Wednesday, June 25, 2014


News Clips For The Day


http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/24/feds-posted-bid-request-to-handle-child-immigrant-surge-back-in-january/

Feds Posted Bid Request To Handle Child Immigrant Surge Back In JANUARY

A bid request posted to a website for federal contractors in January indicates that the federal government was aware of a heavy influx of children coming to the U.S. illegally.
But the Department of Homeland Security, through its immigration and border protection agencies, has only recently began publicly addressing the surge of Unaccompanied Children, or UACs, that have traveled to the U.S., many of whom have been apprehended at the U.S. Border.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, posted a bid request for “Escort Services for Unaccompanied Alien Children” on Jan. 29 at the site, FedBizOpps.gov, looking for contractors to help transport and care for the UACs.

“The Contractor shall provide unarmed escort staff, including management, supervision, manpower, training, certifications, licenses, drug testing, equipment, and supplies necessary to provide on-demand escort services for non-criminal/non-delinquent unaccompanied alien children ages infant to 17 years of age, seven [7] days a week, 365 days a year,” reads the bid request.

“There will be approximately 65,000 UAC in total: 25% local ground transport, 25% via ICE charter and 50% via commercial air.”

The Department of Homeland Security has put the Federal Management Emergency Agency in charge of managing the surge. The Department of Health and Human Services helps place the UACs at temporary facilities while they await deportation proceedings.

UACs have been sent to military bases in California, Texas, and Oklahoma. HHS has also explored sending the children to other facilities throughout the U.S.

At a hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security held Tuesday, Georgia U.S. Rep. Paul Broun quizzed DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson about the bid request.

“I don’t know where this estimate comes from or what it’s based on, so I can’t comment,” said Johnson.

Johnson said that since he became head of DHS last December he knew that a rising tide of UACs were coming to the U.S. The issue became a top priority in April and May, Johnson said.



http://www.npr.org/2014/06/20/323657817/from-a-stream-to-a-flood-migrant-kids-overwhelm-u-s-border-agents

From A Stream To A Flood: Migrant Kids Overwhelm U.S. Border Agents – NPR
by JOHN BURNETT
June 20, 2014

More than 50,000 unaccompanied migrant kids have been detained in the past eight months — an almost 100 percent increase from the previous fiscal year. The numbers have been steadily climbing for the past two to three years.




I've been trying to find out how long the high number of unaccompanied children have been arriving at the US Border. One Republican senator said two years, and this article from NPR corroborates that. I do hope this doesn't involve a purposeful coverup by Obama's administration. I will try to keep up with changes in the situation as they occur.






Supreme Court limits cellphone searches after arrests
CBS/AP  June 25, 2014

Police may not generally search the cellphones of people they arrest without first getting search warrants, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday.

The court said cellphones are powerful devices unlike anything else police may find on someone they arrest. Because the phones contain so much information, police must get a warrant before looking through them, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. Justice Samuel Alito wrote a separate opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

"Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans 'the privacies of life,'" Roberts wrote. "The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought."

The Supreme Court previously had ruled that police could empty a suspect's pockets and examine whatever they find to ensure officers' safety and prevent the destruction of evidence.

The Obama administration and the state of California, defending the cellphone searches, said cellphones should have no greater protection from a search than anything else police find.

However, Roberts wrote, "Digital data stored on a cell phone cannot itself be used as a weapon to harm an arresting officer or to effectuate the arrestee's escape. Law enforcement officers remain free to examine the physical aspects of a phone to ensure that it will not be used as a weapon--say, to determine whether there is a razor blade hidden between the phone and its case. Once an officer has secured a phone and eliminated any potential physical threats, however, data on the phone can endanger no one."

The defendants in these cases, backed by civil libertarians, librarians and news media groups, argued that cellphones, especially smartphones, are increasingly powerful computers that can store troves of sensitive personal information.

The court validated that and noted the ubiquity of cellphones.

Prior to the digital age, people did not typically carry a cache of sensitive personal information with them as they went about their day," Roberts wrote. "Now it is the person who is not carrying a cell phone, with all that it contains, who is the exception."
The court's answer to what police must do before searching phones is simple: "Get a warrant," Roberts said.

The ruling combined two cases: Riley v. California andUnited States v. Wurie.
The two cases arose following arrests in San Diego and Boston.

In San Diego, police found indications of gang membership when they looked through defendant David Leon Riley's Samsung smartphone. Prosecutors used video and photographs found on the smartphone to persuade a jury to convict Riley of attempted murder and other charges. California courts rejected Riley's efforts to throw out the evidence and upheld the convictions.

