MJ, I can't think of a single confirmed "terrorist" that was "white", spoke "English" as a first language, had not flown to or from a mid- eastern, eastern european, or asian country recently.... can you ??
I am all in favor of profiling. I am in favor of ending any flights that are direct links from these nations to the US. I am in favor of a single "US bound" clearing center .... elsewhere ... that all passengers bound for here must clear with whatever type of search guarantees nothing is carried aboard. I am in favor of doing the same for all cargo. Let others surrender these rights to come here..... do not ask me to surrender my rights to be here and fly from Cincinnati to Chicago. As a foreigner, I would have no problem going through these searches if I were in the mood to visit the US.... not one bit. I find that to make your own population to give up their rights in order to accommodate a visitor is just wrong. I have the right to refuse and "vet" anyone seeking entrance to my home..... so do you. On Nov 20, 8:30 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Why the TSA Gets to Grope UsIt's the foreign policy, stupid!byJustin > Raimondo, November 19, 2010 > The Transportation Safety Administration is bringing the war home – and the > American people don’t like it one bit.Storiesof TSAoutragesare everywhere, > from the "Don’t touch my junk" guy to that photo ofa nun in full robesbeing > searched by a TSA thuglet. Talk radio is up in arms, Judge Napolitano > ishaving a conniption, and both liberals and conservatives seem to be uniting > around a general consensus that this level of intrusiveness cannot be allowed > to stand. Yet what is to be done?Rep. Ron Paulhasintroduced legislationin > Congress that would forbid government employees from groping, poking, > inserting, or otherwise violating one’s person, and prosecute them for doing > what would be illegal if an ordinary citizen dared try it. Unfortunately, the > bill isn’t likely to go anywhere – and, even if it did, passage wouldn’t get > to the root of the problem. Because the real source of our troubles isn’t the > TSA, orHomeland Security, nor is it any of the clueless bureaucrats who > populate these agencies: the real problem, as Rep. Paul understands very > well, is our foreign policy of permanent war.Since the end of the cold war, > US foreign policy has been focused on maintaining our imagined position as > the world’s sole superpower, and that means intervening in every "crisis," > arbitrating every dispute, dispensing dollars and discipline to the elites of > every nation. Hypnotized by the myth of our alleged invulnerability, which is > just another aspect of our much-touted "American exceptionalism," the 9/11 > terrorist attacks traumatized the national psyche. A good part of the rage > that followed the attacks was rooted in this illusion-shattering effect, and > there was only one way to repair the damage: the rampage that began withthe > invasion of Iraq, extendedinto Central Asia, and, today, showsno signs of > ending. > The problem, however, is that this response has only succeeded in > underscoring our vulnerabilities. TheShoe Bombercompelled us to give up our > shoes to the TSA. TheUnderwear Bombergave the government access to our > genitalia. And soon enough the Suppository Bomber will give them free entry > to the very crevasses of our personhood, and what is left of our dignity will > perish along with the Constitution. > It was all predicted long ago by oneGaret Garrett, a conservative editor of a > very conservative and indubitably American publication, theSaturday Evening > Post.Garrett’s last book, an account of the American experiment published in > 1956, ended with the Voice of History speaking:"How, now, thou American, > frustrated crusader, do you know where you are?"Is it security you want? > There is no security at the top of the world."To thine own self a liberator, > to the world an alarming portent, do you know where you are going from > here?"If only wehadknown, back then, perhaps we would have taken a different > road. A few, like Garrett, saw what was coming, andwarned against it, but > they were "isolationist" Cassandras, easily ignored as the US entered the > world stage determined to project American power to every continent, and into > every "crisis." Our CIA encircled the globe with > intrigues,overthrowingdemocratically elected governments > andinstallingfriendly dictatorships. Our tax dollars flowed into "development > projects" that filled the pocketbooks of local elites and impoverished the > people. Our diplomats and generals bestrode the earth like giants, > plenipotentiaries of America’s imperial will, succoring our protectorates and > rebuking our enemies – who, by that time, had become legion. > When the Soviet empire teetered and fell, wetook credit for itinstead of > heeding the lesson of imperial exhaustion, and this escalated our hubris > beyond anything yet seen. More "American exceptionalism." > No, there is no security at the top of the world. Furthermore, at these > dizzying heights, it is hard to see anything at all, beyond our own mythology > of Manifest Destiny and otherself-regarding hallucinations. Our vision > obscured by conceit, and our other senses deadened by complacency and > impending decadence, we are blind to the very real danger that comes at us > with the persistence ofNemesis. > That’s how those nineteen hijackers caught us, unawares, at the very height > of our power – or, rather, what we thought was power. That’s why we are still > looking for bombs in peoples’ shoes long after the terrorists have moved on > to new methods. That’s why we will continue to make the same mistakes, and > suffer the same