Dave Carter · Nov 23, 2010 at 3:46am

We've all seen film clips of life in the old Soviet Union, or state sponsored rallies in which citizens waved banners and cheered their leaders or else. But if you want to know what a police state looks like these days, have a look at American airports. Law abiding citizens, stripped of their dignity and at times even their clothing, line up in an orderly fashion and await humiliation. Families must wait passively as agents of the government disrobe and man handle children, the elderly, the disabled, the innocent. We are warned that any protest, any attempt to protect each other against the prying hands of the state will provoke a decisive reaction, possibly even arrest and fines. And what offense have these citizens committed? What 4th Amendment threshold has been crossed that obliterates, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons..."? The simple desire to travel, to move about freely. Nothing more. And for this you are likely to be treated as an inmate entering the hoosegow. Since the purchase of a plane ticket is involved, perhaps Janet Napolitano will tell us that the molestation of the public is warranted under the auspices of the Commerce Clause.

Almost everything lamentable about this exercise in mass submission has already been lamented. When we broaden the view, however, it is but a segment in a larger mosaic. A mosaic whose components include a preference for anarchy on our southern border over the right of the people of the border region to be secure in their homes and property, and even vilifies a state governor who tries to protect her citizens. It is a mosaic that treats law breakers like citizens, and citizens like law breakers.

It is a montage, a patchwork if you will, which includes the belief that if we coddle criminals but outlaw firearms for the law abiding, we will be safe. If we grant constitutional rights to unlawful combatants on the battlefield and try them in civilian court, we will be moral. If we disarm in the face of aggression, stand down on missile defense, abandon freedom's heroes in Iran, announce withdrawal schedules to the enemy, bow to authoritarians, and apologize for our own contributions to the cause of human liberty, we will be respected, loved, and therefore safe. It is, in a word, madness.

It is a self-defeating belief system constructed out of the self-serving and arrogant delusions of the terminally gullible. This system would rather risk the incineration of an American city than pour a little water up the nose of a terrorist to gain information that would prevent the attack in the first place. Ultimately, it is a system that subverts and subjugates the individual citizen to the utopian theories and twisted whims of people who believe that they are organically suited to rule the rest of us.

That is why they expect us to line up, our privates ready for scrutiny, our dignity checked at the door. That is why they prefer a reactive search for weapons rather than a proactive search for killers. It fits with their larger view of a government that wields a heavy fist at home and a limp wrist abroad, leaving the citizen, his property and his freedom vulnerable to both domestic and foreign seizure. The question from this corner is: To what extent are people who willingly endure the dehumanizing debasement we are witnessing entitled to think of themselves as free?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

River
Joined
Aug '10
River

As always with the 'progressive'  crypto-Marxists, massive irony piles on top of enigma and conundrum. Captured battlefield terrorists are entitled to habeus corpus and the presumption of innocence, but not the masses of American citizens.

Why can't we have the system the Israelis have? 'Political correctness' is why.

You nailed it: "...the belief that if we coddle criminals but outlaw firearms for the law abiding, we will be safe. If we grant constitutional rights to unlawful combatants on the battlefield and try them in civilian court, we will be moral. If we disarm in the face of aggression... abandon freedom's heroes..., announce withdrawal schedules to the enemy, bow to authoritarians, and apologize for our own contributions to the cause of human liberty, we will be respected, loved, and therefore safe. It is, in a word, madness."

It's madness indeed, and if we continue to allow this administration to take us down that road, we'll have proved we deserve the terrible chaos and destruction that awaits us.

Look at North Korea, and what Obama's scheme has led to. They're saying the shelling of that island and the South Korean deaths were "an unfortunate accident".

Jimmy Carter
Joined
Jul '10
Jimmy Carter

What's stopping the TSA from putting agents at every car rental center to perform sobriety tests and/or background checks? 

We know terrorists have rented cars, and isn't McVeigh reason enough?

