There's only one thing more disturbing than the roughly one-half of the American population afflicted by Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) - the other half which seems robotically blinded by Neo-conservatism (which isn't Conservatism at all).
Can anyone explain how the transformation of our nation's airports into gleaming monuments to coercion, administered by the government's new Ministry of Safety, is not completely Orwellian - if not completely insane?
Let's get this straight - every time a terrorist plot by Young Islamic Males is detected or thwarted, the proper response for Big Brother is to inexorably ratchet up the unlimited searches and property seizures against law-abiding American Citizens who dare to innocently enter our nation's airports??
For the love of God, HOW does the confiscation of nail clippers, shampoo, and baby formula from millions of innocent people make us safer?!
Challenge your fellow citizens to justify this rank insanity and you'll witness one of three inevitable responses:
1) Unintelligible drivel peppered with "Must Hate Bush... Must Hate Bush..." (BDS ROM-chip has been implanted)
2) Blank, vacant stares indicating your vital inquiry does not even compute. (Normal Reasoning-chip has been unwittingly shut down via relentless "war-on-terror" propaganda)
3) Robotic drone in response, "Well, I'm easily willing to give up a little more freedom if it makes us all safer... [ad nauseam]"! (Orwellian Safety-chip has been successfully implanted)
Will this insanity come to an end, or will we continue our forced march toward Big Brother's utopian state?
Take a chill pill!!
One more thing...In case you have forgotten
9/11
Enough Said
Posted by: Chris on August 14, 2006 04:09 PMOn the other hand, I could see where taking a harsher stance like Great Britain did and ban all carry on luggage could be in the best intrest of the airline. Imagine how much quicker the airline could load the plane and take off.
I don't mind these little inconviences that much. It is nothing compared to what is done in other countries, but I do wish that they would get off the P.C. horse and actually use that horrible "p" word.....profiling.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on August 14, 2006 04:51 PMhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinlein
The interim security procedure was the compulsory order for folk to go topless (men and women), so any parasite Puppet Master could be seen on people's back. This was distinctly missing from the film version!
I suggest a great way to protest any perceived airport security excesses is for people to strip off nude and queue up with only a robe - when TSA workers request an inspection give them the flash, or drop the robe.
Nudity is the best securtiy measure in these dire times.
Posted by: FreeRangeAuthor on August 14, 2006 09:59 PMEnough said - or, how about enough reason and liberty? Is individual freedom a threat to Big Brother? Great Britain is already at about 1983 with their confiscation of all guns, sharp objects, and public surveillance cameras on every street corner - we're at about 1981 and closing fast.
Can anyone point out to me the sign when entering the public airport where we automatically consent to suspending the U.S. Constitution? Try out this thought experiement: Imagine one of TSA's finest (Wendy's drive-thru dropout) commands you to disrobe or to hand over your property or whatever is the latest mind control du jour - and you, standing defiant, calmly state, "No - I am innocent and I do not consent to your tactics of unlimited search and seizure of my person." What do you think will happen to you? And, what should take place in America?
I love the Heinlein idea. But it's already the next step on Big Brother's safety agenda. We're already partially disrobing robotically, and most of us seem already trained to open any cavity automatically for Safety officals to probe us at their whim.
I can't tell you how many times I've seen 85 year-old grandmothers in wheelchairs having someone rifle through their Depends right there openly in the concourse - while she's wearing them!!
But what's really sick is when I witnessed a cute little 5 year-old being pulled out of line and where she was commanded to be wanded - along with her Teddy Bear she was clutching. The most disturbing part is that she thought Big Brother's special attention was some sort of fun, as evidenced when her beloved doll was returned to her unharmed - but, while her innocence shields her from the fact that the TSA clowns are TRAINING her to be compliant in the future whenever they feel the need to ensure her "safety".
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on August 15, 2006 09:33 AMCan you point out to me where the constitution guarantees that there cannot be any searches for any reason by anyone?
The Constitution states:
Article 4 "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Note the key word here is "unreasonable". It is funny that you can be searched for alchohol, waepons and cameras when entering sporting events and other gatherings but when it comes to airports the looney bins try to make it a Constitutional issue.
There is no Constitutional protection against reasonable searches period. Never has been, never will.
Maybe you should concentrate as England has done recently on allowing for "reasonable" racial profiling seeing how 99.9% of the perpetrators in all of the recent terrorist attacks have been Muslims or of Arabic decent.
If you are ging to whine, whine about something that is going to do some good....
You suggest that the U.S. Constitution gives the government license to do anything they desire to us unless specifically restricted. Sorry, the essence of this remarkable document is exactly the opposite. Big Brother can do nothing to violate your individual sovereignty unless specifically authorized - this is what makes it so remarkable.
Second, what you cite is actually the Fourth Amendment to that Constitution - part of our sacred Bill of Rights. Amazingly, you rightly point out one of the keys which is "reasonable" searches and siezures - which has been my whole point all along.
So, you think the unfettered shaking down of the elderly and infirm at our airports in the name of "safety" is reasonable? Indiscriminantly seizing property such as water, shampoo, and baby formula and anything they desire is reasonable?
What part of these other key words "shall not be violated" don't you understand? Where's the Probable Cause indicating that I'm a terrorist attempting to board an airplane? Where's the TSA's Warrant to search and seize at will? Do you seriously think that fastfood rejects commanding you to disrobe and bend over is the righteous path to ensuring freedom in America?
Yeah, the profiling of young, Islamic, males is a great idea - that's my point. (BTW - that's NOT the same thing as "racial" profiling)
Could you please unplug your Safety ROM-chip for a second and explain to me how preserving our rights as American Citizens constitutes "whining"?
