You are not safe. Not at work. Not at home in your bed. The biggest threat is not terrorism. It's corporate negligence leading to a blast or collapse or release of toxic chemicals.
If you want to see why the public approval rating of Congress is down in the sub-arctic range all you have to do is take a quick look at how the House and Senate pay worship at the altar of corporations, banks and other special interests at the expense of public need.
Over a decade after 9/11, many of our communities have become more prepared to deal with the threat of a terrorist attack or crisis situation like the Boston Marathon bombing. Leaders in every community must ask themselves whether they are doing everything they can to be prepared.
The justification that legislative assaults on the Constitution that seriously eroded the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments were necessary to prevent another 9/11 are now revealed to be as fictitious as any imaginary fairytale.
America will never be a "no drone zone." There was a small glimmer of hope that these aerial threats to privacy would not come home to roost, but that all ended when Barack Obama took office and made drones the cornerstone of his war efforts.
The idea of increased surveillance by UAVs may well be unpopular, but should proactive security surveillance measures harnessing the latest technology not be a viable alternative to the reactive scramble for evidence?
Between watching Homeland and Zero Dark Thirty, you could be forgiven for thinking our nation's defense and counterterrorism operations are run by rail thin, whip-smart blonde women and a cadre of loyal but less brilliant men.
The chairman of the Chicago White Sox and Bulls is going into the global security business with an eclectic and controversial group of partners tied to the Obama administration, documents and interviews show.
Are we looking at a life-and-death crisis that demands mass mobilization, a controlled and rationed economy and large-scale strategic planning for the short and long term? Does this crisis demand, in short, a war economy and a complete rethinking of the military system?
For 10 years, the United States has been fighting very real and very expensive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But we have never levied a dime in special taxes to pay for either of these conflicts, let alone the also-expensive war at home (in the form of homeland security).
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution already provides us with protection against unreasonable search and seizures for people in their "persons, houses, papers, and effects" -- is it time that we add "data" to this list?
Have you heard about the undisclosed amount of new un-circulated $100 dollar bills that seem to have disappeared on their way to the Federal Reserve? It seems no one in the federal government even knows how much was lost. Was it billions, maybe trillions? Nobody seems to know.
Once upon a time, "homeland" was a word of little significance in the American context. There was a reason: "homeland" had a certain ring to it and anyone would have known at once just what that ring, that resonance, was.
Despite sucking up a sum of money that could have rebuilt crumbling infrastructure from coast to coast, this new agency and the very concept of "homeland security" have largely flown beneath the media radar -- with disastrous results.
The scanners haven't foiled a single terrorist attack.