Bobby Jindal: How about protecting the rights of Americans and not terrorists?

posted at 10:52 am on November 22, 2010 by Cubachi

I thought after reading some of the horror stories coming from people who dealt with TSA pat-downs hit its climax last week. But TSA keeps proving me wrong.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal asks a simple question, why is it that the Obama administration is more preoccupied with protecting the rights of terrorists, while subjecting law-abiding citizens to these intrusive body searches?

I think the American people are worried when they see an administration worried about reading Miranda rights to the underwear bomber. They’re so worried about rights of the terrorists, what about the rights of innocent American travelers?

The big issue here is that our government is playing the political correctness game.

TSA Chief John Pistole told Candy Crowley yesterday on “State of the Union,” that Israel’s security methods will never be adopted in America because the US doesn’t do “profiling.” So instead, we have to treat everyone like they’re the enemy, to not offend a certain group. Forget about the successful record of Israeli security in airlines, we must not offend. Ah, political correctness strikes again.

Although Pistole has sent out word that there may be changes in screening policy, making it as “minimally invasive as possible,” he never cited what these changes will be, nor when they’ll take place.

Jindal added in the interview:

“It feels too much from this administration like we’re playing a defensive game in the war on terrorism.”

“Luck is not a strategy. We need to be rooting out these networks, we need to be killing these terrorists. The bottom line is yes we need to secure our country, but simply playing defense isn’t enough.

Cross-posted at www.Cubachi.com

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

TSA Chief John Pistole told Candy Crowley yesterday on “State of the Union,” that Israel’s security methods will never be adopted in America because the US doesn’t do “profiling.”

Pistole is not accurate. We don’t do profiling of terrorists under Obama, except to the extent we give proven terrorists the extra benefit of the doubt over non proven tourists at airports.

The Obama administration has no problem with a civil jury releasing a mass murdering unrepentant jihadist terrorist onto the world to pursue his trade, but has every problem releasing a sales rep from Cleveland onto a jumbo jet

If the terrorist had been found not guilty on all counts, is there any chance he would get a hand search up his pants before being released into the world?

At the moment the terrorist would have been found ‘not guilty’ his pants would be sacred.

Yet the average American at the airport is also not guilty, until proven guilty

entagor on November 22, 2010 at 12:26 PM

If Palin can’t take the heat, she shouldn’t be in the kitchen.

Big words from someone who wasn’t responsible for paying her legal defense bills. If she stayed in office, she’d be bankrupt by now. Simply for having to defend herself against charges of holding a fish, wearing a jacket with a logo, and other such nonsense. But, instead of admitting that she was the target of a coordinated attack to ruin her, you spout nonsense about not being able to take the heat. Like you could…

joejm65 on November 22, 2010 at 12:26 PM

The Hatefilled Left would love for us to abandon Palin for two main reasons. She fights right which makes have to get everyone in on the attack full time and that makes what they are doing so obvious. We’d be doing them another big favor by giving them a new target. They aren’t being believed re Palin anymore, they have really over done it by now and her show on TLC is killing them.
CCRWM on November 22, 2010 at 12:19 PM

CCRWM on November 22, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Jindal’s parents are naturalized citizens, and therefore, he doesn’t meet the natural-born Constitutional qualification.

But Obama doesn’t meet that standard, either. Obama could have been born down the hall from me… he still isn’t Constitutionally qualified to serve as President.

itsacookbook on November 22, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Jindal’s parents are naturalized citizens, and therefore, he doesn’t meet the natural-born Constitutional qualification.

itsacookbook on November 22, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Were they naturalized before or after he was born? If memory serves, I think that does make a difference.

gryphon202 on November 22, 2010 at 12:32 PM

“We don’t do profiling??” As a middle aged white man, I beg to differ.

teacherman on November 22, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Stuff the TSA. I’ll take road trips from now on. Mr. President better wisen up and straighten this mess out if he wants to leave office with even single digit approval ratings. Only an ignorant fool would subject its citizens to this kind of behavior in the name of keeping them safe.

scalleywag on November 22, 2010 at 12:36 PM

Gryphon who is going to vote for Obama in 2012? Even if he keeps the 20% hard liberal left, he’s lost the Independents with his unconstitutional freedom stealing entitlement dependent power grab. Even if the economy gets a little better, he’s given the 80% of the rest of us such a scare that we want him and his czars and his Puppetmaster Soros gone gone gone. He’s going to lose so the Hatefilled Left knows who ever gets the Republican nomination is going to win. Palin will reduce the size of gov’t, reduce the debt and give us our Freedom back. The Hatefilled Left doesn’t want to lose all they have gained and they know they will with Palin.

