Huckabee: It’s time for Obama to send the first family through TSA’s new screening

posted at 12:42 pm on November 23, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via Greg Hengler, why not? Why not at least send them through the scanner, just as a PSA to remind passengers that they can skip the junk-touching if they’re willing to stand in front of the machine for a few seconds? Frankly, I’m surprised that The One hasn’t already mobilized Napolitano and TSA chief John Pistole to be scanned in full view of TV cameras to help calm passengers’ nerves, as Villaraigosa had the good political sense to do yesterday at LAX. After all, the backlash to the backlash is now in full swing, with loyal liberals loudly proclaiming that their junk is here for the touching. Seize the moment, Barry! Now’s the time for a little proactive “messaging” — if only to distract people from the whining by White House aides about how frustrated they are with the public’s grumbling.

As for Huck’s insistence that strip-or-grope is unconstitutional, the truth is a bit more nuanced. See this primer from CBS on how courts balance protections against unreasonable searches with the special security needs of airports. They can’t do anything they like to you, but as long as they’re being no more intrusive than necessary — and arguably, per the Abdulmutallab plot, checking people’s junk is now necessary — then they’re probably safe. (Er, what happens then if a terrorist is caught smuggling explosives in a body cavity?) Which is to say, when that TSA supervisor famously told John Tyner, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights,” he wasn’t as wrong as you might think. Exit question: Okay, let’s give up the scanners and the patdowns. What’s Huck’s solution once we do that?


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

We don’t need The Zero to walk through a scanner to illustrate what we already know.

That the Emperor truly has no clothes?

glockomatic on November 23, 2010 at 1:56 PM

Frankly, I’m surprised that The One hasn’t already mobilized Napolitano and TSA chief John Pistole to be scanned in full view of TV cameras to help calm passengers’ nerves

erp…ugh, threw up a little in my mouth.

NickelAndDime on November 23, 2010 at 1:58 PM

Queen Barry must not be laughed at… And Mrs. Barry (aka Medusa the Hut) would break the monitor and blind people turn men to stone if the images leaked.
-

RalphyBoy on November 23, 2010 at 2:02 PM

THAT’s OK, I give– don’t make me watch Napo get a porn scan!!!

leftnomore on November 23, 2010 at 2:03 PM

My point is simply that if your desire is to insult Muslims to discourage them from flying, you won’t be effective at discouraging the ones who actually mean you harm from flying but instead will only be effective at discouraging innocents from doing so.

And yeah, all Muslims are terrorists or know one, or something.

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 1:48 PM

I am not in favor of using dogs to offend people. Use dogs to find explosives. If your religion has some preposterous dictates regarding man’s best friend, and you must tolerate this sniffing anyway, how is that one bit more offensive than selecting innocent non-Muslims at random and subjecting them to strip scans or groping of the genitalia?

Nor did I suggest that all Muslims either are terrorists, or know terrorists. But as a group the vast majority will sit silently while their co-religionists smear their religion with the blood of thousands of slaughtered innocents.

It is a gross understatement to say that Muslims aren’t doing enough to root out the evil in their midst. Perhaps if they are inconvenienced or even offended by the measures we take to protect ourselves from their terrorist co-religionists, they will begin to recognize the common enemy must be fought by us all.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 2:04 PM

I can’t believe that TSA and Homeland security can’t come up with a better idea than this. These people are supposed to be competent. They’re educated, they make good money. When you make people cry or soil themselves in order to get where they need to go it’s time to find a new method. Do a better job and stop this nonsense.

scalleywag on November 23, 2010 at 2:12 PM

The problem with molestation is the messaging.

theperfecteconomist on November 23, 2010 at 2:13 PM

Most of these sexually repressed fanatics would wet themselves with excitement if an American woman, or any attractive woman, spoke to them. Unless, you know, someone who might tell the wife or the Imam was around to see.

Remember, the 9-11 boys spent their last night on earth in a strip joint.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 1:15 PM

As I recall, a woman who was neighbor to one of the Florida-residing 9/11 guys was amazed by the rude hostility of the one she occasionally ran into.

HINT: if the man looks like he want to bury you up to your neck and stone you to death, let him go through the scanner AND the patdown.

And the TSA agent gets hazard pay.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Yeah, but I wouldn’t want to see his daughters humiliated just to make that point.

sharrukin on November 23, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Moochelle has no problem with that – she outed them both as fatsos to make a point.

Although strangely, she has no comment on the junk in her own trunk.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:37 PM

I am not in favor of using dogs to offend people.

