USA Today claims "Napolitano resigns as Homeland Security secretary" wasn't she the director?
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who has handled hot-button issues ranging from immigration to counter-terrorism, said Friday she is resigning to run the University of California and its system of colleges.
"I thank President Obama for the chance to serve our nation during this important chapter in our history," Napolitano said in a statement. "And I know the Department of Homeland Security will continue to perform its important duties with the honor and focus that the American public expects."
Obama praised Napolitano's performance during four-and-a-half years at the Department of Homeland Security, noting that its responsibilities during her tenure ranged from the Joplin tornado to Hurricane Sandy, as well as efforts to thwart terrorism.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/07/12/obama-napolitano-department-of-homeland-security/2511755/
After the Bush-monkey Obama appointed as FBI Director, who will he appoint as Supreme Court Justices or to lead DHS?
Here are some valid questions that Comey should have been required to answer before he was appointed:
1. Will you maintain the F.B.I. ban on torture and coercing of statements and confessions? Would you instruct F.B.I. agents to investigate all credible reports, including those involving other federal personnel, of violations of Sections 2340 and 2441 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which define torture and war crimes? (In 2002, according to a Justice Department report, F.B.I. agents at Guantánamo Bay created a “war crimes file” to document accusations of prisoner mistreatment by American military personnel, but an F.B.I. official ordered that the file be closed in 2003.)
2. In March 2004, you argued that the N.S.A. surveillance program was illegal. Do you still believe that the domestic communications of American citizens can be legally monitored by the government only with a judicially approved warrant? If so, what assurances about the warrantless surveillance scheme did Mr. Bush offer that persuaded you to stop opposing the program?
3. Do you stand by your statement, made at a Justice Department news conference in June 2004, that it was right to hold Jose Padilla, an American citizen who was arrested on American soil, in a military brig (for two years at that point) without charges?
4. Why, in April 2005, did you approve 13 harsh interrogation tactics, including waterboarding and up to 180 hours of sleep deprivation, for use on suspects by officers of the C.I.A.?
5. Do you stand by a speech in March 2009 in which you spoke of the need to “incapacitate” terrorists who could not be prosecuted, either because of a lack of sufficient evidence or because the information had been secretly provided by a foreign country? Do you believe that since procedures exist for “preventative detention” of people with dangerous mental illness, there should be a similar way to detain terrorism suspects without trial?
6. Do you believe there is a trade-off between civil liberties and national security, or do you think, as Mr. Obama stated when he ran for president, that this is a false choice? Where do you believe the balance between privacy and safety can be found, when the government has ready access to vast amounts of data collected by communications companies?
7. The N.S.A.’s data-mining operations seem to be sweeping up information involving foreigners and American citizens alike. How can we preserve the distinction between “non-U.S. persons” abroad, on whom officials have virtually unlimited authority to conduct surveillance, and “U.S. persons” inside our borders, on whom they lack authority to conduct warrantless surveillance?
8. Can you explain why the F.B.I. has submitted requests to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for phone call data, even though the data is to be directly furnished to the N.S.A.? How does the F.B.I. follow up on such requests to ensure that the N.S.A. is protecting the rights of American citizens?
9. Are the N.S.A.’s data-gathering efforts, disclosed in recent weeks, an outgrowth of Mr. Bush’s earlier warrantless surveillance program, to which you objected? Do they relate to the “Total Information Awareness” scheme proposed by John M. Poindexter, a retired admiral and former aide to Ronald Reagan, that was terminated after it was made public in 2002?
10. Officials say that great national harm will result from the disclosure of secret activities that are legally questionable. What do you think of this proposed remedy: The government should abide by international law and refrain from infringing on the rights of American citizens in the first place?
Unlike the George W. Bush Jr. NSA fiasco, where telecoms were under media attack, the recent news articles on data-mining and invasions of our privacy by the NSA included reports that the FBI was involved. Who will our federal government allow to watch us next? Maybe researchers will be allowed to watch us have sex and perform psychological experiments on us as we sleep. Maybe some of us can prove it and sue the hell out of these fools.
= new reply since forum marked as read
