Department of Homeland (in)Security

[ryoder 1,590]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/10/dhs_fugitive/

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[tkhayes 348]

too big to fail maybe?

The concept of trying to put all agencies under one roof is valid, but the result is aan agency that is so huge with so many facets to it that it cannot function and gets mired in bureaucracy.

Maybe we should try looking at why we need the agency first to see if we can reduce the need for it, rather than try to 'flog that dead horse' to make it work.....

oops- damn liberals thinking logically again.....

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

too big to fail maybe?

The concept of trying to put all agencies under one roof is valid, but the result is aan agency that is so huge with so many facets to it that it cannot function and gets mired in bureaucracy.

Maybe we should try looking at why we need the agency first to see if we can reduce the need for it, rather than try to 'flog that dead horse' to make it work.....

oops- damn liberals thinking logically again.....

Yep, damn liberals thinking logically about reducing a need for government agencies...

on a different note...

we should increase government agencies and bury more shit in bureaucracy with healthcare...

so much logic... so little time to flip flop...

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[tkhayes 348]

I consider health care to be a basic human right and a need. I do not consider homeland security to be a basic human right nor a 'need' - at least to the extent for which each is delivered.

not flip-flopping at all. since the two are unrelated. Some things actually DO NEED to be government run and some things should not be.

we just disagree on what those things are.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

but the result is aan agency that is so huge with so many facets to it that it cannot function and gets mired in bureaucracy.

sounds like obamacare.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

but the result is aan agency that is so huge with so many facets to it that it cannot function and gets mired in bureaucracy.

sounds like obamacare.

Or Dirigo-care... sucks for the people in Maine, though.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 348]

and what is the common thread? Maine still has PRIVATE insurance,

single payer - the only way to provide it for everyone at a reasonable cost.

Too bad the plan the govt is proposing is the same crap and will not work, it will just force MORE private insurance.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

I consider health care to be a basic human right and a need.

I consider health care a need, too. I don't think all needs should be handed out by a nanny state government.

Quote

I do not consider homeland security to be a basic human right nor a 'need'

Of course you don't. You've always been under an umbrella of protection and security so it's very easy to take for granted.

Quote

Some things actually DO NEED to be government run and some things should not be.

Homeland security shouldn't be government run? Should we see if Xe needs a new contract?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

I consider health care to be a basic human right and a need.

I consider health care a need, too. I don't think all needs should be handed out by a nanny state government.

Quote

I do not consider homeland security to be a basic human right nor a 'need'

Of course you don't. You've always been under an umbrella of protection and security so it's very easy to take for granted.

Quote

Some things actually DO NEED to be government run and some things should not be.

Homeland security shouldn't be government run? Should we see if Xe needs a new contract?

Whats wrong... you dont think that being the official militia of the rePUBICan party has been lucrative enough????

[tkhayes 348]

maybe if we didn't have 700+ military bases in 130+ countries, we might not NEED the department of homeland security. (or at lest the mammoth size of one that we have)

Our military size has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

but of course, you and others will probably disagree. Certainly Xe would disagree.

[champu 1]

Quote

I consider health care to be a basic human right and a need. I do not consider homeland security to be a basic human right nor a 'need' - at least to the extent for which each is delivered.

That final caveat seems to put a subjective spin on the comparison, making the comparison itself meaningless, but I could be misunderstanding you. Do you feel that homeland security (as defined in mission statements, etc) itself isn't a right or need? Or do you feel that what your interpretation of what the department of homeland security actually does isn't a right or a need?

Keep in mind that no amount of rights do you any good if someone comes into the country and kills you.

[diablopilot 2]

Holy smokes, I agree on something with TK.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

maybe if we didn't have 700+ military bases in 130+ countries, we might not NEED the department of homeland security. (or at lest the mammoth size of one that we have)

Our military size has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

but of course, you and others will probably disagree. Certainly Xe would disagree.

Maybe if companies like Xe give all those young republicans a cost incentive to join maybe they wont be running away like little cowards as they have been from our military.

Can stock options overcome the chickenhawks unwillingness to serve?

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

maybe if we didn't have 700+ military bases in 130+ countries, we might not NEED the department of homeland security. (or at lest the mammoth size of one that we have)

Now you're just reaching as far as you can to try and make a point. If we closed every overseas base, do you think the need for homeland security would go away? If so, why? What do overseas bases have to do with homeland security being run by the government?

Quote

Our military size has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

How so?

Quote

but of course, you and others will probably disagree. Certainly Xe would disagree.

