What is a Sinkhole?

Geologically, a sinkhole is a depression in the ground that has no natural external surface drainage. Basically this means that when it rains, all of the water stays inside the sinkhole and typically drains into the subsurface.

Sinkholes are most common in what geologists call, “karst terrain.” What’s that? These are regions where the type of rock below the land surface can naturally be dissolved by groundwater circulating through them. Soluble rocks include salt beds and domes, gypsum, and limestone and other carbonate rock. Florida, for instance, is an area largely underlain by limestone and is highly susceptible to sinkholes.

When water from rainfall moves down through the soil, these types of rock begin to dissolve and spaces and caverns develop underground. Sinkholes are dramatic because the land usually stays intact for a period of time until the underground spaces just get too big. If there is not enough support for the land above the spaces, then a sudden collapse of the land surface can occur.

USGS map showing areas of the contiguous United States that are underlain by relatively soluble rocks with potential for cave and natural sinkhole formation. Note that the delineated areas are generalized; actual potential for sinkhole development varies locally within each region.

Credit: USGS

Keep in mind though that while collapses are more frequent after intense rainstorms, there is some evidence that droughts play a role as well. Areas where water levels have lowered suddenly are more prone to collapse formation.

Areas Most Susceptible

About 20% of our country is underlain by “karst terrain” and is susceptible to a sinkhole event. The most damage from sinkholes tends to occur in Florida, Texas, Alabama, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania.

Different Types and Various Severities

Sinkholes can be characterized into two types. First, there are cover-collapse sinkholes, which can develop abruptly (over a period of hours) and cause catastrophic damages. Secondly, there are cover-subsidence sinkholes, which form slowly over time with the ground gradually subsiding or deflating. These types of events can be less noticeable and go undetected for long periods.

Collapse sinkhole in a salt dome in Daisetta, Texas (September 2008).

Photo Credit: Randall Orndorff, USGS

Sinkhole collapses can range in size and severity. Sinkholes can vary from a few feet to hundreds of acres and from less than one to more than 100 feet deep. Sinkholes can have dramatic effects, especially in urban settings. They can contaminate water resources and have been seen to swallow up swimming pools, parts of roadways, and even buildings.

Is There a Sinkhole on Your Property?

This is a difficult question, and unfortunately there isn’t a very efficient system to determine this quite yet. It is recommended that people constantly observe their property for things such as small holes in the ground or cracks formed in a structure’s foundation. People can also check to see if they live in areas underlain by soluble rock, and they can do so by checking with county offices, local or state geological surveys, or the USGS.

Even Humans Cause Sinkholes

While sinkhole collapses are frequent in karst areas, there are a variety of other circumstances that can lead to such events. Many sinkholes form from human activity. Collapses can occur above old mines, from leaky faucets, when sewers give way, or due to groundwater pumping and construction.

Think about all the changes that occur when water-drainage patterns are altered and new systems are developed. And when industrial and runoff-storage ponds are created, the resulting substantial weight of the new material can trigger an underground collapse of supporting material.

Aquifer systems are another factor in sinkholes. The sediment above the aquifer system may be delicately balanced by ground-water fluid pressure, meaning that the water below ground is actually helping to keep the surface soil in place. Groundwater pumping for urban water supply and for irrigation can produce new sinkholes. If pumping results in a lowering of groundwater levels, then underground structures could fail and thus sinkholes can occur.

Cover-collapse sinkhole in limestone near Frederick, Maryland (September 2003).

Photo Credit: Randall Orndorff, USGS

Start with USGS Science

Starting with science is important to understanding where sinkholes are likely to occur and making the best decisions to protect life and property. Scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) play a key role by developing geologic maps of the nation.

By mapping the nation, the USGS contributes important geologic and topographic information needed to understand karst regions and local areas. Detailed geologic mapping helps to define areas of soluble rock at the surface and in the subsurface, thus educating the land planners, policy makers, and the public about sinkhole risk.

