Facebook flunks English, suspends user for writing “chigger.”

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Dunce_cap02

The illiteracy, it burns:

It started yesterday, when SF author Michael Z Williamson was blocked by Facebook for 12 hours for using the word “chigger” in a post.  When his twelve hours were up — following massive derision against Facebook by all his friends — his block expired. He was promptly blocked again.

Read the rest of Charlie Martin’s post. Williamson finally got his account unblocked, but Facebook also couldn’t understand “niggardly,” and so banned another miscreant; Facebook tried the “we’re overwhelmed with reported posts and sometimes make mistakes” excuse, but that doesn’t explain why they continue to allow a page that calls for a man’s murder and others that repeatedly use an extremely offensive word for Blacks. (Not to mention various pages advocating violent jihad against the West.)

Facebook is a private company and has every right to monitor what’s written on its site, but one would think they should want to a) hire people with the vocabulary of at least a 7th-grader; b) try to be consistent; or c) just give up and let everyone vent. (At least option C is helpful for monitoring idiot jihadis.)

Flashback: It’s not the first time the use of the word “niggardly” has exposed the ignorant.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Class act Katherine Webb says Musburger not “creepy” for gushing about her on nat’l TV

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Can’t believe there was even a stupid “controversy” about this, but in a society obsessed with being “politically correct”, sure enough there were “feminists” who were fauxfended:

When you get bored, your eyes wander.

So when a blossoming blowout between the University of Alabama and some other team in Monday night’s college football championship floated into yawnfest territory, the electronic eyes of ESPN naturally went wandering — settling on a brunette bombshell who just happens to be the girlfriend of Crimson Tide quarterback AJ McCarron.

“Now when you are a quarterback at Alabama, you see that lovely lady there, she does go to Auburn, I want to admit that, but she’s also Miss Alabama and that’s AJ McCarron’s girlfriend, OK,” ESPN broadcaster Brent Musburger said Monday night as the camera focused on Katherine Webb in the stands.

“Wow, I’m telling you, quarterbacks — you get all the good-looking women. What a beautiful woman,” he gushed. “Wow!”

As the chasm grew between Alabama and the other team — the name will surely come back to us soon — ESPN kept going back to the well, repeatedly showing Webb cheering in the crowd, wearing her boyfriend’s No. 10 jersey.

Finally, Yahoo! Sports columnist Jess Passan jokingly tweeted, “Sources: A.J. McCarron’s girlfriend to seek restraining order from Brent Musburger at halftime.”

[…]

Musburger’s fawning attention prompted a spate of criticism of the 73-year-old broadcaster, with some posters to Twitter calling his comments “creepy.” The episode even spawned the creation of a parody Twitter account, “Horny Musburger.”

CNN was not able to reach Musburger for comment through ESPN, but the network responded, saying: “We always try to capture interesting storylines and the relationship between an Auburn grad who is Miss Alabama and the current Alabama quarterback certainly met that test. However, we apologize that the commentary in this instance went too far and Brent understands that.”

Far from being creeped out, Webb said Tuesday that she was “flattered” by the broadcaster’s comments, entertainment website TMZ reported.

“I’ve been reading on Twitter that Musburger had backlash that he’s ‘creepy’,” TMZ quoted Webb as saying. “If I were to see him I would say, ‘I don’t think you’re creepy at all!’ “

Bravo to ya, gal.

In case you missed it – if you’re a guy, you probably didn’t! – here’s the video of Musberger’s gushing over Webb as the camera panned to her:

Nothing he said was obscene nor offensive (unless you are a perpetually outraged “feminist” who hates being a woman). He talked about how beautiful a beauty queen (hint hint!) was. No harm, no foul. And that should have been the end of the story.

War on the #WarOnWomen: Stop w/ the @AmbassadorRice is a “sexism victim” nonsense!

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Conservative commentator Rachel Campos-Duffy, who is the wife of Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI-7), spoke for MANY women across America today who are absolutely fed up and disgusted with the BS “sexism” cries coming from Democrats over legitimate criticism of Ambassador Susan Rice’s statements on Benghazi (via Twitchy):

Preach! More women need to stand up against this utter nonsense. Many of us have, and more are joining in on the push back, including Democrat Kirsten Powers. Ms. Rice is an adult, an accomplished woman in a position of power, and is capable of speaking for herself. She certainly shouldn’t have to feel like she has to hide behind President Obama – who just a few months ago was hiding behind her in the immediate aftermath of the Benghazi terrorist attack and murders, which is, in part, what started the questioning of this administration’s handling of the fallout in the first place. That female Democrat politicos are joining in on the “sexism” charge is predictable but nevertheless deeply disappointing. As Powers mentioned in one of her tweets, these “progressive” females need to “GROW UP.”

