Posts by Jaime Ortega-Simo:
Licensed to Kill?
April 16th, 2012
By Jose Castillo.
Licensed to kill?
An X-45C Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) can fly at 35,000 feet over your head, and it is able to deploy a variety of deadly powerful payloads on its target without being detected. There sure is nothing that a semi-automatic modified rifle can help you, an ordinary citizen, to defend against it if you were the target.
The second amendment of the constitution explicitly gives people the right to keep and bear arms. This right being more of a necessity in the presence of an oppressive government during a time in which wars were fought with rifles and cannons as men marched into the enemy’s line of fire. But this was over 200 years ago. It does not take a military expert to realize that the way in which wars are fought has changed dramatically since the revolutionary period.
There is no question that a gun can help you protect against an armed aggressor, but the idea that a group of citizens with rifles can defend against and overthrow an oppressive government in this day and age is preposterous. Especially if governments have cutting edge technology and are at the front line of the development of weapons such as an UCAV.
Recent uprisings in the Middle East could prove the above statement wrong, but these uprisings were not started with the type of guns which are available to civilians in the United States. It would be like comparing apples and oranges, and the apples have rocket propelled grenades, explosives, and the backing of a military might.
In retrospect, there is no question that there is a right for a person to own a gun, but rather how can tragic events like the Trayvon Martin shooting be avoided? Concealed weapons laws in some states have recently been extended to grant a person the ability to carry a gun into a bar. On September 2011 a law was passed in the state of Ohio allowing concealed-carry license holders to bring their guns into liquor-permit premises.
The now infamous stand your ground law in Florida and 20 other states has caused outrage after the delay of George Zimmerman’s arrest and that it might be the reason he will be acquitted during his trial over the Martin shooting.
It seems that the extension and broadening of gun laws are established as a response of the fear that an individual could be attacked and have no means to defend themselves. Being shot is a legitimate reason to be afraid, but not enough to want to take an innocent life.
There are alternatives in protection such as non-lethal weapons, technology which even law enforcement agents use to avoid fatalities. Tasers, rubber bullets, and maze are widely used in stopping offenders in situations that do not require deadly force. Law enforcement agents are trained and qualified in using both methods and to know when lethal force is and is not necessary to stop a criminal, but ordinary people are not.
Efforts should be made by lawmakers to push for the use of non-lethal weapons as self defense mechanisms instead of broadening a person’s ability to carry a firearm in as many places as possible, and to use it under the protection of the law against unarmed people. The more that this “right to bear arms” is expanded, the more it will conflict with daily life situations in which emotions run high, and literally deadly mistakes can be made.
It would be unfair and unrealistic to label all licensed gun-owners as trigger happy nuts who fear that the government will turn into a dictatorship. However, it is a fair guess to say that you own a firearm because you are afraid for your own and your family’s safety. Perhaps that was what George Zimmerman felt, he was afraid of a man stealing from his neighborhood, and made the fatal mistake to follow and confront him. It was prejudice, and it took the life of an innocent young man; a crime in itself trying to avoid a crime that did not exist.
So for those who fear that the government will take away their liberties, they should focus more on other powerful protections granted by the constitution such as their right to vote, to assemble, and the separation of powers to name a few. Guns will not save your country but protecting the essence of your freedom and right to life will. And to those who find safety in taking a firearm to church, you should be careful since you might look like you are trying to steal the offerings and someone might confront you with their own gun and shoot you in “self-defense”.
(Jose Castillo is a graduate of Aerospace Engineering from the Ohio State University and a writer for The Daily Journalist)
Matthew Bowman professor at Hampden-Sydney College responds on Mormons and racism.
April 15th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo.
Professor Matthew Bowman
Hi, Jaime – well, this is a lot of material. It appears that you’ve copied and pasted it in its entirety, including typos, from this website: http://yhvh.name/?w=548. In the future, I’d recommend you avoid copying material and dumping it on people; you’d do much better to begin with interviews with the people you want to write about and inquire with them about what other material might or might not be relevant.