Then my original comment wasn’t directed at you.

Nor did I suggest that all Muslims either are terrorists, or know terrorists. But as a group the vast majority will sit silently while their co-religionists smear their religion with the blood of thousands of slaughtered innocents.

It is a gross understatement to say that Muslims aren’t doing enough to root out the evil in their midst. Perhaps if they are inconvenienced or even offended by the measures we take to protect ourselves from their terrorist co-religionists, they will begin to recognize the common enemy must be fought by us all.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 2:04 PM

You said that they know who the terrorists are better than we do. This statement is based on nothing more than the fact that they are Muslim. And while I’m sure that’s true with maybe even the majority of Muslims, I don’t believe it’s an accurate statement for all.

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Good point, so even if you want to specifically discriminate against Muslims, you’ll really only be discriminating against those who mean you no harm. The ones who want to kill you won’t be stopped by a dog or bacon.

Professor Blather on November 23, 2010 at 1:12 PM

What about bacon-wrapped dogs?

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:39 PM

Okay, let’s give up the scanners and the patdowns. What’s Huck’s solution once we do that?

EASY: Use SNIFFERS capable of detecting explosives and/or noxious chemicals. AP: you fall to easily for the left’s clumsy ‘false choice’ arguments!!!

“Sniffers” could also detect explosives which are made into clothing: an obvious threat which is not being addressed at all.

The scanners and pat-downs are only yesterday’s stopgap measure designed to solve yesterday’s problems. They have NO RELEVANCE to the safety problem of today!!

SCRAP THE SCANNERS and CAN THE TSA SEX ABUSERS!!! Send the scanners to the southern border to use on illegal aliens if you can’t bear to thrown them away.

landlines on November 23, 2010 at 2:41 PM

Moochelle has no problem with that – she outed them both as fatsos to make a point.

Although strangely, she has no comment on the junk in her own trunk.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:37 PM

True enough, but given who there mother is, I think they have enough of a burden to carry. I mean they were taken to that foul church with a hate spewing preacher, they get the same garbage from their mother about how ‘mean’ the country is and they are called porky by mom on national television and we should add to that?

sharrukin on November 23, 2010 at 2:41 PM

Moochelle has no problem with that – she outed them both as fatsos to make a point.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:37 PM

Leave. Their kids. Alone.

MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 2:50 PM

The great thing about Obama — and it really is a gift to all of us — is how incontrovertibly Leftist he is. I mean this not simply ideologically but deeply, internally. He hates us. This isn’t recognized by him on a level of typical human understanding that could ever avail itself of therapy or cure or even true political remediation. It just is, and always will be. We are beneath him. That is the end of the story. And it cannot, will not, finally, escape notice.

rrpjr on November 23, 2010 at 2:51 PM

It’s Time to Know the Truth

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 2:51 PM

Didn’t His Royal Majesty ‘show the way’ when he got that flue shot?

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 2:52 PM

As for Huck’s insistence that strip-or-grope is unconstitutional, the truth is a bit more nuanced. See this primer from CBS

From CBS? Ridiculous.

The test is what is reasonable and what is not reasonable. In a civil court, the use of the “reasonable man” standard is commonplace. It seems to me that a “reasonable man” standard should apply in airport security. Is it reasonable to grope elderly women and young children? Is it reasonable to make people partially disrobe in public? Is it reasonable to make people pass through a metal detector? Is it reasonable to make people pass through a scanner which depicts them in the nude? Is it reasonable to look into carry-on luggage?

The Obama administration through the Dept of Homeland Security and the TSA has set forth a policy that is so far beyond reasonable that it cannot continue for long. Napolitano and Pistole are mere lapdogs for Obama, doing his dirty work and Obama is responsible for this unconscionable assault on the American people. If not stopped, he could and most likely will, expand the searching of people in the name of security when his goal is so obvious, make us accept being treated like sheep. Nobody should think for a minute that this scan and grope policy was instituted without the full knowledge and approval of Obama himself.

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Huck will be better than Mitt.

unseen on November 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM

Marginally; it’s like saying Hillary would have been better than the Bamster.

slickwillie2001 on November 23, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Is it reasonable to grope elderly women and young children? Is it reasonable to make people partially disrobe in public? Is it reasonable to make people pass through a metal detector? Is it reasonable to make people pass through a scanner which depicts them in the nude? Is it reasonable to look into carry-on luggage?

This is meant as a test. Which are reasonable and which are not?

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 3:01 PM

As I recall, a woman who was neighbor to one of the Florida-residing 9/11 guys was amazed by the rude hostility of the one she occasionally ran into.