And as I wrote last night, it’s not just the gender card being played, but the race card has been thrown out there on the table as well. I pointed out earlier on Twitter that is almost seems like Democrats deliberately appoint/nominate “minorities” to key positions in efforts to try and immunize them against necessary questions and legitimate criticisms. They know there are a lot of politicos who will back down quickly in the face of the left and their allies in the MSM playing their usual deck of cards (race, religion, sex, sexuality, etc) so what better way to head off the political opposition at the pass than to nominate or appoint someone who carries the silly “absolute moral authority” card, who should be “above reproach”, in their view?

I’m heartened by the number of women who are responding in anger and disgust to this tired, stale Democrat party tactic. We have INDEED come a long way, baby, and most definitely far enough to realize when so-called “tough, bold women” on the left stupidly pretend otherwise to shield each other from much-needed sunlight.

Liberal religious intolerance watch – Day 3: Philly City Councilman Edition

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

The latest liberal exposed for rank hypocrisy when it comes to pledging “religious tolerance”? Philly City Councilman James Kenney:

Philadelphia City Councilman Jim Kenney (D) entered into the Chick-fil-A furor this week with a letter to company president Dan Cathy.

The latest skirmish in the nation’s culture wars began when Cathy told the Baptist Press that the company was “guilty as charged” for backing “the biblical definition of a family.” In a later radio interview, he ratcheted up the rhetoric: “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.'”

Gay rights groups have called for a boycott, the Jim Henson Co. pulled its Muppet toys from kids’ meals, and politicians in Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago told the chain it is not welcome there.

Kenney wrote: “As a fellow American and an elected member of Philadelphia City Council; I am entitled to express my opinion as well. So please — take a hike and take your intolerance with you. There is no place for this type of hate in our great City of Brotherly and Sisterly Affection.”

Here’s the letter Kenney wrote.

And as conservative talk show host Michael Graham wrote in today’s Boston Herald, Boston Mayor Tom Menino has some “religious tolerance” hypocrisy to answer for himself. Big time.

I’m working on getting together a contact list for every hypocritical Democrat politico who has made their bigotry against Bible-believing Christians obvious for the world to see. I’ll share it as soon as I have everything together.

Previous:

7/26/12 – Liberal “religious tolerance” hypocrisy watch – Day 2: The Rahmbo Edition (UPDATED)

7/25/12 – Spitzer: Let’s tolerate gay-hating Islamists, but not traditional marriage backers at @ChickfilA

Liberal “religious tolerance” hypocrisy watch – Day 2: The Rahmbo Edition (UPDATED)

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Another day, another example of a bigoted liberal showing his hypocritical true colors – via the Chicago Sun-Times:

Ignoring Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan’s history of anti-Semitic remarks, Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Wednesday welcomed the army of men dispatched to the streets by Farrakhan to stop the violence in Chicago neighborhoods.

Ald. Debra Silverstein (50th), an Orthodox Jew, has said it’s good that Farrakhan is “helping” in the fight against crime, “but it doesn’t eradicate the comments that he’s made about the Jewish community.”

Emanuel offered no such caveat. Although Farrakhan has a history of making anti-Semitic statements, Chicago’s first Jewish mayor has no interest in revisiting that controversy.

He’s more concerned about reducing a 40 percent surge in Chicago homicides that’s become a media obsession and threatens to undermine his efforts to market Chicago to international tourists.

Good grief. A Jewish mayor of a major US city is ok with an anti-Semitic, racist “minister” dispatching his goons to help “protect” the rougher parts of Chicago, but a Christian establishment that has expressed the non-violent view that they support the Biblical definition of marriage is not welcomed:

The anti-gay views openly espoused by the president of a fast food chain specializing in chicken sandwiches have run afoul of Mayor Rahm Emanuel and a local alderman, who are determined to block Chick-fil-A from expanding in Chicago.

“Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values. They’re not respectful of our residents, our neighbors and our family members. And if you’re gonna be part of the Chicago community, you should reflect Chicago values,” Emanuel said Wednesday.