Robert E. Lee
Joined
Jun '10
Robert E. Lee

People will wake up one abused citizen at a time.  People do not believe their government really sees them as a bigger threat to their authority than any outside terror organization until they've actually been abused themselves.

Why would a serious terrorist put up with the hassles of flying into the United States when they could freely walk across the border en masse, carrying any weapons they please?

Lady Kurobara
Joined
Nov '10
Lady Kurobara
Dave Carter: A mosaic whose components include a preference for anarchy on our southern border over the right of the people of the border region to be secure in their homes and property, and even vilifies a state governor who tries to protect her citizens.

The Law is a fiction, an abstract artifact that exists only in the mind of Man.  So Government is very much an exercise in Faith.  The ordinary citizen submits to authority with the understanding (or the hope) that the rulers will maintain security without abusing that authority.

But now, in myriad ways, the US government has broken faith with its citizens - most egregiously in the case of Arizona.  By refusing to enforce its own immigration laws, by attempting to punish Arizona for enforcing said laws, by inviting foreign countries to bring suit against Arizona, the federal government has, in effect, committed treason against one of its own regional governments.  And I do mean treason.

In my considered opinion, Arizona is now legally entitled to secede from the union.  Morever, it may actually be obligated to do so, if only to protect its citizens.

This country is very, very close to bloody revolution.

Pilgrim
Joined
Jun '10
Pilgrim

Maybe this point has been made on Ricochet before but Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the Christmas Day "diaper bomber" exposed this hole in airline security almost a year ago.  Allowing time for policy review and training, I would have expected the new pat-downs to have been implemented last spring or summer, not two weeks after the mid-term elections. Coincidence? I think not.  The regime knew that the people were not going to accept this without a fight, they just didn't want the fight before the mid-terms.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

My favorite line: "It is a mosaic that treats law breakers like citizens, and citizens like law breakers."

That's it exactly.

Similarly, Obama reaches out to and treats sympathetically everyone with a grievance--real or imagined--against America, while everyone who unabashedly loves America is dealt with as part of the problem.

Dave Carter

Bob, very good point as always. The border is open, the with which to grow the ranks of a progressive base that is shrinking at home. Why wouldn't terrorists exploit this, even as we relieve returning soldiers or their nail clippers? And who is to say they haven't already?

Dave Carter

Lady Kurobara, I'm not advocating a "bloody revolution" here. There are many options out there that don't involve bloodshed. I would agree, however, that the feds have all but abandoned the rule of law on the border, and that the madness has to stop.

EJHill
Joined
May '10
EJHill

Remember how outraged the professional left was at Abu Ghraib? How dare they subject Saddam's professional torturers to humiliation and nakedness? Eleven of our troops were courts-martialed for such offenses.

Now, humiliating US citizens at the airport is Obama Administration policy. And 99% of take it.

TSA agents are now complaining to their union about verbal abuses directed at them from the public. What the union needs to do is remind them that they are not obligated to follow an illegal directive and by doing so they open themselves to personal civil suits.

Layla
Joined
Nov '10
Layla

EJHill: Remember how outraged the professional left was at Abu Ghraib? How dare they subject Saddam's professional torturers to humiliation and nakedness? Eleven of our troops were courts-martialed for such offenses.

Now, humiliating US citizens at the airport is Obama Administration policy. And 99% of take it.

TSA agents are now complaining to their union about verbal abuses directed at them from the public. What the union needs to do is remind them that they are not obligated to follow an illegal directive and by doing so they open themselves to personal civil suits. · Nov 23 at 5:41am

Excellent, EJ!

The WaPo reported yesterday that 2/3 of those surveyed were pleased as punch with the full-body scanners. Grrrr.

Mark Steyn made the point the other day that there comes a time when you just say "no" to your employer's little whims, like the Nazi camp guards should have done.

I believe that you'll see Americans go nuts if and only if Muslim women in hijab are exempted from scans and pat-downs. The fact that congressvermin are exempt doesn't do it for us: We're utterly accustomed to their privilege.

Claire Berlinski, Ed.

