atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#2414: TSA considers incredibly stupid policy.

Via Alan Caruba I get this:
Now the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, wants special procedures for screening Muslim women so they can avoid pat-downs and reportedly Homeland Security is considering letting them pat themselves down!

Muslim terrorists are the entire reason the TSA says we all have to be patted down and examined and screened and x-rayed and groped: all these measures are meant to prevent people from bringing bombs aboard aircraft.

Caruba makes the point that it was islamic terrorists who tried bringing bombs aboard airplanes, and I want to add that only the incompetence of the would-be bombers prevented these islamic atrocities from killing anyone.

This being the case, why the motherfucking hell should MUSLIMS get a free pass from TSA?

If muslims get to "pat themselves down I had better be allowed to do the same, because if I can't, that amounts to:

1) government respecting an establishment of religion, which violates the First Amendment
2) a violation of the principle of "equal treatment under the law" as enumerated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

* * *

Al Gore admits that corn ethanol is greenie bullshit.

* * *

Another blow stricken for civil rights!

I find it hard to believe that the arresting officer didn't know what the freaking law was. But a cop doesn't falsely arrest someone, illegally search him, and confiscate his property, without thinking he's either enforcing the law, or above it.

And it's no secret that plenty of cops absolutely detest the idea of citizens being allowed to own and carry firearms.

Everything the cop did in that instance was wrong. If he doesn't know the law, he for damn sure shouldn't be allowed to enforce the law. He ought to be fired, or at least sent back to the police academy for remedial training in the freakin' law.

* * *

Serious flight-sim nerd alert. It's really cool, though.

* * *

Wear a kilt like a true Scotsman for your next flight!

...technically this is punishing the guys down in the trenches for a policy set by the Oval Orofice, but the more unpleasant the pat-downs become for the screeners, it increases reluctance of the screeners to do them--and you end up with incredibly long lines at the checkpoints. Pretty soon you have the airlines screaming at the TSA over their on-time performance etc, etc.

And that's what we want: we want the airlines to scream at the TSA. If the airlines get mad enough, they'll force airports to kick out the TSA and bring in private security.

* * *

Incidentally, does anyone know what the lefties are saying about this?

I would expect them to say, "All right! The American people are finally waking up to the realities of Bushitler's Patriot Act!"

But I don't think they're saying that; I think they're saying, "Don't those idiots know that the TSA is just trying to keep them safe?" Because their guy is in charge.

"That's what you're doing!" You may say, incorrectly. "You were fine with the TSA when Bushitler was in office!"

The TSA wasn't using full-body scanners nor was it groping people (and strip-searching children) when Bush was in office.

I was fine with the security protocols put in place after 9/11. I traveled by air in 2002, 2007, 2008, and 2009, and did not consider the scans and such to be excessive. They were really just enhanced versions of the kind of security measures undertaken before 9/11. They x-ray your luggage and have you walk through a metal detector--no biggie, IMHO, as for the most part that's all they did prior to 9/11. Some things get a little extra attention (like my old Inspiron 9000--it got swabbed).

But the scanner/pat-down/strip-search protocol they're doing now is far too invasive. The idea of the pat-down is to make people opt for the scanner; they want everyone to walk through the scanners because they're faster than the pat-down. The idea is to make the invasive search quick and easy, thus not inconveniencing people, because the cattle won't stampede if they're not inconvenienced.

Meanwhile, none of this would have stopped the pantybomber or the shoebomber, because they didn't have enough metal on their persons to set off the metal detectors and the body scanner looks right through nonmetallic objects.

Do you still have to take your shoes off before you walk through the scanner? Do you still have to take all the stuff out of your pockets and run it through the x-ray machine? Limbaugh says "yes" and I don't expect the TSA will rely just on the body scanners since it's not invasive enough.

* * *

If we really want to stop these people, we need to profile.

* * *

More extremely crappy science reporting: "Boring into the bed of the Dead Sea, the group of engineers and scientists began extracting layers of the earth's core...."

Reuters can't afford to hire reporters that understand the difference between a core sample and the core of the planet?
They will drill a five-cm-wide hole, which is much smaller than those used to find oil, and not stop until they reach 500 meters....
So there you have it: the Earth's core is 500 meters down. Reuters says so!


This is, of course, why the mainstream media uncritically accepts anthropogenic global warming: they're all a bunch of ignorant fools.

* * *

Anyway, I'm starving. I'm-a gonna go get me a bacon motherfucker or something.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.