The court ordered the California Supreme Court to take a new look at Riley's case.

In Boston, a federal appeals court ruled that police must have a warrant before searching arrestees' cellphones.

Police arrested Brima Wurie on suspicion of selling crack cocaine, checked the call log on his flip phone and used that information to determine where he lived. When they searched Wurie's home and had a warrant, they found crack, marijuana, a gun and ammunition. The evidence was enough to produce a conviction and a prison term of more than 20 years.

The appeals court ruled for Wurie, but left in place a drug conviction for selling cocaine near a school that did not depend on the tainted evidence. That conviction also carried a 20-year sentence. The administration appealed the court ruling because it wants to preserve the warrantless searches following arrest.

The justices upheld that ruling.




I am one of the few people who don't carry a “smart phone,” but if I did I wouldn't put all my deeply personal information on it. I have an inexpensive “Tracfone,” and it only has half a dozen telephone numbers in it. It won't take pictures, so I'm not tempted to clutter up my computer with low grade shots of my friends and family. I do collect photos from the daily news and other websites if I especially like the picture. I want beautiful or “interesting” shots and shots of some of the famous people of my lifetime. On Facebook I have photos of my family.

I'm glad to see the Supreme Court ruled this way, because how hard is it for the police to get a search warrant, anyway? The privacy of private individuals is already eroded enough. I'm for law enforcement having tools to do their job, but they should be willing to go through the proper steps.






U.S.: Syria may have launched airstrikes in Iraq
CBS/AP June 25, 2014

WASHINGTON -- U.S. officials say there are indications that Syria launched airstrikes into western Iraq Tuesday in an attempt to slow the al Qaeda-inspired insurgency fighting both the Syrian and Iraqi governments.
Officials said the strikes appeared to be the work of Syrian President Bashar Assad's government, which is locked in a bloody civil war with opposition groups. The target of the attacks was the extremist group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which has been fighting along with the rebels opposed to Assad and has since moved swiftly across the border into Iraq. The group is also known as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levan (ISIL).
CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports that State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the U.S. is aware of the airstrike reports and "we have no reason to dispute these reports."

The White House said intervention by Syria was not the way to stem the insurgents, who have taken control of several cities in northern and western Iraq.
"The solution to the threat confronting Iraq is not the intervention of the Assad regime, which allowed ISIL to thrive in the first place," said Bernadette Meehan, a National Security Council spokeswoman. "The solution to Iraq's security challenge does not involve militias or the murderous Assad regime, but the strengthening of the Iraqi security forces to combat threats."
Another U.S. official said Iran has been flying surveillance drones in Iraq. The officials spoke only on grounds of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the issue publicly.

In an unusual twist for the long-time foes, the U.S. and Iran find themselves with an overlapping interest in stabilizing Iraq's government. However, while Iran wants to preserve Shiite control of Iraq's government, the U.S. is pressing leaders in Baghdad to create a more inclusive political system.
U.S. and Iranian officials have had some direct discussions on the matter, though the Obama administration has ruled out the prospect of direct military involvement.
The U.S. is also conducting aerial surveillance over Iraq and is dispatching about 300 military advisers to Baghdad and elsewhere to help train Iraqi security forces.




ISIS has declared a goal of uniting three nations under their control to form a huge power base for Sunni Muslims. I think Iran has a right to find that threatening. I understand the Obama administration's desire to make the Iraqi government function in an inclusive manner toward its Sunni minority, instead of having Shiites defeat them militarily, and it would create a more stable government if Iraq were to do so. There was talk of a divided Iraq with Sunnis, Shia and Kurds each having their own territory. That would probably work, but it might depend on who got the oil fields.

I don't think Assad is trying to take over Iraq, but rather is fighting his enemy ISIS. Personally, I would rather see Iran and Syria “help” the Shiite government in Iraq than have our troops sent in again to fight. We have sent in 300 to advise and help the Iraqi army, but it may not be long before they are involved in combat. If Iraq's newly recruited young Shia men will stand and fight rather than dropping their weapons and uniforms at the first sight of ISIS forces, that will be an improvement.





Teen accused of school plot: "I'm just really mentally ill"
By CRIMESIDER STAFF CBS NEWS June 25, 2014

MINNEAPOLIS - Recordings of a police interview with John LaDue, the 17-year-old suspect in an alleged plot against his school and family, reveal the teen considered himself to be mentally ill, was fascinated by tragedies, and wanted to kill as many people as possible in his hometown of Waseca, according to CBS Minnesota.

