and create more homeless.
Love your logic. This is exactly how oppression begins. Taking away rights of groups little by little until one day when you wake up and are living in a dictatorship.
The due-process provision from the 5th Am.: “No person shall… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …” Relevant provision, no person — not no citizen — is to lose due process. And a Kafkaesque list restraining movement, a limited form of detention, from which the person has blind-alley ways to appeal, to prove a negative — that they are not what they’re suspected of.
It’s one thing to investigate suspects, with a view to prosecution, 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments and all that. Something else to engage in this twilight provision.
The list is a bunch of crap, but we use should use it anyway, as a legally-binding decision making tool, so long as we promise to improve the listkeeping later?
No, Matthew, this is an idiotic argument.
Americans may not understand the history of how dangerous ideas become dangerous acts. Watch lists are not only a dangerous idea, they begin to codify laws that become intractable, and can lead to legalizing crimes against humanity. Legalization is the keyword here. A slow but sure legalizing of removing from society the dissidents and undesirables can snowball into far greater acts that become genocide. This is the danger we are facing.
Raphael Lempkin – Created the Theory of Genocide: and talked about the Axis rule in Europe, justified by Christian/Roman/Greek law: rights are given to you by a sovereign, and can be taken away from you anytime the monarch (president) wants. In Natural Law: People have an inherent dignity and inherent right given to them by the creator.
In the 20th century, Roman law has come to dominate: Any group of people who have LOST THEIR STATUS UNDER THE LAW OF A NATION, and have lost the accompanying protection of the sovereign, are reduced to the effective status of slaves, and can be legally eliminated either individually or collectively.
Where did the notion of LEGAL extermination come from? Nazism.
Richard L Rubenstien: Nazism emerged out of Christianity. It excludes and condemns those who won’t submit to their conquest. Christian superior dominion over all other beliefs. Superior rights of Christian over heathens and non-Christians.
Keven Annett expertly outlines the history of these concepts here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83iNcYdqpH8
Democrats must NOT allow these secret watch lists that can arbitraily create a suspected terrorist out of anyone the government (or it’s masters) may not like for any reason. It is one of the cornerstone issues to abuse of power which can/will open the floodgates to atrocities.
No fly lists and gun licenses are the least interesting aspects of what the Stasi’s Zersetzung goons do with lists of innocent people they do not like.
Ody and his kids insist they are the most interesting aspects and you are supposed to just take their word for it like a good little American house pet.
There are two distinctly different types of watchlists that require different oversight: “Confrontational” and “Non-Confrontational” Blacklisting. Both today are unconstitutional in their current practice.
The “No Fly List” is a “confrontational” blacklist – when you are denied access to fly on a plane – you are confronted. As bad as it is, you can challenge the system in court. It’s unconstitutional because it essentially is a “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” system. The burden of proof is placed on the “accused” instead of the “accuser”.
Most watchlists (or blacklists) are “non-confrontational” which is far more harmful and downright evil. You are placed on a blacklist (for life) without notifying you and without confronting you. If you even know you’re on the blacklist, you can never challenge it because you are never accused of anything – so it’s near impossible to obtain “legal standing” in court. Non-confrontational blacklisting is also an incentive for government corruption and outright fabricating of evidence by officials. They can fabricate or embellish anything they please because you can never challenge it. This was the type of blacklisting used against Martin Luther King, Jr. – he was never aware he was on the blacklist, but female FBI agents masquerading as his mistresses were calling his wife trying to destroy his marriage.
“Employment tampering” is probably the worst evil with this type of “non-confrontational” blacklisting. When Bush’s Attorney General, John Ashcroft, fraudulently abused the federal “Material Witness Statute” – Ashcroft would go to a person’s boss (or customer of a small business owner), persuade them to fire the employee or vendor then slap a gag order on the employer. Ashcroft then would determine where his blacklistee would work or if they would work at all. Destroy a person’s livelihood and you destroy their marriage and life. Ashcroft had no intention of calling his victims as witnesses and was severely reprimanded by a federal court for his criminality.
“Confrontational” watchlists – should have tremendous oversight to protect citizens. “Non-Confrontational” blacklisting should be abolished completely.
“Confrontational” watchlists – should have tremendous oversight to protect citizens. ”
How am I protected being on this watchlist? I currently have my phone microphone turned on and all my conversations listed to. My data is pulled from my phone between once and twice a day.
