Ron Paul To TSA: "Enough Is Enough!"...

[Liberty]

This man is beyond any foreseeable limit in wisdom.

 

[Jarhead]

tough shit....if a religion passively puts up with terrorism then it needs to be condemned and ousted...

just because they call it "religion" does not mean Americans have to respect it....

Islam = Sharia law = anti-American

...those who wish to live by Sharia law can take their "religion" and go live that way in an Islam country of their choice...but NOT here in America...

So do you believe it fair that we have the FBI start harassing any or all random Italian Americans in an effort to force them to expose any and all Mafia members they may know?

If they are suspicious then the FBI should profile them...

Does their being Italian looking make them suspicious?

 

[jillian]

If they are suspicious then the FBI should profile them...

two words... timothy mcveigh

 

[ScreamingEagle]

So do you believe it fair that we have the FBI start harassing any or all random Italian Americans in an effort to force them to expose any and all Mafia members they may know?

If they are suspicious then the FBI should profile them...

Does their being Italian looking make them suspicious?

Not necessarily....but if he's between the ages 17 and 45 quite possibly...

 

[Foxfyre]

Not only are special cronies of the current Administration (and none of its opponents) profiting handsomely on these 'see you naked' machines--there are now four of them at the local airport and we understand more have been ordered--the machines don't detect the plastic explosives that are the weapon of choice for terrorists these days. And unless they do a full body cavity search too, does anybody think that the sexual groping is really going to find a bomb? So cronyism, profits, and intrusiveness that should offend the most leftist American are not making us a hell of a lot safer.

And here's another little tidbit that should be of interest to those who haven't drunk the kool-ade into unconsciousness:

In a significant victory for federal employee unions, the Federal Labor Relations Authority decided Friday that Transportation Security Administration staffers will be allowed to vote on union representation.

The decision clears the way for a campaign by the government’s two largest labor organizations, the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union, to represent some 50,000 transportation security officers.

It was bound to happen. Before it became an agency known as Fourth Amendment violators, due to its critical national security responsibilities, the TSA was created in 2001as a non-union agency.
TSA Unionization: A $30 Million Annual Gift to Union Bosses | RedState

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Not only are special cronies of the current Administration (and none of its opponents) profiting handsomely on these 'see you naked' machines--there are now four of them at the local airport and we understand more have been ordered--the machines don't detect the plastic explosives that are the weapon of choice for terrorists these days. And unless they do a full body cavity search too, does anybody think that the sexual groping is really going to find a bomb? So cronyism, profits, and intrusiveness that should offend the most leftist American are not making us a hell of a lot safer.

And here's another little tidbit that should be of interest to those who haven't drunk the kool-ade into unconsciousness:

In a significant victory for federal employee unions, the Federal Labor Relations Authority decided Friday that Transportation Security Administration staffers will be allowed to vote on union representation.

The decision clears the way for a campaign by the government’s two largest labor organizations, the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union, to represent some 50,000 transportation security officers.

It was bound to happen. Before it became an agency known as Fourth Amendment violators, due to its critical national security responsibilities, the TSA was created in 2001as a non-union agency.
TSA Unionization: A $30 Million Annual Gift to Union Bosses | RedState

right....the scanners would not have detected the diaper bomber....

Last year, a Muslim attempting to murder Prince Mohammed bin Nayef of Saudi Arabia blew himself up with a bomb stuck up his anus. Fortunately, this didn't happen near an airport, or Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano would now be requiring full body cavity searches to fly.

anncoulter.com

 

[Paulie]

Thank You Dr. Paul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rsW88ULI24

I just wish he was a better public speaker.

For some of us, we don't need him to articulate his ideas with perfection.

But his message just gets lost on most people because of it.

 

[Sallow]

I saw a report today on the scannners and saw how they "pat" you down if you refuse them.

I'm starting to change my mind on this. It really does look like they are going to far.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I saw a report today on the scannners and saw how they "pat" you down if you refuse them.

I'm starting to change my mind on this. It really does look like they are going to far.

The pat down is aggressive because they are attempting to "encourage" everybody to use the radiation scanning machines.....which pose health risks....

....will pregnant women or cancer patients or small babies be "encouraged" to go through the scanners too...?

But in the end (heh play on words)....there is no real "safety".....a terrorist could just pack his explosives....you know....in his end...

....not to mention the thousands of airport workers that could possibly have acces and put explosives into a waiting airplane...

 

[Paulie]

I saw a report today on the scannners and saw how they "pat" you down if you refuse them.

I'm starting to change my mind on this. It really does look like they are going to far.