CCRWM on November 22, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Wasn’t Jindal born here in the USA? I better buy his book, I know very little about him…

CCRWM on November 22, 2010 at 12:42 PM

CCRWM on November 22, 2010 at 12:21 PM

The Liberal Media Smear Machine is always running at full speed. The liberal propagandists can never increase the intensity of their attacks without obliterating what little credibility they still hold among the more feeble viewers. And, as Alinsky taught them, propaganda works best when it can be focused against one single individual at a time.

In other words, every attack against Sarah Palin has drawn the fire of the liberal attack machine for three years now.

People like Jindal are doing what they SHOULD be doing: taking advantage of Sarah’s bravery to help advance the flag.

And that’s also why the so-called “conservatives” who join in with the liberals in sniping at the person on “their side” who happens to be sticking her neck out the farthest all deserve a special place in Hell.

logis on November 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM

“We don’t do profiling??” As a middle aged white man, I beg to differ.

teacherman on November 22, 2010 at 12:33 PM

We certainly do profile, we take little old blue-haired ladies, catholic nuns and big-bosomed blondes and toddlers out of the lineup for special screening just to prove that we don’t profile. How is an anti-profiling process not profiling?

slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM

It’s impossible to argue with Jindal’s point – it’s airtight.

Also, there’s no question that if a TSA agent put hands on my daughter the way I’ve seen in some of these videos, there would quickly be a TSA agent on the ground in need of medical attention.

But…

What keeps nagging at me is that it’s only a matter of time before we have some fair-haired young woman of Nordic descent decide she’s going to strike a blow against the bourgeois patriarchy of Berkeley, CA or Cambridge, MA, convert to Islam, stuff her rectum with C4, and blow up a passenger jet after waltzing through security without so much as a beep from the scanners, having avoided a patdown because she doesn’t fit a profile.

And on that jet will be a dozen or so little kids, maybe even one that we’ve previously seen being humiliated by a TSA agent during an “enhanced patdown.”

Then what?

greggriffith on November 22, 2010 at 12:50 PM

What keeps nagging at me is that it’s only a matter of time before we have some fair-haired young woman of Nordic descent decide she’s going to strike a blow against the bourgeois patriarchy of Berkeley, CA or Cambridge, MA, convert to Islam, stuff her rectum with C4, and blow up a passenger jet after waltzing through security without so much as a beep from the scanners, having avoided a patdown because she doesn’t fit a profile.

And on that jet will be a dozen or so little kids, maybe even one that we’ve previously seen being humiliated by a TSA agent during an “enhanced patdown.”

Then what?

greggriffith on November 22, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Then we will have exactly the same two choices we have now;

1) Let the exception prove the rule, or

2) DON’T have a government that act like a bunch of psychotic morons.

Personally, I support the second option. And I will continue to support it even in the extraordinarily unlikely event that your are actually correct — and it turns out that the biggest threat to the security of the free world is Dakota Fanning.

logis on November 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Big words from someone who wasn’t responsible for paying her legal defense bills. If she stayed in office, she’d be bankrupt by now. Simply for having to defend herself against charges of holding a fish, wearing a jacket with a logo, and other such nonsense. But, instead of admitting that she was the target of a coordinated attack to ruin her, you spout nonsense about not being able to take the heat. Like you could…

joejm65 on November 22, 2010 at 12:26 PM

Boo hoo.

It’s politics. She (I hope) knew the very real risks to her and her lifestyle going into it.

When you’re dealing with Democrats, whose value systems are by default skewed towards the scumbag end of the scale, you have to know that they’re going to come after you in any way they can.

It was far too easy to drive her out over literally nothing, but the fact that she or someone in her circle didn’t take note of this well before the time it happened worries me.

Good Lt on November 22, 2010 at 1:09 PM

I know.

