I love the title of the Kos thread:

"DHS perv says Bush is a liar who lied about WMD. "

They don't care if he's a "perv" as long as he bashes Bush.

How pathetic can you get?

We better shut down all those universities and just send our kids to church. Besides, the test questions are so much easier to pass there:

Question: Explain the Theory of Relativity.
Answer: God

Question: Why do sodium and clorine ions remain separate in an aqueous solution?
Answer: God

Yeah, those universities haven't done a single darn thing for all of humanity. Earth revolves around the sun... as if...

Matt,

The dems are still mourning the loss of their hero, zarkawi. The libs seemed really depressed when zarkawi was killed. Chris Matthews seemed pissed. So it should lift their spirits to know that doyle is a bush hating, lib sex offender. Anyway, one persons sex offender is anothers freedom fighter.

Chris Matthews a liberal? You mean the guy who kissed Delay's backside on his way out the door? That's some funny schtick.

Hey, liberals just might do those things you suggest. But conservatives Gannon, Coulter and Rice might just call up Doyle and offer to make him feel "positively Presidential!"

Gander or goose?

Matt:

Whoever is hosting this site for you is overpaid, even if they're hosting for free. The errors reduce the site to an amateurish state seemingly through no fault of your own.

I could suggest a half dozen bulletproof cgi script processing server hosts, but in the spirit of Bush's economic policies, YOYO (you're on your own).

Bye!

At least KOS admitted he was a pervert .. you're right, as long as he bashes Bush, it doesn't matter to them. It solidifies my stand to never vote for a democrat EVER.

Wow, he was a registred democratic voter back in 1984, 22 years ago. During Regan. We all know that people never change their political choices over the years right? A open time democratic voting person is always one right?

The point to all of this is NOT what Bryan is, but that homeland security could have him in his employ. They failed to do the necessary background checks. This is a second DHS pedophile nailed in 6 months.

Wow axis, you go through the trouble to write about how Doyle may not be a Democrat, then claim that his party affiliation is not important! Sit down a minute, you must be dizzy from all that spin!

"he was not a political appointee, and even worse for the liberal bloggers, he was a Democrat."

And even worse, hitler was a christian!

Non-liberal biased media

I guess if we make every party or religion responsible for their own, they will start asking us about hitler!

There are Republicans who are pedophiles too, or commit other crimes, such as murder, rape, extortion, corporate fraud. It is ridiculous to point out the party affiliation of a particular criminal as a basis for condemning all other members of that party, especially when we are talking about huge political parties such as the Democrats and Republicans.

Most people were not making an issue of what party he votes for from the beginning. They were making an issue that Republican created and controlled homeland security had hired him.

axis,

RE: "The point to all of this is NOT what Bryan [Brian] is, but that homeland security could have him in his employ. They failed to do the necessary background checks."

Are you saying that Brian has a previous conviction as a pedophile? Could you give me the link to that information?

When and where did he serve his time for the conviction?

Are you saying that once a pedophile serves their time, they are no longer entitled to a job, even if that job does not involve working with children?

Actually, I thought the guy was caught in a "sting" after he had been hired by DHS.

If that is the case, what means do you suggest we employ to "interview" those "closet pedophiles" who have never been arrested or convicted of that crime? A little torture perhaps?

How about an unannounced search of their house, computers, telephone records, work place computers, and anything else that might contain child pornography? Perhaps we could subpoena all search records of Google, Microsoft, and all of the other Internet search engines for all applicant to federal, state, or local jobs.

A lie detector for all applicants might be nice too; although, not 100% reliable!

How far do you suggest we go in our search for information?

Should we pass a law that all employers will conduct a similar search?

AAR

Looky: More Homeland security scandals and lies.