These USGS maps and data are essential to many other purposes, including assessing ground-water quality and contamination risks; predicting earthquake, volcano, and landslide hazards; characterizing energy and mineral resources and their extraction costs; waste repository siting; land management and land-use planning; and general education.

 sinkhole is an area of ground that has no natural external surface drainage–when it rains, all of the water stays inside the sinkhole and typically drains into the subsurface. Sinkholes can vary from a few feet to hundreds of acres and from less than 1 to more than 100 feet deep. Some are shaped like shallow bowls or saucers whereas others have vertical walls; some hold water and form natural ponds. Typically, sinkholes form so slowly that little change is noticeable, but they can form suddenly when a collapse occurs. Such a collapse can have a dramatic effect if it occurs in an urban setting.
Areas prone to collapse sinkholes

The map below shows areas of the United States where certain rock types that are susceptible to dissolution in water occur. In these areas the formation of underground cavities can form and catastrophic sinkholes can happen. These rock types are evaporites (salt, gypsum, and anhydrite) and carbonates (limestone and dolomite). Evaporite rocks underlie about 35 to 40 percent of the United States, though in many areas they are buried at great depths.

Types of sinkholes

Since Florida is prone to sinkholes, it is a good place to use to discuss some different types of sinkholes and the geologic and hydrologic processes that form them. The processes of dissolution, where surface rock that are soluble to weak acids, are dissolved, and suffosion, where cavities form below the land surface, are responsible for virtually all sinkholes in Florida.
Dissolution sinkholes

Dissolution of the limestone or dolomite is most intensive where the water first contacts the rock surface. Aggressive dissolution also occurs where flow is focussed in preexisting openings in the rock, such as along joints, fractures, and bedding planes, and in the zone of water-table fluctuation where groundwater is in contact with the atmosphere.

Cover-subsidence sinkholes

Cover-subsidence sinkholes tend to develop gradually where the covering sediments are permeable and contain sand. In areas where cover material is thicker or sediments contain more clay, cover-subsidence sinkholes are relatively uncommon, are smaller, and may go undetected for long periods.

Cover-collapse sinkholes

Cover-collapse sinkholes may develop abruptly (over a period of hours) and cause catastrophic damages. They occur where the covering sediments contain a significant amount of clay. Over time, surface drainage, erosion, and deposition of sinkhole into a shallower bowl-shaped depression.

Sinkholes can be human-induced

New sinkholes have been correlated to land-use practices, especially from groundwater pumping and from construction and development practices. Sinkholes can also form when natural water-drainage patterns are changed and new water-diversion systems are developed. Some sinkholes form when the land surface is changed, such as when industrial and runoff-storage ponds are created. The substantial weight of the new material can trigger an underground collapse of supporting material, thus causing a sinkhole.

The overburden sediments that cover buried cavities in the aquifer systems are delicately balanced by ground-water fluid pressure. The water below ground is actually helping to keep the surface soil in place. Groundwater pumping for urban water supply and for irrigation can produce new sinkholes In sinkhole-prone areas. If pumping results in a lowering of groundwater levels, then underground structural failure, and thus, sinkholes, can occur.

When History channel series The Bible by Roma Downey and Mark Burnett first aired last Sunday, my hope was that this series would spark intense interest in the actual Bible. Regardless of any philosophical viewpoint, this miniseries presents a great opportunity for Christians and church leaders to educate people about scripture – whether it be to correct errors or to expand upon truths. If you find anything wrong (and I found some major things wrong), the primary tone should be education, not condemnation, because we desire for people to understand scripture and come closer to Christ.

Honestly, I did not realize how much I actually liked the Sodom passage in the Bible, but I appreciate it on account of its parallel to Judges 19 and 20. While the introduction with Noah telling the history of creation was brilliant, the first episode disappointed me in its refusal to seriously discuss scripture. This is where Christians and church leaders need to step up and discuss the scripture openly.

The introduction scene to the city of Sodom features numerous pairs of heterosexual kissing. It is actually pretty tame and mild – dare I say prudish? – by today’s standards. It basically seems to be one drunken kissagram. I thought this would be a good foreshadowing of worse things to come. After all, Sodom is well-known for an attempted male rape, but heterosexual sins could also be just as prevalent if not more prevalent. In our own culture, heterosexual sins erupted first, followed by homosexual sins, and now heterosexuality deserves the abomination label just as much as the other. So, I thought the kissagrams would be a foreshadowing of worse and more overt sexual sins.

But that appeared to be it, and the entire scene within Sodom was completely rewritten.

Now, the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground.

And he said, “Here now, my lords, please turn into your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way.” And they said, “Now, but we will spend the night in the open square.”