I’m just curious as to why some people seem to think she’s just going to sail into the WH if she’s nominated.

Here’s what she’s in for from the national Democrat-media complex:

- “QUITTER.” (Repeat every day)
- What were you doing on that TLC reality show? How does that help you prepare for the presidency? Is that what you think “leadership” is?
- What have you done in public office since you quit the governorship?
- What were all of those ethics complaints about? Surely, there must have been something you did to have so many of them filed.
- “QUITTER.”
- Rinse, lather, repeat. Ad nauseum.

Compare that to Jindal:

- Quitter? Nope.
- Ethics complaints (no matter how frivolous and false?) Nope.
- Leadership? See gulf oil incident. Expertise and past successes in reforming health care at govt level, which is pertinent in coming years.
- What experience do you have? Executive – governor of oil-producing state who saw it through an ecological crisis while President Obama golfed, flubbed and diddled.

Jindal has a lot less baggage and more substance when you consider his coming media exam.

It doesn’t matter that Obama was and is supremely unqualified for the Presidency. We know this, but the reality is that through a combination of Bush fatigue, media malpractice and bad candidates on the GOP side, he managed to win the Presidency.

Now the object has to be to show that not only is he incompetent because he was unqualified, but to show that the incoming challenger has more experience than he did.

WE know that Palin did, but that doesn’t matter to the national media and they won’t pay attention to this.

Good Lt on November 22, 2010 at 11:33 AM

^this

Face it, they will hammer on and on about it.

Also, enough wiht the “so-and-so voted for such and such so he’s no conservative”. Guess what. Reagan passed amnesty. So if you guys have any intellectual honesty you will either (a) call Reagan a RINO or (b) admit that just because a particular politician disagrees with you on one, two, or three issues doesn’t mean he or she isn’t a conservative.

DethMetalCookieMonst on November 22, 2010 at 1:10 PM

I wasn’t aware that there was a Conservative litmus test that you have to like Sarah Palin in order to be a Conservative.

Gets on my nerves, too. I like Sarah (if you look at my past posts you’ll see that I’m not lying). However, it’s extremely annoying that things instantly went from “Rove, that magnificent bastard. I love Rove! ect.” to “Rove the RINO!!! Rove’s a traiter!! Tokyo Rove!!!” because he dares make a legitimate observation about Palin doing a reality TV show or because he didn’t root for O’donnell.

DethMetalCookieMonst on November 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM

@ gryphon202, 12:21 PM

Jindal’s parents were here attending school so were probably here on student visas. She was already pregnant with him when they arrived. He may fall into the category of “anchor baby”, but it carries no weight constitutionally. In order for him to be a “natural born” citizen, both of his parents had to have been citizens when he was born.

The classifications of citizen are:

Natural born = born on US soil to two US citizen parents. Official military bases/installations and US Embassies are considered US soil.

Citizen [as distinguished from 'natural born' citizen] =
born on US soil to one citizen-parent/one non-citizen parent. [Obama falls into this category]; born on US soil to anyone from anywhere, i.e., “anchor babies”. “Anchor baby” status did not exist at the time the constitution was written/signed; nor did “Anchor baby” status exist at the time of the 14th Amendment [ratified 7/9/1868].

Naturalized citizen = born a citizen of another country, but choosing to become a US citizen [Jindal's parents - and millions of others: our ancestors] Naturalized citizens are the only citizens who take an oath of allegiance.

As a very basic generalization, put into common ‘today’ understanding: The naturalized citizen weeps at the sight of the Statue of Liberty; the anchor baby waves the flag of Mexico rather than Old Glory.

There is gross misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the 14th Amendment. It came about for no other reason than to confer citizenship on those who had been slaves. The 14th gave [former] slaves a country – THIS country – citizenship – because as slaves they had had no legal resident or citizenship status. They were property – ‘things’ – no difference in status from that of a frying pan. The purpose – the only purpose – of the 14th was to confer upon them the status of person, human being, citizen – as opposed to being a ‘thing’.

The 14th does not confer natural-born status upon citizens; the term “natural born” appears no where in the 14th. It simply officially recognizes that persons [black, as well as white - or any other race] born here, or naturalized here, are US citizens.