---------------------------------

DHS Releases Cunningham Letter
By Justin Rood
TPM Muckraker

Friday 16 June 2006

(Photo: Talkingpointsmemo.com)

One day after an official swore under oath that the Department of Homeland Security had no record of a letter from Randy "Duke" Cunningham pushing her agency to do business with the scandal-linked Shirlington Limo company, the department reversed course and released the letter.

Republicans on the House Homeland Security committee went ballistic. "The Department of Homeland Security has a lot to explain," a press release quoted chairman Peter King (R-NY) as saying. "Despite repeated assurances to the contrary, it now turns out that the Department had the Cunningham letter all along. This is yet another example of DHS incompetence-and I think it may have been more than just bad record-keeping."

"This letter certainly puts the Department's credibility on the line, and raises further questions about political manipulation in the contracting process," the release quotes Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) as saying.

Duke Cunningham, of course, is serving out an eight year-plus prison sentence for taking bribes. Federal investigators have been told that Shirlington ferried Duke around town, as well as prostitutes which serviced him.

"[Shirlington owner Christopher Baker] has been of service to me and other Members of Congress over the years," Cunningham wrote in the letter, dated January 16, 2004. "Please be advised of my full support of his wish to provide transportation services for the Department of Homeland Security."

Are you saying that Brian has a previous conviction as a pedophile? Could you give me the link to that information?

-- AAR, lets get serious here, getting a job at Homeland Security is not like getting one at Walmart. It is a high security position that deals with sensitive information. If employees were properly screened, such as they do when hiring for the CIA, FBI or NSA, these incidents would not be taking place.

Another DHS pedophile is before the courts, trolling for underage girls at the elementry schools using an official DHS vehicle.

If you can't keep the pedophiles out of Homeland Security, how can Americans expect to trust you to find terrorists in their midst?

Are you saying that once a pedophile serves their time, they are no longer entitled to a job, even if that job does not involve working with children?

-- I am saying a pedophile should ne be eligible for a high security position or a position of authority, such as police. If there is any risk of the convict reoffending, he should be barred from employment around children.

If that is the case, what means do you suggest we employ to "interview" those "closet pedophiles" who have never been arrested or convicted of that crime? A little torture perhaps?

-- I was thinking a little more on the line of full Psych exams, the same kind they give you when hiring for the FBI, CIS, NSA to make sure you are not a predator, psychopath or sociopath. You know proper dilligence and all that.

Bush is not big on those backgound checks, just a couple months ago, he announced a plan to start doing background checks on the employees at the various ports, meaning these were totally insecure and unchecked for nearly 5 years after 9/11

Classic...another Dem...another sex offender and another liar. It's classic. Thank you for posting this because it's certain that the mainstream media will not. I will be emailing this to about a thousand people tomorrow. I love the internet to expose these a-holes.

Oh and isn't Axis' response delicious irony.

He's whining and bitching about background checks....this is the same Canadian clown that has a stroke when we listen to terrorist phone calls but now he thinks (and blames) Bush is directly responsible for background checks on some of these guys.

Now that is CLASSIC. What an absolute seal killing hypocrite this guy is. And "axis" is such a perfect name for him. LOL

Congressive...Chris Matthews was asked to work in the Clinton Administration. He has worke for FOUR Democratic policiticans and ZERO Republicans.

He was a speech writer for Democrat JIMMY CARTER.

Here's his OWN BIOGRAPHY

"Matthews has worked for four Democratic politicians. He was a presidential speechwriter for four years during the administration of Jimmy Carter. He served as a top aide to long-time Speaker of the House of Representatives Tip O'Neill for six years. He worked in the U.S. Senate for five years on the staffs of Senators Frank Moss and Edmund Muskie before running for U. S. House of Representatives from Pennsylvania."

Yes Congressive....he's not a liberal...he's a hard core Republican conservative.

Good grief, do you guys EVER tell the truth? EVER??

I don't believe the other DHS kiddie troller was a democrat. Those lying about the Cunningham certainly were all Republicans.