“What the CEO has said as it relates to gay marriage and gay couples is not what I believe, but more importantly, it’s not what the people of Chicago believe. We just passed legislation as it relates to civil union and my goal and my hope … is that we now move on recognizing gay marriage. I do not believe that the CEO’s comments … reflects who we are as a city.”

Got that? Christian values “do not reflect Chicago values” – but apparently expressing your hatred of Jews & whites does. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright-approved Nation of Islam thugs are greeted with open arms because Rahmbo thinks they will help with the city’s “image problems”, but a pro-family restaurant chain that has done more positive things for the traditional family structure, kids, and local communities than Mayor Rahm and Farrakhan ever will should be shunned, ostracized, banned.

Welcome to the world of liberal self-loathing. It’s pretty damned ugly.

Related:   Spitzer: Let’s tolerate gay-hating Islamists, but not traditional marriage backers at @ChickfilA

Update – 5:53 PM: So Chick-fil-A isn’t welcomed in Chicago, but a restaurant in honor of Nation of Islam “Minister” Louis Farrakhan is. “Chicago values” for ya. (Hat tip: ST reader GWR)

Spitzer: Let’s tolerate gay-hating Islamists, but not traditional marriage backers at @ChickfilA

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Here’s disgraced former Governor of NY Eliot Spitzer on the idiotic calls by the “tolerant” left to boycott the Chick-fil-A fast food chain over their Biblically-based support for traditional marriage (bolded emphasis added by me):

Chick-fil-A makes a great chicken sandwich, and I used to like getting one—with a cup of their amazing lemonade—whenever I was in the South. In fact, before I knew more about Chick-fil-A, I used to joke about helping to open one in New York.

Then I found out the company, according to the LGBT group Equality Matters, has donated millions of dollars to groups that oppose gay rights, and Chick-fil-A’s president, Dan Cathy, told a Baptist newspaper that he supported the “biblical” definition of family. That’s why former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas has asked that folks who share the company’s principles stop by a Chick-fil-A on Aug. 1 to show support for the company’s conservative values.

And that’s fair enough.

If you really don’t think gays and lesbians should have the same rights as everyone else, and you oppose same-sex marriage, stop by Chick-fil-A. If you truly believe gays and lesbians should be second-class citizens, and if you sincerely don’t want them to marry the people they love, stop by Chick-fil-A.

But the same goes for those of us who support same-sex marriage and have what we consider to be a broader view of civil rights. We should boycott Chick-fil-A. These are our consumer dollars—and they’re part of our voice. We should use them for products we like—to support companies we like and to back causes we like.

Spitzer is right on the issue of the consumer having the right to spend their hard-earned money where they so choose (the money they have left after the government confiscates an obscene amount from their checks, anyway), but the stench of religious intolerance towards Christians who believe differently than him and other leftists on the issue of alternative forms of marriage is pretty strong, isn’t it?  What Spitzer is saying here is that if, as a Christian, you’ve correctly interpreted the Bible to understand that God promotes  man/woman couples and disapproves of homosexuality, then you deserve to lose business.  He’s also stated categorically that any Christian who believes this also thinks gays are “second class citizens” who “don’t deserve the same rights” as straights.

While it’s true that some misguided Christians do indeed, unfortunately, “hate gays” rather than taking the correct attitude that you are to “love the sinner and hate the sin” (as we are supposed to do with ALL sinners, since we are all sinners ourselves), there are many more who don’t “hate gays” at all but who DO believe that the definition of marriage should be that it consists of one man and won woman only. Some Christians base their beliefs solely on Biblical scripture (while God is not tolerant of any sin at all, the Bible makes it clear that He is the judge when it comes to sin, not anyone here on Earth).  Others use secular arguments to justify their position.  And others base it on a mixture of both.    But the important thing to note here is that it is a non-violent religious belief grounded in scripture and for the Cathy family of Chick-fil-A to change their stance on the issue in order to become sufficiently “tolerant” to Spitzer and the liberal Gay Gestapo (and to avoid further political blackmail, which I’ll get into in a minute) would mean violating their religious principles.