Or should we just roll over and let the O'Brien Brigade take care of our puny whining..
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on August 15, 2006 11:16 AMI'm accused of employing empty rhetoric when you pull the term "restrictions" out of a hat in order to ignore the 4th Amendment to the Constitution? You say there's no seizing of property at the airports - where millions of innocent people are coerced to give up - excuse me - spontaneously donate $Billions of dollars of personal posessions in conveniently (and coincidenatally) -located collection-bins at the airports?
Please explain to me how it's reasonable to "restrict" my bottle of water away from my posession in the name of saving the lives of others? How exactly does my water bottle threaten anyone? Because some young, male, Islamo-fascists overseas were thinking about secreting scary liquids and gels onto an airplane? How does this make any sense to therefore presume I'm guilty? (until I "donate" my dangerous posessions, of course)
How is it "reasonable" to single out people "at random" (indiscriminantly) for special extra scrutiny who have done nothing wrong? How is it reasonable for a TSA goon to don those baby-blue latex gloves and start digging around in someone's underwear in front of everyone in the concourse - WHILE THEY'RE WEARING THEM?!
How is it reasonable to snatch a little girl's teddy bear, wand it obsessively, and nuke it with X-rays? What messages are you sending this beautiful young, impressionable girl??
I've witnessed these actual events and more in person - Simply amazing the insanity... Or,
Wait! - has O'Brien gotten to you? Have you been converted by Big Daddy? Do you work for Big Brother or something?
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on August 15, 2006 02:38 PMNo one is ignoring the 4th? So, next time I'm singled out "randomly" for some friendly TSA frisking, I have your word that I can simply exercise my rights and refuse their commands? (requiring them to show a warrant or demonstrate probable cause that I need to be treated as a terrorist threat)
There is nothing simple about these "rules". They're ever-changing, illogical, not posted very well, administered inconsistently by power-hungry law enforcement wannabes - besides the fact they don't actually make anyone safer.
One must be blind not to see the coercion en masse - and yes, I've witnessed first hand the Teddy Bear incident and worse by TSA clowns on power-trips. Remember the incident a few years ago when one of these safety geniuses forced a woman to drink her own breast milk in order to prove she's not a terrorist? No coercion there.. These are facts - wake up!
By following life's simple "rules" I hope you're referring to our LAWS - which all need to be enforced CONSTITUTIONALLY.
No, there's no coercion going on at all - "open up your bag, what's this - water?!"
"No coercion here - donate your dangerous items here - no corecion.. keep moving.. we're keeping you safe, as long as you just peacefully follow our every command.. we'll have no trouble"
"Hey, Normy, we've got a problem - this wiseguy here is trying to resist our searches. Send some reinforcements so we can "re-educate" this guy about what's good for him."
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on August 15, 2006 05:09 PMLet's get real - water bottles don't threaten anyone - terrorists do. I'm not a terrorist, nor will I ever be one. (the same goes for any person we're ever likely to encounter in our lifetimes)
My entire point is that I'm a normal Grade A, 100% red-blooded, law-abiding innocent American CITIZEN. So, confiscating my posessions or water bottle, which contains WATER, or forcing me to run through any rat-maze TSA's finest dream up does abosultely NOTHING to safeguard this nation. Is this not just basic logic?
I think what my totalitarian Whidbey friend will not concede is that this promised safety nirvana is not achievable under the currently insane security mindset - even though most of us sadly have been brainwashed into submitting ourselves to the mass coercion in order to receive the feel-safe placebo (not to mention the fear of being sent to Room 101). This most certainly IS Orwellian.
This realization starts with admitting that Government by definition means coercion. And the more coercion, the less freedom we have. These are indisputable facts. The God-given right of an American Citizen is to live free and be responsible for their own happiness and liberty. And the first priority of our government is to use their limited powers of coercion, which the People GRANT to them, to safeguard our sacred freedoms. This is what the Constitution is all about. My "Security uber alles" friends think it's the other way around where we serve at the whims of Big Brother.
So, with all of this talk about the TSA protecting our freedoms, they must spend their limited resources where the biggest threats are! - and not to abuse law-abiding citizens. Why do I need to point out what should be common sense? How much sense does a politically correct "random" search make?? Think about it.
Here are a few ideas I would implore our totalitarian friends, Left or Right, to implement:
1) Seal the FREAKING borders NOW.
2) Concentrate the majority of national security resources where the greatest threats are most likely to be - E.g. Young, Male, Islamo-fascists.
3) Stop harrassing innocent law-abiding Citizens who are exercising their God-given liberties wihtin their own country.
4) Stop this insane "random" search and indiscriminant seizure nonsense.
5) Treat innocent Citizens with the dignity they deserve by the power-hungry wusses who actually work for THEM. (not the other way around)
Come now Totalitarians, this isn't really that hard to understand is it, if you'd just disconnect your chips for a little while? - if it's not too late...
Posted by: Jefferson Paine on August 15, 2006 08:31 PMConfiscating your possessions is what you deserve. If you are too thick headed enough to not to follow the basic rules that we all follow you deserve to be refused service almost anywhere much less on the airlines..
Basic logic tells us that when terrorist make attempts to blow up airliners using waterbottles etc that these same possible weapons be banned.
Logic does not tell us to rant about how your constitutional rights have been abused or how we have been turned into an Orwellian state
Why don't you pick a little more convincing arguement next time? Your post has nothing but hyperbole, rhetoric and half truths, no constitutional issues whatsoever and certainly no proof that we have become an Orwellian society...except in you own little head.