by Becky Akers: Good
Tidings of Great Joy
Security Administration (TSA) finds itself indebted to the Nazis
yet again. Adolph himself wrote in Mein Kampf, "…
[T]he principle — which is quite true in itself — that in the
big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because
the broad masses of a nation … more readily fall victims to the
big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small
lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale
falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal
untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the
impudence to distort the truth so infamously." It goes without
saying that Adolph's minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, obligingly
devoted himself to substantiating this observation.
The TSA has
relied on the Principle of the Big Lie so often both should have
collapsed by now. Alas, no. But the truth will out: an "area
director" for the agency spoke to the Denver Post over
the weekend; both he and the reporter unwittingly blew one of the
TSA's whales of a whopper right out of the water. (At least I assume
the truth-telling was inadvertent. Or perhaps the "area director"
has tired of molesting little kids and figures if the TSA fires
him, he can nonetheless remain on the dole.)
The TSA has
begun retrofitting its carcinogenic porno-scanners with software
that supposedly replaces explicit pictures of our birthday suits
with a "genderless
image," as the Post puts it. The paper adds that
the TSA last "Friday
unveiled new security checkpoint machines at Denver International
Airport that will obscure details of a passenger’s body and instead
show what looks like a chalk outline."
get with the program. The TSA has pretended all along that its perverts
see only a "chalk outline" on their monitors; indeed,
its propaganda — sorry, press release dated February 23, 2007 employs
that very phrase: "TSA’s
privacy-filtered image looks like a chalk outline of the person’s
Hard on the
Post's honest heels came Der Direktor. Speaking of the contraptions'
previous scans, the ones still denuding passengers across the country,
he admitted, "They
were graphic, no doubt about it."
Direktor didn't receive the memo ordering Our Rulers never to reveal
to the serfs how much we're revealing to the scanners. Indeed, the
TSA fibbed about that dirty little secret every chance it got. Over
assured us that the scanners protected
our privacy as they
stripped us naked.
for the TSA, incidents conspired to highlight these fabrications.
There was the
thug in Florida who agreed to pose in one of the gizmos while
the agency was training him and his fellows on their operation.
His "chalk outline" proved our suspicions, that guys who
up on the elderly for a living fall a tad short when it comes
to the ol' manhood. In fact, his "chalk outline" was so
precise that his colleagues, sensitive souls who torment
little boys in braces and humiliate
cancer's survivors, teased him mercilessly about his deficiency.
To the point that he attacked one of them and wound
up in both the headlines and jail — a living, breathing (or,
more accurately, seething) contradiction of the TSA's claims.
other evidence of the TSA's mendacity. For instance, though the
same scanners were infesting Britain, authorities there prohibited
filming children with them because their "chalk outlines"
its laws against pedophilia. So while we don't need Der Direktor's
testimony against the TSA's deceit, it sure is fun!
So is the
hatred for and skepticism of the agency readers now spew. The TSA,
its lackeys in the corporate media, and pundits
praise the agency's new software, but victims know better. Catch
this canny comment: "This
is simply a ruse to offset the damage done to TSA by EPIC in
court last week. TSA is trying to score some PR points before they
have to seek public comment as ordered in the ruling."
cynic here refers to a decision
from the DC Court of Appeals that the TSA's porno-scanning is
completely constitutional — yep, I kid you not — but violates the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA) because the agency neglected
to seek "public comment" before installing the technology.
The court recognizes how vital ogling naked girls and grandparents
is to national security, so it did not prohibit the TSA from continuing
to do so while it collects those "public comments." (It
seems the unofficial comments that passengers have been screaming
since last fall don't count.) No, the TSA must formally solicit
our opinion on whether government's goons should leer at our nudity.
Nothing says it has to heed our wishes, but the APA and the court
demand that it make the pretense of listening. This is what passes
for "good" government among Progressives.
is factually incorrect since the TSA's testing of the new software
predates the court's utter lunacy. But isn't his doubt exhilarating?
So is his conclusion: u201CTSA constantly lies and this is no exception.
Nothing less than the complete elimination of TSA is acceptable.u201D
reader announces, u201C…these invasive searches are ILLEGAL; plain and
simple,u201D while a third opines, u201CTSA helps people like rabies helps
to put this exceedingly dangerous beast down.
Akers [send her mail] writes
primarily about the American Revolution.