Now, on to your questions.
I am unclear about whether you want my response as a Mormon or as a scholar. Your first question – whether I agree with the material you’ve shown me – is a bit intrusive and personal, so I’ll take it that you’re interested in my opinion as a Mormon. I’ll respond first thus.
No, I agree with none of the ideas, sentiments, or theories presented in the material you’ve quoted below. It is not Mormon doctrine. Virtually any Mormon alive today would say likewise. Indeed, many of them would find the compilation and presentation of such material combined with requests to pass judgment on whether it is Mormon doctrine or not rather peculiar and perhaps offensive. This is because what whoever compiled these quotations has done is roughly equivalent to harvesting various anti-Semitic quotations from nineteenth century Catholic bishops (which, I assure you, exist) and using them to assert that it is present day Catholic doctrine to hate Jews.
As a scholar. I’m glad you’ve approached me with this material, because I’m reasonably confident that since you’ve copied and pasted it, you’re rather unclear on who guys like Orson Hyde and Joseph Fielding Smith are, and are thus unfamiliar with how authoritative Mormons today might take the statements below. Indeed, you refer to them as “verses,” which is an odd word, because it’s usually used for scripture, and nothing you’ve pasted below qualifies as that for Mormons save for the excerpt from the Book of Mormon. The answer as to how authoritative Mormons take these statements to be is “not very.” Virtually all of the men you quote below were born in the nineteenth century. Many Mormons today would have a hard time identifying precisely what Orson Hyde or Mark Petersen thought about anything. and even who they were. To invoke the same metaphor, it’s a bit like brandishing the statements of Catholic cardinals who died before World War II and proclaiming them authoritative Catholic doctrine.
The following things are true:
Many Mormons in the nineteenth century believed that people of African descent were the descendants of some figure cursed in the Bible, either Cain or Noah’s son Ham, or both. This was not uncommon. Many other Christians in the western world believed something similar, and had for centuries; the idea appears in medieval Catholicism, and was commonly invoked by slaveholders in the Americas and Africa.
Because of this belief, in the 1850s Brigham Young, second president of the church, declared that people of African descent could not hold the Mormon priesthood. Various other leaders of the church offered speculations as to why this might be: these are the sources of the various statements you quote below.
This policy lasted until 1978. Many Mormons find its persistence more than a decade after the civil rights movement disappointing; many Mormons felt this way at the time. In 1978, however, it was revoked. Bruce McConkie, one of the men you cite below, immediately revoked his racist statements when this occurred.
Does racial prejudice still exist in Mormonism? Largely, no less and no more than in white America more generally. It is worth nothing that in the past decade two leaders of the church strongly denounced racial prejudice and the sort of speculations you present below. Since these men were alive in the past few years most Mormons take their statements to be far more authoritative than anything you cite below.
A relevant link:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/635196411/Pres-Hinckley-calls-racism-ugly-and-unacceptable.html
I’d recommend if you have further questions to consult Margaret Yong, a professor at BYU, who’s done a lot of work in combating racism in Mormonism today. Her email is margaret_young@byu.edu.
Best
mb
Jabriel Ballentine a seminarian at Virginia Theological Seminary writes about Mitt Romney’s Mormonism.
April 15th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo.
Jaime,
Thank you for this opportunity to share my perspective. I have done what I feel best approaches an intersection of the sentiment of your search and my considerations.
In peace,
Jabriel
David, an Israel/Middle East expert comments about the ‘Arab Spring’ and Israel.
April 15th, 2012
Hi Jaime,
Below, are my opinions to each of your questions.
1) Is the Arab Spring bad for Israel in the long run or good?
1. Even though the Arab Spring began over a year ago, things are still unfolding and no one knows what the outcome will be yet, especially in regards to Israel. In all honesty, it should take at least a few years before we get a clearer picture of everything.
2) The ‘Arab Spring’ is been really contagious in the Middle East, but have thing really changed for all those countries or just for a few with their relationship with Israel?