Besides not conferring “natural born” status on citizens, the 14th does not usurp the natural born requirement admonition set forth in Article II. The term “natural born” appears no where else in the Constitution. It’s there for good reason. It cannot be schlepped off to the whim of progressives and Marxists. It is contained within
a Constitutional Article, and can be changed only by a specific amendment. The 14th Amendment – which does not mention “natural born” status – does not anywhere say it;s purpose or intent is as an amendment to Article II, Section 1.

Article II, Section 1 stands unchanged in intent and purpose since September 17, 1787 – no matter who today doesn’t like it.

GGMac on November 22, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Article II, Section 1 stands unchanged in intent and purpose since September 17, 1787 – no matter who today doesn’t like it.

GGMac on November 22, 2010 at 1:21 PM

There’s a lot of the constitution that stands unchanged in intent and purpose (e.g. the fourth amendment) that we simply ignore. Damn shame.

gryphon202 on November 22, 2010 at 1:29 PM

Stuff the TSA. I’ll take road trips from now on. Mr. President better wisen up and straighten this mess out if he wants to leave office with even single digit approval ratings. Only an ignorant fool communist dictatorship would subject its citizens to this kind of behavior in the name of keeping them safe.

scalleywag on November 22, 2010 at 12:36 PM

labrat on November 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM

Yep, if Jindal looks like a possibility, the liberals will suddenly discover what ‘natural born’ means. Count it.

slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Actually, the US does profile. Certainly, the US Customs service profiles.

After a Mexican family vacation about 12 years, my then twenty something daughter who had needed to leave early to go to work, was pulled out of the customs line for a barrage of questioning. We later figured they may well have suspected she was a drug mule.

Lucky for her she was eliminated from suspicion simply by some really invasive questioning. Her profile: a youngish caucasian woman traveling alone from a country rife with illegal drugs and drug-runners.

This whole “we don’t profile” is a bunch of nonsensical balderdash…it happens all the time. Last time I checked, customs inspectors are just a lot better trained and more capable than the average TSA drone.

marybel on November 22, 2010 at 2:48 PM

CCRWM,

Palin being on the TV isn’t killing anyone. It’s no big whoop.

But being on TV, which most any dope can handle, is a far cry from being able to accomplish anything.

Spouting rightist slogans doesn’t indicate competence. Asking to be elected governor and then quitting indicates nothing good for anyone except the Palin bank account.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM

Yep, if Jindal looks like a possibility, the liberals will suddenly discover what ‘natural born’ means. Count it.
slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2010 at 2:44 PM

If the liberal media can convince morons that Sarah Palin of all people is a “quitter,” they can convince them of literally anything about literally anyone.

Jindal is a fine man. But he hasn’t been through the gauntlet yet. That is not a positive factor in estimating his electability; it is a giant question mark hanging over his head.

logis on November 22, 2010 at 3:34 PM

This whole “we don’t profile” is a bunch of nonsensical balderdash…it happens all the time. Last time I checked, customs inspectors are just a lot better trained and more capable than the average TSA drone.

marybel on November 22, 2010 at 2:48 PM

The truth is that if we do profile, a computer program will do it based on how the ticket was purchased, route, passport details, etc, etc. Race will not enter into it, but we all know that already. It won’t be the typical liberal bedwetting type of ‘profiling’.

slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2010 at 4:19 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on November 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM

I you scrollpast the jenfidel comments you’ll be just fine.

katy the mean old lady on November 22, 2010 at 4:43 PM

The truth is that if we do profile, a computer program will do it based on how the ticket was purchased, route, passport details, etc, etc. Race will not enter into it, but we all know that already. It won’t be the typical liberal bedwetting type of ‘profiling’.

Which is why three year old toddlers are being groped by strangers.

Thanks, I’ll walk, drive, hitch-hike, or take the bus. I, and my family, will not be flying, anywhere. The TSA can go grope themselves for all I care.

DngrMse on November 22, 2010 at 4:48 PM

Spouting rightist slogans doesn’t indicate competence. Asking to be elected governor and then quitting indicates nothing good for anyone except the Palin bank account.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM

How did you know that Palin really had a future “bank account” after resigning? You’re a genius, eh!

Palin had no offer then, except for writing a book!

You’ve been memorizing Rombot’s talking points too much!