But he insisted strongly; so they turned in to him and entered his house. Then, he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. (Genesis 19:1-3)

Quite a generous and charitable host to his guest, that Lot to the angels! But what was Lot doing in the gate close to nighttime? Why did he insist so strongly against them sleeping in the open square? Great room for building suspense and drama. Unfortunately, there was no suspense or drama in the miniseries’ Sodom scene. Instead, it features the two angels screaming and yelling for help. Lot rushes to their rescue. This never happened in the actual Bible. And the miniseries portrays the angels as liars since they never needed help, and it was all a ruse to get Lot into action. Rescue from what is never revealed, and the angry mob at the Lot’s door – their intentions and motivations are never revealed in the episode, either.

Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we may know them carnally.”

So Lot went out to them through the doorway and shut the door behind him and said, “Please, my brethren, do not do so wickedly!” (Genesis 19:4-7)

That could have been an extremely intense, dramatic, and terrifying scene. Instead, it was replaced by an angry mob whose intentions were vague and unknown. There were never any threats of male rape. I have heard some Christians assert that the complete absence of homosexuality was to avoid offending the gays and to appease the activists. This could be true. However, gay activists refer to the Sodom story as a condemnation of rape, not necessarily consensual sex. This is a good argument on their part, and that is why we have Leviticus 18:22.

So, there is nothing in the biblical Sodom scene which could legitimately offend the gays and lesbians. Besides which, it has a strong parallel to the end of Judges, which features a heterosexual gang rape. In Judges, we get to see what would have happened if the mob did gang-rape Lot’s virgin daughters instead.

I suspect the producers in charge of the movie heavily sanitized the Sodom scene for the sake of a Christian audience. If Christians saw only gays kissing, they would object severely at the filth. If they saw threats of male rape or attempted male rape, they would go fleeing and squeaming away from the scene. I suspect that too many Christians would protest the presence of homosexuality in a Christian movie, even in the context of it being wrong. So, I think it was sanitized simply for the sake of its audience.

After Lot tells the men of Sodom, “Please, my brethren, do not do so wickedly!” he follows it with:

“See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man. Please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish. Only do nothing to these men, since this is the reason they have come under the shadow of my roof.” (Genesis 19:8)

Lot’s willingness to prostitute his daughters is absent from the miniseries episode. Perhaps the people who made the miniseries thought it would be too traumatic for children to watch. Well, then, do not let the kids watch it. This alternation in the miniseries seriously changes and damages the substance of their material. Much more could have been taken from scripture and weaved into this scene for more tension and suspense.

Lot was willing to prostitute his daughters, which goes against God’s moral law. One of the angels could become outraged and furious, threatening to leave Lot to burn with the rest of the city. In Judges 19 and 20, we see what would have happened if the two daughters were given over to a gang rape. And then, there is another verse to toss into the mix.

“Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a harlotry; lest the land fall to harlotry, and the land become full of wickedness.” (Leviticus 19:29)

This would definitely drive home the point that there is not one single righteous in all Sodom while the second angel could counter the first angel: they need to rescue Lot for Abraham’s sake. This is stated within the narrative text of Genesis 19:29, so you would have two angels arguing what to do and Lot facing a possible death sentence alongside the homosexual rapists for wanting to prostitute his daughters. Adding this scene that I suggest, based entirely upon scripture, would have made the audience more aware of the actual Bible’s contents and of God’s views on certain topics plus the scene would have been more intense, dramatic, and suspenseful.

Unfortunately, none of that happened. The Sodom scene in the miniseries episode was vague and bland and indiscernible. The episode never presented enough wickedness for it to deserve its punishment. Because it failed to present enough wickedness, it failed to explain why God was perfectly just in destroying the city. This is one instance in which Christian squeamishness is a dishonor and disrespect against God.

In the actual Bible, the two angels “struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they became weary trying to find the door.” (Genesis 19:11) And then, the two angels and Lot with his family stayed one more night in Sodom so that “when the morning dawned, the angels urged Lot to hurry.” (Genesis 19:15)

In the miniseries, the angels did do something to the men’s eyes. It does not appear to be blindness. Another review I read had said the angels made the men’s eyes bleed, but I could not tell what was happening when I watched it. Blindness would be much more efficient and humane.

