0 comment Sunday, April 27, 2014 | admin
The question was raised in a comment the other day about why there was no searching and body scanning involved in traveling by train or bus or boat.
We all expected this, sooner or later:
''The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
"[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through," Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose."
"I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?"
The writer of the article, Jordy Yager, mentions that others, like Joe Lieberman, have already suggested similar measures for those entering federal buildings.
''Napolitano said she hoped the U.S. could get to a place in the future where Americans would not have to be as guarded against terrorist attacks as they are and that she was actively promoting research into the psychology of how a terrorist becomes radicalized.''
'Guarded against terrorist attacks?' Who? Where? How? By leaving our southern border wide open to narco-traffickers and gangs and basically anyone who strays across the erstwhile border? Or by purposely admitting people from lawless countries like Somalia, and planting them in small towns across the U.S.? Who does she think she is fooling?
She mentions promoting research to try to understand the psychology of how terrorists develop. Typical blather about ''root causes'' and 'understanding.'
Even if we can psychoanalyze those who mean us harm, that would be a long term strategy, not a way of protecting American citizens here and now. The cliche about 'understanding' malefactors is a longstanding obsession with leftists and silly females. We used to hear the bleeding-hearts talking about how we should not execute murderers, but try to get at why they do what they do, so that we can prevent such acts in the future. Well, suppose we could see into the minds of violent people of whatever kind, and suppose we spot these theoretical telltale signs of a budding maniac. Do we then lock him up just in case? Medicate him? Put him in an institution for re-education? Drug him into harmlessness? The whole notion would not be allowable in a free country, and thus it is probably exactly what these lefties would like to do. I suspect they would not be as interested in the real threats, but in what they are now casually calling 'domestic extremists', formerly known as 'normal Americans', or perhaps just Americans who are being goaded to do something 'extreme' so as to justify abridging our rights even further.
So what's next? Internal passports? Searches at state borders, or other random places?
Whatever is next, it will not be to ensure our security, but to extend the government's power.
We all expected this, sooner or later:
''The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary.
"[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through," Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose."
"I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?"
The writer of the article, Jordy Yager, mentions that others, like Joe Lieberman, have already suggested similar measures for those entering federal buildings.
''Napolitano said she hoped the U.S. could get to a place in the future where Americans would not have to be as guarded against terrorist attacks as they are and that she was actively promoting research into the psychology of how a terrorist becomes radicalized.''
'Guarded against terrorist attacks?' Who? Where? How? By leaving our southern border wide open to narco-traffickers and gangs and basically anyone who strays across the erstwhile border? Or by purposely admitting people from lawless countries like Somalia, and planting them in small towns across the U.S.? Who does she think she is fooling?
She mentions promoting research to try to understand the psychology of how terrorists develop. Typical blather about ''root causes'' and 'understanding.'
Even if we can psychoanalyze those who mean us harm, that would be a long term strategy, not a way of protecting American citizens here and now. The cliche about 'understanding' malefactors is a longstanding obsession with leftists and silly females. We used to hear the bleeding-hearts talking about how we should not execute murderers, but try to get at why they do what they do, so that we can prevent such acts in the future. Well, suppose we could see into the minds of violent people of whatever kind, and suppose we spot these theoretical telltale signs of a budding maniac. Do we then lock him up just in case? Medicate him? Put him in an institution for re-education? Drug him into harmlessness? The whole notion would not be allowable in a free country, and thus it is probably exactly what these lefties would like to do. I suspect they would not be as interested in the real threats, but in what they are now casually calling 'domestic extremists', formerly known as 'normal Americans', or perhaps just Americans who are being goaded to do something 'extreme' so as to justify abridging our rights even further.
So what's next? Internal passports? Searches at state borders, or other random places?
Whatever is next, it will not be to ensure our security, but to extend the government's power.
Labels: 4Th Amerndment, Anarcho-Tyranny, Freedom Of Movement, Terrorism, Totalitarianism