The Extended Patriot Act

2013 is shaping up to be an eye opener for Americans to the extent that our Federal Government and agencies have extended their look into our private lives. The IRS delay of approving Conservative and Jewish 501(c) applications while approving Liberal 501(c) groups in a timely manner - even on one instance back dating the approval several years. Over the last week, the UK newspapers broke several stories about the NSA, and other agencies, demanding phone records, email data, and internet activity of American citizens. The NSA, FBI, and CIA all claim all requests were legal and compliant under the recently extended and amended Patriot Act.

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, defended the use of a classified program known as PRISM last Thursday by claiming that "information collected under his program is among the most important and valuable foreign intelligence information we collect, and is used to protect our nation from a wide variety of threats. The unauthorized disclosure of information about this important and entirely legal program is reprehensible and risks important protections for the security of  Americans." Part of what Clapper claims is accurate that the information obtained can be extremely valuable to defending our borders and infrastructure from any manner of foreign attack. The trouble with Clapper's claim is the program is being used to survey Americans which violates one Due Process at a very minimum.

Granted the Founding Fathers didn't foresee the internet nor a global economy as we experience today; yet they were intelligent enough to put forth broad ideas that are applicable to evolutionary forces. Societies as they mature have become more and more reliant on technology - internet, tablets, and smartphones. With this reliance comes opportunity of abuse in the form of cyberattacks, unwarranted intrusion, or mining of information. No secret exists that Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, etc...track the pages we go to, words we search, friends we make, topics we discuss all in an effort to tailor our experience and drive revenues.

The trouble now is that Big Brother is mining this data for reasons that are not legit. The 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution protects every American from illegal searches and seizures. As I stated above, the Founding Fathers didn't foresee the internet but the concept is applicable. Any American, as long as the use is legal, ought to be able to fire up the internet without fear that any branch or agency of the government is tracking their every move. Makes me wonder though, of the over 300 hits my blog posts get - how many are government agencies?

Rep. Maxine Waters stated earlier this year that, "The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That's going to be very, very powerful. That database will have information on every individual on ways that it's never been done before and whomever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They're going to go down with the database and the concerns of those people because they can't get around it And he's been very smart. It's very powerful what he's leaving in place." When Rep. Waters first stated this most Americans, and the media, presumed that she was talking about a database of Democratic donors. Take this statement, combine it with the IRS scandal and the recent revelations of NSA and FBI mining of internet activity leads one to see that President Obama's database is much more than donors.

The dots are being connected and American's need to see them. Our Federal Government has grown too big and under the current administration has expanded the Patriot Act to the point of violating every American's 4th Amendment right. Unfortunately it took the UK Guardian to break the levee, leaving American media playing catch up. I agree that we need to ensure that cyberattacks and other illegal activity is combated on the internet but it needs to be done within the context of protecting our freedoms and obeying the law of the land. 

Fort Hood Tragedy lends an Opportunity for Obama to strengthen the Intelligence community.

Last week I reserved judgment on the shooting rampage that took place, and hoped others would as well, as not a lot was known about Nidal Malik Hasan. Since that time a lot of information has been leaked out about Major Hasan. The FBI had intercepted communications over the past year between Major Hasan and a radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awaki, but dropped the investigation because it was believed the messages gave "no indication Major Hasan was planning an imminent attack at all," said a senior investigator (www.thestartribune.com).

According to the Washington Post, Major Hasan gave a presentation to his supervisors and others at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in June of 2007 where he said, "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims." Anwar al-Awaki was been thrown out of the United States due to his radical thoughts and has been connected to bombers of the 9/11 attacks. To compound things Dana Priest said in her Washington Post article, Major's speech in 2007 upset medical colleagues, noted "An Army spokesman said on Monday night that he was unaware of the presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined to comment."

Today President Obama will address Fort Hood in a memorial for those that lost their lives and were wounded by the rampage performed by Major Hasan. The Associated Press is running a story today about Major Hasan's attorney, Ret. Col John Galligan, concern that his client will not be able to get a fair trial at Fort Hood "given the national media attention that has been focused" on the case (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jATMK2q96bKfz6B-aZUHOd5i4mBgD9BSLKJ80). Can we remove the word alleged from the reporting of the rampage? A civilian officer shot Major Hasan, although I was not there, in an attempt to stop him from doing further damage. My thought is that she didn't shoot him because he was Muslim or was there to help protect the troops. Then again we may want to reserve judgment until she is properly investigated as well.

The decision has been made to hold the trial in military court because the belief that Major Hasan worked alone and was not influenced or assisted by any outside person or persons. While the trial will take its course, it is time now for the FBI and other authorities to learn from this situation. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) has called for an investigation to determine whether the shootings were a terrorist attack and determine how the warning signs were missed. Sen. Lieberman will look to use his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee. The push by Sen. Lieberman come on the heels of new information that classmates of Major Hasan warned Pentagon officials that Hasan "gave a presentation at the Uniformed Services University that justified suicide bombing and even told classmates that Islamic law trumped the US Constitution" (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6528199/Fort-Hood-shooting-senator-calls-for-investigation.html). The Telegraph also reports that another classmate sent a command climate survey that warned that political correctness may hamper an "intellectually honest discussion of Islamic ideology".

Justice needs to be served for those that feel at Fort Hood. Even though a death sentence will not wash away the tragic event, it will bring the ultimate justice that can be given. Anything less would be a travesty and mock the events that took place at Fort Hood. I can see the Obama Administration hiding behind the fear of making Major Hasan a martyr and giving Jihadists a poster boy for recruitment. It is time for American Intelligence community to ensure their understanding of the Islamic ideology is complete. Sleeper cells are alive and well inside the United States. The event at Fort Hood is evident of that.

Major Hasan did not hide his ideology. The portrait that will play out in the mass media will be one of a man troubled by his duty to Islam and to the military he was a part of. When it was a reality that he'd be going over to the Middle East to potentially kill those that share his view it was too much and he snapped. The mass media will paint this, much to the liking of the Obama Administration, of an isolated man that acted alone. The short sightedness by the media and lack of journalistic fortitude will not push hard to ensure the messages by radical clerics are silenced. American's realize the time under which we live. Now, I am not advocating that an onslaught of backlash be heaved upon the Islamic community; rather we must have proper investigation into the activities to determine the extent of radical thought being taught. Like it or not, profiling has a purpose and when applied correctly can mitigate events like Fort Hood shooting rampage.

Where do we go from here? Can we finally call it a "war on terror" instead of a "manmade disaster"? Can we call these people terrorists? Why must we be politically correct? Why can we not talk about issues, not just the tragic at Fort Hood, with blunt talk? Is it time for political correctness to go away?