White House Pulls Down TSA Petition
Jeremiah Cornelius writes with a note that on Thursday of this week "The Electronic Privacy Information Center posted a brief and detailed notice about the removal of a petition regarding security screenings by the TSA at US airports and other locations. 'At approximately 11:30 am EDT, the White House removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House 'We the People' website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration were obtained when the White House unexpectedly cut short the time period for the petition. The site also went down for 'maintenance' following an article in Wired that sought support for the campaign."
...for the least transparent administration in American history. Perhaps the Obama Administration will restore the petition shortly after they turn over the Fast and Furious documents Obama has claimed Executive Privilege over.
This is also par for the course for the Obama Administration's constant defense of the TSA. When Texas tried to pass a bill to ban TSA groping in the state, the Obama Administration threatened to impose a no fly zone on Texas over the right for TSA agents to grope people. Do you think think the Obama Administration will be any less protective now that they're unionized.
Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz has called for the abolition of the TSA. Given the wasteful, intrusive, and ineffective security theater they stage, does anyone think the America public would object to to their abolition?
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I tried to sign this petition several times over the last couple of weeks, but the system would not let me create an account.
Perhaps people should take a page from from the copyright cartel playbook and keep putting the petitions up until they get the number of signatures they need.
We just recently saw a study which shows that the TSA isn't an issue -- Americans don't hate them that much.
But the study didn't control for whether you'd flown or not in the past few years.
Obviously, I'd like to see the study redone with whether you've flown. I suspect people who've flown HATE the TSA and people who haven't think they're grand.
But I'd also like another variable added. People who vote.
I suspect the people who don't hate the TSA are a complacent bunch who don't read, don't think, and don't vote. I further suspect people who don't fly don't vote. But it could go the other way. I want to see those numbers. The TSA may be a much, MUCH bigger issue than the administration thinks it is, or they may be completely right -- ignore it, because it's not something the real people who vote crare about.
I'm afraid I just found out that the whole point of the people's power, which allegedly started with the French Revolution, was to fool us, the people, in thinking that finally we would be in control.
While on the other hand it was just a puppet revolution setup by the banks to get rid of their bad-debt risks with lending huge sums of warfare money to kings and queens where the inheritor of the same would deny responsibility for paying back those debts. With governments you don't have this problem because then it's the whole country which is liable for the debt, and countries don't change that often.
So the whole french revolution was nothing more than a good PR, suckering 'the people' in taking over responsibility of their countries' loans.
While keeping those in control who already were...
(I think the current 'debt crisis' proves my point.)
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
You know I think it's also bad that police officers put themselves in danger to protect the public. How about you use the same drones to attack suspected violent offenders on home ground too and help avoid the danger they present to the police?
What's that you say? You're not happy? You think it wasn't fair to blow up the dude who might have been a murderer as while he wasn't a nice person, you weren't sure if he actually killed anyone or not? And you're angry the missile killed some his friends, family and children that were at the bowling alley at the same time? Oh I understand - you think that they should have been afforded due process and rights because they were your people not someone that doesn't share your language?
Let's get something straight : drone attacks may keep some military personnel safe in the very near term but they're constantly indescriminately killing people. In the past years in pakistan they've killed somewhere between 400 and 800 people, of which around 160 were children. How would you be feeling if another country had flown drones into your country and been killing those numbers of people?
Don't you think that if those peoples surviving family, friends and neighbors didn't previously think that western powers deserved a good kicking, the wanton and unashamed murders by drones will have changed their minds? If one of the angry relatives pulled off something even half as awful as the WTC attacks, would you still say the drones saved "your people" successfully?
Are you not paying attention, or are you just plain stupid?