Month: December 2017

DHS Announces Program To Scan American Faces

As TSA agents continue to prove their incompetence in the “War on Terror,” the Department of Homeland Security is now allocating $1 billion in taxpayer funding to create a facial recognition program that will scan Americans’ faces. A study conducted by Georgetown Law’s Center for Privacy and Technology looked at the biometric scanners that are creating an inventory of the faces of individuals leaving the country at airports across the United States. While they are only at certain major airports right now, the full implementation of these scanners could cost Americans up to $1 billion. The study noted that while the “9/11 Response and Biometric Exit Account” created by Congress has the funds for the program, “neither Congress nor DHS has ever justified the need for the program.” In addition to the fact that Congress has never provided a reason why the system is needed in the U.S., the study claimed that DHS has “repeatedly questioned ‘the additional value biometric air exit would provide’ compared with the status quo and the ‘overall value and cost of a biometric air exit capability,’ even as it has worked to build it.” Not only is a government agency pouring $1 billion into a program to increase the country’s security measures even though it lacks full confidence, and has no evidence that the program it is implementing will do so, there is also the fact that the program requires Americans to give up their civil liberties, and it has never been explicitly authorized by the government. As the researchers from Georgetown Law noted: “DHS’ biometric exit program also stands on shaky legal ground. Congress has repeatedly ordered the collection of biometrics from foreign nationals at the border, but has never clearly authorized the border collection of biometrics from American citizens using face recognition technology. Without explicit authorization, DHS should not be scanning the faces of Americans as they depart on international flights—but DHS is doing it anyway. DHS also is failing to comply with a federal law requiring it to conduct a rulemaking process to implement the airport face scanning program—a process that DHS has not even started.” The study also found that the biometric scanners used by DHS are not reliable, and often make mistakes. In fact, “according to DHS’ own data, DHS’ face recognition systems erroneously reject as many as 1 in 25 travelers using valid credentials.” This means that at the country’s busiest airports, more than 1,500 travelers could be wrongfully denied boarding in a single day. As The Free Thought Project has reported, while the biometric scanners are currently located at the major airports in Boston, Chicago, Houston, Atlanta, New York City and the District of Columbia, DHS has made it clear that they plan to roll this program out nationwide by January 2018. Sens. Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, and Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah, criticized the privacy implications, and called for Homeland Security to halt the facial recognition scanning program in a letter to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielson: “We request that DHS stop the expansion of this program, and provide Congress with its explicit statutory authority to use and expand a biometric exit program on U.S. citizens. If there is no specific authorization, then we request an explanation for why DHS believes it has the authority to proceed without congressional approval. Additionally, we ask that you address a number of our privacy concerns with the program.” Markey told The Hill that DHS should never have started testing and implementing the biometric scanners without first receiving congressional approval, and the United States Congress should take the time to weigh the implications of the program before handing the department a blank check. “When American citizens travel by air internationally, they should not have to choose between privacy and security,” Markey said. “The implementation of the Department of Homeland Security’s facial recognition scanning program for passengers leaving the country raises a number of concerns around accuracy, transparency and basic necessity.”

Definitely some disturbing implications here..  This is a toughy..and it pits two competing conflicting values; privacy and security.  Here at The Daily Buzz we are ALL for securing biometric data from those NON-U.S. citizens coming to America, especially illegal aliens.  With the ever growing threats to our national security and our homeland, that is just basic common sense.  However, we need to be VERY careful that such efforts, and the technologies used to implement those efforts, are not used against law-abiding American citizens, without a proper warrant or other court order.  We’ll keep an eye on this developing story…

