Of course, by "shutting down", we mean "changing the name" just as Rumsfeld chuckled over having done with the TIA program a few years back.
The Pentagon said Tuesday that it will shut down an anti-terror database that has been criticized for improperly storing information on peace activists and others whose actions posed no threat.
It will be closed on Sept. 17 and information collected subsequently on potential terror or security threats to Defense Department facilities or personnel will be sent by Pentagon officials to an FBI database known as Guardian, according to Army Col. Gary Keck, a Pentagon spokesman.
Keck said the Pentagon database is being shut down because “the analytical value had declined,” but not because of public criticism of how it was used. Eventually the Pentagon hopes to create a new system — not necessarily a database — to “streamline such threat reporting,” according to a brief statement issued Tuesday.
Not enough déjà vu for you? Try this... a side-by-side comparison of Fox News' drumbeat towards the invasion of Iraq with their coverage of the runup to the invasion of Iran:Fox Attacks Iran. Why do they use the identical propaganda and tactics even after they have been exposed as being damnable lies? Because, apparently, it works.
Also, LETS NOT FORGET this:
Operation in Basra: Agents Provocateurs
SAS soldiers who were ‘liberated’ after being arrested by the Iraqi police on 19 September -- by a phalanx of tanks and helicopter gunships that stormed the police station where the two undercover soldiers were being held after they allegedly failed to stop at an Iraqi police roadblock and subsequently opened fire on the Iraqi police, killing one and wounding another.
I have said repeatedly the same tactics at use abroad are being used at home. This war has two fronts, and the North American people --in Canada and America--are seen just as much as 'the enemy' as so called insurgents abroad to this government both red and blue.
Finally, a broader analysis: Terrorizing Social Protest
Political protesters are not terrorists, as police and prosecutors well know. Yet it seems that the broad authorities granted under recent counterterrorism laws are too tempting to resist. Why would state officials respect normal criminal law rules when they can instead employ laws that offer sweeping powers, few procedural safeguards, and harsh penalties?
More than 50 governments have passed counterterrorism laws in the past six years -- many of them poorly written, filled with open-ended language, and vulnerable to misuse.
Post a Comment