[PJM] WASHINGTON The recent revelations about the federal governments surveillance programs underscore a subtle trend in the U.S. that should raise some concerns about personal freedoms in America.
According to John W. Whitehead founder of the Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties and human rights organization more Americans might find themselves in increasingly dangerous situations as SWAT teams and SWAT-team tactics are used more frequently in routine law enforcement activities.
Violent crime in America has been on a steady decline since the mid-1990s. No one knows exactly why criminal activity is down, but experts point to a variety of factors for the continuing decline in overall violence. They cite the end of the crack cocaine epidemic and changes in technology that include a substantial increase in surveillance cameras, among other reasons, as being responsible for bringing down crime.
Despite falling crime rates, some of the nations major cities are increasing the size and scope of their police agencies. For example, the New York Police Department (NYPD), the biggest police force in the nation, boasts more than 34,000 officers patrolling the streets of New York. Other cities with increasingly large police forces include Los Angeles (which has approximately 10,000 officers) and Chicago (13,400). Perhaps the 'crime rates' are not actually falling, but rather migrating to urban areas.
More robust police departments have also been credited with the fall in criminal activity. Nevertheless, other cities without similar increases in their police force, including cities like Dallas and Seattle, also saw decreases in crime rates during the 1990s. In fact, both of these cities have reduced the size of their police departments, which has led some experts to question whether there is a strong correlation between department size and declining crime rates. Experts questioning the obvious once again ?
Notwithstanding the lack of evidence, police forces across the nation have not only continued to grow but have ramped up the scope of their activities.
In a Pulitzer prize-winning investigative series, the Associated Press revealed an NYPD surveillance program of Muslim communities. The AP investigation detailed how, after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly sought to transform elements of the nations largest police force into a miniature CIA, with the help from the intelligence agency, which is prohibited by law from spying on Americans. More accurately, some agencies assist, some agencies do not.
Since President George W. Bush declared war on terrorism in the early 2000s, there has been a crucial shift in law enforcement policies.
In an effort to remedy their relative inadequacy to combat terrorism on U.S. soil, police forces throughout the nation adapted their operations to meet the demands of fighting against a different type of threat.
American police departments increased their use of military-grade equipment to perform counterterrorism duties. To assist them in deploying this new equipment, police departments sought and received extensive military training and tactical instruction. Are you then saying it [SWAT] then became....an interprise ?
Initially, only the largest metropolitan police departments maintained SWAT teams, and they were called upon only when a truly military-level response was necessary. In 1984, around 25 percent of towns with populations between 25,000 and 50,000 people had a SWAT team. That number rose to 80 percent in 2005. The number of annual SWAT deployments in the U.S. has gone from a few hundred in the 1970s to around 80,000 today. According to author and investigative reporter Radley Balko, there are an estimated 150 SWAT raids in America every day. If you don't use it, you lose it.
Under the 1033 Program, Congress has allowed the Department of Defense to transfer surplus military goods to state and local police agencies, including high-powered weapons and assault vehicles. Last year, the program stopped the transfer of firearms to police forces because of concerns that state coordinators were not keeping adequate inventory records. Suspension of the firearms distribution programs is expected to be lifted in October. Imagine that, the feds concerned about keeping accurate records of weapons transfers.
Recently, Whitehead discussed at the Heritage Foundation some of the startling findings he uncovered while doing research for his latest book, A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State.
#4
Unfortunately, de-civilization and anarchy require a heavy police or military presence. The trend will continue as "the wealthy and well connected" move to safer, gated communities and more tax advantageous overseas locations. As the migration continues, the "disadvantaged" begin to fill the ranks of law enforcement. Political and tribal loyalties then make turn the enforcers into oppressors. As municipal police pensions collapse, we may begin to see the rapid growth of private security companies. I look for this to happen soon.
