Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

thecentristword

(187 posts)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:49 PM Jul 2012

TSA Outrage - GOP Fodder for the Feeble Minded

I have one word for all you people dumb enough to be offended by the TSA for violating your freedoms – Greyhound.

I was amused to see a blog entry on the site of Breitbart dingle-berry Dana Loesch about the outrage of the TSA. How dare these people invade your freedoms in the name of public safety. This is all the sweeter given Dana’s claim to conservative fame is that the “9-11 attacks were her inspiration to become a conservative”. Despite the fact that if we had the security in place then that we have now, perhaps 9-11 would never have happened. Perhaps she worships the GOP’s national security incompetence that allowed such a tragedy to happen on their watch after repeated ignored warnings. It is hard to say. Is it even worth trying to find reason in the logic of another college dropout, conservative mouthpiece – probably not.

For more - check out the post ---> http://wp.me/p1asum-yO

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TSA Outrage - GOP Fodder for the Feeble Minded (Original Post) thecentristword Jul 2012 OP
Is this the new line of reasoning, then? enlightenment Jul 2012 #1
LOL!!! Daemonaquila Jul 2012 #2
You are missing the point spasiba Jul 2012 #3
TSA IS an assault on our freedoms. pscot Jul 2012 #4
Really? enlightenment Jul 2012 #5
Apparently something different than you..... spasiba Jul 2012 #6
I read the entire thing. enlightenment Jul 2012 #7
Well, then let me clarify thecentristword Jul 2012 #8
Liberals SHOULD be concerned about TSA's unconstitutional unwarranted search & seizure litbrit Jul 2012 #9
Yes, many liberals hate the TSA too Leejnd Jul 2012 #10

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
1. Is this the new line of reasoning, then?
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:55 PM
Jul 2012

Bring out the instant attack phrase - "you people".

Tell said people they are "dumb".

Suggest they ride the bus (do you know of any that float?)

Suggest that anyone who feels the TSA oversteps their boundaries is both a "conservative" and "feeble minded".


hmm.

This OP really doesn't work for me. Perhaps you could rephrase it into something that sounds vaguely liberal?

 

Daemonaquila

(1,712 posts)
2. LOL!!!
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:08 PM
Jul 2012

Sounds a lot like "America - love it or leave it!" doesn't it? Why no, real patriots reserve the right to fight security theater - the gateway drug to a passive and disempowered population.

spasiba

(2 posts)
3. You are missing the point
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:44 PM
Jul 2012

There is no mention to the TSA overstepping their boundaries, unless I missed it.

This is a sarcastic jab at those who preach that anything the government does is an assault on freedoms.

Language may be strong for a liberal, but if you ever had to listen to Dana Loesch for more than 30 seconds - you might write something similar...

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
5. Really?
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 04:01 PM
Jul 2012

The fact that the post does not include the exact phrase "overstepping boundaries" means it doesn't say that?

What on earth are you reading?

spasiba

(2 posts)
6. Apparently something different than you.....
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 05:22 PM
Jul 2012

Did you actually click on and read the post? Did you find and read the Loesch post this is talking about?

They (the right) are not complaining about the actions of the TSA (whether it is doing too much or too little) - they are talking about TSAs right to conduct any type of security because all types of security is an assault on personal 'freedoms'. By this same line of reasoning, laws are an assault on personal freedoms. It is libertarianism taken to the Nth degree.

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
7. I read the entire thing.
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 05:36 PM
Jul 2012

My point, however, is that the word choices of the poster clearly suggests that anyone who questions the right of the TSA to do anything that they feel is necessary is an idiot who should simply ride the bus if they're so worried about transportation security.

It is the responsibility of the original poster to post in such a manner that they make themselves clear - particularly when they make those kind of remarks. It is nice that you feel the need to rise to the OP's defense, but I stand by my comment.

thecentristword

(187 posts)
8. Well, then let me clarify
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 06:21 PM
Jul 2012

As the original poster, I can tell you exactly what I was thinking.

