TSA: Terrorists Seeking Access

This illustration is an older report, from a Congressional Committee. But its title never goes out of style.

This illustration is an older report, from a Congressional Committee. But its title never goes out of style.

You know, I could just about, maybe, kind of, sort of, understand the unwarranted, and unwarrantable intrusions into our persons and possessions of the TSA, if they had any record at all of reducing terrorism. The thing is, they don’t. It’s pure theater of the absurd, the only purpose of which is evident, is to cow the people into submission. I first saw this at the Powerline Blog, which had something to do with bringing it to light. But I like this write up better, I’m becoming weary of calm civilized tones on this.

Remember when the bozos in DC redefined the mission of NASA as “Moslem outreach?” That was pretty weird — they’re alien, but notthat kind. But if you were wondering whether an agency ever could top that for Mecca-facing featherbrained imbecility, wonder no more. And you know what agency did it.

No one good, decent, honest, competent, moral, ethical or intelligent has ever been employed at the TSA in any capacity whatsoever.

The latest outrage that these no-good, indecent, dishonest, incompetent, immoral, unethical and unintelligent payroll patriots have inflicted on us, actually took place in 2014 and 2015 and has been previously reported: special guided tours of security areas and procedures, exclusively for… Somali Moslems. It’s back in the news because Judicial Watch finally pried the documents loose with a FOIA request, and they’re pretty bad.JW summarizes:

On at least two occasions—December 18, 2014 and February 18, 2015—federal authorities granted the unprecedented excursions of the facility’s sterile and secure areas, according to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) records obtained by Judicial Watch. The DHS agency that conducted the expeditions, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), provided the Muslim participants with “an in-depth, on-site tour and discussion of CBP’s airport, including both inbound and outbound passenger processing,” the TSA files state. Besides multiple roundtable meetings between CBP and Somali community leaders including imams, the records show that a luncheon and “cultural exchange and educational brief” also took place between December 2014 and February 2015 so that attendees could ask about the agency’s “specific practices” at the airport.

The roundtable events and airport tours were organized by Abdirizak Farah, who is identified in the records as a policy advisor in the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL). Farah joined DHS in 2010 with an annual salary of $89,033 and by 2015 his yearly pay increased to $130,453, according to a government database. The TSA’s “Somali liaison officer” in Minneapolis, Andrew Rhoades, told Judicial Watch that the special airport tours were organized for Somali Muslims after they complained to Johnson that they felt “harassed and profiled” by CBP at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport. The DHS secretary had “a sympathetic ear to that,” Rhoades said, adding that no other group has been granted such airport access by DHS. “Now, I will say we’ve never done that, or we don’t do that, to let’s say the Hmong community living here in Minneapolis, uh, the Christian community, the Catholic community, the Irish… whatever you want to call it. This has been the only one,” Rhoades said.

Read the whole thing™ here: TSA: Terrorists Seeking Access | WeaponsMan

Advertisements

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

10 Responses to TSA: Terrorists Seeking Access

  1. the unit says:

    What started out hoping for us to become a “melting pot” populace became a salad bowl of ingredients. Now we’re heading down the path to become a toilet bowl full of upchuck.
    And we are being led that way and have been for a long time. I’m just a little older than when these ideas began to be fulfilled. Some recognized the danger ahead. A few years years after WWII the discussion was there to get it started, heading for the toilet bowl that is. In congress and likely among constituents. The worries were expressed by some in congress leading up to the passing of:
    https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/immigration-act
    I’m kinda thinking this endeavor isn’t just coincidental to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
    Some previous administrations and including the present one seem to like doing what the U.N. says, like i.e. air warfare against Gaddafi without congress’s approval saying the U.N. says it’s ok.
    Since that convention there was the 1967 Protocol defining and expanding the demographics of who can be included as refugees and asylum seekers. So now it’s ok to accept them from terrorist states, in fact its obligatory.
    I’ll give a informative link how all the above effects a sovereign nation if anybody would like it. I didn’t give it here as some sites won’t accept multiple links in one comment.
    As to the description of the TSA employees, so describes the leadership and what they do is fine with them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Pretty much agree with you, although I think some of it may be unintended consequences, as usual.

      Sure, post it. The limit here (as most places, in my experience, is two per comment. They say it helps cut down on spam. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        Another coincident. Wife out of town and fixing to have a spam sandwich for lunch, fried! 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Hah! I would but spam has gotten overly expensive – cheaper to buy real ham, or maybe baloney! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • the unit says:

          I’m splurging. But I better check and see what meaning the DNC gives that word nowadays.

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          😉

          Like

  2. the unit says:

    OT, but a quite Sunday night is a good time to ask a question. I just added Adblock Plus couple of days ago. Sites now load beautifully and fast. However some big sites require that I whitelist them. I guess their ads will come up then.
    I guess I’ll have to learn to do that. One site said to click on the Adblock icon and then click on some selection that will put their site on white list. I fail to see a icon. Or there are plenty of other places to visit. Whitelist? Won’t that open me to name calling?
    Did you or any other reader have to do this?

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Yeah, I run it too. I’ve whitelisted a couple, but for the most part, if they insist I do, I pass on their sites. I’d tell you how, but I don’t remember either, someplace in the Adblock settings, a tab I’m thinking, but it’s been most of a year since I’ve added anything to it. It’s a good program, I think.

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        The only one that wouldn’t let me proceed to view was Bloomberg. Yeah speed is like new again. Yes good program. i was thinking I had some bug slowing me down. In fact had two different computer techs debug and for a pretty penny too. Neither helped really. But it’s great now.
        I’m not going to whitelist either. Why…to see their ads? I no born yesterday prog., just born yesterday. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yep, you’re like me, I may have fallen off the truck, but not last night! 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s