WWW.RIDESIDE.NET

home | about | tracker | comics

i ride sideways
Posted by cdubrocker on 2006-03-28 20:39:16 +0000

Homeland Buffoonery

The whole post-9/11 "What If?" scenario is in my opinion making it easier for communities to come up with new, creative, and not always helpful ways to spend money, and to give public officials whose job it is to ensure public safety just a little too much leeway in creating their own utopia. A prime example is this piece, about an Alaskan fishing town of 2,400 being watched by 80 cameras about town. WTF?

Posted by tgl on 2006-03-28 20:45:47 +0000
"Once a terrorist is inside Alaska, that person is inside the United States," says David Liebersbach, director of the Alaska Division of Homeland Security. --- Err, except you have to leave the United States in order to return to the United States. Unless clearing Customs in Alaska means you don't need to clear Customs a second time.

Posted by dawnbixtler on 2006-03-29 03:43:15 +0000
While we must blame Clinton for coming up with the idea (though Bush implemented it), the Dept. of Homeland Security is perhaps the biggest mistake the USA has made in the 'battle on war', I mean 'terrorism on war', I mean 'battle on terrorism'. Why do we need more beauracracy in defense? Wasn't the Dept of Defense/CIA/FBI overlap enough? Fear! FEAR! FEAR!!!

Posted by pamsterdam on 2006-03-29 07:11:43 +0000
As far as I know, once you've cleared US customs & immigration you don't have to do it a second time just because the first leg of your journey lands you in a noncontiguous state. Flights from Alaska (or Hawaii for that matter) are treated like flights from California or Massachusetts or Texas or any other US state. So lax procedures in one of the noncontiguous states (if that is the case) would indeed be an issue to address. And just for the record, customs is just for goods you're bringing in, whilst immigration is for yourself. Sorry to be pedantic, but that's why there are two clearances you make when flying internationally - first immigration control, then customs control.

Posted by Honar the librarian on 2006-03-29 12:12:14 +0000
"Ronnie Heyano, a fisherman, sums up his concerns: 'Who will be watching the watchers?'" Nice to know they get The Watchmen up there.

Posted by tgl on 2006-03-29 14:05:54 +0000
Both sides use fear-mongering, admittedly. There is the grotesque fear-the-other version that torpedoed (no pun intended) the Dubai port deal, and there is the fear of failure / fear of unpreparedness that I'm more likely to buy into. Who is it that's more likely to cause an alert on video cameras in a sleepy Alaska fishing village? Non-whites. That's fear of the other at work not fear of unpreparedness. Security cameras did not stop the attacks of Sept. 11th, 2001. I'm still waiting for real security measures. Maybe a Congress not interested in forking over multi-million dollar (in the case of the Medicare Drug Plan, multi-billion dollar) legislation for business interests in exchange for $50 lunches, trips to Scotland and a couple thousand in campaign contributions will do the necessary work.

Posted by tgl on 2006-03-29 14:18:10 +0000
I used to think that Alaska was a rugged frontier where men and women went to reinvent themselves and make their own fortunes. Increasingly, it comes across as a welfare state dependent on the federal government for aid in order to survive.

Posted by dawnbixtler on 2006-03-29 17:32:08 +0000
Fear.

Posted by tgl on 2006-03-29 18:09:07 +0000
Nah, grown men with better things. Although, it is a felony to threaten the President. Misdemeanor?

Posted by cdubrocker on 2007-06-01 13:30:35 +0000
Part Deux: "Even though U.S. officials had put Speaker on a warning list, he caught a flight to Montreal and then drove across the U.S. border on May 24 at Champlain, N.Y. A border inspector who checked him disregarded a computer warning to stop Speaker, officials said Thursday. The unidentified inspector later said the infected man seemed perfectly healthy and that he thought the warning was merely 'discretionary,' officials briefed on the case told The Associated Press."

Posted by ConorClockwise on 2007-06-01 13:34:48 +0000
You have to wonder what the US could have done with border security, if we decided to spend $300 billion on security instead of creating chaos in Iraq.

Posted by tgl on 2007-06-01 15:13:38 +0000
It also highlights the ludicrousity of "strong" IDs or national identification cards. We don't have any problems knowing who people are, it's doing something about them when they cross our borders. All 19 hijackers on <rudy-giuliani's-entire-campaign-strategy-is-to-repeat-this-historical-date> were in this country legal, with the proper identification. The FBI and the CIA and the NSA were on the lookout for at least 3 of them.

E-mail to tgl@rideside.net to add your tumblr.
Find me on github.