The word choice (abrasiveness) was a sarcastic response to the tone of the ridiculous post from Mrs Loesch. In fact, her site uses precisely the formula you describe. If you didn't pick up on this, you would think my post was pretty offensive and you would really miss the point. Or as you put it, it would not sound very 'liberal'. That wasn't the intent and if this was apparent - it was a failure on my part. The comments from our site indicate the majority of our readers picked up on this.

When is somebody going to create an emoticon to convey - 'I am taking the piss' at something. There I go again - a British expression that means that you are making fun of something


litbrit

(7 posts)
9. Liberals SHOULD be concerned about TSA's unconstitutional unwarranted search & seizure
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 05:18 PM
Jul 2012

Last edited Tue Jul 31, 2012, 03:12 AM - Edit history (1)

I have a lot to say about this most unfortunate post by thecentristword. (And I am not "dumb".)

First of all, just because a conservative complains about something, one should not dismiss the issue out of hand. Set aside that Ms. Loesch is a "conservative mouthpiece", and consider the myriad TSA abuse heaped on ordinary, law-abiding Americans every day, people of indeterminate politics who simply want to get from Point A to Point B in their own country. Elderly people are routinely humiliated, forced to undergo gropings of their bodies and adult diapers. So are adults and children with disabilities. Breast cancer survivors report being forced to remove their breast prostheses in full view of the public, as the agent holds it up to "inspect" it. Mothers carrying bottled breast milk for their infants are forced to drink it; one mother, an attorney, was imprisoned in a glass cubicle so long while agents figured out what to do, she missed her flight, despite having printed out TSA's policies beforehand so she could show them--in case they didn't know--that it was indeed permissible to bring pumped milk on board. Children with cerebral palsy have had their crutches seized and been told to walk through the metal detector or scanner, unassisted by parents and caregivers. Same with children in wheelchairs. Parents are often separated from their children while agents grope them; some kids are frightened by the process, naturally, but parents are barked at if they try to hug or touch their child.

I could go on.

Second, the TSA are not deputized law-enforcement officers, and their policies do NOT, as the poster implies, have anything to do with "public safety". TSA have NEVER prevented a single terrorist attack. Their policies are reactions after-the-fact. They do sometimes find knives, throwing stars, and even weapons in carryons--virtually all were picked up by the metal-detectors--which were in use for decades--NOT the nude-scanners, which are useless and expensive DHS boondoggles, which brings me to my next point:

Third, the scanning machines--also fondly referred to as "radiation showers"--are as good as useless. They do not detect the kind of explosive the underwear bomber used that Christmas, which kicked off the rollout of the untested, useless machines. Jon Corbett, an engineer and activist, proved their uselessness: by secreting a metal object in a side pocket, as opposed to on his front or back, he was able to walk through to the gate with his secreted metal object intact, as the machines can't detect objects thus placed. Furthermore, the machines are untested, and no-one really knows the amounts of radiation they emit or its effects in the short or long term: the TSA refuses to allow independent peer-reviewed testing of the machines. TSA say they've tested them and they're safe; however, the data is extremely limited and did not sample enough machines to provide a scientifically sound result. TSA will not permit agents to wear or carry dosimeters so as to allow them to know if there is a higher level of radiation at any given time (unlike Border Patrol agents, who do wear/carry dosimeters). Unlike the x-ray machines at your local hospital or imaging center, TSA's scanners are not covered under FDA regulations and are not thus regularly maintained and calibrated. Doctors familiar with them routinely warn patients with history of skin and eye cancers to opt-out of the machines, as they concentrate radiation on the surface of the body. Finally, submitting to the naked-scanner will not guarantee you won't ALSO be groped, whether it is to resolve an "anomaly" or simply at the agents' whim.

Fourth, the physical "enhanced patdown"--aka groping--to which passengers must submit if TSA says so, would under any other circumstance qualify for sexual assault. Countless passengers report that agents put their gloved hand down their pants, under their underwear. Countless women report being penetrated through their clothes during aggressive gropes. As you can imagine, for the 1 in 6 women who are rape victims (and for the many men who are too), being groped is extremely traumatic.