Fact Check: The Math Adds Up for Trump’s Claim That USPS Undercharges Amazon

Following a tweet from President Trump today where he called out Amazon and the United States Postal Service, Breitbart News investigated Trump’s claims. “Why is the United States Post Office, which is losing many billions of dollars a year, while charging Amazon and others so little to deliver their packages, making Amazon richer and the Post Office dumber and poorer? Should be charging MUCH MORE!” Trump said in a tweet posted on Friday. Trump’s claim that the USPS is losing billions of dollars is entirely correct, in 2016 the USPS announced a $5.6 billion net loss and in 2017 stated a $2.7 billion net loss, making this the eleventh year that the Postal Service has announced a loss. The total from 2007-17 amounts to a staggering $65.1 billion in losses. Things do not seem to be looking up for the organization anytime soon, with the USPS predicting in their public 2018 Integrated Financial Plan that they would suffer a net loss of $5.2 billion in 2018. With mail volume at a 29 year low and amassing large amounts of debt, the Postal Service is facing a tough time ahead. However, a bipartisan bill has been proposed that would help the Postal Service. The USPS operates under a law from 2006 that restricts how much they can charge for stamps, how much they must pay into retiree health funds, and other general restrictions on business operations. Some elements of that law expired in 2016, such as the one stating that USPS must pay $5.4 billion to $5.8 billion into retiree health funds, but this new bill would see the law revamped entirely to help the Postal Service compete in the modern age. “Once enacted, and together with aggressive management actions, the Postal Service can meet all of our obligations and continue to improve the way we serve the American public,” said Postmaster General Megan Brennan in testimony to Congress. Another element hampering the Postal Service is the price it charges to deliver packages for e-commerce giant Amazon. A Citigroup analysis in July of 2017 found that a subsidy of $1.46 was attached to every Amazon package delivered by USPS due to the Postal Service delivering the company’s packages below their own costs. It was determined in 2007 by the Postal Service and its regulator that a minimum of 5.5 percent of the Postal Service’s fixed costs must be allocated to package deliveries. Ten years later, despite 25 percent of USPS’s revenue coming from packages, the percentage of fixed costs allocated to packages has not increased enough to become profitable. According to Citigroup’s analysis, if these costs were fairly redistributed and allocated, the average parcel would cost around $1.46 more to deliver. Amazon has used a method called “postal injection” to save money on their own deliveries, delivering pre-sorted Amazon packages to local post office delivery depots for “last mile” deliveries to be made by the USPS at a greatly discounted price. With Amazon warehouses located near many USPS depots, Amazon has managed to outsource almost two-thirds of their deliveries to the United States Postal Service. So is President Trump right in saying that the USPS should be charing Amazon much more? Based on the current figures relating to the number of packages the USPS delivers for Amazon, the price they charge for delivery, and the Postal Service’s current financial state, the answer is clearly yes.

Classified Documents Found Among Huma Abedin’s Emails on Weiner’s Laptop

The State Department released emails Friday that investigators found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop which were sent from his estranged wife—top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin—some of which contained classified information. At least five of the found emails were marked classified, the New York Post reports. One email from Abedin to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was preparation for a phone call with Prince Saud of Saudi Arabia. The call was intended to warn the Saudis of classified material Bradley Manning had given to Wikileaks and was about to become public. Most of the content of the emails was heavily redacted when released by the State Department: “I deeply regret the likely upcoming WikiLeaks disclosure,” read one of the talking points. “This appears to be the result of an illegal act in which a fully cleared intelligence officer stole information and gave it to a website. The person responsible will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law” the message continued. “This is the kind of information we fear may be released: details of private conversations with your government on Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton released a statement after the release of the emails. “This is a major victory. After years of hard work in federal court, Judicial Watch has forced the State Department to finally allow Americans to see these public documents,” Fitton said. “It will be in keeping with our past experience that Abedin’s emails on Weiner’s laptop will include classified and other sensitive materials.” “That these government docs were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop dramatically illustrates the need for the Justice Department to finally do a serious investigation of Hillary Clinton’s and Huma Abedin’s obvious violations of law.” Judicial Watch has filed numerous lawsuits for official emails found on Clinton’s private email server to be made public.

Major kudos to Judicial Watch for its efforts in getting this information and making it available to the American public.  We the people have a right to know just how corrupt Hillary and her minions are/were.  And, we believe that Congress and/or AG Jeff Sessions need to reopen the probe into the Hillary email scandal with this new information that has come to light this past year.  It’s way past time Hillary and Huma were held to account for their clear violations of handling of classified information, among other things.

