DHS and Friends: Blog Views

One computer in the DHS office at Laredo, #153, performed 54 page loads from 6th November 2009 13:05:01 to 9th November 2009 18:48:00.
besides visiting the article about al-Nafisi, they visited snooper.wordpress.com/2009/11/, gaining direct access to the following posts:

• Homeland Security or Insecurity?
• Defamation || Negative Stereotyping
• Defamation of Religions Draft 10-29-09
• Defamation of Religions: Background Info.

They also viewed:

• snooper.wordpress.com/2009/08/22/obamination-ramadan-treason/
• snooper.wordpress.com/no-amnesty/ .

A second computer in the same office, #152, performed 51 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:48:05 to 9th November 2009 15:55:01. They also viewed snooper.wordpress.com/no-amnesty/.

One computer in the DHS office at La Pryor, # 151, performed 72 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:37:48 to 9th November 2009 18:36:36.
They also viewed:

• snooper.wordpress.com/ , giving them access to the November'09 archive listed above
• snooper.wordpress.com/about/
• snooper.wordpress.com/2009/11/
• snooper.wordpress.com/no-amnesty/

One computer in a DHS office in Washington D.C., #160, logged on at 9th November 2009 09:32:49 and remained connected for 8 hours, 39 minutes. They confined their viewing to snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/.

Another computer in that office, #161, performed one pageload 6th November 2009 14:05:10.

One computer in another DHS office in Washington D.C., #155, performed 34 page loads from 6th November 2009 13:08:53 to 9th November 2009 17:47:12.
They also viewed snooper.wordpress.com/hell-no/.

A second computer in that office, #152, performed 42 page loads from 6th November 2009 12:54:54 to 9th November 2009 20:29:58. There is no indication that their interest extended beyond the post about al-Nafisi.

One computer in the Springfield office of DHS, # 81, performed 1 page load 6th November 2009 18:21:15.



It appears that the DHS shared their curiosity with a few friends. Someone at the office of the City Of Harlingen viewed snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/., joined by someone at the Texas Department Of Information Resources.

The FBI office in Mcallen read snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/, logging in 9th November 200914:46:02.

There may be a connection, however tenuous, most likely coincident nomenclature. I found this near the top of a results page for a compound search.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

File Format: Microsoft Word - View as HTML
Dr. Abdelrazak Al-Nafisi. Permanent Delegate, Ambassador .... Dr. Abdul Azeez Al Babtain (Saudi Arabia). Dr. Nidal Hassan (Syrian Arab Republic) ...
portal.comnat.free.fr/Repkuwait08.d

But that was a meeting of UNESCO national councils, the Dr. Hasan was a Syrian bureaucrat and the al-Nafisi from Kuwait had a different first name. In any case, the article they've been viewing is relatively short, requiring much less than eight hours to read.

Sphere: Related Content

Homeland Security or Insecurity?

Freedom Ain't Free welcomes the Department of Homeland Security, who began reading snooper.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/al-nafisi-incites-terrorism/ shortly after noon Nov. 6, '09 and hung around through 3am Nov. 8.

The Washington D.C. office loaded that single post 33 times while the Laredo TX. office made 45 page loads, reading a few other posts in addition to the post about Sheikh Nafisi.

In April, when the post was fresh, it was viewed 62 times. It had 9 hits in August, 7 in September and 9 in October, with 124 hits in November. Why did a post which averaged less than one hit per day in recent months suddenly spike to 77, 41,2 three days in November? What accounts for the multiple page loads? Did multiple staffers load the page in succession?

A search for the Sheikh's name did not turn up any relevant news using Google and Bing. Searches for recent crop duster and anthrax related stories also came up empty. There were two search engine referrals involving al-Nafisi. There was one page load for that post that was not directly attributable to the DHS. I assume that DHS had some reason for searching for that name. What I do not understand is why they did not click through to MEMRI to view the source of the material I posted.

Is there some indication of a renewed potential for an anthrax attack? That is just what we need with a flu epidemic under way; if every cough and sneeze raised fears of anthrax inhalation, the emergency rooms would be swamped with panicked patients.

Our government needs to come clean with us, drop the pretenses and admit the fact that Islam is our enemy, having declared and prosecuted war against us. The Bush / Obama blather about a "great religion of peace, hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists" is counterproductive, as is their policy of leaving our southern border wide open to a flood of illegal immigrants, including a substantial number of "other than Mexicans". .

If I recall correctly, several GIs were killed in Iraq by a grenade tossed by a Muslim colleague. The Fort Hood Massacre was perpetrated by a Muslim whose conduct and expressions had raised red flags. Two cases do not form a clear pattern, but they do present a warning sign. Our servicemen must not be placed at risk by mixing enemy forces into their ranks.

