This story reminded me about the article posted by bob above with kinda the same thing.
Quote:There is also the danger of kids getting into trouble at school or with the cops for their own inappropriate online behavior. For example, a Florida appeals court recently upheld the conviction of two teens (16 and 17 at the time) who took sexually explicit pictures of each other and then one of them sent the digital images to the other.
The naughty photos weren't posted publicly or distributed but somehow police found out, and the youths were arrested and convicted for producing and possessing child porn. This is far from a case of pedophilia, but it was a technical violation of the very strict child porn laws.
Now for the big story that I like! I'm just going to comment a bit within the story but not too much....hopefully.
Quote:Audit: Anti-terror case data flawed
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer Tue Feb 20, 4:35 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Federal prosecutors counted immigration violations, marriage fraud and drug trafficking among anti-terror cases in the four years after 9/11 even though no evidence linked them to terror activity, a Justice Department audit said Tuesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Overall, nearly all of the terrorism-related statistics on investigations, referrals and cases examined by department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine were either diminished or inflated. Only two of 26 sets of department data reported between 2001 and 2005 were accurate, the audit found.
Responding, a Justice spokesman pointed to figures showing that prosecutors in the department's headquarters for the most part either accurately or underreported their data — underscoring what he called efforts to avoid pumping up federal terror statistics.
The numbers, used to monitor the department's progress in battling terrorists, are reported to Congress and the public and help, in part, shape the department's budget.
"For these and other reasons, it is essential that the department report accurate terrorism-related statistics," the audit concluded.
Hmmm maybe because all terrorist acts are carried out by our own government. I think the real proof that there is no terror threat, as far as we think about it today, is, in fact, that we've had no terrorists attacks since 9/11. To show this I point to 3 key areas. Board, Ports, Airports. All three of these are NOT locked down so tight that it would stop any wrong-minded person to come in and do some damage if need be. Want to carry out a jihad against San Fransisco? Mexican boarder's wide open! Want to ship in illegal exports and ship out white female sex slaves to China. We've not only had open ports but we're sold the only deep sea port on the West Coast to the CHINESE! Want to hijack a plane and hold hostages? You've got 10 hours to do it while waiting for the plane to take off. If our own government can't find real situations in which they've stopped real terrorists from attacking then that should be proof enough for anyone that there is no such thing as the terrorists we've come to know and love today. Of course that's wishful thinking.
Quote:Fine's office took care to say the flawed data appear to be the result of "decentralized and haphazard" methods of collection or disagreement over how the numbers are reported, and do not appear to be intentional.
DECENTRALIZED?! Isn't that what the Department of Homeland Security was for?! I THINK SO!!! How much more centralized can you get?! Get the FBI, CIA, DOD, DOJ, NSA, DHS, Secret Service, FCC, RIAA, MPAA, UN, etc., etc. and make them to Department of Us Vs. You!?
Quote:Still, the errors led Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., to question whether the department had exaggerated the number of terror cases.
"If the Department of Justice can't even get their own books in order, how are we supposed to have any confidence they are doing the job they should be?" said Schumer, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the department. "Whether this is just an accounting error or an attempt to pad terror prosecution statistics for some other reason, the Department of Justice of all places should be classifying cases for what they are, not what they want us to think them to be."
Auditors looked at 26 categories of statistics — including numbers of suspects charged and convicted in terror cases, and terror-related threats against cities and other U.S. targets — compiled by the
FBI, Justice's Criminal Division, and the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys.
It found that data from the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys were the most severely flawed. Auditors said the office, which compiles statistics from the 94 federal prosecutors' districts nationwide, both under- and over-counted the number of terror-related cases during a four-year period.
The office has since agreed to change the way it counts and classifies anti-terrorism cases, said department spokesman Dean Boyd.
Boyd denied suggestions that the department pumped up its numbers. He said Criminal Division prosecutors at Justice headquarters and the FBI have overhauled their respective case reporting systems since 2004 for a more accurate picture of terror-related workloads. Both agencies, he said, were strained to accurately report terrorism data in the flood of cases immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
"The notion that the Justice Department intentionally inflated its statistics is false and flatly contradicted by the OIG report itself," Boyd said.
In all but one area, Criminal Division prosecutors either accurately stated or underreported their data — the ones the department usually uses in public statements about its counterterror efforts, Boyd noted. He said the Justice Department has already completed most of the fixes recommended in the audit.
Much of the problem stemmed from how that office defines anti-terrorism cases.
That's because no one has seen fit to define what terrorism is and what acts are terrorist acts! Remember that whole PATRIOT Act thing? Ya it defined all crime as terrorism! When were the courts allowed to rule the constitutionality of this "law"...ohh never. We have secret courts to rule over these "terrorist" cases sure. Can you appeal them to the Supreme Court? Negative.
Quote:A November 2001 federal crackdown on security breaches at airports, for example, yielded arrests on immigration and false document charges, but no evidence of terrorist activity. Nonetheless, the attorneys' office lumped them in with other anti-terror cases since they were investigated by federal Joint Terrorism Task Forces or with other counterterror measures.
Again proves my point! Want to be the perfect terrorist?! Sneak into the country and work for the frackin airports! Are we to assume that these terrorists are smart enough to pull off 9/11 but to stupid to take the opportunity to submit an application?
Quote:Other examples, according to the audit, included:
_Charges against a marriage-broker for being paid to arrange six fraudulent marriages between Tunisians and U.S. citizens.
_Prosecution of a Mexican citizen who falsely identified himself as another person in a passport application.
_Charges against a suspect for dealing firearms without a license. The prosecutor handling the case told auditors it should not have been labeled as anti-terrorism.
"We do not agree that law enforcement efforts such as these should be counted as anti-terrorism," the audit concluded. Even if those cases were not taken into account, the audit said, the U.S. attorneys' office had overstated statistics in all other categories it reported.
___
On the Net:
The audit can be found at:
http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus/a0720/final.pdf That's right...this is what we need to give up our rights for. To be secure...from non-terrorists!!! How can you have marriage fraud be terrorism? I don't know...the defendants don't know...the GOVT DOESN'T EVEN KNOW!!!
X
(Take your happy pills and go back to sleep America...you're government is here!!!)