2. Right now, the state of Arab-Israeli relations is mixed. On the positive side, Israel’s neighbors are in no position to start a war. On the negative side, terrorists, such as Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, have managed to take advantage of the anarchy and acquire thousands of rockets to launch at Israel. And in fact, Hamas has been making good use of their rockets as the people of Israel’s southern communities could very well tell you. In addition, terrorists in Sinai have been taking advantage of the anarchy in Egypt (and Sinai in particular) and attacking Israeli communities over the border, on and off, when they’re not busy sabotaging the gas pipeline which supplies both Israel and Jordan.
3) What is the current U.S. policy with Israel (good as always)?
3. American-Israeli relations have always been good – regardless of who is president. That’s because Congress, in general, has always been supportive of Israel, and the president, whoever that would be at the time, has to take that into consideration. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t be considered a “president”, but a dictator.
4) Does Israel have anything to gain from the Arab Spring?
4. Whether Israel has anything to gain from the Arab Spring or not, at this point, is subject to debate. Surely, if the Arab countries were to become true democracies, that might help. But then again, the countries of the European Union are true democracies and many of them have been cold to Israel for years. I guess for a more detailed answer, I’d refer you to my answers to your first and second questions.
5) Is Israel secretly dealing with all or some of the new governments founded after the revolutions? Or with any?
5. If I knew if Israel was dealing secretly with any of the Arab governments, then it wouldn’t be a secret. I do know that the present military ruler of Egypt, Omar Suleiman, has been doing his best to help Israel keep the peace along the border. Egypt and Israel has had a peace treaty since 1979 and Suleiman knows it’s in Egypt’s best interest not to break it. Whether or not his successor would feel the same is a different story. King Abdullah of Jordan, in accordance with Jordan’s peace treaty of 1994, has also kept his border with Israel quiet. Israel is also trying to restart peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, but that, I believe, is just an exercise in futility. Further away, Israel has a trade liaison office in Qatar for a few years now.
6) Anything else you may want to add.?
6. I think I covered everything on this subject that I can think of. If you feel I’m missing something, feel free to ask me as many questions as you like.
I thank you for liking my previous articles. I aim to please.
Economic disparities on the Rise in the US
April 14th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo.
Economic Disparities on the rise.
According to the Census Bureau in the last decade the number of people living bellow poverty increased from 31.6 million in 2000 to 46.2 million in 2010.
The gap between the poverty line has increased and it could get worse if the right policies are not applied.
“It’s staggering,” said in a phone conversation Feb. 8 by Lane Vanderslice, editor for the World Hunger Organization.
“One in seven people in the U.S. reaches the poverty line,” Vanderslice said. “Since 2007 the poverty was about 12.5%, the base line was 2.6%, a 20% increase of the national poverty level.”
As for Ohio Vanderslice said that the unemployment rate in Ohio went from 5% to 3% in February 2007 to 10.6% in November 2009. The decline went down only 1.6% in December 2011.
For Vanderslice the economic upheaval and disparity within the wealth gap was caused by the recession in 2008, the bust of the housing bubble, and the exportation of jobs overseas.
“The line of unemployment is dropped and the issue of supporting jobs for a long time for the middle class has been hallowed,” Vanderslice said. “Well paid jobs are much harder to get.”
Vanderslice reiterated that the gap between rich and poor is increasing and jobs are being shipped overseas.
“There has also been a particularly big shift in the percentage of income nationally attributed to the rich,” and he added, “Rich are living on their wealth, diversifying their portfolios and investing overseas.”
Lucia Dun, Professor of applied economics at The Ohio State University, said in a phone conversation Feb. 8, “The gap is widening and the money is going to the top hands.”
“A major implication in poverty is that the health care of people is affecting people’s quality of life,” Dun said.
For Dun, the emerging privatized sector is not responsible for the economic gap between rich and poor, but political instability is. Therefore, in order to cure the problem, education levels need to grow in the U.S. now as education is going to be harder to access in the future.
“Education needs to be more affordable,” Dun said. “People need to get back to the workforce.”