Disagree with what? You've yet to make a point in this post. You said we don't need homeland security run by the government. With that as a baseline, you either think we don't need it at all or it should be run by someone other than the government.

If we don't need it at all, why? If it we do need it and it shouldn't be run by the government then who should take it over?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

maybe if we didn't have 700+ military bases in 130+ countries, we might not NEED the department of homeland security. (or at lest the mammoth size of one that we have)

Our military size has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Strongly concur.

IMO, the interests of the military industrial complex are seldom aligned with the best interests of the country.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

maybe if we didn't have 700+ military bases in 130+ countries, we might not NEED the department of homeland security. (or at lest the mammoth size of one that we have)

Our military size has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

but of course, you and others will probably disagree. Certainly Xe would disagree.

DHS != DOD... you *DO* know that, right?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 348]

OK, I will spell it out
I believe that the world 'hates' America, not because of our 'freedom' as some would like you to believe, but because we are an invasive, domineering, imperialistic nation.

That is demonstrated by us having 700+ military bases in 130+ countries around the world

Norway, for example, does not have such a structure.

We endure many attacks against the USA, for many reasons, but one of the reasons certainly is that military presence. If Russia opened a military base in Alabama (or Cuba), We would certainly think that they were up to no good and it would probably fuel many hostilities again them for doing so.

So we build a larger military because we are under (perceived) attack by terrorists and we expand those military operations and installations. (The self fulfilling prophecy part) or Catch-22 if you want to call it that.

So yes, I am making a point, and yes, many will disagree with it.

Closing all the military bases around the world would EVENTUALLY remove that 'hate' for America, not that our foreign policy in general could use some work, but yes, I believe that it is a large part of why radicals around the world rally against the USA.

Reducing the need for the military, reduces the 'hate', which reduces the need for all the homeland security (i.e. we leave them alone and whaddya know - they leave us alone).

This is what I believe.

Norway does not have military bases all over the world and they do not have the problems that we have. The military industrial complex is sometimes its own worst enemy. Xe would hate to see things change because they make billions from it. The military would hate to see things change, because that's what the military does best; be a military.

If you go to the military for a solution, you will most likely get a military solution. Just like when you go to a surgeon, you will get a surgical option, - but you might only need a physical therapist.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Maybe if companies like Xe give all those young republicans a cost incentive to join maybe they wont be running away like little cowards as they have been from our military.

Can stock options overcome the chickenhawks unwillingness to serve?

Where's those crowds of Dems signing up to go to Afghanistan, again?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[tkhayes 348]

where's the crowds of republicans signing up for Afghan.?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Maybe if companies like Xe give all those young republicans a cost incentive to join maybe they wont be running away like little cowards as they have been from our military.

Can stock options overcome the chickenhawks unwillingness to serve?

Where's those crowds of Dems signing up to go to Afghanistan, again?

You might be surprised how many in the service are tired of being butt fucked over and over by your favorite rePUBICans. Support for them has waned. As usual you dont have a grip on the current realities.

Quote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/09/democrats-make-big-gains_n_142515.html

In the past two election cycles, Democrats have added ten new Democratic veterans to Congress. Last week, President-elect Barack Obama helped close the gap among military voters, winning 44 percent of veterans as opposed to John F. Kerry's 41 percent in 2004

But the main problem I see is that you still cant figure out the definition of a CHICKENHAWK... too fuckin chicken to serve but being warmongers in their daily actions and beliefs. Can we say also say usually willing to profit handsomely from war as so many of your leaders have.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Can we say also say usually willing to profit handsomely from war as so many of your leaders have.

You keep making that claim...can't ever seem to prove it, though.

Unless you mean these guys?

snippet:
In 2006, members of these two committees had between $32 million and $44 million invested in companies with DOD contracts. Foreign Relations member Kerry's investments accounted for most of it—between $28.9 million and $38.2 million. Members of the two committees held between $3 million and $5.1 million in defense-only companies.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Can we say also say usually willing to profit handsomely from war as so many of your leaders have.

You keep making that claim...can't ever seem to prove it, though.

Unless you mean these guys?

snippet:
In 2006, members of these two committees had between $32 million and $44 million invested in companies with DOD contracts. Foreign Relations member Kerry's investments accounted for most of it—between $28.9 million and $38.2 million. Members of the two committees held between $3 million and $5.1 million in defense-only companies.

DUUUUUUDE.. you are begrudging guys making millions from legal investments..when Friends of Cheney ( Halliburton) and Bush like Blackwater have ripped off B I L L I O N S

You do know the difference right??