The time has come to purge our armed forces of Muslims. The time has come to weed them out of clerical, administrative and decision making positions in the federal bureaucracy. A Muslim is one who submits to and obeys Allah. What did he command them to do? What did Muhammad exemplify for them to emulate? Expressions such as "fight them", "fight those who" and "cast terror" come to mind immediately. Regular readers of my posts are familiar with them and their sources. The shooter was praising Allah while murdering his comrades. Once is enough.

Did the army enlist American Nazis in WW2? Why not? Weren't they harmless moderates, patriotic Americans? Would ANP members have experience conflict if sent to Europe to fight the Germans? Who would they have aimed at? Maj. Hasan was conflicted about fighting his Muslim brethren. Who did he aim at?

The time has come to drop the pretense & fantasy and observe the facts in the cold clear light of reason. If the Congress & President we elected won't do what is right, then we need to replace them in the next election cycle.

Sphere: Related Content

Homeland Security Buys a Clue

This article came to me from one of my legal contacts and may be helpful for those with out-of-country travel plans.

Since DHS took over the passport office and made the requirements regarding passports (can we say National ID anyone?) for even day travel into Mexico and Canada, not to mention areas normally not requiring passports, the wait time for your passport has doubled and in some cases, tripled. Leave it to the government to further screw things up (yet morons think the government can make national health care run smoothly? How about y'all re-think that idiocy, 'k?).

DHS is, of course, pushing its implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005, and a handful of states not only objected to its implementation but actually passed laws against it with anti-REAL ID legislation.

DHS has now "blinked". For those who have travel plans and no passport, the deadline requiring compliance with the REAL ID Act has been extended to December 31, 2009.

Here is the article from Law.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Homeland Security Avoids Clash With
States by Extending Time to Improve ID Security

Extension is viewed as a victory by six rebellious states

Pamela A. MacLean
The National Law Journal
04-11-2008

Faced with a minirevolt among a handful of states, the Department
of Homeland Security avoided a head-on confrontation and extended time to improve security procedures on drivers' license identification under the REAL ID Act of 2005.

The extension of time to all 50 states, whether they asked for it or not, is viewed as a victoryby the rebellious states. The extension will avoid hassles, and pat-down searches, for many Americans trying to board airplanes using drivers' licenses as the summer vacation season approaches.

Six states have steadfastly refused to go along with some of the REAL ID mandates, which require Americans to carry a federally approved ID card, or passport, to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, get into federal buildings or collect social security.

States were required to adopt licensing systems that meet federal standards by May 11, 2008, which include new security layers to prevent forgery and include verification of birth certificates, social security numbers and immigration status.

Among the recalcitrant states were Maine, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Montana, Oklahoma and Washington, but by April 2 Michael Chertoff, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security,indicated all states were technically in compliance, despite some states'passage of laws
rejecting REAL ID requirements.

DHS spokeswoman Veronica Valdez said April 7, "We have reached agreements to make sure all states are ontheir way to making identification more secure and REAL ID Act compliant." She declined any further comment.

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer has been among the leaders of the pack of objecting states. He said in March that "DHS blinked" when his state got an extension from Chertoff despite insisting Montana would never comply and a state law that bars compliance.

Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath sent a letter to DHS in March pointing out the steps the state has taken to improve license security and catch fraudulent documents. He asked that DHS not punish the state because the Legislature has not been in session since its unanimous vote in 2007 to forbid implementation of REAL ID.

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford was equally defiant about the REAL ID
program but got the extension anyway. The state passed an anti-REAL ID measure in 2007 and has not backed down.

"At the end of the day, I'm duty-bound to uphold the laws of our state, which right now say we can't comply with REAL ID," he told reporters on the eve of the DHS extension. "That being said, I do fall into the camp that believes REAL ID is poor public policy for any number of reasons, and we have some real questions as to whether the benefits in terms of security outweigh the costs in terms of time and money," he said.

Maine was the last state to get the extension on April 2, according to the DHS.

The state asked that the federal government not penalize Maine residents
for the state's failure to comply under a 2007 law that states Maine would
refuse to implement the act to protest treatment of the states by federal
authorities.

Maine Gov. John Baldacci promised to seek legislation to halt Maine's current practice of issuing licenses to people not lawfully in the United States and to begin retaining photographs of people who apply for state
identification, even if no ID is issued, according to the DHS.

Baldacci also promised to submit legislation that would have Maine use the federal alien verification system to verify noncitizen documents and seek state appropriations to pay for the changes.

The promises were good enough to win a DHS approval for the extension.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I have issues with the idea of a National ID, no matter how it's sugarcoated or named. I understand we have to have something to identify citizens and those here illegally. Frankly, I don't know the solution to this issue.

I don't like the government having more and more control over me and I think this is where my real objection lies. Further, if the government is going to require passports, you'd think they'd reduce the cost of them. Instead, the cost has remained the same while the service to obtain a passport has deteriorated--just like any other government run agency.

Also posted at Digg! here, GOP Hub here and Real Clear Politics here (for the moment--they may still censor me).

Sphere: Related Content