Ironically enough, it was Spitzer himself who said two years ago that religious intolerance had no place in a modern American society …. but in this instance he was talking about the controversial “Ground Zero mosque” in a broad-based discussion on so-called “Islamophobia” in general.  Matthew Balan at Newsbusters transcribed Spitzer’s remarks at the time (bolded emphasis added by me):

[ANDERSON] COOPER: There’s- you know, we’ve seen these incidents now moving away from just this mosque, but to opposing- some oppose the building of any new mosque in the United States, or some expose just the expansion in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. And those who support it say, ‘Look, this is Islamophobia.’ Do you buy that?

SPITZER: I think there’s a big element of Islamophobia, but I think this is also part of our history, and we need to be careful that we appeal to our better angels, as Lincoln said.

COOPER: This is just the newest group?

SPITZER: This is (unintelligible)-

COOPER: From Catholics to Jews to the-

SPITZER: Precisely, the newest incarnation- and, in fact, before I came on the show, I dug out George Washington’s letter to a synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island in 1790, where he addressed this and he said the wonderful thing about this nation, a new nation at that point, three years old- 220 years ago, he wrote this- is that we are tolerant, and we need our political leadership to speak to tolerance. We need to go back to those values, so that everybody can do what the imam wants to do and what David Gergen spoke to, which is to get people together and say, ‘wait a minute, let us not’-

COOPER: But that’s not what our political life is about now.

[KATHLEEN] PARKER: But we keep hearing this, ‘they’re going to do this, if you let them get in.’

COOPER: Pat Robertson saying that (unintelligble)-

PARKER: You let them do this, then they’re going to demand, demand. Who is the ‘they’? I mean, these are Americans, too, and it makes me wonder how many people out there watching tonight actually know someone who is a Muslim? You know, there seems to be- I just feel like this has become a misunderstanding on a broad scale. And while- absolutely, when you talk to people whose families died in this and- you know, on 9/11, you can’t not take that seriously. I mean, that emotion is real, and it’s still raw. But I think we’ve got to stop thinking of Muslims as being ‘them.’

OTOH, when it comes to Christian conservatives, that “tolerance” rule Spitzer promoted just a couple of years ago doesn’t apply.   This is especially interesting, considering the high degree of INTOLERANCE promoted by the Koran itself – as noted by my co-blogger at the time the Ground Zero mosque debate was raging:

[…] Muslims have the right to practice their faith in over 30 mosques in New York City, alone, and can build more. And it is not about private property rights (which is funny coming from you, given your treatment of property rights in the GM and Chrysler bailouts), for no serious critic says property owners do not have the right to do what they wish with their property within zoning laws.

It is, however, about the location chosen and the inappropriateness of exercising those rights at that place. Ground Zero is where a Muslim jihadist organization launched a razzia (“raid”) against the kuffar(“infidels”) for the sake of Allah (jihad fi sabil Allah) and in accordance with the Qur’an, chapter nine, verse five:

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

And, at the same link, verse 111:

Lo! Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph.

That act of war, done in the name of Islam and in accordance with Islamic law, killed 3,000 of our people and foreign guests. And you think it’s a good thing to build a mosque there? Muslim spokesmen and their liberal and libertarian apologists demand we be tolerant and sensitive. Tell me, sir, why shouldn’t they (and you) be tolerant and sensitive toward the nearly 70% of Americans who opposebuilding that mosque on that spot?

Bingo.

And, oh – here’s another irony alert: How interesting is it that the “pro-gay rights” Spitzer promoted “religious tolerance” of the Ground Zero mosque and Islam when Islam is decidedly anti-gay to the point that it mandates the public judgment, stoning, and murder of gays by fellow Islamists?  In other words, whereas the Bible teaches that the ultimate judgement for all sin, including the sin of homosexuality, will come when you die and have to answer to God, Islam directs its followers to be the judge, jury, and executioners of those who do not strictly adhere to Mohammed’s teachings.   Gays (and women and “infidels”) are not merely “second class citizens”  in the Islamic community, they are the lowest of the low who “deserve”  the violent persecution and punishment meted out to them by “true” Islamists.   This, friends, is factual in nature and is what Eliot Spitzer, in effect, told us to “tolerate” in the name of “religious freedom.”

But the privately-owned Chick-Fil-A’s announced and financial (and very much non-violent) support of traditional marriage as based on Biblical scripture?  Forget “religious tolerance.” Not only should you not “tolerate” Chick-fil-A’s stance on marriage, but you should avoid their stores at all costs – even if it means putting them out of business.  According to the Spitzers of America, we should “tolerate” a religion that promotes savagery towards women, gays, and non-believers, but NOT tolerate in any way shape or form a PRIVATE business due to their Biblically-based non-violent beliefs on traditional marriage.