I wonder what that gal looked like.

HINT: if the man looks like he want to bury you up to your neck and stone you to death, let him go through the scanner AND the patdown.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Don’t forget the dog-sniffing. In fact, if the guy fits a terror profile well, time for a proctoscopy.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:07 PM

I think the days of molly coddling Moslems are coming to a very swift end. For 10 years we’ve tried it all… The only thing that will work is profiling.

Between this garbage with the TSA and now mister I wanna mosque at ground zero demanding a $5M grant?

The dayz of moslem molly coddlins is ovah!

/Can I hear an Amen

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:09 PM

I know, I sound like a conspiracy nut, but I’m not. I’m just saying the potential is there, and I believe that the old saying that, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” is accurate given enough time.

FloatingRock on November 23, 2010 at 1:48 PM

Remember that people without honor – you know, the kind who believe that “the end justifies the means” and “if you can’t open their minds, open their heads” – would be not only NOT reluctant to use such technology against their enemies, they would think it their DUTY.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 3:11 PM

Leave. Their kids. Alone.
MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 2:50 PM

But they. Wanna. Grab my. Kids’. Crotch.

Akzed on November 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM

We do have a right to free movement, yet there is nothing in the Constitution that states such a right. The only reason the founders included a Bill of Rights amendments to the constitution was because some of the founders feared that government would violate those basic rights unless written into the Constitution, not because all rights to the people were limited to those ten amendments. I believe it was either Thomas Jefferson or George Madison who opposed the Bill of Rights amendments on the grounds that the Constitution already gave all rights to the people, limiting only the rights of the government, and that, if enacted, some future government would misconstrue them as the only rights given to the people. Saying that driving or flying is a privilege just because it is not written in the Constitution is the same as saying that our rights come exclusively from the government, which clearly are not. It is in the 10th Amendment where the issue of whether driving or flying is a privilege resides; that is, it is a right that belongs with the people or the states, certainly not the federal government’s. We limit our rights at our own peril.

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM

Or, put another way:

Gee, Gramma.. Sorry you have to get felt up and x-rayed. It’s for the moslems.

Gee, Son… Sorry you have to be terrified of a stranger feeling your body after all we’ve taught you about stranger danger and bad touching. It’s for the moslems.

Gee, Disabled Vet… Sorry you have to be stripped down and poked and prodded by an $8/hr union TSA worker because you have a prosthetic leg and arm. It’s for the moslems.

Gee, Cancer Survivor… Sorry you have to show us your surgical scars and your prosthetic breast and that we have to embarrass you in front of thousands of travelers…. It’s for the moslems.

Gee, Ostomy/Colostomy user… Sorry we had to invade your privacy and humiliate you, and make you walk through the airport in your own waste without a change of clothing…. It’s for the moslems.

/This ain’t gonna fly.

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM

And yeah, all Muslims are terrorists or know one, or something.

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 1:48 PM

They are certainly not all terrorists, but every last one of them is an adherent to a way of life that is an affront to American liberty.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Luka on November 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM

They always seem to forget this one.

Ninth Amendment – The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

sharrukin on November 23, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 2:38 PM

I don’t think we have a serious disagreement here. I do think that a Pakistani Christian or an Egyptian Copt would have a better fix on which Muslims were dangerous than most Americans, for example, even American Muslims.

But the simple fact is that Islam is the blueprint for a totalitarian society, designed by a seventh century barbarian warlord to consolidate and expand his power. Most of these societies are tribal at the core, and they share with Islam the idea that it is a form of betrayal to criticize a member of the tribe or a fellow Muslim to anyone outside the tribe or the religion. If Muslims are to re-take their religion from the Islamists, they must get over this barrier.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM

I hear there have been a big influx of TSA job applications from Vermont…

thedudesblog on November 23, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Nor did I suggest that all Muslims either are terrorists, or know terrorists. But as a group the vast majority will sit silently while their co-religionists smear their religion with the blood of thousands of slaughtered innocents.

It is a gross understatement to say that Muslims aren’t doing enough to root out the evil in their midst. Perhaps if they are inconvenienced or even offended by the measures we take to protect ourselves from their terrorist co-religionists, they will begin to recognize the common enemy must be fought by us all.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 2:04 PM

You do remember that they believe that everyone should convert or die, right? Then surely you realize that they benefit from the acts of terrorists, even if they shy away from doing the dirty work themselves.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Amen!

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM

Excellent wordplay. We should be looking for Muslims, rather than scrutinizing everyone for Muslims. “For Muslims” meaning in deference to them.

Ironically, we want to make everyone miserable so as not to make Muslims alone miserable, while Muslims want to make us miserable.

Good Muslims that is. The faithful Muslims who follow the Koran and want to kill or subjugate infidels who won’t submit.

The only good Muslim is a bad Muslim.

Akzed on November 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM

The TSA is taking the tack that it’s a privilege, not a right, to fly, even though it has been held forever, including by our Supreme Court, that the right to travel is a fundamental right.
Will the left tolerate the stop and search of every vehicle, when a car bomb goes off in a Walmart parking lot?
Will they tolerate strip searches outside the Rose Bowl if someone blows up a bomb in a stadium? Or cavity searches after the first bowel bomb?

I suppose so, just don’t try to stop an illegal immigrant.

AcidReflux on November 23, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Akzed on November 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM

Well, it’s all true. From the Target cashier who refuses to scan a pack of bacon, to the English style salon that was sued because the owner couldn’t in good conscience hire a moslem with her head and face covered, to the inconveniences not just at airports but at every tourist attraction, monument or cherished place in America.

We are willingly conveniencing ourselves to these fanatics in an inane attempt to either appease or to convince them that we are a fair, good and decent people. I’m farking sick and tired of this garbage.

I guess what really broke my heart were the stories and vids of the children and our elderly being put through terror and humiliation… for the moslems. Fark em. Profile them.

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:26 PM

But they. Wanna. Grab my. Kids’. Crotch.

Akzed on November 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM

Obama’s kids want to grab your kids’ crotch? Or are responsible for TSA thugs grabbing your kids’ crotch? Really? How so?

MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Or are responsible for TSA thugs grabbing your kids’ crotch? Really? How so?

MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Yes! Simply put, Obama is the President, therefore, the boss. The woman burned by her coffee purchased at McDonalds didn’t sue the worker who rang up her purchase, or handed it to her. She sued the boss. The McDonalds corporation.

Anything done on the job, always falls to the boss in the end. This being….Obama.

capejasmine on November 23, 2010 at 3:32 PM

You do remember that they believe that everyone should convert or die, right? Then surely you realize that they benefit from the acts of terrorists, even if they shy away from doing the dirty work themselves.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Not all Muslims believe so. (Technically, there are a couple of other options, dhimmitude or slavery. Not that they are attractive options.) The problem is that the weight of Islamic law supports the idea that all non-Muslims must submit to the rule of the Islamists. So the Muslims who believe that waging war on infidels to expand the Dar al-Islam or forcing them to submit to subjugation or die is wrong are tasked with reforming a system that calls for the death of “heretics”. Most of these Muslims, call them “moderate” Muslims for lack of a better phrase, just won’t take the risk. We need to do everything we can to help them find their huevos and do what must be done to marginalize the barbarians.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:35 PM

capejasmine on November 23, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Way to selectively quote.

Obama’s kids want to grab your kids’ crotch? Or are responsible for TSA thugs grabbing your kids’ crotch? Really? How so?

MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Now try again.

MadisonConservative on November 23, 2010 at 3:36 PM

The only good Muslim is a bad Muslim.

Akzed on November 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM

The simple truth, pithy and succinct.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:37 PM

How many know that you can board a plane to fly domestically in Australia without any ID at all? How many know that you proceed through the screening area to the plane-side area of Australian airports without a boarding pass? How many know that you can carry a bottle of Aussie wine or Victoria Bitter on board? Yes, their screening lines include magnetometers, X-Ray machines for carry-ons and screening employees with wands.

The only time its somewhat ugly to clear Australian security is if you’re boarding a US-bound flight, in common with most other countries. How many think the Australians are stupid for not doing it our way? How many think something closer to the reverse just might possibly be true?

Drained Brain on November 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM

the right to travel is a fundamental right…
AcidReflux on November 23, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Travel, yes. By commercial airliner, no.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Exit Answer from Huck: Do nothing
Exit Answer from me: Profiling

antisocial on November 23, 2010 at 4:18 PM

I don’t think we have a serious disagreement here.

That was my second impression.

I do think that a Pakistani Christian or an Egyptian Copt would have a better fix on which Muslims were dangerous than most Americans, for example, even American Muslims.

Agreed.

But the simple fact is that Islam is the blueprint for a totalitarian society, designed by a seventh century barbarian warlord to consolidate and expand his power. Most of these societies are tribal at the core, and they share with Islam the idea that it is a form of betrayal to criticize a member of the tribe or a fellow Muslim to anyone outside the tribe or the religion. If Muslims are to re-take their religion from the Islamists, they must get over this barrier.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:18 PM

Agreed.

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 4:22 PM

Most of these Muslims, call them “moderate” Muslims for lack of a better phrase, just won’t take the risk. We need to do everything we can to help them find their huevos and do what must be done to marginalize the barbarians.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Or at the very least, help the ones brave enough by doing what we can to keep them safe. There is a reason many of them are afraid.

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Esthier on November 23, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Yes. The first step is to distinguish friend from foe, so you know who to suport and who to attack. This step the Obama administration is unwilling or unable to do.

To be fair, Bush dropped the ball on this one too, perhaps due to his friendship with Saudi royalty. Neither will recognize that it is the “moderate” Muslims who are the radicals. The Islamists, supported by Islamic law, are the reactionaries.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 4:43 PM

This just in:

DHS & TSA: Making a list, checking it twice

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

The introductory paragraph of the multi-page document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President. In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections.

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” The label is then broadened to include “any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

Rae on November 23, 2010 at 5:00 PM

Haha! Barry caught in his own transparency trap! Such a fraud.

BHO Jonestown on November 23, 2010 at 5:30 PM

The TSA is taking the tack that it’s a privilege, not a right, to fly, even though it has been held forever, including by our Supreme Court, that the right to travel is a fundamental right.
Will the left tolerate the stop and search of every vehicle, when a car bomb goes off in a Walmart parking lot?
Will they tolerate strip searches outside the Rose Bowl if someone blows up a bomb in a stadium? Or cavity searches after the first bowel bomb?

I suppose so, just don’t try to stop an illegal immigrant.

AcidReflux on November 23, 2010 at 3:23 PM

The ‘flying is a privilege -so rights don’t apply’ line is government BS talk. It already seems to apply to driving a car. Taken to the next logical step, I could say that walking down a street owned by a county or city is also a privilege. Show me where in the constitution we are guaranteed the right to access the property of a county or city.

slickwillie2001 on November 23, 2010 at 6:02 PM

“By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights,”

If that’s true, which I don’t think it is, then why so pussy-footed about profiling? Racial and religious profiling is only part of the entire profiling picture anyway, the most important of which is behavioral.

Common Sense on November 23, 2010 at 6:42 PM

/Can I hear an Amen

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:09 PM

A belated “AMEN!” to you, Key West Reader!

disa on November 23, 2010 at 9:03 PM

From the Target cashier who refuses to scan a pack of bacon, to the English style salon that was sued because the owner couldn’t in good conscience hire a moslem with her head and face covered, to the inconveniences not just at airports but at every tourist attraction, monument or cherished place in America.

We are willingly conveniencing ourselves to these fanatics in an inane attempt to either appease or to convince them that we are a fair, good and decent people. I’m farking sick and tired of this garbage.

I guess what really broke my heart were the stories and vids of the children and our elderly being put through terror and humiliation… for the moslems. Fark em. Profile them.

Key West Reader on November 23, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Someone who wants to work in a food store but refuses to scan a package of bacon should be fired. Why would such a person even want to live in America, if not for the hope of one day subverting her to Islam?

You really have to ask the questions behind the questions.

Has anyone noticed that the feds are doing this in response to terrorism, but are in fact making US into the default criminals? And now, those of us protesting are, in fact, “domestic extremists” in their book?

Think long and deeply on this.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 9:11 PM

Not all Muslims believe so. (Technically, there are a couple of other options, dhimmitude or slavery. Not that they are attractive options.) The problem is that the weight of Islamic law supports the idea that all non-Muslims must submit to the rule of the Islamists. So the Muslims who believe that waging war on infidels to expand the Dar al-Islam or forcing them to submit to subjugation or die is wrong are tasked with reforming a system that calls for the death of “heretics”. Most of these Muslims, call them “moderate” Muslims for lack of a better phrase, just won’t take the risk. We need to do everything we can to help them find their huevos and do what must be done to marginalize the barbarians.

novaculus on November 23, 2010 at 3:35 PM

The fundamentalists believe so – and they are the ones calling the shots here. And all Muslims understand that “truth” is irrelevant when it comes to Islam. Lying is a sacrament.

By the way, I heard that there are now Muslims inside our Homeland Security dept.

disa on November 23, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Is it my imagination or did Hucklebuckle put on a hundred pounds since ’08? Nobody wants a fat RINO f*ck for El Presidente.

Coronagold on November 23, 2010 at 11:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2