Andrew Fieldhouse, a policy analyst for the Economic Policy Institute said in an e-mail Feb. 8, “Recently, the increasing concentration of capital income at the top if the earnings distribution has been the biggest driver of income inequality, followed by changes in tax policy.”
Fieldhouse believes that the best solution for the gap disparities is to raise the revenue and equalize income levels.
“Equalizing the tax treatment of ordinary income and capital income would substantially advance both objectives,” he said.
“Comprehensive tax reform will have to raise more revenue and restore a greater degree of progressivity to the tax code, so that effective tax rates continue to rise with ability to pay,” Fieldhouse said.
Jason DiGiannantoni VA Ambulatory Care Center on PTSD.
April 14th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo.
Hi Jaime,
1. The VA has a dedicated team of health care providers and social workers that work specifically with veterans returning from Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) and Operations Iraqi Freedom and New Dawn (Iraq). Each veteran receives initial screenings during his/her first primary care appointment for depression, suicidal ideation, PTSD, traumatic brain injury (TBI), homelessness (and risk of becoming homeless), and misuse of alcohol. From there, they can be linked with psychotherapy and/or psychiatric treatment. The “talk” therapy can be in groups or individual. We also conduct outreach in the community with our mobile health unit to help facilitate easy access to VA services.2. The majority of returning veterans do not have PTSD. Those who do typically do not report their concerns right away. Often, it is a concerned family member or friend that helps to encourage the veteran to seek care.3. We offer evidence-based psychotherapy for PTSD such as cognitive processing therapy (CPT) and prolonged exposure (PE). Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) can also be used in PTSD treatment.
4. Sorry, I don’t have any stats for this past year involving PTSD and suicide. Some studies show a link, while others do not.
5. Since I’m not a doctor, I can’t give an opinion about whether medication could make PTSD symptoms worse. However, the type of medication needs to be clarified, since all are not created equal. Antidepressants such as SSRIs are often the medication of choice. Research has shown that other medications like benzodiazepines (Xanax, Valium, etc.) can create problems such as dependency. See attachment for PTSD treatment recommendations.
See attachment about the PTSD app, the new VA website “Make the Connection”, and the veterans crisis line. All of these initiatives have been created to educate and assist veterans as they transition home from combat.
Jason DiGiannantoni, LISW-S
OEF/OIF Outreach Coordinator
Chalmers P. Wylie VA Ambulatory Care Center
420 North James Road
Columbus, OH 43219
(614) 257-5393 (office)
Hussein Fazal from AdParlor opinion on Facebook going public.
April 13th, 2012
1) What is your opinion on Facebook becoming public?
I think it is the logical progression for the company. I have confidence that the leadership at Facebook will continue to make the right product decisions and innovate despite becoming public.
2) How is that going to change as far as advertisements?
Facebook will continue to innovate in terms of ad products. Becoming public may increase the speed in which they enter mobile and display outside of Facebook.
3) Now that Facebook has become public could it end up like Myspace, bought for 522 million and sold for 35 million?
Not a chance. Facebook is a very different business in a very different time. Facebook has built an extremely large and accurate social graph – in addition to being very disciplined about their product and the way they treat users.
I appreciate your time and response Mr Hussein.
Thanks again,
Jaime
(Fazal Hussein is the owner of AdPalor, Facebook’s main advertising partner)
Rolfe Winkler of the Wall Street Journal on Facebook going public
April 13th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo.
Rolfe Winkler
Hello Jaime,
1) Why do you think Facebook wants to go public?
It wasn’t a matter of wanting to go public so much as regulations require them too. The SEC’s 500 investor rule requires companies with that many shareholders to file financials publicly. Might as well raise capital at the same time.
2) If they finally go public, will that affect Facebook users in the long run?
Not much should change. With his super-voting shares, Zuckerberg will still have complete control of the company.
3) When companies that large go public, what are the pros and the cons (you can give one example of both)?
Pro: Zuckerberg will have publicly trading stock which he can use to help finance acquisitions
Cons: increased scrutiny from the public and pressure to deliver solid results each quarter.
