In my on-going series of highlighting any instance where people are not doing their jobs this one is extremely problematic. Border Patrol officials have been found to be complacent and inattentive in their duties by undercover investigators. Weak management controls have also been found. Border Patrol is our first line of defense for the security of every U.S. citizen both physically and financially.
As with most jobs in law enforcement, Border Patrol is one of the toughest, and it is, like every law enforcement branch, under-manned. This is nothing new. Everyone claims they want law and order but there just are not enough people willing to put their lives on the line to enforce it.
Government watchdogs have found that thousands of people who shouldn't have been admitted to the United States were allowed in last year because of security lapses at legal border crossings. Granted, not everyone who comes in is a danger to our physical well-being and they certainly are not all terrorists. But some of these individuals are connected with criminal enterprises which is where our financial well-being is threatened most and why the lack of job performance on the part of the Border Patrol is most egregious to the safety of their fellow Americans.
GAO investigators arriving at one point of entry found no border agents in the inspection booth, while at other locations, agents didn't ask for travel documents, according to the report. I, myself, have driven through Otay point of entry and found no border agents in the booth while re-entering the U.S.
The number of inadmissible aliens who managed to enter through official ports of entry in 2006 has not been disclosed by the Government Accountability Office. However, a source who has seen a full version of the report, in which those statistics were included, put the total at 21,000.
The government, for obvious reasons, does not want to release the numbers of how many escaped the attention of Customs and Border Protection. One reason is there is no way to know the actual number so any number they come up with would have to be prefaced as being an estimate. Another reason they don’t release the numbers is they don’t want the taxpayer, who is paying their salaries, to know they are not performing their duty. They don’t want the very people they are supposed to protect to know they are not performing their duty.
Men and women of law enforcement are a special breed of people. They want to see the bad guy put away, as all of us law abiding citizens do, but they alone are willing to strap on a gun and a badge and put their own lives at stake to put those bad guys away. Those of us who sit back in our easy chairs from the comfort of our homes should be shamed for ever casting a bad light on those who are doing their best. I applaud those individuals and give to them my utmost deepest felt respect. It’s the individuals who have sworn to protect the laws and citizens of this great country and turn their backs on us by slacking in their job performance that should be reprimanded to the fullest extent of the law. To allow possible criminals to get into the U.S. because they did not do their jobs is criminal itself.
Those who are conscientiously doing their sworn duty can get very frustrated when they see criminals they have caught and then released by liberal judges or asshole lawyers who defends the criminal and convinces the judge to let the criminal go.
I can understand the frustration that Border Patrol agents feel after two of their own were arrested and put in jail for shooting a known drug smuggler. But that is no excuse for jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.
The Customs and Border Protection's stance is that at busy border crossings, it has to balance security with commerce. This is blatantly putting commerce ahead of safety.
The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 17,600 Customs and Border Protection officers manning ports of entry, said the agency is understaffed and poorly managed and officers are overworked and not adequately trained. Why can’t we put National Guard to help them? Since Bush can send them to Iraq in the name of keeping terrorists from coming to America then he can certainly send them to our borders in America.
Whether we think the threat is real or not, we cannot afford to assume the threat is not real and slack off on our duties. The U.S. taxpayer deserves to get our monies worth when agents are hired to protect us.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Monday, November 5, 2007
The president who cried wolf!
Here we go again. Stop the world presses! George W. Bush claims that the very security of the U.S. depends on another one of his ‘yes men’ being nominated to high office. Enough of this crap George! Judge Mukasey is no more ‘crucial’ to the security of this country than I am. I at least know that waterboarding is torture and am not afraid to say so. And the fact that you call him a good man raises nothing but serious doubt on whether we can trust him.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Who is looking after us?
Government agencies still taking thinly veiled bribes from the industries they are tasked to regulate.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
U.S. court rules against religious freedom
The Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, and its leaders, were ordered to pay $10.9 million for funeral protest.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
Diplomats don’t want to go to Iraq
U.S. foreign diplomats are being forced to serve in Iraq under penalty of dismissal for refusing. It seems their new plush, multi-million dollar Baghdad facility is not incentive enough for them to do their jobs. It also seems they are very worried about being killed.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)