Anyway, in the miniseries this begins a mad dash for safety during the night. The angels unsheathe their swords and begin slicing the men of Sodom who come after them. This scene is problematic on many levels. For one, this proves that the angels had no need and no basis for requiring Lot to rescue them. Because this added scene reveals that the angels never required any help, this scene reveals them to be liars. Holy creatures are incapable of lying. In the actual Bible, the angels are much more honest; they wanted to sleep in the open area of the city, but Lot insisted and beckoned them into his home.

Another problematic point: because God is going to torch the city anyway, it is completely senseless to kill the men. Are angels supposed to kill God’s creatures? I thought that job was reserved specifically for the death angel. Blindness is efficient and merciful. Because the angels had planned to stay the night anyway (Genesis 19:2), this indicates that God did not intend to destroy the city until the next morning (Genesis 19:15). God is patient and longsuffering. He can wait the night for Lot and his family to rest and to prepare themselves for their exit out of Sodom. Waiting the night also proves that when God judges a place or a person, His judgment is not always immediate.

Instead, in the miniseries, we have an attempt by the producers for a dramatic and intense escape featuring senseless and unscriptural violence by lying angels to escape something vague and unknown for no apparent reason other than God said so.

God has reasons for what He does, you idiots. And when you make a production or interpretation about God, it is your duty to provide those reasons.

Now, about the angels with swords… when the Asian-looking angel pulled out two swords, I thought, “that’s a racial stereotype.” It is a stereotype because although anime and Japanese movies do show one or two men wielding twin katanas, not every samurai wielded twin katanas. There is a diversity of samurai weaponry such as a no-datchi which is just one giant sword, a naginata which is a long blade attached to a long wooden pole, a kusari-gama, which is a blade attached to a chain for throwing. All these weapons were developed roughly around 1000 AD. The samurai era with its emphasis on weaponry did not begin until 1100 or 1200 AD. It is completely anachronistic for them to appear in a time setting 3000 BC. Japan at the time was still heavily populated with the indigenous Ainu, and sophisticated weaponry did not appear until much later.

To have an Asian-looking character wield twin blades is a racial stereotype. That the black angel only had one sword further established the stereotype of the Asian angel. And take a look at this anime picture. All these weapons are depictions of real weapons.

There are twin katanas, but there is also a yari, a nodatchi, a bow and arrow, and a naginata. Quite a diversity of weapons. Actually, I thought Shu Rei Faun wielded something other than a naginata, but that is what it looks like. Oni Masho Shuten had a kusari-gama, but I cannot find a good picture of it.

And when we Christians start citing Ephesians 6:11-17, we can put a whole new spin to the phrase “Armor up!” Scripture can be both fun entertainment and a great education if used properly.

And finally, there is the scene where Abraham prepares to sacrifice Isaac. The narrator says that “Abraham has learned that being chosen by God is a blessing and a test.” I think it was plural. Abraham cries out “haven’t I proven my faith enough?” I wonder why does serving God need to be a series of tests? The episode provides no theological explanation for any of this. Abraham’s anguished and fierce anger at God is both unscriptural and unbiblical. It’s a part of Christian pop culture that has no basis in Christian reality. The most entertaining – and scripturally-sound – retelling of the binding of Isaac is found within the Jewish Midrash.

The offering up of Isaac occurs in chapter 22 of Genesis. There is nothing to indicate that Abraham felt any anger or anguish against God. For more of his adventures, read the actual Bible or at the very least what people excerpt. Even then, check your Bible for verification. On the contrary, this passage of scripture defies pop culture and modern misunderstandings. This scene is a profound declaration of faith in miracles and in God’s provisions.

On the way to the sacrifice, Abraham takes two servants with him and tells them “stay here with the donkey; the lad and I will go yonder and worship, and we will come back to you.” (Genesis 22:5)

Both Abraham and Isaac will return to the servants. This statement is strong proof that Abraham did not believe his son would actually be a sacrifice – either God would do something else or would raise Isaac from the dead. Abraham was preparing to witness a miraculous act of God. Furthermore, Isaac was the child of promise destined to father a great civilization. There is no way Isaac would die or stay dead while this destiny remained unfulfilled. Certainly, Abraham knew this. Never once questioning God, Abraham knew something else was going on.

