911 the terrorist won and now win again
Why people hate us I'm not sure. I have heard they hate our freedom and that we do what we want but not sure if that is true. Yes 911 did change everything, but not how we think. Yes 911 was bad but it wasn't the first attack on American Soil. That was the 2nd attack on The Trade center remember when there where those explosions and they wanted the building to collapse and it didn't work. But about the Oklahoma City Bombing oh that doesn't count cause he is an American. I don't know if this is true but some Expert on tv said that the trade centers where made strong enough to support a plane, so in theory that means if the second plane didn't hit the building wouldn't have given in. If this is true then was the 2nd plane just chance or did someone know that and if they did know that how did they find out. It does make you wonder. I'm not going to say that the government had it planed or that they let it happen but maybe they knew it might happen and thought if it happens great we will have more control over the people. In any even it has lead to lot s of Paronia and people giving up there rights to feel safer. I understand that is a natural feeling but I think it is the wrong thing to do. Maybe it is just me but wasn't the Consituiton (part of it at least) Supposed to protect us and keep our freedoms well what I read about on line seems like it breaks all Americans and anyone coming to our countries freedom. It sounds to me like illegal search and sezuire to me. It could also be envassion of privacy. Yes when ever you cross the boarder if you act guilty you can be checked but based on this they could check everyone and I say it is illegal and needs to go here is the story. I didn't write this it was in the Buffalo News.
New policy allows agents to seize your laptop, iPod or cell phone at the border
By Jerry Zremski NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF
Updated: 08/02/08 9:41 AM
The policy allowing the confiscation of cell phones, computers and other gadgets has been made public.
* U.S. Border Patrol increases scrutiny of Niagara River, irritating some boaters
WASHINGTON - Federal agents can confiscate your laptop, cell phone or iPod at the border without suspicion of wrongdoing under a recently disclosed U.S. government policy that's provoking outrage from business travelers and civil libertarians.
"If you don't want information on your laptop to be seen by the U. S. government, don't bring it across the border," Susan Gurley, executive director of the Association for Corporate Travel Executives, said on Friday. "We cannot warn people enough."
Gurley's group worries that the government can seize or copy electronic information without just cause when Americans return from overseas - and that sensitive corporate secrets could fall into the wrong hands as a result.
But the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which published the policy July 16 after lawmakers asked that it be made public, insisted the broad authority to conduct searches on electronic equipment is necessary to root out terrorists and child pornographers.
"The danger is legitimate," said Amy Kudwa, a department spokeswoman, who noted that the confiscation of electronic devices in pursuit of wrongdoers affects only "a very small population."
Under the policy, "officers may detain documents and electronic devices, or copies thereof, for a reasonable period of time to perform a thorough border search. The search may take place on-site or at an off-site location."
If, after the review, investigators find no reason to keep any of the information they retrieve from electronic devices, they have to destroy it, the policy says. But it offers no specifics for how long agents have to review information and return laptops and other electronic devices to their owners.
The policy - available at www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/admissability/search_authority.ctt/search_authority.pdf - affects all international travelers when they return to the United States not only at land borders but also on overseas flights.
Kudwa said she didn't know how long the policy has been in effect, but it has raised questions in the travel industry for 18 months.
In a recent survey of its members, Gurley's business travel group found that 44 percent of respondents had changed their corporate travel policies because of possible border searches.
Only three of the 100 respondents said an electronic device belonging to their company had been seized at the border this year.
But the business travelers still expressed widespread fears; 72 percent said they worried that data seized by the U. S. government was at risk of being compromised.
"We have reduced travel significantly to almost zero" in response to the policy, another respondent said. "We no longer trust U. S. territory to be secure."
The policy doesn't apply just to business travelers, either.
"This policy is especially difficult for people who live near the border and travel back and forth for business or pleasure," said Greg Nojeim, general counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. "Now they have to think about purchasing a clean laptop just so the government can take it for a few days without damaging their business or revealing personal details about their lives. And that's just what some travelers are doing."
The New York Civil Liberties Union and Muslim Advocates, a San Francisco-based group, said they worry that travelers of Arab or South Asian descent may be particularly vulnerable to unwarranted searches.
A federal appeals court, nevertheless, recently upheld the policy, which the government describes as necessary and harmless.
"During border inspections of laptops, [Customs and Border Protection] officers have found violent jihadist material, information about cyanide and nuclear material, video clips of Improvised Explosive Devices, pictures of high-level al-Qaida officials, and other material associated with people seeking to do harm to our country," Jayson Ahern, deputy commissioner, says on the Customs and Border Protection Web site. "Border searches also have uncovered intellectual property rights violations and child pornography."
Although the policy allows searches "absent individualized suspicion," agents actually conduct inspections only when they have some reason to believe that the devices should be examined, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a recent USA Today opinion piece.
And Jim Phillips, president of the Lewiston-based Canadian/ American Border Trade Alliance, said he has not heard any complaints about the policy from people who frequently cross the border.
In Congress, however, complaints are growing.
Sen. Russell D. Feingold, DWis., called the policy "truly alarming" and added, "I am more convinced than ever that legislation is needed in order to protect law-abiding Americans from this gross violation of privacy."
Feingold said he plans to introduce such legislation soon, and Rep. Brian Higgins, D-Buffalo, said he would consider pushing the bill in the House.
"I would call this an outrageous obliteration of civil liberties," Higgins said of the policy.
Chertoff, however, warned that legislation limiting the searches could cause a "dangerous, chilling effect" that would deter border agents from making searches they ought to make.
"We cannot abandon our responsibility to inspect what enters the U. S. just because the information is on an electronic device," he said in his USA Today commentary. "To do so would open a dangerous window for terrorists and criminals to exploit our borders in new and unacceptable ways."