You make a distinction between confrontational and non-confrontational. But from the days I first realized that I (and my spouse) were being watched, I considered it to be ‘confrontational’.
There is NO such thing as a non-confrontational watchlist.
The only explanation I have ever received from any of the hundreds of serial stalkers who have crossed my path since 2001 is that he did what he did for “certain reasons”. I know nothing of their bureaucracies’ internal structures. I know quite a bit about their behavior towards targets, and understand that blocking me from boarding flights invites legal problems for them and legal standing for myself.
I must say, US legal technicalities aside, death threats, and putting on a Zersetzung skit while applying a straight razor to my throat and poking me in the eye with scissors is quite confrontational, yet this sort of tactic, as you know, leaves me without legal standing in a lawless country. Stabbing me with an IV needle on the top of my forearm, just behind my wrist, instead of in a vein on the inside of my arm, then performing a colonoscopy while I’m wide awake and being mocked by the nurse is also rather confrontational, and yet again, leaves me without legal standing. They have administered physical torture on me in other confrontational ways, including the use of sleep deprivation and utensils not mentioned here. Then there are the usual Zersetzung ‘no touch torture’ techniques adopted from the DDR. These are administered on the street, in the workplace, and in taxis, buses, and planes. They also invade one’s private life through email, web ads, and TV, which in their lingo might be called digital harassment vectors. (I have no idea.) Random street patriots are also recruited for ad-hoc harassment; they even use children just strong enough to hold an iphone to let the target know Americans will always be kept safe from terrorist attacks. Patriots spend tax dollars wisely, as the recent incident in Orlando demonstrates.
It became obvious to me that local police are involved when I went to a San Jose police station (201 W. Mission Street, San Jose, CA 95110) to report crimes, on a whim, on Sept. 26, 2015. As soon as I parked my car a goon walked up to me to say “they’re clooooosed”, and when I reached the lobby doors I noticed a sloppily written sign on the front door saying “Closed” — at 12 PM on a Saturday, with regular business hours posted right next to that sign. While taking pictures of the locked lobby doors with the white posterboard sign I noticed two employees busy behind the lobby counter. At the time of this post their business hours are listed as “Lobby Hours: Every day from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM”
https://www.sjpd.org/ReportingCrime/home.html#Lobby
It has been almost four years since I received my last parking ticket. More than a decade had passed since my previous parking ticket. While parking tickets sum up the extent of my criminal career, a large tome is required to describe the criminals’ attacks on my person — and that’s just the ones I know about.
Abolition is not nearly enough. The perpetrators require long term prison sentences but most Americans are vehemently pro-torture and will continue ensuring these criminals are well kept when they vote in November.
It is nice to converse with someone who knows what is going on…
I completely agree with you regarding the problems with the no-fly list and other related federal watchlists. But if this is the start of a debate on how to regulate gun sales in the country, about damn time.
Sure!! Let’s go ahead and enact racist gun control in the name of getting any gun control!! What a sensible idea!! Why not bring back the racist gun control Act of 1893 while we’re at it??
Thanks for letting us know you have no interest in participating in a debate.
“to name entire “categories” of people on to the no-fly list”
Domestic terrorist groups? Anti-abortion groups? Hate groups….Donald Trump?
My last comment was censored. As a post 9/11 war crime victim, with legal standing from a federal judge, I was saying how fraudulent the lists are with a likely 90% error rate. The lists should be totally abolished.
… and their little subscribers too
Democrats, Republicans, no difference! The current batch of politicians in Washington, and their elitist friends, are mostly authoritarians – they just have a brand; D or R. Don’t expect any respect for the constitution or the rule of law from them.
Democrats and Republicans are both totalitarian vermin. I wait for the day we put traitors like Bush’s heads on pikes.
I love the intercept – love the deep investigative work. Love the comment section – really good serious commentary and some tongue in cheek sarcasm to make a point with a laugh.
I would like it if there was a positive prescription to go with the antiestablishment rhetoric though.
We get it Democrats are bad; Republicans are bad; surveillance is bad; lists are bad. What’s good?
They call it adversarial journalism. But to me it appears their mission is to remind us that everything sucks and we should all be depressed.