All this, to "keep us safe"? Decades before the 9/11 attacks, the courts originally ruled that administrative searches--x-raying your bags and having you walk through a metal detector--were permissible at the airport. What TSA do is not covered under this. What TSA do is far, far beyond an administrative search: forcing passengers to choose between a naked scan with radiation and possible sexual-assault grope, or a guaranteed sexual-assault grope, just so they can fly that day.

Furthermore: so many people wishing to avoid the TSA have taken to driving to their destination. Apply the statistical likelihood of being killed in an automobile accident (versus an airplane incident) to them, and one can conclude that the TSA actually CAUSES more deaths, every single year.

Fifth, the TSA hire criminals. They have admitted that they have hired people without doing any background checks. You can imagine what has resulted. I've lost count of the number of agents arrested for rape, child pornography, child rape, assault and battery, drug possession, and grand theft.

Add to this the fact that TSA's hires--the ones who are given a badge despite no background check having been done on them--have access to "sterile areas" of airports, which should give everyone pause. Cargo. Food service. And so on.

And sixth, and finally, there is that pesky matter of the Constitution, specifically, the Fourth Amendment.

As for this poster saying "Take Greyhound", well, I have news for you: TSA are regularly showing up at bus stations, train stations, and more. They search the private bodies and private belongings of passengers before allowing them to board, and they do so without any probable cause whatsoever. As you'd imagine, immigrants, minorities, and working-class and poor are the ones who suffer most in this respect, and they are often scared to refuse the searches.

This is not America. This is a systematic conditioning of the populace to accept ever-greater intrusions into its lives as the concept of privacy is eroded to the point of nonexistence.

I implore fellow liberals (I am a proud Democratic Socialist, myself) to not fall for this "only the right wing are complaining about the TSA) garbage.

I'll close with a quote from Justice Robert H. Jackson, the former chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials: "Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government.”

Leejnd

(1 post)
10. Yes, many liberals hate the TSA too
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 07:45 PM
Jul 2012

THANK YOU!

This is the smartest, most well-informed post on this topic in this forum. Everyone really needs to read this.

I am a proud liberal and a registered Democrat. I also belong to the following groups:

1. The 1-in-6 women who is a rape victim and, hence, find being pawed by strangers to be traumatic
2. Women who have had their sex organs penetrated through our clothes by the thumbs of overly-aggressive TSA agents at the airport
3. Travelers who've been threatened with removal from the airport for objecting to having our genitals touched by strangers without our consent
4. Disabled travelers who have been abused by TSA screeners (in my case, after major back surgery, the metal in my spine would always set off the metal detectors prompting a grope...one time a brutal TSA screener pressed so hard on my recent surgical incision, that I screamed in pain, even though I had repeatedly asked her to NOT press on that area)
5. Travelers who have directly witnessed the harassment of disabled children (last week I watched in horror as two profoundly disabled children were forced to get up from their wheelchairs and wobble through the metal detector, alone, without the assistance of their upset parents)
6. Americans who did not find it funny when my President, for whom I voted, made a joke in his State of the Union speech about TSA grope-downs, as if it's nothing more than a minor inconvenience (my vajajay can assure you it is NOT minor)

So who wants to tell me that being against the TSA is something only for feeble-minded GOPers?

Here's what I believe: I believe that society has an imperative to help the less-fortunate. I believe that healthcare is a right, not a privilege, and that no American should have to die of a treatable disease because they can’t afford a doctor. I believe that two adults in love should be able to get married and receive the over 1000 legal and financial benefits that all other married couples receive, regardless of their gender. I believe that no American should be forced to live under the tenets of a religion to which he does not believe, and that religion needs to stay the hell out of government. I believe that the wealthy should not be able to pay lower tax rates than the non-wealthy. I believe that mankind is exerting dangerous negative impacts on our environment, and we need to work harder to stop and even reverse these impacts.

AND I believe that no American should be forced into allowing strangers to touch their genitals, manhandle their medical devices, or paw their children in order to exercise their right to travel about the country.

HOW are these two sets of beliefs mutually exclusive?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»TSA Outrage - GOP Fodder ...