Thank you Mr Winkler, I really appreciate your time, effort and help. You will be the star quote for my article.
Dr. Lisa Merlo on the bad side of text messages
April 13th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo
Dr. Lisa Merlo
Hi Jaime,
I just got your message, so on the chance it isn’t too late, here’s a quote:
As people become more dependent on technology, there is sometimes a tendency to focus less effort on in-person interactions. Some individuals ignore the people they are with to answer calls or text messages.
Others are avoiding more intimate interactions, especially those that might be anxiety-provoking, and using text messages to convey information instead. This can create problems in relationships, as well as functional activities of daily living.
Best,
Dr. M
(Dr. Merlo is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Florida McKnight Brain Institute)
Ted Goertzel Ph.D professor of sociology at Rutgers University about Osama Bin Laden conspiracy theory
April 13th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo
Ted George Goertzel, Ph.D
Jaime,
Yes, I believe he is dead. It would have been terribly embarrassing for the U.S. government to announce his death, and then to have him show up alive. Also, his top supporters have acknowledged his death and promised revenge.
I think al-Qaeda is on it’s way out. Other groups will take it’s place.
In the past, there were vague rumors of his death, and he countered them by releasing new interviews.
Jonathan Birdwell researcher at Demos and columnist at the Guardian UK writes about Osama Bin Laden conspiracy theory
April 13th, 2012By Jaime Ortega Simo
Jonathan Birdwell
Dear Jaime,
Thanks for your email. However, I’m afraid if you were expecting me to stoke your conspiratorial fires then you’ve come to the wrong person.
Yes I believe OBL is dead and that he died earlier this year in the successful raid on his compound.
It does not make sense for the US Government to lie about this. Do you really think that they would report his death if they weren’t sure beyond a shadow of a doubt? How embarrassing do you think it would be for the U.S. Government to announce his death and then, whoops, nope sorry he wasn’t dead after all? That would be an absolute catastrophic embarrassment. Moreover, why did the jihadis themselves also admit his death only then?
Perhaps you think he actually died in 2007 and that the U.S. Government knew this but for some reason kept it hidden. If you do believe that, can I just ask one question: why? Why would they hold that information back? Why would they not want to declare victory as soon as possible? If you do believe this then I would be very interested in your answer.
Moreover, where is your source that Turkish intelligence claimed his death in 2007? Likewise with Benazir Bhutto? I’m sure they were speculating, otherwise where is their evidence? Do they have pictures that are not ‘shady’? Why should you believe these ‘heavy weights’? Do you not think they might also have hidden reasons for speculating on his death – or is it just the US Government’s motives that you question?
Or, perhaps you don’t even believe he existed in the first place – or that 911 was an inside job? I sure hope not for the sake of journalism.
If you want to read some amazing journalism on the subject of OBL I highly recommend Lawrence Wright’s The Looming Tower, and Steve Coll’s Ghost Wars.
Good luck with your article.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
R J Hillhouse, an Intelligence Community analyst on Osama Bin Laden conspiracy theory.
April 13th, 2012
Raelynn J. Hillhouse
RJ Hillhouse
Noam Chomsky on Osama Bin Laden conspiracy theory
April 13th, 2012
Jaime.
There are, as you say, many open questions, but I think there is a good probability that the official story of the May 2 assassination is accurate. There have been many allegations over the years of the kind you cite, but none that I’ve seen seemed to me credible.
Noam Chomsky
Ryan Dube of Top Secret Writers on Top Secret Buildings Construction
April 13th, 2012
Jaime,
The first priority of good journalism should be keeping an eye out for propaganda and countering it with hard facts. You’re getting off on a wild goose chase if you’re looking for any sort of Civilian Civil State as right-wingers constantly attempt to portray Obama as stating. The clip was completely taken out of context from one of his election speeches – when you look at the entire speech, he was talking about the Peace Corps. See this authority for the whole story:http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_obama_planning_a_gestapo-like_civilian_national.html
Avoid doing any research on YouTube if you can help it….