LaDue has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder charges for planning to bomb his school and kill his family.
LaDue was charged in May with attempted murder, possessing explosives, and attempting to damage property. Police said his planned attack was foiled when a woman spotted him acting suspicious around a storage locker and called the authorities. Officers searched the locker and the suspect's room, finding guns, bomb-making equipment and a 180-page notebook detailing plans to mimic a Columbine-style massacre, the station reports.
"My plans were to enter [the school] and throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs and destroy everyone, and then when the SWAT comes I would destroy myself," LaDue told police in the interview released Tuesday, and which was recorded soon after he was arrested in April.

CBS Minnesota reports prosecutors are seeking to try him as an adult.

In the recordings, LaDue talks about a YouTube channel on which he uploaded videos of himself detonating homemade bombs. He also told police the violence he planned to carry out against students and family wasn't personal, but rather a result of what he believes to be mental illness.

"I don't even think I've been bullied in my life," the suspect said. "I have good parents, I live in a good town, I think I'm just really mentally ill and no one's noticed and I've been trying to hide it.... I just wanted as many victims as possible."

Authorities said LaDue's plan was to kill his family first, then start a fire in town to divert first-responders, according to the station. Then, he allegedly planned to set off bombs at his school and start firing on classmates. Finally, he said he wanted to battle a SWAT team to prove he "wasn't a wimp" and was "willing to fight with equal force." The plot was supposed to go down on April 19.

"I wanted it to be in April, because April's my favorite month," he told police, "because that's... the month that all the really bad tragedies happen."

The massacre at Columbine High School occurred on April 20, 1999.

LaDue told officers in the recording that he might be a sociopath and asked to see a psychiatrist. In his statement, he also said he had contemplated giving cyanide to a friend of a friend who had gotten on his nerves.
The suspect's attorney is trying to get the charges against his client dropped because nothing actually happened, according to CBS Minnesota. Last week, LaDue's father said his son never really planned to go through with the attack and that the family needs to deal with the teen's issues.




He wanted to fight the SWAT team “to prove he wasn't a wimp,” and “destroy everyone, and then when the SWAT comes I would destroy myself," he said. He says he knows he is mentally ill, but shows no desire to get treatment. Perhaps too conveniently, he plans to plead not guilty, undoubtedly using the insanity defense. I'm sure the court will see to it that he gets a good examination by a psychiatrist. I don't know how many insane people are actually aware that they are insane. I'll be interested to see how this case progresses.





Gary Oldman apologizes for defending Mel Gibson, Alec Baldwin
CBS/AP June 25, 2014

Gary Oldman has apologized for defending fellow actors Mel Gibson and Alec Baldwin from critics of their controversial remarks about Jews and gays.

"I am deeply remorseful that comments I recently made in the Playboy Interviewwere offensive to many Jewish people," Oldman wrote in an open letter to the Anti-Defamation League late Tuesday. "Upon reading my comments in print - I see how insensitive they may be, and how they may indeed contribute to the furtherance of a false stereotype."

During the expletive-laden Playboy interview, Oldman decried the "political correctness" that ensnared Gibson and Baldwin. Gibson delivered an anti-Semitic rant in 2006 while being arrested for drunk driving, and he later apologized. Baldwin last year was accused of using an anti-gay slur in a New York City street confrontation.
Oldman said that Gibson "got drunk and said a few things, but we've all said those things. We're all (expletive) hypocrites." He said he didn't blame Baldwin for using the slur because somebody bothered him.

"Mel Gibson is in a town that's run by Jews and he said the wrong thing because he's actually bitten the hand that I guess has fed him, and doesn't need to feed him anymore because he's got enough dough," Oldman said in the interview.
In his later letter, first reported by the industry website Deadline.com, Oldman wrote, "I hope you will know that this apology is heartfelt, genuine, and that I have an enormous personal affinity for the Jewish people in general, and those specifically in my life."

Oldman's Playboy comments had drawn a sharp response from Jewish leaders.

"Gary Oldman wants Jews to 'get over' what Mel Gibson said. But what Gibson said, was the slogan that Adolf Hitler used to murder six million Jews," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "(Oldman's) comment that Hollywood is a town 'run by Jews' has a very familiar sinister ring to it that is the anthem of bigots and anti-Semites everywhere. That has nothing to do with political correctness," Hier said in a statement to The Associated Press.