The pat down is aggressive because they are attempting to "encourage" everybody to use the radiation scanning machines.....which pose health risks....

....will pregnant women or cancer patients or small babies be "encouraged" to go through the scanners too...?

But in the end (heh play on words)....there is no real "safety".....a terrorist could just pack his explosives....you know....in his end...

....not to mention the thousands of airport workers that could possibly have acces and put explosives into a waiting airplane...

It's not about safety, bro. It never was.

Remember when they had people pouring all their liquids into a big blue barrel because they might be explosives?

It's not safety. It's CONTROL. There was a book written about this. Maybe you've heard of it. The title is some year in the 1980's.

 

[Foxfyre]

I saw a report today on the scannners and saw how they "pat" you down if you refuse them.

I'm starting to change my mind on this. It really does look like they are going to far.

The pat down is aggressive because they are attempting to "encourage" everybody to use the radiation scanning machines.....which pose health risks....

....will pregnant women or cancer patients or small babies be "encouraged" to go through the scanners too...?

But in the end (heh play on words)....there is no real "safety".....a terrorist could just pack his explosives....you know....in his end...

....not to mention the thousands of airport workers that could possibly have acces and put explosives into a waiting airplane...

So they won't allow profiling which would actually head off a lot of these guys. . .but that would be politically incorrect.

Homeland Security has a massive watch list. Surely with today's sophisticated electronics it wouldn't be that difficult process to have it check that list and maybe even do a cursory background check every time somebody buys a ticket? But they don't do that. That would be 'intrusive'.

And with the machines and pat downs nobody is going to try to get a bomb on a plane. They're already diverting them through UPS and other package couriers.

But the terrorists are winning. They've got us taking our shoes off, putting tiny amounts of anything liquid in little plastic bags, our suitcases are frequently searched and the airlines aren't liable for much if anything is missing, we have to get to the airport way early and once inside security we can't visit with loved ones until boarding as we once could. In short they are making flying an extremely stressful process. I'm sure they are delighted even as they devise new ways to get around the system.

 

[Sallow]

I really don't know why they are so adverse to the use of dogs. They can smell explosives. And IMHO they are probably much more reliable then machines are pat downs.

 

[Foxfyre]

That's a good point no matter how reminiscent it would be of Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR. I wouldn't object at all to a smell down by a German Shepherd though. I'm going to have to think long and hard before I will decide whether I will go through that scanner or submit to a pat down though.

 

[Sallow]

Dogs should at least be an option.

Heck..it would clear out the shelters too.

 

[shintao]

The Government's power is not limitless. They can't just force any humiliation they choose on the People. It's time to check their power. I hope more Americans stand up and fight back.

LOL! Wonder why Rand has waited 8 years to speak up? Maybe the president has to be black before he will say anything.

 

[Sallow]

The Government's power is not limitless. They can't just force any humiliation they choose on the People. It's time to check their power. I hope more Americans stand up and fight back.

LOL! Wonder why Rand has waited 8 years to speak up? Maybe the president has to be black before he will say anything.

His father was doing the talking. Only now the right ain't calling Ron Paul a crackpot. Maybe ol' Rand figured he got a shot.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I really don't know why they are so adverse to the use of dogs. They can smell explosives. And IMHO they are probably much more reliable then machines are pat downs.

Hire trained ex-military/police to profile and dog sniffers and we'll be a whole lot safer....

Dump most of the idiot TSA agents and we'll save a whole lot of money too...

 

[The Infidel]

I really don't know why they are so adverse to the use of dogs. They can smell explosives. And IMHO they are probably much more reliable then machines are pat downs.

Dogs should at least be an option.

Heck..it would clear out the shelters too.

Great point... Just think how many dogs could be saved and put into service.... with the money they are spending on those machines.... MILLIONS....not to mention the kickbacks that some are getting in order to purchase the machines.

I say get rid of the machines... hire ex-military interigators to profile passengers and question them JUST LIKE EL-AL Airlines. We could save a ton of money and it would make most of us feel as though our officials REALLY care.... right now... you couldnt pay me enough to fly.

 

[shintao]

I have wondered why passenger planes are not made in two pieces, with the passenger section set for ejection, with cargo parachutes to bring the people cannister section to the ground, while pilots could eject, or come to low altitude and land the craft.

 

[Sallow]

I have wondered why passenger planes are not made in two pieces, with the passenger section set for ejection, with cargo parachutes to bring the people cannister section to the ground, while pilots could eject, or come to low altitude and land the craft.

Like "Lord of the Flies"?