 |
|
|
 THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 596, November 21, 2010 "Protecting our lives by depriving us of any reason we might have for living them"
TSA Gropings and Nudie Shots—a Deliberate Plan To Cut Back on Travel?
Special to The Libertarian Enterprise> I have been following the various controversies over the TSA and it's un-Constitutional warrantless searches. (Makes MY view obvious, doesn't it?) I've listened to John Tyner's recordings, read the accompanying article, and read of the pilot objections to the intrusive searches, read of the little old lady who wants to wear a strap-on dildo to screw with the Nudie-Shot cameras, and other possible problems with the TSA's so-called security procedures. Last night it occurred to me that this MIGHT be part of a greater plan (conspiracies AGAIN, Osborn?) to restrict the un-fettered travel Americans have enjoyed our entire history. Between the proliferation of AGW (anthropogenic global warming) BS being used to control businesses and manufacturing, the ever increasing reduction in both the size and comfort of cars, and the ever rising prices of gasoline, voluntary travel is being cut more and more every year. So, is the latest round of security bullshit another round in the anti-travel gun? Let me make this clear—I do not support ANY of the current crop of "security" regulations. I DO have two methods of making airline travel hi-jack free, and I'll present them later. NEITHER of them violate the Constitution (as ALL the current ones do), nor do they require you to "surrender your rights when you purchase a ticket". After all, this ISN'T Nazi Germany, and no American should have to live as if it were.
THIS sums up my opinion of those who support ANY of these ridiculous "security" procedures. We have a Constitutional right against warrantless search and siezure, yet millions of you support the USA Patriot's Act and it's warrantless wiretaps. Millions of you proudly proclaim that "if you are doing nothing wrong, why would you bitch about TSA security procedures?" Therefore, MILLION OF YOU deserve neither liberty nor security. For myself, I won't fly. PERIOD. I'm NOT taking off my shoes for the TSA. I'm NOT allowing some jack-booted thug to grab my privates. I'm NOT having nudie shots taken and possibly posted on the internet. I'm NOT sacrificing essential liberties. PERIOD. I MIGHT, however, have a little fun. I MIGHT don a pair of lace-up steel-toed combat boots, a pair of 80's punk rock mega-zipper pants, strap on a pair of 14" dildos (under each arm, maybe), and buy a refundable ticket and then wander up to security and refuse everything. I LIKE pushing people's buttons. It is my OPINION that the reason for all these security measures is NOT to make us safe. Especially when they are SPECIFICALLY designed to avoid profiling the people who are committing the terrorist acts, and target the old timers and children. I think these procedures have two other, more sinister goals in mind. The first is to turn us into people who never dream of contesting authoritarian rules that strip away rights or weaken them to the point that they might as well not exist. It started with the idea that government identification is a mandatory part of life, essential to operate in society (think me wrong, go look in your wallet. It's called a driver's license, yet we use it all the time for MANY other illegitimate reasons) The second reason is to make us stay home. The less we travel, the less we meet other people, the less we see of our country. This "saves our planet, conserves our precious resources, and reduces AGW". Now, to the two ways to prevent the successful hi-jacking of ANY form of air transportation. First, (and MY favorite) is an armed populace. Yup, guns on planes. Today, we have the ability to manufacture frangible ammo. This is ammo lethal to humans, yet safe for the airframe. The terrorist stands up and screams "(insert fictional deity of your choice here) is great!! I am hijacking this plane to (wherever)". Five or six of the armed passengers drw their weapons, fill the sucker full of frangibles, and the plane lands and the morgue comes fro the stiff. YES, an innocent or two might get hurt or even killed. Better that than flying into the SEARS tower, or than the entire plane being shot down by your own government. Or, and I like this almost as much, the terrorist screams "(insert fictional deity of your choice here) is great!! I am hijacking this plane to (wherever)." The pilot pushes a button. This first locks the cockpit tighter than a drum. It then floods the entire passenger area with an anesthetic gas, putting the entire passenger population to sleep, and even the crew other than those in the cockpit. The plane then turns around, lands at the nearest airport, and the cops come and take the terrs prisoner. YES, occasionally, a passenger may have an adverse reaction to the anesthetic. It's a risk you accept when boarding the plane. Just as you accept that the plane may crash. Again, better that than flying into the SEARS tower, or than the entire plane being shot down by your own government. Well, now you know what I think. What do YOU think?
TLE AFFILIATE
Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates. We cheerfully accept donations! |
|
|
|
Previous
Contents
Next