[Dawn] THE Defence Committee of the Cabinet meeting yesterday yielded several decisions of note. The creation of a controversial and politically divisive ...politicians call things divisive when when the other side sez something they don't like. Their own statements are never divisive, they're principled... National Security Council was green-lighted, while it was reiterated that the on-going tensions along the Line of Control should be handled through dialogue. The NSC decision in particular deserves careful scrutiny, but for now, another decision taken at the DCC meeting is worth going over. The DCC has decided, according to media reports, that negotiations will only be held with those snuffies who lay down their arms and renounce violence and barring that force will be used to confront the militancy threat. If the government abides by its latest decision, the PML-N's drift from confusing talk about unspecified and un-delineated talks towards more of a pragmatic approach will be near complete. For that, the country should be grateful.
As Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... and Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan have said this week, the government is beginning to grasp the scale of the militancy and terrorism threat and has resolved to do whatever is necessary to defeat it. But as the interior minister pointed out in a comment from the Senate floor on Wednesday, firm and decisive action -- essentially, military operations to begin with in parts of Fata -- will only happen if the army is given the assurance that the use of force enjoys public and political support. In theory, this is a problematic position: after all, the government was elected to lead and the army is sworn to defend the country against external and internal threats; if there is an assessment that the use of force is required, ought political and public pressure from the fringes prevent what is necessary? In reality, however, given the weakness of institutions, and the self-interests of institutions, it has become clear that a political and public consensus will be necessary if the state is to move with force against hard boy groups.
In this realm of realism, there is one reality that stands out: for over a decade now, whichever government has been in power, the use of force as an important -- though by no means only -- element of national strategy against militancy has been invariably agreed upon. Be it a military man, Pervez Perv Musharraf ... former dictator of Pakistain, who was less dictatorial and corrupt than any Pak civilian government to date ... , be it his political support from the right of centre, the PML-Q, be it the secular and liberal PPP, ANP and MQM, and now, be it the conservative PML-N, each has come to accept that force is required against militancy. Thus those in the opposition arguing against it must be persuaded otherwise.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/24/2013 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[SPECTATOR.ORG] But if you are a single parent with multiple children by multiple fathers, and a high school dropout, with a record, then chances are you are part of that culture. If you move to a new rental every six months, yanking your kids out of school after school, and if you do drugs in front of your children, and sell your food stamps for cash, then chances are you are part of that culture. If you are 20 years old, living with your grandmother, with no interest in ever getting a job, or getting married, or doing much of anything, chances are you are part of that culture. If you do not have a kitchen table, but you do have a big flat screen TV, and when the social worker comes to visit someone yells, "The social worker is here, go get the light bulb," then chances are you are part of that culture.
When I moved into the inner-city, I hoped to gain some insight and understanding of the poor and their situation. Two years later I left feeling the situation is intractable. Everything the professional uplifters do for the poor is but pruning the branches, instead of hacking at the roots of the problem. For the underclass to escape the culture of poverty they would have to cease doing most if not all of the above, and I don't see that happening.
Besides, as I have written before, too many of the underclass enjoy the culture of poverty. They would feel horribly out of place in a tony subdivision where they would have to work to make a house and car payment, instead of drinking beer all day on the stoop ― they don't even have stoops in the suburbs. They would have to cut their lawns and keep the trash and noise to a minimum. What fun is that? In the inner-city you can do whatever the hell you want. You can even shoot somebody, and chances are no one will rat you out, because that is the code of the inner-city streets, and people there hate the cops more than they hate the drug dealers.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/24/2013 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hello Carrot meet Stick, Hello people on federal welfare programs meet mr. u r cutoff, find a job or die.
#2
This problem has bothered me for a long time. Not least because I grew up very poor. Poor as in, we were too poor to afford margarine, never mind butter. We ate beef dripping (lard) on our bread.
My solution is 2 tier welfare. Fairly generous help for a period for those who show willing and the wherewithal to get off welfare, and a 2nd tier for those who show no prospect of getting off welfare, not much above the old workhouses. Where people were given the basics to keep alive, as long as they followed the rules.
That is the ticket. It always burns me when I hear some NPR-listening suburban pseudointellectual who pretends at real compassion and concern for the needy say that poverty is its own disincentive or that living in one of "those" places is punishment enough.