When Isaac questions about the absence of a lamb, Abraham replies, “my son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering.” (Genesis 22:8)

Another profound declaration of faith! Isaac is not the sacrifice but a lamb that God will provide. And that is exactly what happened.

Then Abraham lifted his eyes and looked, and there behind him was a ram caught in a thicket by its horns. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up for a burnt offering instead of his son.

And Abraham called the name of the place The-LORD-Will-Provide; as it is said to this day, “In the Mount of the Lord, it shall be provided.” (Genesis 22:13-14)

Sometimes – well maybe most of the time – the Bible is best understood as a whole. This entire passage has parallels to Jesus and His sacrifice. God the Father, Yahweh, has prepared to sacrifice His only begotten Son since the beginning of the world. Yahweh has planned to establish His own people the Hebrews for the birth and sacrifice of Jesus. That the first Hebrew Patriarch should understand the sacrifice of his son and the fulfillment of promise is a vital and essential element of scripture. To complete the establishment of this people for the sacrifice of Jesus requires someone who understands God and the sacrifice that is coming.

Regarding the phrase “God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering.” (Genesis 22:8) yes this is what happened regarding Jesus. God provided for Himself the ultimate sacrifice Jesus the Messiah through a virgin birth. Human actions never had any involvement in the providing of this ultimate sacrifice. The passage/parallel is complete within Genesis 22:13-14, and it is the most prophetic passage within Genesis.

That this miniseries will lead people to a better understanding of scripture remains my hope, but it might not be through what the series does within itself but on account of people searching for accuracy and find things out on their own. To isolate this passage away from the larger context of scripture results in misunderstandings and ultimately in a failure to comprehend the Bible in its entirety. Christians need to get away from pop culture including an abdication of their religion’s own pop culture. Christians, let’s abandon our preconceived notions to start reading, examining, and analyzing scripture on its own merits. When you analyze and examine scripture in its full context and in its entirety, you will discover that there is much more depth and detail than what a surface reading or any film production has ever presented. Amen.

WASHINGTON: Google says the FBI is monitoring the Web for potential terrorist activity. But it can’t say how extensive the surveillance is.

As part of the Google Transparency Report, the Internet giant this week released data on so-called National Security Letters — official requests for data under the Patriot Act passed after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

But Google said it was only allowed to provide broad ranges of numbers: in the years from 2009 to 2012, for example, it received between zero and 999 requests. The requests affected between 1,000 and 1,999 accounts, except in 2010 when the range was 2,000 to 2,999 accounts, Google said.

“You’ll notice that we’re reporting numerical ranges rather than exact numbers. This is to address concerns raised by the FBI, Justice Department and other agencies that releasing exact numbers might reveal information about investigations,” said a blog post from Google law enforcement director Richard Salgado.

Salgado added, “We’re thankful to US government officials for working with us to provide greater insight into the use of NSLs.”

The numbers, while inexact, were believed to be the first data from a private company about the National Security Letters which have been criticized by civil liberties groups for giving the government too much power to conduct surveillance without a warrant.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation calls the letters “dangerous” and has challenged the authority along with the American Civil Liberties Union.

One inspector general review found “serious deficiencies” in the FBI’s handling of the process and noted that the letters concerned tens of thousands of US citizens and non-Americans. EFF said public records have documented “the FBI’s systemic abuse of this power.”

On March 6, the Counterterrorism Bureau at Israel’s National Security Council issued its semiannual travel warning report. Travel warnings, which the bureau emphasized were only “recommendations,” of varying degrees are currently in place for Israelis in 27 countries, including Thailand, Nigeria, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey.

The warnings, according to the report, are “based on solid and reliable information, which reflects a real threat, based upon intelligence assessments.” The report from the bureau noted that Hezbollah blames Israel for the death of Imad Mughniyah in 2008, while Iran blames Israel for the deaths of a number of its nuclear scientists. According to the bureau, Iran and Hezbollah are still looking to exact revenge and are likely to do so by targeting Israelis abroad via suicide attacks or kidnappings.

According to a source in the bureau, Israel is “identifying a systematic campaign operating with the greatest vigor…. They [Hezbollah and Iran] are fully coordinated. It is one axis.” The source also revealed, according to the Jerusalem Post, that Iranian agents have been primarily behind the plots targeting state symbols, while Hezbollah has been responsible for plots against civilian tourists.