BuzzFeed slammed for ‘bigoted piece of filth’ article claiming white people ruin America

BuzzFeed is being slammed for a racially charged article it published Wednesday titled, “37 Things White People Need To Stop Ruining In 2018,” which lists “America” among the things that whites are supposedly tarnishing. “This article isn’t funny, it’s racist—plain and simple. If a similar piece was written about any other ethnicity, the journalist would be fired on the spot. It undoubtedly would spark public outrage, and rightfully so” conservative commentator Britt McHenry told Fox News. BuzzFeed staff writer Patrice Peck put together a listicle of things she feels that Caucasians have ruined, which features everything from macaroni and cheese to makeup. She blames supermodel Bella Hadid for ruining sneaker culture by talking about shoes like an “undercover cop.” Peck’s story didn’t take much work, as she simply embedded tweets, comments and headlines written by other people in an attempt to make her point that white people are ruining America. Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that “openly liberal media have finally outed themselves” and left-leaning media members think “it’s OK to be racist or sexist, as long as their targets are white and male” with conservative values. “The easy test of this is try imagining a bigoted piece of filth like this being written about any other group. Picture the ‘37 Things Black People Need To Stop Ruining In 2018’ headline and then wait for Twitter to shut down your account,” Gainor said. Gainor called BuzzFeed “openly bigoted” but said “major media will let them get it away it” because many would-be critics are just as guilty. “Instead of hating white people, maybe Buzzfeed should thank them. The unemployment rate remains at a 17-year low, and the economy grew last quarter at its fastest pace since 2015. Minorities, including Hispanics and Blacks, are seeing historic lows in unemployment across the country,” McHenry said. Outkick founder and media watchdog Clay Travis echoed McHenry’s feelings about the article, tweeting, “If this is written about any other race every advertiser bails on company & a ton of people are fired.” The story also claims that Kendall Jenner ruined protests, wealthy people have ruined “trees” by installing anti-bird spikes, white Hollywood ruined the Oscars, Adele beating Beyoncé for an award ruined the Grammys and one particular white woman ruined the hit Migos song “Bad and Boujee” simply by posting a video of herself singing along. In fact, Peck says white people ruined the word “boujee” all together. Peck blames white people who voted for President Trump as the ones who have ruined America. She even charges a group of non-Koreans who started a K-Pop band have ruined that genre of music. The list goes on to mention a handful of other hip-hop songs that white people have destroyed by performing – complete with video of a white girl who apparently dislocated her knee while attempting the “Hit Dem Folks” dance. The BuzzFeed staffer also says white people have ruined “any challenge,” “car freestyles” and even hip-hop music in general – which is backed up by a tweet showcasing the amount of white people who currently have hits on iTunes. But Peck doesn’t only think white people ruined rap music, she also lists “classics,” using the Destiny’s Child song “Say My Name” as an example because white actresses Debby Ryan and Ashley Tisdale dared to cover it. The racially insensitive post also claims white people have ruined “childhoods” and links to video of an elderly woman in an argument over a child selling candy outside of a department store. To end the piece, Peck blames white people for ruining the ability to identify as Filipino and black, with links to stories about white people who identify as non-white races. “Eliminating racism means eliminating all commentary like this. Nobody can help the color of their skin,” McHenry said. “Why make fun of people for that? So, Buzzfeed, leave the ‘comedy’ to real comedians.” A BuzzFeed spokesperson told Fox News that it is “important to distinguish entertainment content from News” and declined further comment.

Of course..  Because Buzzfeed is garbage.  In the interest of full disclosure, we have in previous years posted articles, on occasion, from Buzzfeed.  After this, and their “breaking story” regarding the infamously discredited so-called “Trump dossier,” we will no longer do so.  Two strikes, and they’re out!  Patrice Peck is an openly, brazen black racist.  Buzzfeed should fire her immediately, along with whatever editor(s) who allowed her column to be posted, and apologize publicly for such an offensive and breathtaking lack of judgement.