consequences, as every imperial power since the dawn of > history. > The TSA can conduct a full-body search, prison-style, on everyone who gets > near an airport: we can lock down the country, and treat everyone like a > potential criminal, conducting random searches on the streets like > they’realready doingin New York City. We can turn the country into one big > prison yard, and still the terrorists will get through, eventually. > They’ll get through because we’recreating new enemiesevery day, many > thousands of them, as we extend our perpetual "war on terrorism" to new > regions, and claim more blood sacrifices on the altar of our new god, > Revenge. The conduct of our foreign policy for the past decade or so ensures > that the supply of terrorists will be endless, as the relatives and loved > ones of our victims come gunning for us. By hook or by crook they will get us > – unless the cycle of revenge is stopped. > What can stop it is a revolt against the TSA that becomes a widespread > rebellion against ourcrazy,enemy-creatingforeign policy. Short of that, the > anti-TSA movement could easily backfire: the great danger is that the > government will adopt, as an "alternative" to the physically intrusive > methods of the TSA, methods that go much farther in destroying what little is > left of our liberties. > Last [Wednesday] night, I heard Keith Olbermann interview Isaac Yeffet, > former head of security for El Al, the Israeli state-owned airline, who > scoffed at the TSA, his voice dripping with disdain as he described the > porno-scanners and the body searches as worse than useless. Scanners? > No,Yeffet has a better idea:"We don‘t need to spend one dollar to buy body > scanners. Whoyou are searching.""OLBERMANN: Yes. > "YEFFET: only suspicious passengers. We interview every passenger." > To a proposal redolent of every totalitarian state that ever existed, > Olbermann, the great "progressive," can only muster:"Explain that. Because it > seems too simple when we‘ve had ten years of taking our shoes off and > standing in line for an hour. Why does it work? And what does the interview > consist of? And who does it?" > Could someone please explain to Comrade Olbermann why the prospect of every > airline passenger being interrogated by some nosey jerk in a blue uniform > about where one is going and why one is going there is intolerable to a free > people? And why the feigned impassivity? Because I cannot believe that the > highly imaginative "news" anchor who would be screeching at the top of his > lungs if, say,Liz Cheneywas the one suggesting this – cannot conceive what > the interview might consist of:"And why are you going to New York, sir?""I’m > going to visit a lady friend.""And what, exactly, is your relationship with > her?" > As for who does the interviewing, oh, let your imagination run wild: or just > tune in to MSNBC’s "Lock-Up" prison exploitation documentaries, which run > after the "news" programming is over. That’s the new America people like > Yeffet are readying for us, with invaluable assistance from the Olbermanns of > this world. > In that world, as Yeffet explains:"First of all, we have to understand that > people are waiting in line to go to the ticket counter. While they are > waiting in line, this is opportunity for us as security people to go in to > interview every passenger.Every American aPalestinian."We must hire qualified > people. We must train them well. And we need to teach them how to approach > with the passengers, to let them understand we are not coming to investigate > you; we are not coming to insult you; we are coming to help you to fly safe > and secure, to go where you go to your destination." > We’re the government, and we’re here to "help" you. Oh, the future is as > bright as Olbermann is dim:"Passenger profiling. You helped to develop it for > El Al. What does it mean? Why does it work? And for people who jump when they > hear the word, uh-oh, profiling, who are you profiling? It‘s not members of > an ethnic group, is it?""YEFFET: No. We are interviewing every passenger > with no exception. Now, we explain to them what we are doing. When they > understand that we are working for their security, for their life, because we > stay on the ground and they take the flight, 99.9 percent of the passengers > are bona fide, are honest. And they love to cooperate with you." > Like sheep love to be herded to their inevitable fate. > What this means is a TSA database storing the details of millions of > interviews, the personal details of anyone and everyone who gets on a plane. > Oh, but don’t worry, only "suspicious people" will have anything to fear – > you know, people with "suspicious"political opinions, or > "suspicious"demeanors, or perhaps "suspicious"friendswith > "suspicious"political opinions. This is the "intelligence-based" methodology > of a police state, which will be – and is being – proposed as an alternative > – the only alternative – to the TSA’s high-tech –and-rubber-gloves. > Yes, Isaac, explain why it works. Because servility is a habit easily > acquired, and hard to kick. > So how do we avoid our sheep-like fate?It’s the foreign policy, stupid!When > half the world stops coming after us, when we stop playing the role of > al-Qaeda’s top recruiter, the defense of the country will no longer be > impossible. > What the TSA’s reign of terror must teach us is the lesson we’ve been pushing > here at Antiwar.com since our inception: that you can have an empire engaged > in continuous warfare, or you can have your freedom – butyou cannot have > both. http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/11/18/why-the-tsa-gets-to-grope-us/ -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