Douglas Urbanski, Oldman's longtime manager, said in an earlier email to the AP that his client was not defending his fellow actors, despite Oldman's comment in the article that he was indeed defending the actors.

"It simply cannot be read any other way, and to put it any other way is simply cherry picking something, stating it inaccurately, and creating news where there is none," Urbanski said.

He said Oldman was "illustrating the absurd by being absurd."

Oldman stars in the upcoming "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes," out July 11. Distributor 20th Century Fox declined to comment on Oldman's Playboy remarks. His other film credits include "The Dark Knight," "Hannibal" and the recent remake of "RoboCop."

Oldman also appears in a TV commercial for the HTC mobile phone company, which sought to distance itself Tuesday from the actor's remarks. "Mr. Oldman's views are his own and do not reflect the views of HTC," the company said in a statement.




“During the expletive-laden Playboy interview, Oldman decried the 'political correctness' that ensnared Gibson and Baldwin. Gibson delivered an anti-Semitic rant in 2006 while being arrested for drunk driving, and he later apologized. Baldwin last year was accused of using an anti-gay slur in a New York City street confrontation. Oldman said that Gibson 'got drunk and said a few things, but we've all said those things. We're all (expletive) hypocrites.'”

I hate to inform him, but we haven't “all” said those things. Too many do, I agree, but by no means all. In this country there is so much hatred against groups that are either non-conformists or of a different race that I fear a pogrom or the rise of a new KKK could happen here without the public standing up to defend the victims. There seems to be little moral unanimity on the things that Oldman called “political correctness.”

That's why the Tea Party has become as powerful as it has. It depresses me deeply. Those people haven't learned any basic good manners and cooperation, and too many of them don't care when people are treated unfairly or even hurt physically. It's no wonder there is so much talk of the “bullying” in the high schools and even on jobs. The “good” people are not standing up for mistreated minorities. Where are the good Samaritans?








Boy, 14, Aims for Selfie With the Queen
By ABC News | Good Morning America 
June 25, 2014

It is not every day you get a chance to see the Queen of England so when you do, the pressure is on to find a way to remember it forever.
For a 14-year-old quick-thinking boy in Belfast, Ireland, that way was to snap a selfie with the very unsuspecting Queen Elizabeth II.

The boy, identified by ITV as Jack Surgenor, was in the crowd while the queen and her husband,Prince Philip, were visiting St. George’s Market in Belfast Tuesday, part of their three-day tour of Northern Ireland.

Jack was one of hundreds in the crowd surrounding the queen as she made her way through the market when he got close enough to hold his iPhone in front of the queen. He then quickly turned around to include himself in the shot, too.
The ITV reporter who captured the moment, royal editor Tim Ewart, described the 88-year-old monarch as appearing “bemused” at the antics of her 14-year-old fan.
The selfie photo was the queen’s second run-in with pop culture that day. Earlier, she and Philip visited the Belfast set where the HBO hit series “Game of Thrones” is filmed.




I don't get HBO, so I don't have a clue what Game of Thrones is about. I did see a bit of this story on the television and the queen was shown politely but with no appreciation viewing the strange-looking metal “throne.” I'm sure I'm really missing a lot by not watching that show, but somehow I'm not worried about it. This boy in question is on the ABC website in front of the queen taking their shared selfie while she did indeed look “bemused.” Just think about it, she has to remain polite no matter what people do. How “selflies” became so popular I don't know. I do remember making one of myself for amusement about ten years ago before it had a name. It was a terrible shot. Like all fads, I'm sure selfies will be forgotten in the passage of time. Queen Elizabeth is a lady, a smart cookie and a good sport. I really like her.




How Connecticut's Change In Autism Coverage Could Make Waves --NPR
by MICHELLE ANDREWS
June 25, 2014

Many families with children who have autism count on their insurance to help pay for expensive, long-term treatment. But a recent bulletin issued by the Connecticut Insurance Department may undermine existing coverage protections, some advocates say, and they are concerned that other states might follow suit.

Autism spectrum disorder affects 1 in 68 children, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The developmental disorder includes a range of conditions that are characterized by difficulties in communication and social interaction as well as repetitive behaviors.

In recent years, advocates for people with autism and their families have pushed hard to get better insurance coverage, prompting 37 states and the District of Columbia to pass laws that require insurers to cover autism treatment, according to Autism Speaks, an advocacy organization.