Ann Coulter: No DACA Amnesty ‘Until There’s a Wall and Hell Freezes Over’

New York Times best-selling author and populist conservative columnist Ann Coulter says President Trump should not begin to consider amnesty for illegal aliens “until there’s a wall and hell freezes over.” In a post on Friday, Coulter responded to a tweet by President Trump in which he reiterated that he would only be willing to sign off on an amnesty beginning with nearly 800,000 illegal aliens if his list of pro-American immigration principles were enacted simultaneously. Trump tweeted, “The Democrats have been told, and fully understand, that there can be no DACA without the desperately needed WALL at the Southern Border and an END to the horrible Chain Migration & ridiculous Lottery System of Immigration etc. We must protect our Country at all cost!” Those principles include full funding for the construction of a border wall — which has been stalled in the prototype stage — as well as an end to “chain migration,” which makes up more than 70 percent of all legal immigration as it allows newly naturalized immigrants to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the U.S. with them. Additionally, Trump says in exchange for DACA amnesty, he wants to see an immediate end to the Diversity Visa Lottery program, whereby 50,000 visas are randomly given out all over the world every year to foreign nationals who do not have to meet a rigorous set of skills or requirements. Ann Coulter, however, says the Trump administration should not even be considering amnesty for illegal aliens. “No DACA until there’s a wall AND hell freezes over.” In a Breitbart News interview this week, Coulter said she wanted DACA illegal aliens to be deported first, citing the role that many of the enrollees of the program play in the open borders lobby and immigration activism organizations. Coulter told Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow: “It has to be said that many of the legal and illegal low-wage workers, they’re incredibly hard workers, they’re really nice people, and it occurred to me … that I actually like all of the illegal immigrants except the DREAMers. They’re the ones I want deported first because they’re the activists. They’re the obnoxious ones. They’re the ones who go to congressional offices and stamp their feet and say, “How dare you not rush to grant us amnesty?” Whereas the other illegals don’t have the time to be protesting; they’re busy working, being polite, being so friendly and nice and saying, “Merry Christmas.” No. Let’s start by deporting the DREAMers. That’s point one.” Trump signing off on any amnesty plan, no matter if it included an end to chain migration, elimination of the Visa Lottery and funding for the border wall, would be an enormous betrayal to his “America First” agenda and commitment to American workers. Amnesty for DACA illegal aliens has the potential to flood the American workforce with more low-skilled foreign labor and could trigger a surge of illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border. Corporate interests, including the GOP mega-donors Charles and David Koch, have teamed up with the open borders lobby to push a DACA amnesty, as it would provide a stream of cheap, foreign labor that would further drive down the wages of America’s working and middle class.

As usual Ann nails it on the head.  And her point about the obnoxious, entitlement-minded so-called “Dreamers” is extremely well taken!  They ARE the ones getting in everyone’s face demanding that they be granted amnesty.  We agree with Ann..  Dreamers SHOULD be the first to be deported.   But, here at The Daily Buzz, we’ve adopted more of an “option D” approach to deporting illegal aliens here in America; “all of the above.”  There are between roughly 15-22 MILLION illegal aliens in this country (the Dems will say 11 million; the same number they’ve used for over 15 years, btw)!!  To put that into some perspective, in Colorado the total population according to the last census was about 4.5 million.  In other words, there are three timess as many illegal aliens already here in America as is the entire population of the state of Colorado!!  So, that is why we’ve been saying that we to be deporting illegal aliens by the hundreds of thousands…paying particular attention to known gang members, convicted criminal aliens, and those already determined by an immigration judge to be deported…regardless of age or gender.  If we did just that, we’d make a HUGE dent in the illegal immigration crisis that is crushing our country and it’s infrastructure.  Of course we need to immediately secure our southern border and BUILD THE WALL NOW!!!   For more on that, see our comments below the anchor baby article we posted the other day (scroll down 4 articles).


