Skip to comments.
Politics Before Safety: Tell us again why the government had to run airport security?
Wall St Journal ^
| 9-4-02
Posted on 09/04/2002 8:06:53 AM PDT by SJackson
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:47:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Almost a year after September 11, it's hard to remember that people actually insisted that federalization was the cure for whatever ailed American airport security. Yet that's what the enlightened media and political classes argued at the time, and what has given us the federal turkey known as the Transportation Security Administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: airseclist; tommydasshole
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
1
posted on
09/04/2002 8:06:53 AM PDT
by
SJackson
To: *AirSec_List
To: SJackson
But that has it exactly backward, as the TSA embarrassment shows; insisting on bureaucracy-as-usual is the problem. By caving in to Democratic demands, Mr. Bush has given himself and the flying public a year of trouble on airport security. We hope he doesn't make the same mistake now on homeland security. Amen. W better hold the line on this one. Federalizing airline screeners was stupid, stupid, stupid!!!
3
posted on
09/04/2002 8:10:34 AM PDT
by
Wphile
To: SJackson
" Tell us again why the government had to run airport security?"
Because all of the fast food restraunts did not want to have to take back all of those former employees.
To: SJackson; PhiKapMom; Miss Marple; hchutch; rintense
The answer is simple!
One man is responsible as he control the Senate:
Tommy Da$$hole set up these federal jobs for more voters for the Rat Party.
99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all federal employees are 100% rat voters and donators to the DNC Rat central.
This November, we need to defeat about 10 of Tommy Da$$hole's best friends running for re election in the Senate.
Then we can send little Mullah Da$$hole slithering back to his minority Rat Hole in the senate.
The damage this clymer, Da$$hole, has done to America since Jeffords came out of the Rino Closet to be a full Rat, is incredible. He may be more dangerous to Americans than the Clintoon was.
To: SJackson
The Feds need to step in to make sure that grandmothers, WWII vets who fought at Normandy, and children with GI Joe dolls don't get upitty and to make sure that Middle Eastern males between the ages of 20 and 40 are protected from "profiling".
It's essential that, in this current economic malaise, the airline industry wither away.
6
posted on
09/04/2002 8:17:52 AM PDT
by
Wm Bach
To: SJackson
"In sum, "the United States does not have a security system, it has a system for bothering people," says Israeli security consultant Shlomo Dror."
This one sentence says it all.
Don't you like the name Shlomo too?
7
posted on
09/04/2002 8:24:24 AM PDT
by
jjm2111
To: Grampa Dave
" Tell us again why the government had to run airport security?"Tommy Da$$hole set up these federal jobs for more voters for the Rat Party.
Ding Ding Ding! Folks, we have a winner.
In other words: Union.
8
posted on
09/04/2002 8:25:02 AM PDT
by
LTCJ
To: Grampa Dave
Don't hold back-tell us how you really feel ;-)
To: LTCJ
Bingo!
Any union is fertile ground for the Rats.
A federal union of new federal employees is a Wet Dream that has come true for Da$$hole and his fellow Rat policians.
To: LTCJ
Didn't a whole lot of republicans vote for it also? The real problem is with the publik skooled American publik because that must be what they want or their elected representatives would have canned it. (IMHO)
To: SJackson
In sum, "the United States does not have a security system, it has a system for bothering people," says Israeli security consultant Shlomo Dror. And we are still not looking for terrorists. I am getting a little tired of seeing nuns, elderly black women with walkers, and service men and women get strip searched while three shifty eyed young arab men are waived on through because the government screeners don't want to offend anyone by profiling.
To: SJackson
"If you want to professionalize, you have to federalize."
-Tom Daschle
13
posted on
09/04/2002 8:46:23 AM PDT
by
rudypoot
To: SJackson
To get more life-long Democratic voters on the Federal payroll.
(Feel safer now?)