Try what I do, diversify. Come here to learn what the farthest left says and then go to other places to get other views and then make up your own mind.
There are lots of great things about America and lots of bad stuff also.
Here’s some good news, on how the rise of artificial intelligence will result in global peace and harmony as humans become the coddled pets of super-intelligent machines:
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36387734
But really, the solution to the problems of ‘the establishment’ is to restore Constitutional checks and balances to the government, they’ve been heavily undermined by the GW Bush and Obama Administrations – and give up on the global imperial project, as well, it’s just a drain on resources that only benefits a few international elites.
Checks and balances haven’t just been undermined in the last two administrations. It’s been a mostly inexorable march since at least the Wilson administration and there are many earlier examples as well.
I don’t see any rhetoric at all on The Intercept.
I see factual reporting in the tradition of muckraking journalism.
It’s the job of this site to inform you of problems that may affect you and other ordinary people.
The “prescriptions” are up to you, the groups you join, and the people you vote for.
I am for a complete ban on assault rifles, or even firearms in general; however, if that is not possible then the individual’s equal constitutional rights must be preserved, and a large, shadowy, probably Islamophobic and racist blacklist cannot be tolerated.
American citizens are paying for the guns being delivered into Syria that are going to al Qaida for our regime change effort.
So, we are giving free guns to the group that attacked us on 9/11, yet we’re supposed to praise the politicians who are either doing nothing about or who actively support that treason for a half assed stunt for political gain that will have zero effect on like 97% of the mass shootings in this country?
Is the whole “leading by example” thing no longer valid?
And, since the latest nutjob was investigated twice by the FBI and cleared , wouldn’t that mean he wouldn’t have been on the list?
Maybe 97% was too generous?
Anyone seen my 1030pm post around here? Seems to be delayed, yet again. Check back here at 11am tomorrow. Should show up by then.
Getting tired of those pesky man-in-the-middle attacks.
America is a rogue state. Our “government” is only useful to provide a veneer of respectability for the population and as a means for the political class to enrich itself. After agreements like TPP and further globalization, even this will not be necessary. The population has no representation to speak of, even now, on issues of dire necessity for the planet’s survival.
This is nothing more than 2nd amendment scope-creep. Take away a small segment of the population’s constitutional rights today, then tomorrow a few more groups, and finally a few more groups.
This is nothing more than the beginning of a slippery slope that leads to a further the neutering of the Bill of Rights.
1. Speech is being criminalized (.salon.com/2011/09/04/speech_23/)
2. Right to assembly is being criminalized (BDS)
3. Privacy rights being taken away (NSA)
4. Freedom of Press under attack (WikiLeaks)
5. Put US troops on US soil and into people’s homes (.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/us/25detain.html?_r=0)
6. Loss of Due Process and indefinite detention
7. Torture regimes
The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th & 8th amendments are all under attack with these sort of policies.
I know a lot of people don’t like guns or advocate gun control, but the NRA is one special interest group that does have pull on the US government. I, for one, will be getting signed up tomorrow and making my first donation.
It’s 11:03 PST and this post just showed up. One thing is for sure about government, they are predictable.
The Second Amendment is no longer relevant, since there is no longer a need for a militia to protect the state.
While many of the rights on your list are being jeopardized, they don’t include the Second Amendment, whose “rights” are the result of a misreading of the Amendment by the conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
The reasons people give for having to own guns are generally specious or selfish and do not justify the loss of 33,000 lives every year to firearms.
All due respect but the 2nd Amendment was also intended for the people to be able to protect itself from an oppressive government if need be (not that I advocate such a thing). I’m fairly certain the military or national guard wouldn’t see fit to give a hand protecting the Constitution over protecting the government (read: their commander-in-chief) en-masse. Forgive me if this comes across as incendiary… but wouldn’t it be better to have better education in place instead of further advocating the further and exclusive concentration of (even more) power among a pocket of people who have already demonstrated a massive and gross abuse of our civil liberties and our (other) constitutional rights? Just a thought. We don’t need more of a nanny state. We need people to learn how to be responsible, mature adults who care for their communities and who are better educated. The solution to ignorance and abuse of, eg, weaponry isn’t to remove the choice entirely. That’ll just make us weaker and more powerless as a populace. Our rights exist for a reason.
We need to look at what we, as a society, are doing (and failing to do) that has brought us to this ignominious point in our ‘evolution’ and work on repairing the causes of violence, too, along with better firearms education, I guess, while we’re at it. Not every country with liberal firearms laws acts like America/Americans. Our culture is broken.
Interesting that “the underwear bomber”, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was mentioned in this article.
Does anyone remember the witness of Mr. Abdulmatallab’s “escort” demanding he be allowed onto the plane “with no passport”?
He is an American lawyer, Kurt Haskell, who was vacationing with his wife and witnessed the entire incident. Here is his statement:
http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/2011/09/colossal-deceit-known-as-underwear.html
It has been said that guns are muslims for democrats, and now that muslims have figured out how to use guns, muslims are now muslims for democrats too.
Muslims with guns may be the best political trolling of the season (and a pretty good collage band name), its like a black republican–nobody is really happy here–yet it does create the clarity of priorities.
I’m not sure if it’s more of a sin to keep meticulous files on all your victims, or to never know their names. The list thing has the whole nazi vibe, but seeing everyone the same seems so impersonal. I could argue both sides.
For better or worse, we are becoming the other.
IMHO America became ‘The Other’ quite a long time ago — though it’s been a gradual process that probably started around when we developed the bomb and then became the only country to use nuclear weapons and afterward when, instead of incarcerating Nazi scientists, we decided to reward and hide them after WW2. Power corrupts — and it corrupts in an unbiased manner for the most part (which is to say, I’m not picking on America here or saying she’s unique in this regard, though she is the sole military hyperpower right now — doesn’t help matters).
Power corrupted this country a long time ago. We aren’t Luke and Han Solo in Star Wars — we’re the Empire (something I’d been saying for a long time now but which emptywheel stated this past week also; good article). America’s not the underdog (or the victim); Americans have never updated their definitions.
I wish people would stop placing the onus on Islam or Muslims. Angry people are angry people. Yes, it makes sense to categorize reasons (and the outcomes when taken to a certain point) to an extent — but not to associate those reasons, per se, with a label like ‘Muslim’ or even ‘gun-owner’.
Mental shortcuts like this are great for funding and elections, but terrible for anyone’s populace… but yeah, great to make someone ELSE the other (sleight of hand, anybody?).
All we need to do is to establish a process that allows someone to challenge being on the terror watch list.
That would allow innocent people to regain the ability to travel by air, and prevent terror suspects from buying guns.
Is that really so difficult?
Is this process going to allow the innocent people a full and fair hearing, with free legal representation?
Personally I think every American should be put on a watch list from birth and denied all rights unless they’re wealthy enough and have enough free time to fight it in court. That would really stick it to the poors and the Arabs.
Let’s move onto to grocery stores where poison can be used. Restaurants, where of course these “people” can be employed as cooks and servers to poison the food. How about the recruitment of women to become cocktail servers in Las Vegas spreading something viral on a huge weekend of millions of visitors who will leave on Monday becoming a delivery system to all parts of the U.S. and abroad.
Democrats have become the new Soviets.
And Republicans have become the new fascists.
Welcome to America.
I believe you mean “guidelines The Intercept published in 2014…” :)
I am sorry for the no fly list, but the no gun list is a damn good thing. If they could add another 300 milllions americans on that list, it would just the right amount to prevent “terrorism”.
“Just the right amount to prevent terrorism”
Also happens to be the same exact amount to produce oppression.
quote”If they could add another 300 milllions americans on that list, it would just the right amount to prevent “terrorism”.”unquote
Says one who who wouldn’t have the freedom to express his opinion had the British confiscated ALL the weapons in the colonies….
nor never lived in 1938 Germany when the Nazi’s DID confiscate them.
Meanwhile, I’m sure he would cheer as the American Stazi kicked in his door to search for weapons to confiscate.
” in 1938 Germany when the Nazi’s DID confiscate them”
They did what?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany#Gun_regulation_of_the_Third_Reich
You should also look up a certain Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti. Under his rule, every man who considered himself one had a Kalashnikov. The times when people without an army could simply fight against a tyrant are decisively over.
I can hardly wait for law by secret Government list under either Clinton or Trump. Of course this should be followed by incarceration by list just to be safe. This would help fill for profit prisons and create associated jobs and open millions of positions of those lockup. Unemployment would drop to near zero and the economy improve. A little down side for gun owners or Mexicans and Muslims is a small price for a booming economy. This would also relieve the burden of those that have shoulder the economic responsibility of filling our prisons for decades.
I’m pleased the Democrats are discovering the value of blacklists. But using them to control access to guns is only scratching the surface.
Why should a blacklist only apply to air travel and guns? Does that mean the US welcomes terrorists who cross the border by car? Obviously the blacklist should be used to control all border crossings.
Then there is the problem of terrorists working at jobs, saving money to buy weapons on the black market (since they can no longer purchase them legally). So the blacklist should be circulated to all potential employers to cut off this source of revenue.
Finally, does it make sense for terrorists, given recent events, to have free access to nightclubs? Even if they don’t have sexual identity issues, they could still cause a lot of trouble. So people entering nightclubs could be screened against the blacklist.
A fringe benefit, as the use of blacklists becomes more widespread, is that people will be on their best behavior to avoid being placed on the lists. No longer will they push the boundaries, by visiting web sites like The Intercept. Instead, they’ll stop before engaging in any slippery slope type activities, such as reading or thinking.
The No-Fly List, the Selectee List and the Terrorist Watchlist may have been created by the George W. Bush administration, but there is no reason the next Democratic Administration can’t take them to the next level.
I’ve been saying for years, What happens when they skew the definition of terrorist? They are already treating Animal Agriculture activists (who claim half of global warming is caused by animal agriculture (from Cowspiracy documentary) as terrorists almost. You cannot even film livestock anymore, I think it may be a felony in some states.
Regarding animals:
Zoo animals are turning to ISIS too to fight the power; the onion recently reported on tweets sent out prior Cincinnati zoo gorilla and Orlando Disney gator attack.
Next up is probably a BDS list. Clinton, Feinstein, Cuomo etc. already think supporting it should be penalized, and they’ll have plenty of GOP support for fully criminalizing it.
> Democrats Embrace Secretive, Flawed Terror Watchlist
Could The Intercept’s style guide be revised somehow to better distinguish the fascist leadership of the so-called Democratic Party from those good people within and without said party who actually believe in Democracy and Justice?
Now that the no-fly list is a no-gun list and a no-explosives list, we should consider what other behaviors should be banned for Risks. I would think that driving a large truck would be right out (what if the company loads it up with a drum of cobalt-60?), and really, even a car is a deadly weapon. 3D printers might make guns, and computers doubtless could be used for hacking. Probably it would be safest to restrict those concerned to small cells, but expensive. You could go the tracking route of the Starchild Trilogy, but I’m thinking James Bond runs more toward current tastes. The spies making these determinations have a license to kill, so, obviously, they should simply shoot down everyone with the offending name, whether elderly veteran or five month old child.
Now the interesting question is how do you get people on the list?? If somebody uses a VPN to set up a Facebook page for a Dianne Feinstein and fills it with random crap in Arabic copied off of justpaste.it, would they put her on the list? Yeah, I know, her name is taken. But if “T. Kennedy” works, maybe the middle initial, or even the first name, isn’t important, so you can make it like Dianne Bozo Feinstein or something. (Bozo is, of course, a well known Arabic name, the sixth or seventh of the Twelve Imams I think, so that should be extra incriminating) Then we can see if she can use her fancy-dancy airs as a Respected Congresswoman at the TSA counter, or at the gun store (I bet she isn’t above having guns guarding her house!), or when Secret Agent Double-Oh-Fifty-Thousand shows up at her door.
Seriously, we gotta figure out how to put people on the list. If they wanna make themselves vulnerable to attack, the people of the U.S. gotta know how to make that attack. Why should China and Russia have all the fun shaking people down for cash and promises with threats of getting them branded as Risks?
Investigate these poon again, COINTELPRO / MKULTRA continues.
The FBI lie and hide like cacaroaches.
The Democrats are in the process of staging a filibuster on the subject of gun control. Knowing that there will be, as you’ve shown examples of in this article, lots of hypocrisy, half truths, out right lies and grand standing, it might be nice to provide any Democrat on the floor who would like to sound intelligent, as she or he informs his or her colleagues, this article to read aloud to the room.
I’d prefer they read the names of the entire Watchlist. And get the cameras rolling when some of their names are read aloud.
Democrats are the same iron fist, only in a velvet glove.