BS.
Welfare recipients, in historical context, have it easy. Relative to most of the billions of humans who have lived thoughout the existence of our species, these welfare louts have a great, great life. Adequate food, free medical care, adequate shelter, and endless entertainment and access to sex. To the reptile part of the brain, having all of these things equates to perfect contentment. Not having to work for these things represent heaven on earth.
Also, relative to what work has meant throughout history, the vast bulk of the public work force (with notable exceptions) and rent-seekers out there have a sickly simulacrum of a work ethic, and can get by being minimally productive or actually a drag on productivity, chronically tardy, show up to work drunk, etc. And now they earn more, on average, than the private sector from which they extract wealth for their cushy scenario (again, notable exceptions apply).
There was a time when poverty was, in fact, its own deterrent. There was a time when public employees were servants, not rulers. Not the case in any developed country any more.
The truth of things is a that little over half of humans will work because it's in their nature. Another 40% will work if they must to eat. Another 5% won't work even if it means starving. We now have a system where the 40% and the 5% can goof off and do their work poorly or not at all and still get food and shelter even if they proudly declare they won't work.
We need to design the system so that unless you do your job well and work hard you are on the street losing weight. The folks whose nature it is to work have nothing to worry about. The ones who only work to stave of starvation will have a proper and strong incentive to be productive. And the slugs? Oh well. Let the hand wringers feed them, if they desire, with their own after-tax money if that matters so much to them.
The left's attitude, that species of envy of the self-made rich which pretends to be a moral concern for the "needy", has hamstrung our once great country. It needs to go away pronto. If not, the West will.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
08/24/2013 6:37 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It's been recognized for 1500 years as one of the seven deadly sins. It's one of the reasons the 'academics' and pols moved charity from the church to the state, because the church held people accountable for their behaviors to include suffering the consequences of their choices -
Sloth (Latin, Socordia) can entail different vices. While sloth is sometimes defined as physical laziness, spiritual laziness is emphasized. Failing to develop spiritually is key to becoming guilty of sloth. In the Christian faith, sloth rejects grace and God.
Sloth has also been defined as a failure to do things that one should do. By this definition, evil exists when good men fail to act.
Over time, the "acedia" in Pope Gregory's order has come to be closer in meaning to sloth. The focus came to be on the consequences of acedia rather than the cause, and so, by the 17th century, the exact deadly sin referred to was believed to be the failure to utilize one's talents and gifts. Even in Dante's time there were signs of this change; in his Purgatorio he had portrayed the penance for acedia as running continuously at top speed. - wiki
#8
Well, we could help make people want to be successful by NOT helping to make them want to be unsuccessful.
Think of the "ethic" implied by such things as a "gentleman's C" or by the don't keep score, everybody gets a trophy soccer leagues.
Trying harder to get ahead is frowned upon by the establishment in the schools as it is in union work. You can't "lay too many bricks" or you get in trouble. Everyone must reduce to the lowest common denominator. Accomplishment cannot be rewarded.
Different people will react differently to these pressures but the movement toward entropy is hard to beat.
I you have 5 EBT cards in your pocket, drive a new Escalade, your rent is paid by the gov't, and your kids have a full scholarship to Tech, you've already achieved success.
#11
Politicians don't want people to be successful or the 'poor' to be uplifted. The entire 'war on poverty' is designed to prevent this from happening.
If they were to actually 'solve' the problem then they would not have an entire class of people totally dependent on them to 'solve the problem'. Nor would they have any issues to beat their opponent over the head with.
It's kind of like a rat-catcher who only catches enough rats to keep the population down - but not entirely exterminate the problem.
Problem for us - the rat-cathers aren't even trying anymore. In fact they are spreading corn and bread to feed the rats.
#14
Problem is, there are not enough jobs to get them off the stoops, what with the blue and white collar jobs being eliminated by continuing productivity increases, to say nothing about offshoring.
What is the nature of the 21st century economy? On what basis will the non-creatives be paid?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Nawaz Sharif
Pervez 