To: Grampa Dave
--Demotraitor D'Arshloch had plenty of help from wimp Republidums, although as a former South Dakotan who voted against Tiny Tom every time, I agree with your assessment--
To: Wphile
Law enforcement and public safety are two of the few legitimate duties of government. That is why our founders did not let property owners make the laws to be in effect on their property. They did not let property owners enforce the laws that government passed. Leting the aircraft owner enforce the law is a very poor way to proceed.
If it is a good idea for airlines have the power and the duty to provide police protection against terrorists, then lets put the bar owners and auto dealers in charge of enforcing drunk driving laws. You can't have airline hijackers with out airlines selling them tickets and you can't have drunken drivers with out companies selling them booze and cars.
Think how much better our roads would be if trucking companies could enforce the weight limits on trucks. No comapany would ever cheat.. would they. No airline about to go broke would let questionable passengers on a flight ... just becuase they bought a ticket.... would they???
Perhaps you would prefer that meat packing companies provide their own pure food officers to certify the the meat they sell is pure. Why would we want to federalize meat inspection. Just because the meat packers sold us ecoli before we federalized meat inspection, doesn't mean they would do it again..... does it?
Why should the government waste money checking weights and measures in stores. Let every oil company certify their pumps actually pump a gallon of gas when they say it does. If the oil company says it is 87 octane.. then it is...right? Oil companies would not lie or cheat any more than Airlines would... would they???
But perhaps you think airlines people are a differnet breed of cat. They are far more honest and honerable than grocery providers.. Aren't they?????
You must believe that what is good for United Airlines is good for you.
It would not be for me.
When law enforcement is a function provided by the property owner, the nation rapidly becomes a dictatorship with no freedom and all laws are enforced for the benefit of the property owner.
It is a delegation of power that a Stalin or Hitler could only hope to have gained.
To: SJackson; All
All of this is especially worth noting now that Senate Democrats have returned from vacation still insisting on the government's normal jobs-for-life rules at the proposed
Homeland Security Department -- which, if created, would oversee the TSA. One of the reasons Democrats were so enthusiastic about federalizing airport security was the prospect of tens of thousands of recruits for the public-employee unions that support them. Frequent flyers all, they are surely aware of the TSA's problems, but union politics still come first.
Great post, SJ...this article's right on the money...it's the Dem.'s that want to expand the bureaucracy here...call your Senators, folks, and be sure your friends do too!!
17
posted on
09/04/2002 9:01:08 AM PDT
by
88keys
To: Common Tator
Well, if it is moved into the new Homeland Security Department and is run as a "police" unit - fine. All we did last year was reclassify the same workers as federal employees and raise their salaries. And we are adhering to political correctness to our detriment - both physically and economically. If the department is run as a law enforcement unit and not just a federal bureaucracy, then I can go along with it. I have yet to see anything that demonstrates that to be the case.
Not to mention the fact that the airline screeners did absolutely nothing wrong on 9/11. Those boxcutters, etc. were perfectly legal at the time. They were accused wrongly for ineptitude when in fact, it was the FBI and the CIA that were inept.
18
posted on
09/04/2002 9:03:43 AM PDT
by
Wphile
To: KC_Conspirator
And we are still not looking for terrorists. I am getting a little tired of seeing nuns, elderly black women with walkers, and service men and women get strip searched while three shifty eyed young arab men are waived on through because the government screeners don't want to offend anyone by profiling. I think the federalization of the security was a bad idea, and I am all for profiling, but what evidence do you really have that "shifty-eyed young arab men", presumably terrorists, have been "waived through"?
To: Common Tator
It is a delegation of power that a Stalin or Hitler could only hope to have gained.So true. Many of these security personnel aren't able to tie their own shoes, let alone check them for explosives.
In the gulags, the former prisoners were given jobs as guards. The epitomy of the patients running the nuthouse.
20
posted on
09/04/2002 9:16:01 AM PDT
by
johnny7
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson