I've openly shared my disagreement with the idea of homeland security "checkpoints" along our state highways,  as seeming too unconstitutional and orwellian to me. (Click here to see my last entry on the subject.)  Enforcing immigration at our borders is one thing, but stopping our citizens randomly and asking for documents and explanations seems like a clear fourth ammendment violation to me. Homeland Security has argued that checkpoints are allowed within 100 miles of a state border based on a supreme court ruling; but I and many others believe they have misinterpreted the ruling--permanent checkpoints are allowed within a 100 mile zone as necessary to patrol for incoming visitors in remote areas; the high court did not say they can set up random checkpoints to question travelers  their daily travels between cities within our state.

So this program has been extremely controversial, as locals have been inconvenienced and frightened, and international visitors have been detained and harrased. In a few cases, alleged immingration violators have been captured and arrested, but questions remain whether any of these arrests would withstand constitutional challenge through the US Supreme Court. Meanwhile, families of those arrrested are in tears while the tough-talking head of the effort, Joseph Giuliano,  tells them how bad their loved ones are.

Well, today it was announced that Joseph Giuliano--the face of this effort-- has , by his own admission, been raping a 14-year old girl on a regular basis for many, many months.

Here is the story.

Life is so full of sick ironies that it can make your head spin.

I know this man is just one bad apple among a group of hard-working agents that are trying to protect us. But he, the sick child-rapist,  appears to be the one IN CHARGE of this program.  ALL his decisions are now suspect.  Meanwhile, as I've said before, these checkpoints should be eliminated and the agents reassigned at our borders and our ports.

As someone who has traveled with many "anxious" fliers, I hope the government does not waste too much money with this latest idea for screening for terrorists. The federal government is proposing to develop a machine that screens travelers for anxiety, using a remote camera system. I expect that even if this works to detect anxiety, screeners will find about one million people anxious because their flight is delayed, or they can't stand airports, or they are terrified to fly, or they are about to spend Christmas with their crazy uncle, or they feel their taxes are too high, or they don't like being scanned for anxiety-- for every one person that is anxious because he/she harbors ill intent. And even if someone is anxious because they have ill intent, we will still need to find a weapon on them, or documents out of order, to make an arrest...both things that we are already checking for. The human beings already checking documents and looking for weapons are also very good at detecting anxiety; perhaps they need more training to know what questions to ask when someone looks nervous, and how to discern common travel stress from terrorist behavior. That way, maybe we can avoid queuing up at the anxiety detector--we don't need one more line to stand in at the airport.

That's my initial reaction.

What do you all think? Am I wrong? Can a machine like this make us safer for a fair price?

Here is the story:

( Read more... )

I did not realize that the Border patrol has expanded from checking ferries going to San Juan Islands, to now checking state residents at random on Highway 101.

If they find someone with drugs in a random checkpoint search, I don't know how they expect the case to hold up under the Fourth Amendment. Since random police searches goes against our most cherished beliefs, I think these agents should instead be stationed at the port of Seattle-- perhaps looking for dirty bombs in shipping containers. That is much scarier to me, their findings will be worth something (not tossed by a judge), and the agents won't be inconveniencing and bothering state residents who are going about their business.

Here is a quote from the story:

"They say the reason for the checkpoints is to root out terrorist activity, drug runners and other illegal activity. So far there have been 16 arrests due to the roadblocks, and 14 have been immigration related."

I notice they just talk about arrests, not convictions...because there won't be any convictions unless those arrested don't know their rights.

To see the whole story ...Click here


Department of Homeland Security checkpoints along the Washington/Canadian border may be inconvenient and unconstitutional, but they help protect us from the dangerous Canadians...with their funny words, their beer, and their jelly donuts

Don't forget your passport if you go to Friday Harbor on San Juan Island.

The US Border Patrol is now spending your tax dollars checking up on Washington residents traveling within Washington, (warning, sarcasm alert...) on the theory that it is worth it because some of the Washington residents could actually be Canadian terrorists. After all, they could have swam or rafted from Canada to San Juan Island... these desperate Canadians can be very tricky when trying to get into our county.

I know what you are thinking...why wouldn't the terrorist simply walk across the virtually unprotected 3000 miles of land border between our two nations, instead of paddling in a raft across the Strait to get to San Juan Island. But clearly you do not understand how tricky Canadian terrorists are.

Apparently, San Juan island is possibly teaming with Canadian terrorists, just waiting to sneak into the United States. So we better check everyone's ID, and ask them what they are up to. Bill-of-Rights be damned...these are Canadians we are up against.

Here is the story in today's Seattle Times