You are hereBlogs / davidswanson's blog / Chat I Just Had With Homeland Security

Chat I Just Had With Homeland Security


By davidswanson - Posted on 09 February 2012

After publishing this report I was contacted by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).  The individual involved never returned my call.  Instead I heard from Brian Hale who said he had been with Director Morton at the event recently held at the University of Virginia and discussed in my report.  He told me that ICE in fact had nothing to do with contacting activists, that in fact Ed Ryan (who had contacted local residents from an ICE email address) actually worked for Federal Protective Services which used to fall under ICE and still has some ICE email addresses.  I asked Hale, regardless of department, why any branch of Homeland Security was using our money to contact us in a manner that intimidated people out of exercising their First Amendment rights.  Hale told me to ask Federal Protective Services (FPS).

I reached Rob Winchester at FPS.  I asked him about the January 20th MovetoAmend.org "Occupy the Courts" events held here in Charlottesville, Va., and around the country.  He said that FPS inspectors had tried to facilitate events in order to get them permitted and make them legal.  Some of the events, he said, were on federal property.  The intent had been dialogue and not intimidation.  If people were intimidated, he said, he apologized for that.

I told Winchester that the street corner where the Charlottesville event was held is routinely used for demonstrations without permits or authorizations beyond the First Amendment, and that we have never had a problem, but that the FPS contacts instructing people to inform authorities of their plans by certain deadlines and so forth had in fact intimidated people out of exercising their rights. 

Winchester replied that at one location elsewhere in the country some people had "been pushing against the barricades."  I didn't ask what the barricades were doing there.  In another location, he said, "our folks were laughing and joking with the people there."  Mine was the first report of any intimidation, he said.

I pointed out that people who are intimidated by FPS contact do not phone in to the FPS to report that they feel intimidated.  Winchester said that he understood and would pass this along as "lessons learned."  I thanked him for his apology and for understanding.  But this is clearly a work in progress.  Many would like to be free to hold rallies without the presence of a militarized federal force, regardless of whether that force is joking and laughing with us.  Many would like to be left alone to exercise their First Amendment rights undisturbed rather than fund Big Brother to the tune of $75 billion per year, no matter how benevolent the intentions.  The problem is not Ryan or Winchester but the system they have made themselves a part of.

My advice to intimidated activists is to not leave me the only person phoning in to complain.  Phone in.  Phone every day.  Ask for a meeting to discuss the problem.  Call 202-282-8000.

If Obama was forced out by the IRAQIS, kicking and screaming, to continue the war because he could not get immunity for


his fascist military, it means the removal of war in Afghanistan after endless statements how WESTERN FASCISTS/NATO  would stay there


until HELL FREEZES OVER........IMPLIES ANOTHER REASON FOR THE SHIFT.


 


SUGGESTION:   WAR WITH IRAN AND POSSIBLY A WORLD WAR, WHICH IS OPPOSED BY THE WHOLE WORLD.  THESE NAZIS,


FASCISTS,  U.S./NATO/ISRAELI THUGS ARE GOING TO PROVOKE A WORLD WAR TO ENABLE ISRAELI/ZIONIST FASCISM.


 


The world needs to confront, collectively, all their Western class thugs, rejecting votes for class parties, class politicians, to save them-


selves from nuclear war and global Fascism.  INTERNATIONAL STRIKES AGAINST WESTERN FASCISM. 

I find much of value in what David writes here and other locations online. However he repeatedly ascribes the problem to the system without realizing that only individual people make the ideas/words that are the description of a system into something that is tangible and results in benefit or harm. In the case of a political system - generally, a method of human interaction that results in various levels and types of order between them - most all current and in the past have been a government, the dichotomous ruler(s)/ruled arrangement instituted and kept in place by way of government/ruler employed enforcers.
David wrote near the end: "The problem is not Ryan or Winchester but the system they have made themselves a part of."
Without all the Ryans and Winchesters and the many other government enforcers - those willing to threaten and actually initiate physical harm on others, either within or outside the boundaries that a government declares its jurisdiction - all the words of "the system" remain just that. Words in themselves are ignorable. It is only when someone(s) use physical force (or even threats of it) to "persuade" others to act in a certain way, that there is a true problem. Blaming "the system" merely makes the problem less solvable by depersonalizing and even dematerializing the real causes of the problem, which is the individual persons supporting and enforcing "the system".

Many, maybe even David, would retort that people must have rules to follow, otherwise chaos would reign.
My response is yes, but those "rules" should not be promulgated (let alone enforced) from the top by elitists who think they know best for everyone, but rather they should naturally emerge from all individuals in a society, each acting to maximize hir individual lifetime Happiness in the longest range widest thinking possible manner. Human society (anywhere on earth), just like any other natural system, can be naturally self-regulating by means of interactions between its members - if only humans seek to discover and are allowed to implement the methods by which such self-regulation can be effective, rather than continuing to embrace social systems that  need to be constantly held in an unnatural (and very unoptimal) state of balance by the operations of their rulers and other influencers. "Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Interaction": http://selfsip.org/fundamentals/socialmetaneeds.html
This treatise and its many links to technical terms is NOT a breezy quick read - a warning for those looking for and used to soundbites with which to walk away, thinking that such bromides are really foundational and meaningful as a solution to serious social problems. If the solution to this very longstanding problem were so simple, it would already have been much earlier discovered. Instead, the twin-framework implementations of the Social Meta-Needs theory - The Natural Social Contract and Social Preferencing - are envisioned as full replacements for entire existing governmental structures and mechanisms, which in the US alone require thousands of volumes and many millions (?billions? trillions?) of words enabling tens of thousands of lawyers to charge handsomely to serve as "gatekeepers" for the common folk.

As for the current problem of government enforcers, both domestic policing agents and military participants, keep in mind that there are far more non-enforcers than enforcers in the US (and in any other location). Therefore it is quite possible for a large number of non-enforcers who cease voluntary association with these enforcers to have a persuading effect on them, if reasoned logic doesn't do it first. For all who disagree with their various harm-causing actions, don't voluntarily associate with these government enforcers - no sales, no service, no camaraderie, no anything! And do the same to anyone who you know is a direct supporter of such enforcers. This is shunning and ostracism, used down through the ages with considerable success towards modifying others' behaviors viewed as unacceptable.

So instead of simply blaming "the system" and focusing all attention on this ethereal quagmire (evil apparition), take a more substantial tangible approach. Make the position of government enforcer one that is truly unpopular and there will be a lot fewer of them. Stop enabling/supporting government enforcers in any manner and they will cease to exist. With fewer enforcers to obey their orders, governments can't do the amount of harm they get away with now. In fact, without any enforcers, governments will also cease to exist.

i want Bush, Cheney, Obama, and particular Supreme Court Justices impeached, not their theories or their systems but them

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Store:



















Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.