The purpose of H.R. 2438 is “To ensure that certain Federal employees cannot hide behind immunity.”
I don’t know Peter Gadiel, and he apparently knows absolutely nothing about me. But that hasn’t stopped him from attacking me in a recent article (Influential Conservative is Dangerously Wrong on E-Verify). His article makes some outrageous statements about me, even to presume he can tell you what motives are in my head when I take a position.
Recently, I released an article entitled “E-Verify and the Emerging Surveillance State.” My opposition to E-Verify is that it is a major tool in the creation of a surveillance society; will give the government the power to decide who works and who doesn’t in America; will be a great burden on both worker and business; and will do absolutely nothing to protect us from illegal immigration or terrorism. In short, E-Verify represents another false promise of security and a greater threat to our freedom.
Drive your car through the small town of Royston, England, and your license plate will be photographed by a hidden camera and checked against a national police database, regardless of whether there is probable cause to suspect you have committed a crime. Simply passing through the city limits is apparently cause enough.
Royston, writes the Daily Mail, “has become the first [town] in Britain to have every car passing through it tracked by police cameras,” with “a set of police cameras installed on every road leading in and out of it, recording the number plate of every vehicle that passes them.”
The devices are known as Automated Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras.
In an effort to draw national attention to the federal government's intrusion into the everyday lives of its citizens, Oklahoman Kaye Beach has elected to take on the system. She refused to renew her driver’s license in protest of not only forced biometric enrollment — having her information shared with corporations and government agencies — but also the influence of international organizations on U.S. policies and laws. Her actions have initiated a full-fledged legal battle.
According to the Constitutional Alliance, an organization supporting Beach’s case, she was recently cited for driving with an expired license in Norman, Oklahoma, reportedly because she felt that being forced to renew her driver’s license with biometric information was a violation of her constitutional rights.
If you aren’t already convinced that judicial robes cloak the biggest set of fools and tyrants outside Congress, a decision last week from the DC Court of Appeals should finish the job.
At issue was the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) carcinogenic porno-scanners at the nation’s airports — contraptions so evil that the TSA has repeatedly, constantly lied about their dangers to both our health and modesty as passengers who submissively shed their shoes and bag their liquids revolt against this final indignity.
Texas Congressman Ron Paul was interviewed Tuesday on Fox Radio's Tom Sullivan Show and took the opportunity to restate his position that the naked body scans and enhanced pat-downs by employees of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are unconstitutional. He declared that the TSA is “invasive, unnecessary, and ineffective,” and said it should be replaced by private security forces.
The Blaze notes that Paul "rejected the underlying premise of the TSA wholesale — that federal bureaucrats will keep us safer than private enterprises with direct interest in the safety (and satisfaction) of their customers."
Paul observed that those at the TSA who are performing the enhanced pat-downs are not "the most reputable people.” He also noted the double standard concerning behavior by the TSA which is considered acceptable, commenting, “We would be arrested if we did this.”
Perhaps responding to the increasing criticism for its unconstitutional policies, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced major changes to its privacy policies. According to the agency, they will be utilizing newer technology in several U.S. airports. With the new equipment, when a passenger goes through a "naked body" scanner at a security checkpoint, a generic outline of a person is shown instead of a naked body.
The new technology is intended to address concerns posed by the advanced image technology (AIT) that has exposed naked pictures of travelers who enter the body scanners. Unsurprisingly, the scanners and the naked images that were produced by them provoked concerns regarding privacy rights.
Wired provides some background regarding the controversial scanners:
Michele Bachmann’s high-profile entrance into the 2012 presidential race has been a boon to a media with a short attention span for issues pertinent to statecraft. Largely ignoring any actual qualifications the Minnesota congresswoman might have to abandon her position in the nation’s most important governing body and serve instead as President, news reporters, “journalists,” and political commentators have, instead, fixated over the past few weeks on where Bachmann attends church, what medications she may or may not be taking for a “medical condition,” and her husband’s education and career. For instance, the media thought it important to drill down deep to find out why the Bachmann family left one church to join another. Similarly, in the journalistic tradition of the National Enquirer, the Daily Caller employed a series of anonymous quotes from “former” aides, advisors, and such to create a sensational news story about a “stress-related condition” that supposedly “incapacitates” Bachmann on a regular basis. With a headline that alleged “heavy pill use” on the part of the Minnesota congresswoman, the story couldn’t fail to gain traction among a news media hungry for any bit of spice in Bachmann’s candidacy.
A growing telephone hacking scandal in London surrounding Rupert Murdoch’s multinational media empire News International has prompted a number of arrests and resignations, and has been the subject of severe controversy in recent news. The latest developments occurred this weekend, when Les Hilton, chief executive of Dow Jones and Rupert Murdoch’s “right-hand man,” resigned from News Corporation; London Metropolitan Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson stepped down after criticism for his handling of the scandal; and former News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks — who was virtually head of Murdoch’s British newspapers — was arrested.
News of the scandal hit media waves earlier this month when the Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid News of the World was accused of hacking into the cellphone records of victims ranging from celebrities, royals, and politicians to the grieving families of missing persons. The police have examined 4,000 people who have been targeted by the paper. The Blaze reports:
The rush is on to force into law mandatory use of the E-Verify system that will mandate that all businesses use this hand-me-down from the Social Security Administration in order to hire anyone. Republican Representative Lamar Smith has introduced H.R. 2164, and House action is expected at any time. Say proponents, E-Verify is necessary to stop illegals from getting jobs. Many freedom-loving conservatives are supporting the idea in a desperate attempt to control illegal immigration. Is this the right way to protect America?
To answer that, it’s necessary to ask another question. If government won’t do its job, is that a reason for Americans to surrender their liberty? Do you think that is a funny question? Well, it is actually what a number of conservative activist groups are now advocating in the name of stopping illegal immigration through enforcement of E-Verify.