[Vision2020] Homeland Security Questions, Please

[bill london]

One aspect to this Homeland Security stuff that I do not understand is 
the way the Republican Party has flopped completely on the issue of  the 
intrusion of the federal government. 
The Republicans used to show nothing but contempt for government actions.
Republicans used to laugh about the ineptness of the federal government 
and swore they were going to rein in its power and growth.
But now, while they are in power, they have fully supported massive 
increases in federal power and the number of federal workers (and the 
debt to pay for it). 
What did the Republicans expect?  They grant the federal government all 
these new powers and somehow expect that the government forces would 
shed their bureaucratic bungling, stupid rulemaking, and autocratic ways? BL

Saundra Lund wrote:

>Visionaries:
>
>Having just returned from The Trip from Hades, I've determined that I
>haven't a clue as to the *purpose* of Homeland Security.  I mean, I
>*thought* I had a basic understanding of its purpose and goals since I keep
>up with the news fairly well, dutifully pay my taxes, have traveled too many
>air miles to count, and have been in & out of government institutions and
>through security many times, but it's become clear my knowledge is clearly
>lacking in some important aspect.
>
>Since I know some here have done a better job of keeping abreast of things
>than I, I'm hoping for some clarification.
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies forcing a small group of US women
>and children *back* onto a train on US soil with a suspected bomb and
>suspected terrorists?
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies holding hundreds of US citizens
>(and perhaps non-US citizens -- I didn't, and wouldn't have been allowed to,
>survey all the passengers and crew) hostage on a train for hours with a
>suspected bomb and suspected terrorists?
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies moving the same US train on US soil
>full of hundreds of US citizens (including children, the elderly, & the
>disabled) to a remote field and forcing the passengers off without their
>possessions, including medications?
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies holding those same US citizens at
>gunpoint (well, surrounded by guns) for hours in a hot remote field overrun
>by cicadas for hours with no food, water, or facilities, and no place to
>sit?
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies holding that same group of US
>citizens in that field close enough to the train that had there been a bomb
>that exploded, we'd all have been history?
>
>What part of Homeland Security justifies depriving US citizens of their
>belongings (including money and medication) for hours once the "bomb threat"
>and "terrorist threat" have been resolved?
>
>A related, but less pressing question, is what part of Homeland Security
>justifies keeping those US hostage-citizens completely in the dark about
>what's going on while the circumstances are being reported on TV and are
>widely known amongst the citizens of the town where the "terrorist scare"
>unfolded?
>
>And, what part of Homeland Security justifies *everyone* but those US
>hostage-citizens access to the information?
>
>Thanks in advance for any enlightenment.  At this point, I'm forced to
>conclude that Homeland Security is nothing but a huge expensive joke that
>puts US citizens at risk and takes away our basic human rights.
>
>
>Saundra Lund
>Moscow, Idaho
>
>The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
>nothing.
>Edmund Burke
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>               http://www.fsr.net                       
>          mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>
>.
>
>  
>