In addition, some advocates look to new policies on mental health coverage to aid families. Until recent years, coverage for mental health conditions was often significantly more limited than coverage for physical ailments. The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 required that mental health benefits be covered at least as generously as medical/surgical benefits in large group plans. The Affordable Care Act extended those protections this year to people in individual plans that weren't grandfathered and those offered to small groups.

Advocates, however, are concerned that state actions like those in Connecticut could chip away at hard-won coverage gains. That state has defined autism behavioral therapy as a type of medical benefit not subject to the mental health parity law, a move that allows insurers more latitude to limit the benefits they offer.

"The whole reason you have mental health parity is that mental health conditions were being singled out for discriminatory treatment," says Daniel Unumb, executive director of Autism Speaks' Legal Resource Center. "And that's what we're still facing with autism."

Connecticut is one of the states that mandate coverage for autism spectrum disorders. Among other things, the law requires health plans to cover behavioral therapy: up to $50,000 annually for children younger than age 9, $35,000 for children between 9 and 13 and $25,000 for children age 13 or 14.

The state's coverage mandate applies to insured group and individual plans. Although self-funded plans that pay employees' claims directly rather than buy insurance aren't required to cover behavioral therapy and other treatments spelled out in Connecticut's autism coverage mandate, most do, says Cheryl Hughes, an attorney at human resources consultant Mercer's Washington Resource Group.

Connecticut's changes deal with a part of the federal health law that prohibits plans from imposing annual or lifetime monetary limits on 10 categories of coverage called the essential health benefits. The federal Department of Health and Human Services has said it'spermissible for plans to impose nonmonetary limits, however, restricting the number of physician visits or days in the hospital, for example. Plans can convert those financial coverage limits to visit or unit-of-treatment limits that are actuarially equivalent to the dollar amounts.

While the change shouldn't necessarily result in less generous coverage, experts say the lack of consistency in how plans convert those dollar limits may sow confusion and limit access to care.

For example, the $50,000 limit was converted to 417 hours of care annually by one Connecticut insurer, while another calculated it was equivalent to 150 visits annually, says Katie Keith, director of research at the Trimpa Group, a consultancy that works with autism organizations.

"It will mean a lot of work for families at the front end to understand what they're getting," says Keith.

The conversion inconsistencies might not have mattered except for another wrinkle in Connecticut's approach to autism coverage.

According to the Connecticut bulletin, the state classifies autism behavioral therapy as a habilitative benefit – something that helps people develop or keep skills for daily living – and therefore it is defined as a medical service rather than a mental health service. As such, "they are not considered subject to mental health parity," says Donna Tommelleo, a spokeswoman for the insurance department.

Under the federal health law, states can define the essential health benefits, of which "rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices" is one. The state may be attempting to implement the law's provisions — rather than limiting coverage — by defining autism behavioral treatments as habilitative services.

But Connecticut's interpretation gives insurers the green light to impose the visit and hourly limits that generally wouldn't be permitted under the mental health parity law.

Ohio and the District of Columbia have also defined behavioral therapy as a habilitative benefit, but they have taken a different approach.

For example, the District of Columbia's description of its essential health benefits on its marketplace website, says that "coverage for habilitative services must include applied behavioral analysis (ABA) for the treatment of autism spectrum disorder."

"In [Connecticut's] case, they appear to be doing this to avoid coverage, rather than enhance coverage," says Sara Rosenbaum, a professor at George Washington University's School of Public Health and Health Services. "The parity rule seems to say you can't play games like this."




Autism affects a larger number of people than I used to think. One in 68 is scary. Now the state of Connecticut seems to be cutting down on the benefits. “A recent bulletin issued by the Connecticut Insurance Department may undermine existing coverage protections, some advocates say, and they are concerned that other states might follow suit.”

“While the change shouldn't necessarily result in less generous coverage, experts say the lack of consistency in how plans convert those dollar limits may sow confusion and limit access to care.... The conversion inconsistencies might not have mattered except for another wrinkle in Connecticut's approach to autism coverage. According to the Connecticut bulletin, the state classifies autism behavioral therapy as a habilitative benefit – something that helps people develop or keep skills for daily living – and therefore it is defined as a medical service rather than a mental health service.”

This is unfair to families with autistic children, as they may have minor symptoms or may be almost uncontrollable, and in need of extensive amounts of care. Why the state of Connecticut would leave the coverage up to the interpretation of the individual insurance company I don't know. People may start suing the state. Maybe the Federal government has some control over how states implement the Affordable Care Act. If I see any more articles about this I will clip them.