In addition to Iranian and Hezbollah plots, the bureau warned that there is an increasing threat “of global jihad attacks in Africa in light of the continued fighting in Mali.” The report specifically named Mauritania, Algeria, Senegal, and Djibouti, among others.

With regard to the Sinai Peninsula, the bureau said there was a “very high and concrete threat,” and that Israelis should “leave [the Sinai] immediately and return to Israel.”

The targeting of Israeli and Jewish targets by Iran and Hezbollah appears to be on the rise. Only weeks ago, Bulgaria declared that Hezbollah was responsible for the terror attack in Burgas that killed five Israeli tourists and a Bulgarian national last July. On Feb. 20, Nigeria’s State Security Service announced the arrest of three members of an Iranian-backed terror cell that was reportedly planning to carry out attacks on US and Israeli interests as well as former Nigerian officials. On Feb. 26, it was reported that Hossam Taleb Yaacoub, a 24-year-old Lebanese-Swedish dual citizen who was arrested in Cyprus on July 7, 2012, told investigators that he was a member of Hezbollah and responsible for “collecting information about the Jews…[t]his is what my organization is doing, everywhere in the world.”

Immediately following the Burgas attack, the NYPD’s Intelligence Division said Iran has “sharply increased its operational tempo and its willingness to conduct terrorist attacks targeting Israeli interests and the International Jewish community worldwide.” Between May 2011 and July 2012, over 20 attacks tied to Iran and Hezbollah against Israelis and Jews abroad were thwarted. These thwarted attacks, not all of which were publicly reported, took place in Cyprus, Turkey, Kenya, India, Thailand, and Azerbaijan, and elsewhere.

Security: In addition to stockpiling over a billion bullets and thousands of semiautomatic weapons the feds would deny U.S. citizens, the vehicle of choice for fighting the counterinsurgency war in Iraq is appearing on U.S. streets.

The sequestration question du jour is why the Department of Homeland Security, busy releasing hundreds, if not thousands, of deportable and detained illegal aliens due to budget constraints, is buying several thousand Mine Resistant Armored Protection (MRAP) vehicles?

And just who are they intended to be used against?

This acquisition comes on top of the recent news of the stockpiling by DHS of more than 1.6 billion (with a ‘b’) bullets of various calibers, enough by one calculation to fight the equivalent of a 24-year Iraq War, and the ordering of some 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians.

Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these MRAP vehicles for service on the streets of the U.S. They were formerly used for counterinsurgency in Iraq.

These vehicles are specifically designed to resist mines and ambush attacks. They use bulletproof windows and are designed to withstand small-arms fire, including smaller-caliber rifles such as a .223 Remington. Does DHS expect a counterinsurgency here?

After IEDs began to take a toll on U.S. military forces in Iraq, the Pentagon ordered a large supply of MRAPs.

“They’ve taken hits, many, many hits that would have killed soldiers and marines in uparmored Humvees,” Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a recent interview.

A DHS officer, Robert Whitaker, stationed in El Paso, Texas, recently proudly described the agency’s new armored toy as “Mine-resistant … we use to deliver our team to high-risk warrant services … (with) gun ports so we can actually shoot from within the vehicle; you may think it’s pretty loud but actually it’s not too bad … we have gun ports there in the back and two on the sides as well. They are designed for .50-caliber weapons.”

This is needed to serve warrants? Perhaps it might have been useful at Waco.

So the question is what does DHS need 1.6 billion bullets, 7,000 Ar-15s and 2,700 armored vehicles for?

What are they anticipating or planning for, and why are few in the media and Congress asking about it, particularly in the light of daily apocalyptic bleats from the administration about sequestration cuts?

We have asked if this has anything to do with then-candidate Obama’s proposal for a national security force as powerful as the U.S. Army.

In a July 2, 2008, speech in Colorado Springs, Colo., candidate Obama said: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

As Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News contributor, recently opined in the Washington Times, “The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us.”

No, we are not scanning the sky for black helicopters.

But we are concerned about an administration pushing for ever stricter gun control and de facto gun registration in the form of allegedly universal background checks to which criminals and gangbangers won’t comply is arming itself to the teeth.

If weapons of war don’t belong on the street, Mr. President, explain these purchases.