TheAlamos on November 22, 2010 at 5:28 PM

Although Pistole has sent out word that there may be changes in screening policy, making it as “minimally invasive as possible,” he never cited what these changes will be, nor when they’ll take place.

Well, that’ll be bad news for Gloria Allred . . . just when she finally gets the first good feel she’s had in a long time, you take it away? Tease!

tpitman on November 22, 2010 at 5:40 PM

TheAlamos
old buddy, how much was the book worth to her?

And do you really think that she didn’t have people telling her how much money she could make if she was a private citizen?
How long did it take before Palin was signed to an agency and going around giving speeches at $100K+? Was it much more than 2 months after she resigned?

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 6:13 PM

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 6:13 PM

Somebody wants to believe the worst. Somebody else wants to believe the best. I like to think that in human nature, the truth lies someplace between the extremes.

gryphon202 on November 22, 2010 at 6:32 PM

gryphon202,

and you’re usually gonna be right about that. few of us are saints or devils.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 6:44 PM

TSA Chief John Pistole told Candy Crowley yesterday on “State of the Union,” that Israel’s security methods will never be adopted in America because the US doesn’t do “profiling.”

This is a bald faced lie. The U.S. government does, and demands, a massive amount of profiling. What does this moron think ‘Affirmative Action’ is? If ‘affirmative action’ isn’t profiling, I don’t know what it would take to be profiling.

Luka on November 22, 2010 at 6:57 PM

Luka,

perhaps Pistole meant that we don’t use profiling as a law enforcement targeting determinant.

I’m pretty sure that Pistole knows that other parts of the government, such as the Census Bureau, collect information for other purposes.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Whose country is it? If the public wants an Israeli like screening system instead of the current intrusive embarrassing & time consuming nonsense they can get it. Sure CAIR & maybe others will sue about “racial profiling”, let them – I’m not sure they would win. We live in a new world of global terrorism and adjustments have to be made and can be made even it takes a constitutional amendment to allow profiling in certain cases. It’s our country, not CAIRs. Our biggest obstacle is probably Obama – he’s got to go in 2012.

Chessplayer on November 22, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Whose country is it?

The country belongs to the citizenry and it’s governed according to the Constitution that they adopted.

If you and other folks don’t understand that or don’t like that, and if you and your imaginary public want

an Israeli like screening system instead

there are ways to go about changing the American way to be more Israeli.
You’re not likely to get that done, because most Americans don’t want Israeli systems here.
Maybe you’ve got to go….. someplace where the systems suit you.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Jindal and Palin are the only Republicans who are calling out Obama for this and other things by name and the only ones who have actually called for profiling.

Common sense and guts.

I love this guy. He has been my first choice for the last 2 years.

If he really isn’t interested,as he says, I hope he changes his mind for 2012.

Elisa on November 22, 2010 at 9:48 PM

the country belongs to the citizenry and it’s governed according to the Constitution that they adopted.

If you and other folks don’t understand that or don’t like that, and if you and your imaginary public want
an Israeli like screening system instead
there are ways to go about changing the American way to be more Israeli.
You’re not likely to get that done, because most Americans don’t want Israeli systems here.
Maybe you’ve got to go….. someplace where the systems suit you.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 7:35 PM

You heard it here first, folks. Audi thinks that violating the fourth amendment is constitutional. Try again, douchebag.

gryphon202 on November 22, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Jindal’s parents were here attending school so were probably here on student visas. She was already pregnant with him when they arrived. He may fall into the category of “anchor baby”, but it carries no weight constitutionally. In order for him to be a “natural born” citizen, both of his parents had to have been citizens when he was born.

The classifications of citizen are:

Natural born = born on US soil to two US citizen parents. Official military bases/installations and US Embassies are considered US soil.

Citizen [as distinguished from 'natural born' citizen] =
born on US soil to one citizen-parent/one non-citizen parent. [Obama falls into this category]; born on US soil to anyone from anywhere, i.e., “anchor babies”. “Anchor baby” status did not exist at the time the constitution was written/signed; nor did “Anchor baby” status exist at the time of the 14th Amendment [ratified 7/9/1868].