Secondly – your numbers are wrong. There are about 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies working with the intelligence community (IC) on counter-terrorism post 9/11. Actual building complexes under construction in and around Washington for top-secret intel work after 9/11 totals just 33. I don’t know where you got the number of 3,068 new facilities, but I’d double check your sources.
So, to answer your questions:
Q – Are all these new facilities part of the possible construction civil state that Obama proposed in one of his speeches? here is the source http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
A- No – because there is no such construction civil state – in his speech he was talking about the Peace Corps.
Q – Is there much more than secret buildings constructed? are they other things that you guys might of noticed that the Washington Post might of not shown?
Q – What key players are part of these secret projects? Any names in particular names, government agencies, private corporations?
A – The core is CIA and NSA, all under the guidance of the DNI. Raytheon, Mitre and many, many other private companies too numerous to list here.
Q – Are all these agencies connected and do they all know other agency plans?
A – Definitely connected through funding channels (DNI mostly manages all of the IC), and private contractor funding filters down from the various IC organizations like CIA, DIA, etc… No – every agency doesn’t know every bit of the other agencies plans because some projects are so highly classified that they have to be compartmentalized and kept classified on a need-to-know basis. Even people within the same agency don’t know about some of the projects that other people are working on.
Q – what site have you guys encountered, that is a top facility?
-Ryan
Brian Moeller Ex-InfraGard member speaks about his experience.
April 13th, 2012
Hello, Jaime!
I’m not much involved with the Infragard community anymore. I helped form the Columbus Chapter in 1999, along with Bill Yang (formerly at OSU), Steve Romig (OSU), and several other devoted members of the community.
My workload – both professionally and personally — has grown significantly since 1999, and in 2008 I decided to no longer be a board member due to these commitments. I served from 2004 to 2008 as the Columbus Chapter Chairman, and was very proud to offer my service for such a worthwhile program.
Special Agent Corey Collins (FBI) is the FBI liaison with the group currently. His number is 614-224-1183. Steve Mallott (smalott@limitedbrands.com) is the current Chairman. Both of those individuals would likely be able to share much more valuable and current information than I would. I sincerely haven’t participated much (other than going to an occasional meeting and participating in the e-mail list) since 2009/2010.
Infragard is a great program. Protecting the information infrastructure is the second-highest priority for the FBI (second only to counter-terrorism). The FBI realized in 1996 that protecting the information infrastructure was critical to the US – and also realized that they didn’t have all the knowledge they needed to protect it well. They needed to become familiar with cybercrime, and protecting it, so they reached out to Industry experts to form a partnership where these experts share knowledge of how cybercrime is structured, and in return the FBI assisted Industry with knowledge regarding how U.S. Law applies to cybercrime.
I’m happy to talk with you, but I’d urge you to contact Mr. Mallott or Agent Collins. They’re both well engaged with Infragard, and much more current on membership issues, counts, and the like.
At OSU, I would estimate that there are fewer than 10 individuals involved with Infragard — however that’s just a wild, unfounded guess.
Brian
FBI spokesman Jenny Shearer on InfraGard
April 13th, 2012
Hi Jaime,
Here are responses to your questions:
1. Can InfraGard access college students’ records to protect against cyber-crime attacks? What about the protections students have under FERPA? Could students legally be prosecuted in court under the Patriot Act for data obtained via InfraGard?
Answer: As previously explained, InfraGard is made up of individual members, not organizations. InfraGard is an FBI outreach program with the mission of fostering an information-sharing partnership between the private and public sectors for the purpose of protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure.
2. Has InfraGard been used to access college students records, data, communications, etc. before for national security reasons?
Answer: No. InfraGard is made up of individual citizens interested in protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure. It is not used for investigative activity.
3. Does InfraGard share information with any other agency besides the FBI? What type of unclassified information have they shared about college students? Do they provide information about college students?
Answer: Again, InfraGard is not used to access information about college students. The FBI is part of the intelligence community and does share information with other agencies if warranted.
4. Is InfraGard part of the FBI? What exactly is the relationship there?
Answer: InfraGard is an FBI outreach program. It is a public-private partnership that shares information about critical infrastructure. It brings together subject matter experts from the public and private sectors to help protect our nation’s critical infrastructure and key resources from attacks by terrorists, criminals and others who wish us harm. It’s a partnership that makes sense because most U.S. infrastructure components, such as utility companies, transportation systems, telecommunication networks, water and food suppliers, public health and financial services, are privately owned.
Kind regards,
Jenny
US Department of Homeland Security on new secret buildings being constructed
April 13th, 2012
Please attribute the answers to Robert C. Glenn, Ohio Homeland Security Executive Director.
Thanks!
Lindsey
On 05/09/11 at 9:46 PM, Jaime Ortega-Simo
<ortega-simo.1@buckeyemail.osu.edu> wrote:
Thanks you Lindsay, I appreciate your time. Here are 5 questions, in order.
1. According to the Washington Post, Documentary there is a list of locations which are considered secret facilities all over the Nation, in Columbus there are 34, and 10 emerged new after 9/11. Why do we have 10 more facilities? Here is the source: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/map/
“We are at war, and it’s a different kind of war than one we have fought previously, so It’s not surprising that there are new sites that have a prevention, protection or counterterrorism mission in Ohio. Certainly, such a spike in activity and vigilance is not new.
I can only speak to the State of Ohio Fusion Center – the Strategic Analysis and Information Center enables us to access information previously unavailable to state and local officials such as the recent
notice about the rail ways threat seen in the media last week. Additionally, the description in the website provides a rationale behind the need of such as facility.
By bringing together federal, state and local homeland security partners, we can better assess and analyze threats and vulnerabilities to better share information throughout the state and address emerging challenges like cybersecurity and better protect infrastructure.”
2. After talking to several Experts, (James M. Dorsey (WSJ), Ali Soufan (NYT), Jonathan Schanzer, Stefano Casertano..etc..they all agree that Al-Qaeda is not really a threat to the USA, and don’t have the funs to make any
significant impact. If that is so, why do we run more than 3000 of these secret facilities to operate over a dying network of terrorist?
“Our assessment is that we are still at risk of a terrorist attack, and in Ohio we are vigorously working to prevent terrorism. The hate of Al Qaida and the inspiration to fight the west continues beyond the
death of their leader. Also, terrorism is much broader than Al Qaida.”
3. The second question raises another question; having so many new secret facilities for any other reason that might not relate with counter-terrorism oriented projects, but relate with a future police state proposed by Obama? (Sounds conspiratorial,but its not) This is what Obama Said: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
“Again, I cannot speak for all of the facilities in Ohio that may ormay not be within my authority to . Ohioans are not ready for a police state. We are fulfilling a mission that enables us to do the
first work of government – protecting the rights and freedoms of its citizens. In fact, all members of Ohio Homeland Security recently attended civil rights and liberties training to ensure we do this.”
4. How many corporations, and other outside powers that are involved in this project? Could you list 3?
We don’t fully understand this question.
5. Do you think the Washington Post is on to something big, or are they just not reporting right?
“The Washington Post is fulfilling the role of the media to hold government accountable. The first Amendment is one of the freedoms we enjoy because of many who are openly and secretly working to defeat those who seek to maim, kill and remove freedoms under the flag of Al Qaida and other terrorists.”
I appreciate your responses,
Jaime Ortega
Mike Brickner of ACLU on the InfraGard Organization
April 13th, 2012
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for your inquiry. The ACLU is concerned that Infragard may be used by the federal government as a way to spy on average citizens. As you may know, Infragard is a coalition of several private businesses who have agreed to work with the federal government to report any “unusual activity.” While there is certainly an interest in the government working with private businesses on specific cases where there is credible evidence of terrorist activity, Infragard seems to work by having the private companies cast as wide a net as possible.
When businesses are asked to report anything “suspicious,” it often leads to people being reported who may have divergent political views, religious beliefs, or group affiliations. Americans who are simply exercising their First Amendment rights should not be subjected to additional government surveillance.
As far as specific examples of Infragard monitoring people, the answer is that we simply do not know. Like so many other things with national security, the government has cloaked the program in a cloud of secrecy. There is very little transparency or accountability, so the average citizen, government watchdogs, and the media have very little knowledge about the inner workings of Infragard and who has or has not been investigated.
The ACLU believes strongly that government works best when it is open to the people, and that there must be measures put in place to ensure abuses do not occur. Since Infragard is allowed to operate in almost complete secrecy, there is very little people can do to discover abuse or corruption.
Best,
Mike Brickner
Director of Communications & Public Policy
ACLU of Ohio
(216)472-2220
mbrickner@acluohio.org
FERPA changes and the Patriot Act (Nsé Ufot, JD)
April 13th, 2012
Nsé Ufot, J.D.
Government Relations Officer
American Association of University Professors
1133 – 19th Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 737-5900 Ext. 142
Email: nufot@aaup.org
“Academic Freedom for a Free Society”
Support AAUP by joining today!http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/involved/join/
AAUP on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21119399464
From: Jaime Ortega-Simo [mailto:ortega-simo.1@buckeyemail.osu.edu]
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2011 3:50 AM
To: Nseabasi Ufot
Subject: RE: FERPA changes
FERPA was changed after 9/11, in 2002 by the PATRIOT Act.
1) Did or have all Universities approve the changes done under the Patriot Act? did any University opposed FERPA’s changes under the PATRIOT Act?
We have no way of knowing which Universities approved (or are complying with)the post-Patriot Act changes to FERPA. I also don’t know which Universities were opposed to the PATRIOT Act’s changes to FERPA.
2) Have agencies like the FBI or organizations like InfraGard ever used the new changes done on FERPA under the Patriot act, without student or parent consent and approval to look for possible terrorist suspects?
The AAUP does not have any direct knowledge of any government agency invoking section 507 of the Patriot Act and accessing a student’s records without consent. By definition, neither law enforcement nor the institution is required to give the affected student notice.
3) How does FERPA’s changes under the PATRIOT Act, reflect on the Fourth Amendment?
I’m not a constitutional scholar, but it appears that the provisions of post-Patriot Act FERPA are specifically written to address any 4th amendment concerns. FERPA still maintains a requirement that law enforcement get judicial permission, parental permission or permission from the student before they can access a student’s records. But in the case of alleged “terrorism”, the US attorney general’s office can ask a judge, to ask an institution, to grant the US attorney access to a student’s records, ex parte, without the student’s knowledge.
4) Have any higher education institutions, students or parents complained about the changes made on FERPA, under the PATRIOT Act or claimed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education?
I don’t have any knowledge of lawsuits or complaints about FERPA+PATRIOT Act initiated by institutions, students or parents against the Department of Education.
Finally, here is an excerpt from the September-October 2002 Academe, (the AAUP’s monthly magazine) giving faculty advice about the changes to FERPA made by the PATRIOT Act … Full article here at http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2002/SO/Col/LW.htm
“Finally, faculty should be aware of changes to FERPA made in the USA Patriot Act, which makes it easier for the offices of the U.S. attorney general to get court orders to obtain educational records relevant to an investigation or prosecution of terrorism. Once an institution is presented with a “terrorism” court order, it must disclose the requested records. The institution need not obtain the consent of the student or parent, notify either party that the disclosure has been made, or maintain a record of the disclosure. Moreover, the act gives institutions immunity from liability for disclosures in response to such court orders.
A court order requesting release of student information will typically come to an institution’s administration or its counsel’s office. If, however, a faculty member should receive such a notice directly, the professor should immediately contact the institution’s legal counsel. Neither the faculty nor the administration wants the institution to be sued for disclosing records, and neither wants to disclose information about students that would violate those students’ privacy rights.”
Thanks for your response Mr Ufot.
FERPA and Patriot Act Document (Education Government)
April 7th, 2012FERPA VS PATRIOT ACT, (DOCUMENT)