By the way, I'd just like to note that Ricochet was talking about this issue before it was cool.


Joined
Sep '10
Scratch
Pilgrim: ... I would have expected the new pat-downs to have been implemented last spring or summer, not two weeks after the mid-term elections. Coincidence? I think not.  The regime knew that the people were not going to accept this without a fight, they just didn't want the fight before the mid-terms. · Nov 23 at 4:46am

Or, perhaps, it was implemented in response to the results of the election? What is it that Obama said?

"If they punch you, you've got to punch back twice as hard."

Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

Scratch

Pilgrim: ... I would have expected the new pat-downs to have been implemented last spring or summer, not two weeks after the mid-term elections. Coincidence? I think not.  The regime knew that the people were not going to accept this without a fight, they just didn't want the fight before the mid-terms. · Nov 23 at 4:46am

Or, perhaps, it was implemented in response to the results of the election? What is it that Obama said?

"If they punch you, you've got to punch back twice as hard." · Nov 23 at 6:53am

Obama doesn't hold his wrists like someone who's thrown many punches. GWB did.

Brian Watt
Joined
Jun '10
Brian Watt

Dave - You've deftly encapsulated the Alice-in-Wonderland America in which we all find ourselves subjects of state control run amok. The TSA pat-down, feel up, grope around of citizens treats all travelers as criminals first. It is a presumption of guilt until proven innocent. "I don't have to show you reasonable cause. We don't need no stinking 4th amendment." There is evidence that Middle Eastern nationals have been coming across the nation's porous southern border yet there are no measures to make it more secure. In Obama's words, "It's just too big" and DOJ is too busy taking legal action against Arizona a state that is only trying to UPHOLD federal immigration law! Aaargh!! And never mind that we were able to secure the borders of Western Europe for decades against Soviet encroachment. Should we be surprised now that the security of South Korea now is being challenged? Would the North Koreans have attempted such provocation under Reagan or any other president except Obama? 

"Give your evidence," said the King; "and don't be nervous, or I'll have you executed on the spot." - Alice In Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll

Edited on Nov 23, 2010 at 9:07am
Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

Funny bit from humorist Adam Savage which underscores the real problem which is that TSA is looking to keep bad stuff off planes and not bad people. Focused on bad stuff it becomes a stupid game of hiding/finding the stuff which is always one step behind the last place they found the stuff.

*Warning* He says the bad word implied by WTF TSA?

http://gizmodo.com/5697222/adam-savage-mythbusting-airport-security-wtf-tsa?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gizmodo%2Ffull+%28Gizmodo%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

G.A. Dean
Joined
May '10
G.A. Dean

In fairness to the traveling public, I think much of what happens out at the airports reflects willingness of the American people to endure inconvenience and even sacrifice in order to accomplish something important. The "security theater" has been sold to the public as a necessary effort in the war against terrorism, and effort which most Americans do support. Willingness to resist terrorism is a fine impulse, but, as we have seen, in this case it is based on a fiction. As people see through that fiction, they are less willing to endure the "theater".

The good news here is that these same people will soon be confronted with more inconvenience and sacrifice as the country grapples with a debt crisis. Let's hope they are as willing to pitch in there.

Lady Kurobara
Joined
Nov '10
Lady Kurobara
Dave Carter: Lady Kurobara, I'm not advocating a "bloody revolution" here. There are many options out there that don't involve bloodshed. I would agree, however, that the feds have all but abandoned the rule of law on the border, and that the madness has to stop.

I am not advocating bloody revolution, either, Dave.  I am merely pointing out that things are going to hell in a handbasket.  We must remember that the 50 Governors are, in a sense, "mini-Presidents."  They actually run the country on a day-to-day basis.  And each Governor is responsible for the citizens within his state.

If you are the Governor of a state with a sound fiscal policy and the Feds try to bankrupt you with Obamacare and a relentless barrage of other senseless socialist programs, you just might want to check out the secession option.

This is not wild speculation.  It is being discussed by sober people in statehouses across the country.

 


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In