Inside the Minds of Hillary Clinton and the TSA

Inside the Minds of Hillary Clinton and the TSA

People say that if we allow the threat of terrorism to affect how we live, the terrorists will have already won. Hillary Clinton seems to agree.

As if anyone would dare to touch the person of Hillary Rodham Clinton–or want to–our Secretary of State made it vividly clear on Sunday’s “Deface the Nation” and on “Meet the Depressed,” (sorry, Rush). that no one will get the opportunity. It’s unclear whether she included hubby Bill Clinton in that declaration, not that it would much matter to Bill.

Mouthing platitudes about the unfortunate necessity of invasive pat-downs and naked body scans at airports, the former first lady, ever hopeful of squatting in the same Oval Office as the nation’s first Presidentress where hubby Bubba was, umm, serviced by Monica Lewinsky, was actually implying the need for allegedly-unconstitutional profiling.

Hillary said that we clearly need tighter security but that ways should be found ”to limit the number of people who are going to be put through surveillance” and that she empathized with “how offensive it must be” for some people to undergo the searches. What America needs is “the right balance” in order to “get it better and less intrusive and more precise.”

She then added the non-PC kicker in response to a query as to whether she would submit to a pat-down. ”Not if I could avoid it,” she said, smiling, ”No. I mean, who would?” (http://tiny.cc/ibxtj)

Let’s do a little Hillary-Speak parsing here since, apparently, she doesn’t see the practicality of the purported, creative, very effective but explosive Israeli idea on eliminating airborne terrorist attacks–and the terrorists, themselves :http://tiny.cc/dzzav

First of all, limiting ”the number of people who are going to be put through surveillance” could only be accomplished by TSA hands-on employees drawing rational conclusions on whom to pat-down and whose naked bodies to surveil. They would have to distinguish between the swarthy or non-swarthy, between the snarling or non-snarling, between potential suicide bombers and kids, nuns, elders, and just your average travellers out to pay a final visit to grandma before she shuffles off this mortal globe.

That would be a relatively simple task for the TSA but our government forbids it. Profiling is deemed a far worse offense than humiliating the public or, for that matter, blowing the public out of the skies.

Secondly, . . .
(Read more at People say that if we allow the threat of terrorism to affect how we live, the terrorists will have already won. Hillary Clinton seems to agree.

As if anyone would dare to touch the person of Hillary Rodham Clinton–or want to–our Secretary of State made it vividly clear on Sunday’s “Deface the Nation” and on “Meet the Depressed,” (sorry, Rush). that no one will get the opportunity. It’s unclear whether she included hubby Bill Clinton in that declaration, not that it would much matter to Bill.

Mouthing platitudes about the unfortunate necessity of invasive pat-downs and naked body scans at airports, the former first lady, ever hopeful of squatting in the same Oval Office as the nation’s first Presidentress where hubby Bubba was, umm, serviced by Monica Lewinsky, was actually implying the need for allegedly-unconstitutional profiling.

Hillary said that we clearly need tighter security but that ways should be found ”to limit the number of people who are going to be put through surveillance” and that she empathized with “how offensive it must be” for some people to undergo the searches. What America needs is “the right balance” in order to “get it better and less intrusive and more precise.”

She then added the non-PC kicker in response to a query as to whether she would submit to a pat-down. ”Not if I could avoid it,” she said, smiling, ”No. I mean, who would?” (http://tiny.cc/ibxtj)

Let’s do a little Hillary-Speak parsing here since, apparently, she doesn’t see the practicality of the purported, creative, very effective but explosive Israeli idea on eliminating airborne terrorist attacks–and the terrorists, themselves :http://tiny.cc/dzzav

First of all, limiting ”the number of people who are going to be put through surveillance” could only be accomplished by TSA hands-on employees drawing rational conclusions on whom to pat-down and whose naked bodies to surveil. They would have to distinguish between the swarthy or non-swarthy, between the snarling or non-snarling, between potential suicide bombers and kids, nuns, elders, and just your average travellers out to pay a final visit to grandma before she shuffles off this mortal globe.

That would be a relatively simple task for the TSA but our government forbids it. Profiling is deemed a far worse offense than humiliating the public or, for that matter, blowing the public out of the skies.

Secondly, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=2770)

UPDATE on Airport "Fondling, Groping, and Squeezing"

UPDATE on Airport "Fondling, Groping, and Squeezing"

Apparently, my recent article, “Paid Government Perversions, Compliments of Your TSA,” (November 5, 2010, http://tiny.cc/0m6iq), which detailed (alleged!) outrageous Transportation Security Agency violations of personal space and bodies at American airports, was totally erroneous.

Apparently, also, the statements of “Michelle” (last name omitted to preserve what’s left of her dignity) were a bundle of lies.

When she attested on the Alex Jones radio show that a male officer “cupped” her breasts, ran his open palms up and down her legs and her “private area” at the Denver airport and that the TSA insisted on “patting down” her 2 daughters, age 20 months and 8 years, she fabricated the whole thing!

I profoundly and profusely apologize for posting such slanders against the fine men and women of the TSA. I now know they were lies and slanders because the TSA says such indignities, which amount to sexual assaults and pedophilia, never happened, aren’t happening, and could never happen under its watch.

Furthermore, according to the TSA, any fears of radiation from airport naked body scanners are totally unfounded, so I therefore also apologize for posting any misleading information on that issue.

The TSA’s own “Blogger Bob” was asked, “Why are you [not] posting about TSA’s ongoing sexual assault on travelers who don’t wish to be irradiated by untested machines run by poorly trained screening clerks?” Blogger Bob responded, “There is no fondling, squeezing, groping, or any sort of sexual assault taking place at airports. You have a professional workforce carrying out procedures they were trained to perform to keep aviation security safe:” http://tiny.cc/c3wgr

That link also provides a vivid demonstration of TSA’s non-fondling, non-squeezing, non-groping pat-down procedures.

Government and government flunkies never lie so there, that’s settled.

Except that it’s anything but settled. . .
Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=2602)