Homeland Security Suddenly Likes My Blog?

Welcome friends. And by that, I mean a hearty welcome to my new friends from the Department of Homeland Security. I noticed 2 hits on my analytics on Friday, 3 days ago, from Springfield, VA. I have been watching for hits from this area ever since I wrote this blog post after the April Tea Parties. Now why did they decide to search my blog twice on Friday. Did it have anything to do with the new SNITCH report email service set up at flag@whitehouse.gov? I did not report myself last week, as a number of bloggers have done. Did someone report me for publishing FISHY stories about proposed GOVERNMENT health care? Is there a DHS dossier on this blog? Or is it kept at the white house? In what way does my exercise of my first amendment right to free speech regarding HEALTH CARE create a threat to our HOMELAND????

American Thinker has this to say regarding the new snitch service:

The Obama administration has made a terrible mistake.

On Tuesday, August 4, the White House posted a blog entry enjoining Americans to spy on one another, and to report any "disinformation" which might undermine the administration's health-care reform:

"There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."

How can an American president think to embrace such open Orwellian thuggishness? The answer is a noxious combination of (1) liberal moral obtuseness, and (2) the naked lust for power which has characterized the political left since Robespierre. (The political designation sinistra in fact originates with the French Revolution: Jacobins sat to the left of president's chair in the Third Estate.)

For liberals, the morally correct stance on every issue is by definition the liberal one. It is a moral imperative that everyone have health insurance, consequences be damned. To cite possible negative repercussions of liberal policies is to reveal yourself to be ethically and intellectually degenerate. Just look at what liberal pundits and politicians are saying about anti-Obamacare protesters: Paul Krugman vilifies them as racists; to Nancy Pelosi, they are literally Nazis.

Got that, America? If you're against government-run health care, you're not just a Nazi, you're a racist Nazi. Liberals cannot help but think in such terms; their views to them are so enlightened that to oppose them is to automatically render one unfit for discourse...and unworthy of respect. The irony, lost on Pelosi et al, is that, if there had been a few more freedom-loving citizens in 1930's Germany protesting government take over of industry, there may never have been a Nazi regime.

Then there is the left's all-consuming thirst for power. It animates the tactics of ACORN and Union head busters; the methods advocated in Saul Alinsky's community-organizing manifesto Rules for Radicals. It gave rise to the notoriously corrupt political culture of the Chicago machine, in which fetid waters Obama bathed and came to political maturity.

The White House wants to be appraised of "fishy" things? Very well. Let us appraise them. Let us send them every study by every reputable research institute - Heritage, CATO, AEI, Galen, Pacific Research - which uses solid economic and historical data to argue against Obamacare; send them every op-ed or article written by any respected economist, author, or pundit (and they are legion) who makes a solid case against further government intrusion into health care.

But if they really want fishy, send them this report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which gives the lie to the president's assertion that his reform measures will reduce costs. Instead, according the CBO, Obama's proposals would produce economically suicidal deficits as far as the eye can see.

The White House's blog may be illegal - some experts claim it is a clear violation of the Privacy Act of 1974, which places strict legal limits on how and why federal agencies can collect and maintain data on private citizens (instituted - rightfully so - after Nixon's abuses). Whether or not it is illegal, it is certainly repugnant for the president to ask us to spy on his political opponents for him.

Really, what country does he think this is?

FBI Spied on Tea Party Americans

http://homelandsecurityus.com/?p=2659

Did you ever feel like you were being WATCHED? The Northeast Intelligence Network thinks you may be right:

'“Listen to what I am saying,” stated the source during an interview with Doug Hagmann, founder (NEIN). “The Department of Homeland Security Intelligence Assessment that is receiving so much attention is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, and the true patriotic citizens of this country are on the Titanic. This is what bothers me. But is goes far beyond that assessment. There have been very significant changes made over the last few years that redirect the focus and assets of the intelligence community internally. These changes have greatly accelerated under this administration, and the threats have been redefined to include those who used to be patriots. It’s not only chilling but absolutely insulting to God-fearing Americans.”

According to this unimpeachable source, a single-page confidential directive issued by the FBI headquarters in Washington, DC (FBIHQ) was sent to each of the 56 field offices located across the United States on or about March 23, 2009, instructing the Special Agents in Charge (SACs) of those offices to verify the date, time and location of each TEA Party within their region and supply that information to FBI headquarters in Washington. The source stated this correspondence termed the TEA parties “political demonstrations,” and added that the dissemination of the directive was very tightly controlled. “Not all agents were privy to this correspondence,” stated the source, who compared the dissemination to an older “Do Not File” classification.

In addition to obtaining or confirming the location and time of each “demonstration,” each field office was instructed to obtain or confirm the identity of the individual(s) involved in the actual planning and coordination of the event in each specific region, and include the local or regional Internet web site address, if any. The information collected by region was then reportedly sent to FBI Headquarters.

The source alleges that a second directive was issued on or about April 6, 2009 that reportedly instructed each SAC to coordinate and conduct, either at the field office level and/or with the appropriate resident agency, covert video surveillance and data collection of the participants of the TEA parties. Surveillance was to be performed from “discreet fixed or mobile positions” and was to be performed “independently and outside of the purview of local law enforcement.”

Although the level of detail collected from each operation is unclear, the information was reportedly submitted to Washington, where, “at the level of the National Security Branch (NSB), this information was to “include the office of the Directorate of Intelligence (DI), and integrated with a restricted access database, one that reportedly is accessible to only two agencies” [of the 14 agencies that comprise the U.S. intelligence community, according to the source.

“The implications to the citizens of the U.S. are ominous. It seems that there is a hostile political agenda coming from Washington that characterizes the supporters of our constitutional freedoms as threats to our domestic security, which is totally absurd. The redirection, the refocusing of domestic threats from al Qaeda cells to ‘flag waving right-wingers’ is something that has gone from a murmur a few years ago to a roar today.”

Training government-issued cameras on ordinary citizens, many of whom brought their children to an estimated 600 Tax Day TEA Parties is a page torn out of George Orwell’s 1984 and makes the term “God Bless America” more meaningful than ever.'