Trump administration to repeal Obama fracking rule Friday

The Trump administration on Friday will officially repeal the Obama administration’s 2015 fracking rule regulating oil and natural gas drilling on federal lands. “We believe it imposes administrative burdens and compliance costs that are not justified,” the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management wrote in a notice that it will rescind the rule, to be published in Friday’s Federal Register. The Interior Department initially proposed ending the rule in July and wrapped up the comment period in September. The Obama-era rule targets the practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which has made the U.S. the world’s leading producer of energy. The rule is intended to increase the safety of fracking by reducing the risk of water contamination. It would have forced companies to comply with federal safety standards in the construction of fracking wells and to disclose which chemicals they used in the fracking process. Killing the rule has been a top priority of the oil and natural gas industry, as well as Republican lawmakers from Western states. The rule affects oil wells on public lands that are found mainly in the West. “We applaud the Interior Department decision to completely rescind the Obama-era rule regulating hydraulic fracturing on federal lands,” Barry Russell, president and CEO of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, said Thursday. “IPAA has long fought for independent oil and natural gas producers against an Obama-era federal rule that was overly restrictive and did not make hydraulic fracturing any safer than current state laws.” Environmental groups are expected to sue the agency after the rule is finalized, adding to the list of Trump administration actions going to court in the new year. “The Trump administration is endangering public health and wildlife by allowing the fracking industry to run roughshod over public lands,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Thursday. “Fracking is a toxic business, and that’s why states and countries have banned it. Trump’s reckless decision to repeal these common-sense protections will have serious consequences.” The Trump administration can issue its own measure regulating fracking.

Of course it can..  These are executive level rules that can be implemented with the wave of one President’s hand, and undone by his successor’s hand/pen.  Such is the case here.

Farmers’ markets a racially biased cause of ‘environmental gentrification,’ professors say

Two California professors are criticizing farmers’ markets for causing “environmental gentrification” in which “habits of white people are normalized.” San Diego State University geography professors Pascale Joassart-Marcelli and Fernando J. Bosco contend that farmers’ markets are “white spaces” oppressing minorities in a chapter for “Just Green Enough,” an environmental anthology focused on urban development. Environmental gentrification is defined as a process where “environmental improvements lead to … the displacement of long-term residents,” according to the anthology. The professors, as reported by Campus Reform, say farmers’ markets are “exclusionary” because locals cannot “afford the food and/or feel excluded from these new spaces.” The SDSU professors, who teach classes like “Geography of Food” and “Food Justice,” argue that “farmers’ markets are often white spaces where the food consumption habits of white people are normalized.” While such markets are typically set up to help combat “food deserts” in low-income and minority communities, the academics argue that they instead “attract households from higher socio-economic backgrounds, raising property values and displacing low-income residents and people of color.” “The most insidious part of this gentrification process is that alternative food initiatives work against the community activists and residents who first mobilized to fight environmental injustices and provide these amenities but have significantly less political and economic clout than developers and real estate professionals,” the professors argue. They claim that, while “curbing gentrification is a vexing task,” the negative externalities of “white habitus” formed at farmers’ markets can be managed through “slow and inclusive steps that balance new initiatives and neighborhood stability to make cities ‘just green enough.’” Joassart-Marcelli and Bosco received funding from the National Science Foundation to research “the role of food in structuring everyday life in immigrant and low-income urban neighborhoods.”

..which you and I paid for.  That’s your hard-earned tax dollars at work…NOT!  You’re welcome, guys.  What a bunch of mind-numbing psychobabble!!  I love going to the farmer’s markets here locally each summer.  And, one of my favorite ones is in downtown Denver.  For those of you who live locally in the greater Denver area, it’s off of Colfax and right in front of East High School; an inner city Denver Public School (DPS) high school…not exactly in the burbs.  And, when I’m there I see people of ALL ages, both genders, and ALL ethnicities.  So, this study by a couple anti-white, racist professors in California shows just how out-of-touch with reality these pointy-headed electoids really are.  Farmer’s markets are set up by local vendors to simply sell their produce and other wares.  Yes, sometimes they set them up in the burbs or in middle-to-upper income areas.  Absolutely.  That’s called BUSINESS.  Imagine that?!  But, other times, they set them up in urban areas as well, and their customers are from ALL walks of life and socioeconomic circumstances.  What a bunch of self-loathing, racist, offensive idiots!  Parents;  If you have kids in their classes, yank ’em out quick!  Unreal..