Arimathea | Philosophy | Sexual Assault at the Airport | Comments
Page views: 2384000
Total entries: 1456
Total comments: 225



Tuesday, December 14, A.D. 2010
Sexual Assault at the Airport

I first wrote of the repulsive new security regime at American airports in a March post, “American Mandarins.” The T.S.A. goon squad continues and even worsens its inane and totally un-American police state policies, and the masses simply bend over. We Americans no longer deserve sovereignty, and thus the bureaucratic maggots have taken it from us. A manly population would rebel and demand that our so called republican government respect its citizens’ dignity. De Maistre was right.

I have written politicians, airports, and airline companies. I even cancelled my Christmas flight, which I booked before they were using the new machines at my BWI terminal. I shall no longer fly from a molestation airport. Here is a copy of the letter that I sent to Cincinnati’s airport management last month:

I am writing you today to complain about the TSA scanners. Though the issue has become newsworthy lately as more and more people experience the TSA’s invasion of their personal space, I wrote to politicians and to the DHS when the new policies were first announced. Since then, I have had to undergo the new procedures myself, and I am furious that Americans are being put through it. I frequently fly between Cincinnati and DC; so, the issue is very relevant to me.

I appreciate the need for airline security, but I find the new scanning system to be an outrageous disregard of citizens’ privacy. If Israel—an obvious target for the terrorists—does not force people to suffer naked scans and groping sessions, then the USA does not have to do so, either. It is a false dichotomy to claim that TSA must execute the new procedures or else our planes are at risk. The new security regime defies our American values and our people’s human dignity.

I first “opted out” of the nude scanner in May at CVG, when I first encountered it. The TSA personnel were rude, and they tried to make me as uncomfortable as possible—to teach me a lesson, I suppose. One of the workers lectured me about how I was somehow insensitive to the victims of 9/11 because I objected to the scanners, which offended me greatly.

I decided that I would never fly from CVG again. Since then, I have flown from DAY about ten times. The extra hour in driving is inconvenient, but at least I can avoid the totalitarian security measures at CVG. I imagine that the TSA is eager to install the new scanners at DAY and at the other alternatives. Then, I will not fly at all. I suspect that many fellow Americans are deciding the same.

Of course, you must obey the government, too. However, I hope that enough people complain and boycott the airline industry so that the far more influential organizations of airports and airlines will start to protest, too. Politicians listen when it comes to money and power. I suspect that the companies that sell the scanners are pressing Congress not to get involved.

Well, I want them to hear other voices, and I hope that CVG will pass along my frustration and disgust. Then, I hopefully will be able to use my own city’s airport again.

Where is the American love of liberty? Coulter noted on a television show that I saw last month that only seven percent of Americans have flown more than four times in the last year. I think that I have flown about twenty-four times. So, the “large majority” that supposedly thinks nothing of police state pornography and sexual assault is not experiencing it. Still, the news reports show countless folks who just shrug and say platitudes about safety. Were they unsafe for the past nine years when the T.S.A. was not groping innocent citizens’ genitalia? Will they remain unsafe in the future, as the porno-grope regime cannot detect internally stored explosives?

Let us just cut to the chase and admit that the only way to keep the terrorists from being able to blow up a plane with absolute certainty is not to have planes fly. President Reagan (p.b.u.h.) famously said that we could have ended the Cold War in one day and ensured international peace. How? Surrender. Yet, he did not think that absolutely guaranteed peace was worth the price of enslavement to Communism. Everything that we do involves risk. We can reduce and manage those risks, and the decisions that we make have certain costs. I think that the humiliation and debasement of a free people in the interest of a security regime that can be circumvented by our enemies is not worth it. The Mohammedan terrorists who wish to harm Western peoples can exploit whatever weakness they see in our “wall.” They can wear prosthetics that hide explosives. They can plant bombs inside their bodies. They plan to die, anyways. So, we can frustrate their efforts, but we cannot always stop them.

A security system that targeted people from the Dar al-Islam would focus our resources intelligently. For the extremely rare Johnny Jihadi white boy convert to Mohammedanism, intelligence lists and behavior analysis would likely work. I read a story several months ago about an Irish woman who had married or was enamored with an Arab. She was going to participate in a terror plot, but Israeli behavior and interview analysts figured out that the Celtic lass had become a traitor. Yet, Erin McDonoughs and Brian Millers mujahideen are almost nonexistent. We hear of each case because they are so novel and bizarre. Al-Qaeda has hundreds of millions of sympathetic Mohammedans who wax enthusiastic about killing Jews and Christians. They are not going to waste a Western convert catch on a cheap suicide mission. Such folks are far too valuable as potential moles and fifth column coordinators.

Yet, do we expect that hideous pornographic troll that commands the totalitarian sounding Department of Homeland Security to follow such sensible advice? No. The Mohammedan threat is a nice crisis to exploit to establish further a police state wherein the technocrats and bureaucrats train a docile population to do its bidding. Bush, Obama, McCain—what difference does an election make when only Leftists run? It is only a matter of how bad, or how apparent, the abuse of the American people will be. We have become American Mandarins, indeed.

Posted by Joseph on Tuesday, December 14, A.D. 2010
Philosophy | PoliticsPermalink

Previous entry (all realms): Episcopalian Pride
Next entry (all realms): Incest: Test Case for Liberalism

Previous entry (Philosophy): Hating the Rich
Next entry (Philosophy): Incest: Test Case for Liberalism
Leave a comment

Christian / First Name: (required and displayed)

E-mail: (required but not displayed)

Location: (optional and displayed)

Web site: (optional and displayed)

Please write your commentary here: (Click here to add Smileys)

Please submit the word that you see below:

Your comment will be posted after Joseph makes sure that it is neither spammy nor unpublishable.