DHS lies to Republicans, they lie to Democrats, they lie to everyone, just like the Bush administration. Are you catching on as to why you are losing stream in your base? The neo-cons in power only represent themselves. They are not real Republicans.

One day, perhaps you will learn that the liberal movement is an anti-bush one, not an anti-conservative one.

He's whining and bitching about background checks....this is the same Canadian clown that has a stroke when we listen to terrorist phone calls but now he thinks (and blames) Bush is directly responsible for background checks on some of these guys.

-- There is simply no conparision between doing proper background checks before hiring into a high security position and illegal spying.

No one has a problem with monitoring terrorists, just follow the law and get a FISA warrant and then full your boots. Bush is not doing that, nor is he just monitoring terrorists, he is monitoring everyone.

Alberto Gonzalez went on the record to say that the NSA spying program will likely be used to spy on reporters. These are domestic americans, so if they are all set up to evesdrop on american journalists, then they are also evesdropping on all americans as well.

Gonzalez also said the spying program will be used to evesdrop on confidental client/lawyer conversations as well as doctors conversations etc. These are inadmisable in court as they are in violation of the constitution, however the constitution means nothing to Bush, unless he needs it as an excuse to break the law.

axis,

Which "axis" are we dealing with on this thread?

Are you saying there are no pedophiles in the CIA, NSA, or FBI? Are you really going to make a statement like that?

The NSA and CIA can't even screen there employees to prevent illegal leaking of classified information. For all we know, it may be pedophiles leaking the information. How about screening for people who are leaking the information that really affects our national security. How about throwing those in jail who tell the terrorists about our efforts to stop them from blowing up our cities and buildings.

Which is more important? Finding all of the pedophiles who may be working for the CIA and NSA? Or, finding those who are leaking secrets about our national security?

Now, did he or did he not have any prior conviction of being a pedophile? Since you refused to answer that question, I take it that the answer is no! No, the guy did not have any known background of pedophilia!

Now you're now saying that "Psych exams" (whatever that includes) can identify ALL pedophiles, right?

Are you really familiar with those "psych exams" they give the CIA, NSA, and FBI applicants? Have you ever been given one? Do they really check all CIA, NSA, and FBI applicants to see if they are pedophiles? Do they ever miss any? What about other deviant sexual behavior?

Why don't we run all of the nation's teachers through your little "fool proof" pedophile exam? Oh, you say police? So I guess you would like us to run the hundreds of thousands of police from all around the country through your "fool proof" pedophile exam too? How about doctors who treat young children?

Who else do you think we should run through your pedophile exam?

The fact is axis, you are simply trying to use "pedophile" to make the issue into something it isn't!

The guy got caught in a sting. Hopefully, the guy will be tried and maybe even found guilty. Who knows what the courts will do from there.

Did you hear about the judge who gave that child molester 10 years probation because he was "too short" in her [liberal] mind to spend time in prison where he too might be molested? Who knows what "sentence" [if any] he might get from her.

How about we start giving those pedophiles, rapists, and child molesters we do catch some real jail time?

Perhaps we can send him to Oklahoma and see what they can do for him there.

AAR

axis,

Did I miss that Supreme Court ruling that said the NSA's terrorist surveillance program was found to be illegal?

Could you give me the link to that so I can read exactly what they said in their ruling?

You are right on one thing, there is no comparison -- ABSOLUTELY NO COMPARISON -- between finding and firing a pedophile and those illegal NSA leaks! It's no big deal that our nations secrets are being released to terrorists. It's no big deal [to you] that someone leaked the information to the press and to the terrorists about our nation's efforts to protect American lives, and cities from destruction.

You are in a tizzy about a previously unknown pedophile who was caught, but you dismiss the actions of those who could cause the death of thousands and thousands of American citizens -- even more if a nuclear weapon were used!

As for all of your statements about illegal spying, lawyers, warrants, etc., etc., etc. -- that's just more of your liberal smoke screen and fog. I'll wait and see how that finally plays out.

