Napolitano Proposes TSA Checkpoints on ALL Mass Transit
Thanks to smokeboater for pointing this out, from Fox News, "Napolitano Eyes Tighter Security for Trains, Ships, Mass Transit" (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/25/body-scanners-headed-trains-ships-mass-transit/).
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said this week that her department is considering beefing up security on trains, ships and mass transit amid a public backlash over the body scanners and "enhanced" pat-downs at airports across the country
Oh, that's nice. Because leering at and groping travelers at random is working so well ...
But a Homeland Security official told Fox News that the use of such full-body scanners is not under consideration, saying they "would not be feasible in a system with hundreds or thousands of access points."
Placing scanners at every entry point would create a "bottle neck" that would defeat the purpose of mass transit, the official said.
Ok, then what's the Brilliant Plan? How do you plan to "beef up security," then?
Napolitano has defended the screening procedures and criticized the protests.
"I really want to say, look, let's be realistic and use our common sense," she said last week, ...
ROFLMAO!!!
This, coming from the woman who "solved" the threat of terrorism by re-labeling terrorist attacks "human-caused disasters?" From the woman who said ...
The system worked." -Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, on airline security's failure to stop the Nigerian terrorist who tried to blow up a passenger jet on Christmas Day, Dec. 27, 2009. (She later acknowledged that security had failed)
Well, "failed" only in the narrow right-wing ideological sense of "not catching the terrorist." But "the system worked" in the larger and more important sense that lots of people were groped and documents filed and TSA high-school dropouts paid lots of money and ... terrorists nearly setting off bombs? What does that have to do with the TSA?
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/stupidquotes/a/dumb-quotes-2009_2.htmhttp://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/janet_napolitano.html
All images generated by imaging technology are viewed in a walled-off location not visible to the public. The officer assisting the passenger never sees the image, and the officer viewing the image never interacts with the passenger. The imaging technology that we use cannot store, export, print or transmit images.
proven wrong when stored images from the system were shown on the Internet
I've appointed a task force to take a fresh look at the color-code system and whether we should retain it, change it or scrap it.
Because, apparently, she's only an appointed official. She can't make decisions. I wonder if she appoints a "committee" to shop for shoes?
Let me be very clear: We monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. We don't have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.
So she blinds herself to the reality of just which group is actually at war with us: she regards the VFW and the Boy Scouts as being just as likely to try to blow up airliners as she does Al Qaeda and the Taliban?
Let's see ...
We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not - nor will we ever - monitor ideology or political beliefs.
Yep. That's what she said. She's arguing that security systems can't take into account whether or not the people trying to pass through them hold ideologies or political beliefs opposed to the nation operating those systems. Oh, Skorzeny could have used her on the American side during the Battle of the Bulge -- his commandoes wouldn't have even needed to wear American uniforms; they could have gone in SS uniforms and they would have been waved right through!
The last thing the Department of Homeland Security is about is infringing on anybody's constitutionally protected rights.
Even though they do. Constantly and routinely. Though, apparently if this is not the mission statement, it's no problem. In her mind, anyway.
Ok. So this is who is lecturing us on "common sense?"
Getting back to the original article,
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/25/body-scanners-headed-trains-ships-mass-transit/
and Janet Napolitano's words of common-sensical wisdom therein,
"This is not about the government itself," she said. "We all have a role to play in security."
Yeah. Her role is spouting inanities without any consciousness of the stupidity of what she's saying. The TSA's role is random groping. And your role is bending over, spreading your legs and being groped. Clear on that?
"And so I really regret some groups saying, 'Well, we don't want to be a part of that,'" she added. "I regret it because it's not what we're all about. What we're all about is shared responsibility."
And groping. Don't forget the groping.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said this week that her department is considering beefing up security on trains, ships and mass transit amid a public backlash over the body scanners and "enhanced" pat-downs at airports across the country
Oh, that's nice. Because leering at and groping travelers at random is working so well ...
But a Homeland Security official told Fox News that the use of such full-body scanners is not under consideration, saying they "would not be feasible in a system with hundreds or thousands of access points."
Placing scanners at every entry point would create a "bottle neck" that would defeat the purpose of mass transit, the official said.
Ok, then what's the Brilliant Plan? How do you plan to "beef up security," then?
Napolitano has defended the screening procedures and criticized the protests.
"I really want to say, look, let's be realistic and use our common sense," she said last week, ...
ROFLMAO!!!
This, coming from the woman who "solved" the threat of terrorism by re-labeling terrorist attacks "human-caused disasters?" From the woman who said ...
The system worked." -Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, on airline security's failure to stop the Nigerian terrorist who tried to blow up a passenger jet on Christmas Day, Dec. 27, 2009. (She later acknowledged that security had failed)
Well, "failed" only in the narrow right-wing ideological sense of "not catching the terrorist." But "the system worked" in the larger and more important sense that lots of people were groped and documents filed and TSA high-school dropouts paid lots of money and ... terrorists nearly setting off bombs? What does that have to do with the TSA?
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/stupidquotes/a/dumb-quotes-2009_2.htmhttp://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/janet_napolitano.html
All images generated by imaging technology are viewed in a walled-off location not visible to the public. The officer assisting the passenger never sees the image, and the officer viewing the image never interacts with the passenger. The imaging technology that we use cannot store, export, print or transmit images.
proven wrong when stored images from the system were shown on the Internet
I've appointed a task force to take a fresh look at the color-code system and whether we should retain it, change it or scrap it.
Because, apparently, she's only an appointed official. She can't make decisions. I wonder if she appoints a "committee" to shop for shoes?
Let me be very clear: We monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. We don't have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.
So she blinds herself to the reality of just which group is actually at war with us: she regards the VFW and the Boy Scouts as being just as likely to try to blow up airliners as she does Al Qaeda and the Taliban?
Let's see ...
We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not - nor will we ever - monitor ideology or political beliefs.
Yep. That's what she said. She's arguing that security systems can't take into account whether or not the people trying to pass through them hold ideologies or political beliefs opposed to the nation operating those systems. Oh, Skorzeny could have used her on the American side during the Battle of the Bulge -- his commandoes wouldn't have even needed to wear American uniforms; they could have gone in SS uniforms and they would have been waved right through!
The last thing the Department of Homeland Security is about is infringing on anybody's constitutionally protected rights.
Even though they do. Constantly and routinely. Though, apparently if this is not the mission statement, it's no problem. In her mind, anyway.
Ok. So this is who is lecturing us on "common sense?"
Getting back to the original article,
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/25/body-scanners-headed-trains-ships-mass-transit/
and Janet Napolitano's words of common-sensical wisdom therein,
"This is not about the government itself," she said. "We all have a role to play in security."
Yeah. Her role is spouting inanities without any consciousness of the stupidity of what she's saying. The TSA's role is random groping. And your role is bending over, spreading your legs and being groped. Clear on that?
"And so I really regret some groups saying, 'Well, we don't want to be a part of that,'" she added. "I regret it because it's not what we're all about. What we're all about is shared responsibility."
And groping. Don't forget the groping.