YOWUSA.COM Home Page  

The Kolbrin Bible: Glenn Kimball Special Edition

Win-Win Survival Handbook

Radio Free Earth

Feel Better on Your Own

 
Yowusa.com Home Page  |  Archive: 2000 - 2012   Cut to the Chase Radio  |  Planet X Town Hall
Earth  |  eBooks  |  ET  |  Humanity  |  Nostradamus  |  Planet X  |  SciTech  |  SCP  |  Space  |  War

 

   

Homeland Security: Are We Creating a Terrible Monster?

YOWUSA.COM, 08-June-02
Marshal Masters

Homeland Security: Are We Creating a Terrible Monster? In his address to the American people last Thursday evening, President Bush said, "Americans should continue to do what you're doing -- go about your lives, but pay attention to your surroundings. Add your eyes and ears to the protection of our homeland."  But the real message is that Washington is building another massive business-as-usual super agency that will centralize information along with power, money and control.  Ergo, what is patently missing in this reorganization is a meaningful inclusion of the American people. 

Proponents like noted radio host Rush Limbaugh hail the largest reorganization of our government since WWII as a sound way to consolidate intelligence gathering efforts under a centralized streamlined chain of command.  With the exception of few far left liberals there are real no opponents. Just reluctant supporters, who know that things in Washington seldom happen as advertised who tell us this is going to be an expensive exercise in reorganizing the deck chairs (while dropping the word "Titanic" from the end of the sentence.)   Therefore we must ask ourselves, could this super agency become a terrible new monster?

VOA News, June 8, 2002
President Bush Seeks Support for
his Homeland Security Proposal

President Bush proposed creation of the homeland security department in a major speech to the nation Thursday. 

The new department Mr. Bush wants to begin operating in January would absorb the work of at least 20 separate government agencies. It would employ up to 170,000 people, making it second only to the Defense Department in size and scope of responsibility. 

If enacted, the proposal would be the biggest government reorganization in 55 years. Creation of the new department needs congressional approval. 

Tom RidgeMost lawmakers have responded positively to the idea. Tom Ridge, the current director of the Office of Homeland Security will soon testify before Congress to make the administration case for the new department. 

Observers say Mr. Bush is almost certain to name Mr. Ridge to head the new department.

There is an otherworldly dimension in how Washington is reacting to all this.  It reminds me of the produce we buy in our 24-hour supermarkets, shipped green from South America straight to our stores.  It looks great, but it has no flavor.  And so we just chew and chew hoping eventually we'll acclimate ourselves to the bland tasting fiber so that we can go on about our business -- as usual. 

But some of us are not willing settle for this and we buy locally grown organic produce at our local farmers market.  Unfortunately, when it comes to homeland security at the basic level, Washington's message to us is that there is no farmers market when it comes to security.  All we can do is to eat Washington's placebo and like it. 

The Terrible Problem With This Reorganization

Simply put, the terrible problem with this reorganization is that President Bush and the Congress only want Americans to serve in two rolls:  Remote audio visual sensors with valid phone cards and business-as-usual taxpayers (and the preference is on the later as opposed to the former.) 

Basically the deal is this. Washington collects more money, power and control and we die and pay taxes.  Yup, this is business as usual.  Perhaps this is more realistic interpretation of what President Bush meant when he said, "Americans should continue to do what you're doing -- go about your lives," last Thursday night. 

Meanwhile, as civil libertarians wail about the potential loss of individual liberties, our current situation clearly shows what we've already lost a great deal since WWII. One clear example is airport security and the ability of pilots to defend their aircraft, crew and passengers with deadly force.

FAA Says -- Pilots Must Let The Passengers Die

At one time, airline pilots were required by law to carry a revolver in the cockpit when carrying mail. Today, the vast majority of airline pilots, the people Americans trust most, have been rudely and summarily denied the right to carry lethal weapons in the cockpit to defend their passengers and aircraft from terrorist attacks (not to mention the mail.) 

American Troops in US Airport"Aha" you say, "but what about all of those National Guard soldiers standing guard in our nation's airports with assault rifles."  