Naturalized citizen = born a citizen of another country, but choosing to become a US citizen [Jindal's parents - and millions of others: our ancestors] Naturalized citizens are the only citizens who take an oath of allegiance.

GGMac on November 22, 2010 at 1:21 PM

I don’t know if I am understanding you correctly. Are you saying that Jindal is NOT a natural born citizen.

That wouldn’t be correct.

He is a natural born citizen because he was not only born here, but subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Title 8, Section 1401, of the U.S. Code provides the current definition for a natural-born citizen.

• Anyone born inside the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, which exempts the child of a diplomat from this provision

Forgive me if I misunderstood you and that wasn’t what you meant.

I hope one day Jindal is President and even though he is still young and has time, I hope it is sooner rather than later. We need him.

Not that I don’t love Sarah and I certainly think she would be a great president. But she has untrue unfair baggage piled on her and we have no room for error here. Can’t take chances.

but if a true conservative doesn’t run, I will campaign my heart out for Palin. And I will defend her with all my heart.

It’s just that I am already weary this week of defending her to nonsense that has come up.

but if we have no one else, I will not grow weary, but will persevere. lol

But Jindal would be easier.

Elisa on November 22, 2010 at 10:13 PM

gryphon202

“douchebag?’

now, now now.

Don’t be making a mistake and calling me by your mom’s nickname.

and you might need to figure out a bit of Fourth Amendment law if you think that I’m calling for violating it when you’re demanding a gutting of it with those “Israeli systems”.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Require everyone that flies to eat a bacon sandwich before they fly.
Otherwise, they can take the car

ToddonCapeCod on November 22, 2010 at 11:34 PM

ToddonCapeCod

I’m pretty sure that the bacon sandwich thing doesn’t fit within the Israeli system, so that’s one thing in it’s favor.

But I think you’re gonna run afoul of the AMA and a couple of other groups.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 11:42 PM

and you might need to figure out a bit of Fourth Amendment law if you think that I’m calling for violating it when you’re demanding a gutting of it with those “Israeli systems”.

audiculous on November 22, 2010 at 11:02 PM

It is my opinion that nothing the Israelis do would constitute an unreasonable search and/or seizure given what I know of existing case law and the propensities of the existing BAU of our very own FBI. But I’d trust in courts to figure that out before I’d trust you…douchebag.

gryphon202 on November 23, 2010 at 12:01 AM

So we have at least one lib here (Audiculous) come out in favor of sexually assaulting passengers, including prepubescent children. Is there something we should know about your proclivities, Audi?

gryphon202 on November 23, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Why can’t we just call 911 when TSA is hassling us, groping us, sexually molesting us, or radiating us, or threatening to arrest us and fine us when we decide we will pass on flying and we decided to just leave the air port and go home?

If we are lucky, the Philadelphia Police will show up in SWAT geat and pin TSA to the ground, arrest them, and escort us out of the airport safely, take us to a safe house, and investigate TSA. Then the DA can press charges, the Pennsylvania Attorney General can bring charges, and the US Federal Court in PA Can get things rolling against the government, including the TSA.

The same can go for New York City, Miami, Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Los Angeles, San Francisco (wait! San Franciscans won’t oppose groping. The homosexual community there, and the leftists there, will actually get a thrill out of being groped, fondled, and radiated.), Seatle, Chicago (maybe not Chicago, land of corruption and of Obama and his Community Organizing minions).

You get the picture.

Does the US government treat illegal aliens sneaking into the country, crossing our borders like that?

Do they take illegals and grope them, fondle them, sexually molest them, arrest them if they decide to go back, and fine them thousands of dollars for trying to leave? Does the Federal government radiate illegals, or force them to choose between cancer producing radiation, or sexual molestation?

No. Illegal invaders, and Muslims, the people of the same Religion of Peace, Love, Tolerance, Understanding, etc., are afforded special treatment.

Go figure!

Nevertheless, perhaps the police will actually help us when we are abused and our constitutional rights are violated.

One can hope.

Since terrorists who want to kills us apparently are carrying materials inside their bodies, placed there via surgical procedures, or implanted inso their orifices, such as their rectum, are we going to now have to submit to rectal, vaginal, and other cavity searches before boarding an aircraft?

Will we undergo manual palpations to see if they dectect materials in our abdomen, chest, intestinal tract, etc.?

How about MRIs to see if there are bombs inbedded below our skull, or behind our eyes, or in our sinuses?

When will the invasive, abussive treatment end and when will procedures which weed out terrorists be implemented?

William2006 on November 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM

Using behavior profiling treats everyone the same, they are scrutinized until the security person is convinced that they are, or are not a threat.

I would have a path for those found to be a threat to be able to fly, it would be necessarily invasive, but would not be the grope fest that is currently going on.

Slowburn on November 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM

I would have a path for those found to be a threat to be able to fly, it would be necessarily invasive, but would not be the grope fest that is currently going on.

Slowburn on November 23, 2010 at 12:41 AM

Not anywhere near as invasive as it is now. Any security is going to be invasive to some degree, almost by definition, but the El Al boys and girls have you profiled within about 30 seconds of walking through the doors — and you may not even know it.

gryphon202 on November 23, 2010 at 12:46 AM

gryphon202.

yes you should know that i have a proclivity for reading comprehension that precludes me from taking you too seriously.

that I think that you’re opting for those “Israeli systems” is a poor choice does not mean that I’ve spoken in favor of intrusive searches of children.

audiculous on November 23, 2010 at 12:53 AM

that I think that you’re opting for those “Israeli systems” is a poor choice does not mean that I’ve spoken in favor of intrusive searches of children.

audiculous on November 23, 2010 at 12:53 AM

Then what do you propose? If you’re anti-sexual assault, but you don’t want to use behavioral profiling, what does that leave us with? Not much, by my reckoning. If you don’t want to do what works, you are implicitly stating that you approve of what we are doing now, that doesn’t — and in any event, anything that doesn’t use some form of profiling won’t leave us any safer than we were before 9/11.

Such it is with Libs. We always get to know what they’re against, but they can’t be honest about what they are *for*.

gryphon202 on November 23, 2010 at 12:56 AM

a little better, but still dumb.

You’re still screwing up by making the only choices “sexual assault” or the “Israeli system”. Rejecting “Israeli” is not an implicit approval of the other because those aren’t the only options.

work on the comprehension and the logic, gryphon.

honestly.

audiculous on November 23, 2010 at 1:06 AM

a little better, but still dumb.

You’re still screwing up by making the only choices “sexual assault” or the “Israeli system”. Rejecting “Israeli” is not an implicit approval of the other because those aren’t the only options.

work on the comprehension and the logic, gryphon.

honestly.

audiculous on November 23, 2010 at 1:06 AM

So what’s the third choice? What, besides an Israel-style behavioral profiling, can keep us safe while not involving sexual assault of three-year-olds?

I asked, you said nothing…so give me an idea of what you do have in mind, rather than telling me what you’re against.

gryphon202 on November 23, 2010 at 1:11 AM

What is TSA going to do when a suicide bomber blows himself up in the security area?

It would kill scores of people and take out a deserving body scanner.

Just how do you protect the people in the security check point? You can’t do it.

The Rock on November 23, 2010 at 1:12 AM

Conduct an informational campaign to explain procedures and either convince the people who fly that they’re going to be heavily scrutinized, and that includes more imaging and more interviewing conducted by security personnel, OR let them opt for less security and the much, much greater likelihood of successful attacks.

There is no really full-proof way to foil a series of determined attacks against airplanes that doesn’t involve scanning everybody and other frustrating and repugnant tactics.

Profiling can prevent some, but wouldn’t work for long. It wouldn’t have prevented Lockerbie or the attack by the Japanese people at Ben-Gurion.
And it won’t thwart determined efforts to determine the profiling criteria and utilize people who don’t fall within its parameters, either as recruits or unwitting dupes.

In any event, whatever methods we use, should they prove entirely successful,
it’ll only require or opponents to adopt to attacking different targets. If they’re determined they will switch.
There’s nothing important that’s gained by blowing up some airplanes that can’t be accomplished by blowing up a couple of large, highly trafficked shopping malls or famous big-city bridges,

What works best, as J E Dyer has pointed out on this site, is offensive action, and lots of it. I would add that the action must be focused better than we’ve done since we screwed up by invaded Iraq instead of finished the job in Afghanistan and draining the scum out of Pakistan.

audiculous on November 23, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2