In January, the illustrious TSA decided to scrap the full-body scanners it has been installing at airports because they showed “too much body.” Instead of going back to previous scanners while they re-tooled, they decided to glom on to new scanners that were being installed in smaller airports because they didn’t show as much “body.” The smaller airports had been modifying their facilities to accommodate the newer scanners.
COMMENTS:
Why didn’t TSA simply order the new scanners for all
airports? They weren’t planning on a
switch until June anyway. The smaller
airports now have to rely on much older metal detecting scanners. The problem arises when you consider that,
once you are past the scanner you can go anywhere in the air system without
being scanned again. Theoretically then,
you could get past a scanner at an airport in Redding, California with some
weapon and eventually end up on a 747 going from LAX to Dallas without being
scanned again. Why open a security hole
anywhere in the system? These guys are
far worse than the Keystone Cops.
TODAY’S QUERIES & ANSWERS:
Q. I know you have said you’ll never watch Bill O’Reilly again
because he is condescending and belittles people on his show. The other night, he went after Fox
contributor Alan Colmes and summarily and rudely told him to “shut up.” Colmes was responding to O’Reilly’s outrage
at the fact the Tsarnaev family had been on welfare and getting food
stamps. Colmes tried to say O’Reilly was
just using the issue as a way to denigrate food stamp recipients. Do you have an opinion on this treatment of
Colmes? (Ornin ~ Garberville, CA)
A. O’Reilly is too big for his britches. He’s a boor to the nth degree. If he had been working for any other network,
he’d be off the air. Back in March, he
went after Colmes and flat-out called him a liar, for which he had to apologize. I’m no fan of Alan Colmes, but this treatment
is uncouth and not acceptable on a major national television broadcast. And, in this instance, I happen to agree with
Colmes: so the Tsarnaev family was on food stamps; so what? Maybe if they weren’t on food stamps, the
bombings would not have occurred? Food
stamp recipients are terrorists? One has
nothing to do with the other. I think O’Reilly
is frustrated because he gave Obama every benefit of the doubt when others were
not, and now he realizes he was very wrong.
Q. RAND Paul says more security cameras and such are leading
the country to 1984. What in the world
does he mean about that? (Tracie ~
Mountain Home, ID)
A. 1984 was a book and subsequent movie by George Orwell,
about a world of perpetual war, electronic surveillance and mind control under
the control of a government run amok.
You should read it or rent the movie, because many of its predictions are
coming to be true today.
Q. Do you think upcoming testimony next week about the
Benghazi Massacre has any chance of pushing things along and getting to the
bottom of it? (Trix ~ Quincy, CA)
A. Yes, at the moment.
I halfway expect the Obama Administration to file some legal maneuver to
stop the testimony, maybe by exerting Executive Privilege again. This could set up another Constitutional
crisis, but they exercised Executive Privilege over Fast & Furious and
seemingly got away with it. They definitely
do not want us to get to the truth.
TODAY’S QUOTE:
“He who controls the past controls the future. He who
controls the present controls the past.” ~ George Orwell, 1984
TODAY’S VIDEO:
No comments:
Post a Comment