The head groping dude is a lovely looking fellow. He looks like a seasoned groper. Look at those hands, that face, that creeping smirk, that molester's toupee and tell me he isn't.
Unsurprisingly, he says he believes the refusal to be scanned is a mistake. I don't believe a word of it. He's patently insincere. Refusing the scans entails more groping, which is obviously his purpose in life.
What a miserable comedown this is for the Democratic merit class. Reduced to the peckerwood perversions of the Republican Party...
Comments (11)
If you don't let them grope you, scan you, stick their fist up your ass and strip you of every shred of dignity then the terrorists win.
Posted by Drunk Pundit | November 22, 2010 10:54 AM
Posted on November 22, 2010 10:54
According to the 9/11 report, they have no definite understanding of how the terrorists got their weapons on the plane. Past reports on airplane hijackings found that the biggest security holes were in the airport logistics; baggage, food service, maintenance and the security personnel themselves.
The 9/11 report also obliquely touches on the overarching security problem, which is government policy itself. This includes the way the security agencies are managed and the way foreign policy is pursued by government and private power interests.
Even right wing domestic terrorism has some grounding in real grievances. Although the overlap between that and power politics obscures the grievances.
The crackpot response is half sincere, nevertheless. The crackpots really do believe humiliation and harassment are beneficial in some broader sense. To do less is tacit appeasement of terrorists.
Posted by Al Schumann | November 22, 2010 11:15 AM
Posted on November 22, 2010 11:15
"The 9/11 report also obliquely touches on the overarching security problem, which is government policy itself. This includes the way the security agencies are managed and the way foreign policy is pursued by government and private power interests."
This part of the report has been overwhelmingly rejected by our ruling interests. In fact, to suggest that our policies might have something to do with generating terrorism is completely off the table in the discourse amongst the reuling elites. To face that they would have to deal with the fact that they would have to consider changing some of their policies and let's just get right down to it. The elites like their policies, they're serving them just fine thank you and if they can respond by just forcing the proles to shed their dignity and submit then so much the better. That's just icing on the cake to the sociopaths who run this asylum.
Posted by Drunk Pundit | November 22, 2010 12:32 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 12:32
I agree. There'd be no threat to their security from taking a pragmatic, easy-going approach to retaining power. But they're pathologically averse to doing anything that would cause a "crisis" of rising expectations.
Posted by Al Schumann | November 22, 2010 1:11 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 13:11
Well, if the vast majority of wage slaves weren't scanned and/or groped, how could our over-privileged elites grant themselves exemptions from being scanned and/or groped? We'd be depriving the diamond card set of their non-earned privileges! How unfair!
Besides, TSA goons need their kiddie porn. How would they get it if they weren't able to scan your thirteen year old daughter? Won't someone think of the pedophiles?
Posted by AlanSmithee | November 22, 2010 1:37 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 13:37
That's a fair set of points. If there were no harassment, no one could be exempted from it and status would be terribly unclear. If the children were exempted, the diddlers might behave even worse.
Posted by Al Schumann | November 22, 2010 3:41 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 15:41
"Reduced to the peckerwood perversions of the Republican Party..."
lovely
Posted by op | November 22, 2010 6:27 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 18:27
"Peckerwood" seemed like an unnecessary circumlocution to me. Wasn't the guy's family surname damning enough?
Posted by gluelicker | November 22, 2010 7:56 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 19:56
It's plenty damning, but this sort of thing needs a loving kick to the status conscious groin. And I do it because I care.
Posted by Al Schumann | November 22, 2010 8:28 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 20:28
full:
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/nude-scanner-images-published-on-web-20101123-184t4.html
Posted by Lajany Otum | November 22, 2010 9:30 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 21:30
EPIC has a complete TSA abuses file, as well as a lawsuit on this particular issue. The ACLU has been making righteous noise about them for years. Home videos of the TSA abuses are plastered all over YouTube. The Big Media outlets put sympathetic interviews on the evening news. Anti-TSA provocateurs are having a go.
But nothing short of sustained consumer rebellion and industrial action is going to have an effect. The Democrats invariably double down on their worst behavior. They're pathological about it.
Posted by Al Schumann | November 22, 2010 9:49 PM
Posted on November 22, 2010 21:49