The fact is, that it was only after Washington felt they were no longer needed did we learn that the ammunition clips in those nasty looking M-16s were empty!  No doubt, it was assumed by Washington insiders that any Islamist terrorist would politely and happily oblige any National Guardsman who happened to ask, "excuse me Mr. Terrorist, but could you pause for a moment while unload my useless empty ammunition magazine; draw a full one from my ammo pouch; insert the loaded ammunition magazine in my rife; lock and load the first round; release the safety; aim my weapon at you; and then pull the trigger?" 

The bottom line is that the Guardsmen were a Washington-based sham!  A placebo that has undermined our faith in our leaders because we were unknowing fooled into believing that we were more secure. Yet, the real fact is that these placebo Guardsmen was as vulnerable to attack as everyone else.

In addition to the placebo Guardsmen, we yet have another opaque level of airport security with screeners that still continue to fail rudimentary security tests, while much of our luggage still passes through the airports an onto our airplanes without being inspected.

OK, so given that we're safe because we're being protected by placebo Guardsmen, marginal security screeners, and luggage that mostly slips by unchecked.  But you forgot the makeshift cockpit barriers we're installing in our commercial airliners.

If there is an in-flight terrorist attack the procedure is simple.  The pilots sit in the cockpit behind the barrier and turn up the MTV real loud so they will not be trifled by the impassioned pleas and blood curdling screams of helpless passengers as they are slaughtered like sheep by the terrorists. Of course, Washington also assumes that terrorists not possess anything capable of blowing down the cockpit barrier, after they've finished their deadly deeds with the passengers and cabin attendants.   (This is because Islamists are dumb.  They can only kill 3,000 Americans at a time.) 

taserSo what has happened?  A politically correct and expedient compromise was struck by everyone except the airline pilots who were not consulted and flat out told "This is where the taser cow chews the cud, you pesky flyboys and flygirls." 

This politically correct comprise allows pilots to carry Tasers maybe!  However, there are still a few more comprises before the final comprise can be once again compromised.  After that, a final, final, final compromise will be worked out.

But will Tasers really work? If they did, the police would pack away their hand guns and carry nothing but Tasers.  Rather, some carry them in addition to their handguns while most leave stash them somewhere in their police cruisers.  So why are the police so hesitant to throw away their handguns in favor of a Taser Full Montey? 

You point a Taser at someone and pull the trigger.  Most times it works and sometimes it doesn't.  You could call it an electronic form of Russian Roulette for those who actually want to live.

On the other hand, when you point a 38 Smith and Wesson at a terrorist and pull the trigger, there is not doubt in your mind that the terrorist is about to have a major bad hair day. 

But then the politically correct compromise jockeys in Washington will raise another alarm. The bullet could pierce the skin of the aircraft; thereby causing a sudden depressurization that could result in the loss of life of all aboard.  Humph!  Got you there!

Not so bucko because pilots could carry handguns loaded with frangible ammunition that cannot pierce the skin of the aircraft, causing sudden depressurization.

YOWUSA.COM, October 8, 2001
Airline Crews and Passengers Should Be Trusted With Concealed Weapons

There are bullets designed specially for environments such as the interior of a commercial airliner. Experts call it frangible ammunition and a popular version of this ammunition is made by a firm called GLASER SAFETY SLUG, Inc. They first developed their Glaser Safety Slug in 1974, and improved the design in 1987 and 1988.   This ammunition has been thoroughly tested over a period of many years and is used extensively by law enforcement agencies all across the USA.

The job of a frangible bullet is to deliver a debilitating blow to a criminal while significantly reducing the threat of over- penetration (the bullet passes through the body and strikes something or someone else), or a ricochet.

Frangible bullets such as the Glaser Safety Slug contain a soft plastic tip, which sits in front of a load of very fine shot, which cannot break through the interior panels of a commercial airliner. (The plastic used in most commercial airline interiors is the same plastic used in football helmets, portable spas and sailboats.) 

These bullets are very accurate at close range, and ideal for the closed combat environment of a commercial airliner.

The bottom line is that pilots are the most trusted professionals in America and they want to be armed.  Instead of responding to a reasonable request, the pilots remain disarmed.  Further, if they ask someone of Middle Eastern decent to leave the airplane because they or their passengers are concerned, they can be assured these passengers will come back with ACLU-armed lawyers and sue them in court.  This is called Homeland Security!

Regardless of your stand on gun control, this Washington-based placebo insanity represents a complete disregard for 2nd amendment rights of passengers at the expense of the sensibilities of those who seek to kill us.

[1] [2]