If you are worried about the Constitution, then let's stop those liberal activist judge "law givers" of yours from usurping the powers granted to the Congress by the Constitution.

AAR

Pedophilia is a psychological condition, which can be identified easily enough in psych exams. The most common involves a slide show of random photos, which they time the amount of time that the person spends looking at each one. A pedophile will spend a greater amount of time looking at the photos of children than he will looking at nature photos.

While there is no guarantees that these precautions will get all of them, they will find most of them. By what I have read, there is no such screening in place for homeland security. Just standard FBI background checks like you need to work at a casino.

leaking classified information is an act of opportunity, there is no way to identify those that have the potential to do such things.

Nonetheless, most of the information leaked so far has been covered under the whistleblowers legislation, because it was done to expose government corruption and lawnbreaking, not to futher a political purpose or financial gain like most that sell state secrets.

Pedophilia is a psychological condition, which can be identified easily enough in psych exams. The most common involves a slide show of random photos, which they time the amount of time that the person spends looking at each one. A pedophile will spend a greater amount of time looking at the photos of children than he will looking at nature photos.

While there is no guarantees that these precautions will get all of them, they will find most of them. By what I have read, there is no such screening in place for homeland security. Just standard FBI background checks like you need to work at a casino.

leaking classified information is an act of opportunity, there is no way to identify those that have the potential to do such things.

Nonetheless, most of the information leaked so far has been covered under the whistleblowers legislation, because it was done to expose government corruption and lawnbreaking, not to futher a political purpose or financial gain like most that sell state secrets.

axis,

So, what you are saying is that we show a person some random images of children selected by your liberal psycho-analysts. Then, if the person happens to be sexually aroused by any or all of those images, that person is thereby convicted of being a pedophile.

It doesn't matter if that person never has actually done anything related to pedophilia. It doesn't matter if that person may never have committed any acts of pedophilia. It doesn't matter that person may never even consider committing any acts of pedophilia. You are willing to convict that person because of their reaction to some of your liberal psycho-analyst's images. You want to convict that person because of his or her thoughts, which you cannot really know. You are willing to deny that person a job -- that has nothing to do with children -- because of the way they reacted to "your" test.

You are willing to convict a person of a crime based on what "you think they are thinking"!!!

Interesting concept! Typical liberal mentality!

Now, what about that short guy who DID molest a child and was CONVICTED of molesting a child? You are worried about convicting a person based on what you think that person is thinking while liberal judges allow convicted child molesters off with 10 years probation instead of prison... because that person is short and the liberal judge "fears" that the convicted child molester "might" be molested in prison!

Interesting concept! Typical liberal mentality!

What about those other convicted child molesters who get off with only a short jail time -- allowed to go free by the liberal courts to prey upon more children. No outrage there. They are convicted criminals and that gives them rights! LIBERAL RIGHTS! They qualify for a staff of ACLU lawyers to defend them, but their victims... no outrage there. No rights there!

If you believe that DHS, NSA, CIA, FBI, teachers, police, and everyone else who works with and around children should be put through one of your liberal "mind and thought analyzers and testers" -- and any who may have "inappropriate thoughts" should be denied jobs and fired -- then contact your American friends and have them call their Representatives and Senators and pass the legislation to start your program to convict Americans because "you don't like what you think they may be thinking".

Never mind that they may never have or never will commit the acts that you think they are thinking. Never mind that they were never arrested. Never mind that they were never indicted. Never mind that they were never tried. Never mind that they were never convicted. Let's CONVICT them ON THEIR THOUGHTS and send them to Canada!

As to your incessant desire to help terrorists kill Americans by releasing classified information on our programs to stop them... You say "most of the information leaked so far has been covered under the whistleblowers legislation?" Is that your opinion, or have the courts found that to be the case after a trial?

Either way, "most" implies that some is NOT "covered by your whistleblower legislation" which says that the secret information was ILLEGALLY LEAKED to the press and terrorists. So, let's get on with finding those "illegal" leakers who are helping the terrorists and the sworn enemies of the United States. Let's get out and round those liberals up, give them their trial, and put them in prison where they belong.

After that, we can take another look at whatever whistle blower laws you believe gives liberal traitors the right to leak information on national security and help terrorists to kill our citizens and destroy our cities.

Go find another whistle to blow... I don't like the sound of your music!

AAR

axis... your hypothetical test at best could only indicate their MIGHT be something to look into.

First, there are more reasons than sexual interest that one might look at pics of children (unless you're specifically speaking of child porn, which you did not mention). Kids are cute. Maybe the person isn't into nature.

In addition, if those being screened have any idea of what they might be looking for, such a test would be easy enough to beat. It's not like pedophiles have zero self-control ever. If someone were such a person and even thought that might be something they were looking for, they simply WOULDN'T linger on any of that. After all... they'd also have their own sources for such stuff, and for however long the test was, they could put a lid on their predilictions.

AAR, *clapping hands* BRAVO!

AAR, *clapping hands* BRAVO!

Actually, I loved the insight into axis' pathology, as shown by his intimate knowledge of scrrening for pedophilia...and other sexual perversions, perhaps?

Now if Mark could just screen for even marginal intelligence, axis would flunk another test....

But axis typing with one hand WOULD explain some of the more interesting comments, such as "lying about the Cunningham.."

So, what you are saying is that we show a person some random images of children selected by your liberal psycho-analysts. Then, if the person happens to be sexually aroused by any or all of those images, that person is thereby convicted of being a pedophile.

-- Not convicted dummy, flagged for further investigation. If you show a photo of a child to one that is attracted to kids, he will spend more time looking at it than other photos, just as a hetro person would spend more time looking at the supermodel one than the one of the mountain scene.
By the same token, a person with a sociopathic nature will spend more time looking at gory photos. These are standard in full psych exams.

You are willing to deny that person a job -- that has nothing to do with children -- because of the way they reacted to "your" test.

-- For a high security job like DHS, CIA, FBI, NSA, damn straight. This is not like a job at walmart dummy. No wonder you have a pedophile problem, you have not the slightest interest in identifying them before they have a chance to do something and seriously embarass the agency and undermine its credibility. No doubt, in your eyes, the more pedophiles in there, the better.

Either way, "most" implies that some is NOT "covered by your whistleblower legislation" which says that the secret information was ILLEGALLY LEAKED to the press and terrorists.

-- Absolutely. This happened when bush leaked the still classified national intelligence estimate to the press a week before it was declassified by the Pentagon. Scott Mclellan admitted the dates on which it was declassified on national TV, which was more than a week AFTER bush admitted to leaking it to the press. You are absolutely right, Bush illegally leaked it to the press an he should be held accountable. Thanks for pointing that out.

After that, we can take another look at whatever whistle blower laws you believe gives liberal traitors the right to leak information on national security and help terrorists to kill our citizens and destroy our cities.

-- No President Bush is a Republican traitor, not a liberal one. Nice try though

Yeah, right axis! Whatever you say.

Not convicted huh? First you wanted to deny the person a job because "you don't think they are thinking properly." That's pretty much a "conviction" in my book!

Now you are just going to "flag" that person for more investigation -- whatever that means. Right! More liberal psycho-tests? Searching their home? Searching their workplace? Looking through all of their computers and files? ...All because a person applies for a job and "failed the axis liberal psycho thought analysis test"! Right!!!

And while axis' is conducting his "mind and thought" analysis, his liberal judge friends are giving real CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTERS a slap on the hand and sending them on their way to "give it another try"! Liberal judges are giving short (height challenged for you axis) molesters PROBATION because they are too short and MIGHT be molested themselves in prison! Others may get a few months in jail. Yeah! Right axis!

Investigators, prosecutors, and the police ROUND 'EM UP and the LIBERAL JUDGES TURN 'EM LOOSE! Adding insult to the injury suffered by their victims, the LIBERAL ACLU fights for the RIGHTS of criminals and CHILD MOLESTERS, while IGNORING their VICTIMS!!!

Let's show some real support, axis for those child molesters we do catch -- not just your "sound good words." Let's not work so much on your "theoretical liberal psycho test" and work more on keeping those child molesters in prison who we do catch. Let's work to force those liberal judges to hand out REAL sentences to CONVICTED child molesters and rapists. Let's demand that the ACLU work for tougher sentences and not spend all of their efforts on CRIMINAL'S RIGHTS! Repeat offenders should get life in prison... or worse. I guess you are opposed to the laws in Oklahoma and four other states that would allow the death penalty in some cases, right?

But now, back to THE OTHER ISSUE... The guy was caught in a sting. Evidence points to the fact that he did what he is charged with doing. He no longer works for the agency. The courts will work the issue. End of case... Right? NO!

Liberal Democrats -- like your far left liberal Kossacks -- now want to embrace this pedophile and make some kind of "anti-Bush media hero" out of him. Liberals ARE NOT UPSET or enraged that he was arrested as a pedophile, or because he could have molested a child. No NOT LIBERALS! They want to use the guy to spread their anti-Bush, anti-American hate propaganda!

By their own actions, liberals thereby dismiss and ignore the actions of a pedophile! Liberals thereby accept and "condone" his actions. ...Why? ...Because it suits THEIR purpose. Liberals have no problem ignoring the crimes if the person has an anti-Bush, anti-American message to feed their propaganda mill! Aren't there enough anti-Bush, anti-American liberals out there who can provide fodder for your mill without having to use pedophiles?

And axis, it is your religion -- liberalism -- and it's social and cultural agenda that creates the environment and many of the conditions and factors that nourishes, fosters, and creates pedophiles, child molesters, rapists, and sexually deviant behavior!!!!!

AAR

axis,

We don't need all of your "psycho-thought-testing" to catch pedophiles. We can use the Internet and computers to search for, monitor, and identify the real pedophiles -- not those you THINK may be THINKING IMPROPERLY -- but those who are ACTING on their thoughts.

Let's just monitor those sites that pedophiles search out and visit on the Internet. Google, Microsoft, and the other search engines can monitor the Internet searches and visits. When they detect someone searching for those sites or viewing their content for more than 27.3 seconds, the computers can automatically generate a search warrant (to make you liberals happy) and automatically and electronically forward it to the local authorities. The police or authorities can then search the house, home computer, work computer, stored data, and telephone records of those caught in the act -- perhaps still logged in to the illegal sites! The system can even generate the arrest warrant so police will already have it in their position and ready to execute if they find materiels or evidence of pedophilia! Great idea, huh? Isn't automation wonderful?

Axis, let's make this a joint effort to catch and remove those pedophiles. We'll identify the pedophiles, issue the warrants, and haul 'em into court.

Your job, axis, is to make sure that those liberal judges of yours put them in jail for the maximum time possible, and keep them there! That means, axis, we also need your help with the ACLU to convince them to leave the criminals in jail and start working on the rights of victims. Do you think you can handle that axis?

AAR

I remember reading about this case when it first came out and everyone kept saying it was a republican. I was embarressed and ashamed then it just sorta dropped of the radar and I didn't hear any more about it, well now i know its because its not a republican so why give him bad press. You can not deny someone a job on what you think they might be thinking, can you even imagine what the aclu would do if a republican came up with that idea. also your "test" for finding them you have also mentioned that a hetersexual man will look more at a supermodel than nature, so pretty much the only constant is people will look at anything more than nature. kids are cute, and not in the far left NAMBLA sorta way but just innocent cute. where they dont have to deal with thinking about all of this.