Lets take this list and look who is on it

Member of Congress Minimum Value of Investment Maximum Value of Investment
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) $28,872,067 $38,209,020
Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) $12,081,050 $49,140,000
Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC) $9,232,037 $37,105,000
Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis) $5,207,668 $7,612,653
Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif) $2,684,050 $6,260,000
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich) $2,469,029 $8,360,000
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $2,000,002 $2,000,002
Rep. Tom Petri (R-Wis) $1,365,004 $5,800,000
Rep. Kenny Ewell Marchant (R-Texas) $1,163,231 $1,163,231
Rep. John Carter (R-Texas) $1,000,001 $5,000,000

[champu 1]

Quote

Closing all the military bases around the world would EVENTUALLY remove that 'hate' for America, not that our foreign policy in general could use some work, but yes, I believe that it is a large part of why radicals around the world rally against the USA.

Reducing the need for the military, reduces the 'hate', which reduces the need for all the homeland security (i.e. we leave them alone and whaddya know - they leave us alone).

This is what I believe.

Radicals rallied against a number of Scandinavian countries (including the one in your example) over political cartoons. It does not "take a military village" to raise radicals.

Opting to replace one unsustainable extreme with another is silly.

Quote

If you go to the military for a solution, you will most likely get a military solution. Just like when you go to a surgeon, you will get a surgical option, - but you might only need a physical therapist.

This is completely true, but it's not really the fault of the military or the surgeon, is it?

[mnealtx 0]

2008:

Darrell Issa (R-Calif) $164,650,039 $251,025,020 $337,400,002
Jane Harman (D-Calif) $112,318,335 $244,796,667 $377,275,000
Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $163,510,027 $214,570,011 $265,629,996
Mark Warner (D-Va) $73,315,204 $209,700,598 $346,085,992
John Kerry (D-Mass) $158,643,501 $208,801,275 $258,959,049
Jared Polis (D-Colo) $50,737,134 $158,173,566 $265,609,998
Vernon Buchanan (R-Fla) $-68,340,597 $142,432,692 $353,205,982
Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $60,196,019 $94,306,010 $128,416,002
Frank R Lautenberg (D-NJ) $47,632,169 $74,744,094 $101,856,020
Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $42,912,257 $72,380,637 $101,849,018

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

And since you are the great defender of THE BUSH

http://dissidentvoice.org/Nov2004/Pringle1102.htm


The WSJ went on to outline the details of the family's investment. The bin Laden firm invested $2 million in Carlyle Partners II Fund, which raised a total of $1.3 billion overall. The fund purchased several aerospace companies among 29 deals. "So far, the family has received $1.3 million back in completed investments and should ultimately realize a 40% annualized rate of return," a Carlyle executive told the WSJ.

On Sept 27, the WSJ said it confirmed that a meeting took place between Sr. and the bin Laden family through Sr's Chief of Staff Jean Becker, but only after the WSJ showed Becker a personal thank you note that Bush Sr. sent to the bin Ladens after the meeting.

Here's a little known fact that may bring goose bumps to some. On 9/11, Shafiq bin Laden was at a meeting in the office of the Carlyle Group, and stood watching TV as the WTC was destroyed under the instruction of his brother.

So in a nutshell, Osama's attacks on the WTC and Pentagon, which lead to a massive increase in defense spending, most likely made the Bush family a great deal of money. And the real kicker is that the attack may have even enriched his own family.

How Does Carlyle Make Its Money?

It's been estimated that Carlyle has investments in over 300 companies, and the majority of them derive revenues from military and security contracts. In fact, Carlyle is the country�s 11th largest defense contractor. In 2002, it received $677 million in government contracts, and in 2003, it was awarded contracts worth another $2.1 billion.

Business has definitely improved for the firm since Jr. took office. For example, one of its subsidiaries, Vought Aircraft, now holds over $1 billion in defense contracts. Prior to 2001, the company's future was iffy at best. Right before 9/11, it had actually laid off 20% of its workforce. But low and behold, business picked right back up with the air strikes on Afghanistan and the war in Iraq.

Carlyle's ties go directly into the Oval Office. In fact, a list of past employees has Jr.'s name on it. He was actually employed by Carlyle at on point in his life. According to a story in Harper's Magazine, Jr. held a position as a corporate director on the board of the Carlyle subsidiary, Caterair. Until he was politely told to hit the road because he didn't have anything to offer the company.

In addition, in March 1995, while Jr. was governor of Texas governor and a senior Trustee of the University of Texas, the University of Texas Endowment placed $10 million in investments with the Carlyle Group. Who knows how much of that investment money benefited the bin Ladens.