Then again, hypocrisy has become Spitzer’s stock-in-trade these last few years, so should we really be surprised at this latest instance?

Sadly, some liberal politicians are taking their hypocritical “religious tolerance” stances even further, and chillingly so – actively encouraging the blocking of Chick-fil-A’s from opening in their cities and states.   Michelle Malkin has much more.  Where’s Mr. “Religious Tolerance”  himself President Obama when you need him?   Don’t expect him to make any big statements on this anytime soon – if ever.  Right now, he’s too busy kissing the a**ses of liberal gays during an election  year. Not only that, but promoting private business aka capitalism has never been in his political playbook (hello?). Thirdly, “religious tolerance” in his view is only for those expressing religious viewpoints that are politically correct – like the ones he espouses.

Never, ever, ever, ever EVER let the left convince you they are in any way, shape, form or fashion “honest purveyors” of tolerance, religious or otherwise.   In reality, liberals are some of the most bigoted people you will ever meet in your life. They’ll tell you that they simply do not “tolerate” hate, but as this post has clearly demonstrated, that  is another one of their infamous -and easily debunked – lies.

They never learn: DOD classifies Ft. Hood massacre as ‘workplace violence’

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

Here we go again:

Sen. Susan Collins on Wednesday blasted the Defense Department for classifying the Fort Hood massacre as workplace violence and suggested political correctness is being placed above the security of the nation’s Armed Forces at home.

During a joint session of the Senate and House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, the Maine Republican referenced a letter from the Defense Department depicting the Fort Hood shootings as workplace violence. She criticized the Obama administration for failing to identify the threat as radical Islam.

Thirteen people were killed and dozens more wounded at Fort Hood in 2009, and the number of alleged plots targeting the military has grown significantly since then. Lawmakers said there have been 33 plots against the U.S. military since Sept. 11, 2001, and 70 percent of those threats have been since mid-2009.  Major Nidal Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist, who is being held for the attacks, allegedly was inspired by radical U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in late September. The two men exchanged as many as 20 emails, according to U.S. officials, and Awlaki declared Hasan a hero.

The chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, said the military has become a “direct target of violent Islamist extremism” within the United States.

“The stark reality is that the American service member is increasingly in the terrorists’ scope and not just overseas in a traditional war setting,” Lieberman told Fox News before the start of Wednesday’s hearing.

As I noted back in February, you had to read between the lines of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s report on the Ft. Hood murders to find out that even they concluded forced political correctness in the US military was greatly enabled Major Nidal Hasan to rise within the ranks and eventually murder 13 and injure 32. all in the name of “Allah.”  At the time, Jon Ham put a finer point on the report’s conclusions:

And why did the FBI and the Army “fail” in their responsibilities to notify the relevant authorities that a Muslim nutjob was operating in their midsts? Because they would have been crucified on the cross of insensitivity and political incorrectness in an atmosphere encouraged by Congress and almost every other institution in American live over the past 30 years.

The real culprit in not identifying the danger of Hasan is the far left, which has preached multiculturalism and identity politics since the 1980s. Any criticism of one of their privileged minorities, racial or religious, has immediately been branded racism. The FBI and the Army, to their discredit, cowed to this insanity, and the loss of life by the likes of Hasan is the result.

I get it, he gets it, you get it, and the families of the victims get it, too:

Nov. 10, 2011: In what could be the first step toward a massive federal lawsuit, 83 people —victims of the 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood and family members of those killed in the attack — have filed administrative claims against the U.S. government alleging willful negligence and seeking about $750 million in damages.

The claimants include family members of eight of the 13 people killed during the rampage, the worst shooting ever on an American military installation.

The claims allege that the federal agencies bowed to “political correctness” in ignoring warning signs regarding Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist facing 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder in the shooting. Witnesses have said Hasan, who was scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan shortly after the shooting, shouted “Allahu Akbar” — an Arabic refrain meaning “God is greatest” and something of a war cry for Muslim terrorists — before opening fire inside Fort Hood’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center, killing 12 soldiers and one civilian and wounding more than 30.

The claims cite a February U.S. Senate report by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, which concluded that Hasan was a “ticking time bomb” and that federal agencies failed to take action against Hasan despite mounting evidence that the psychiatrist, born in Virginia to Palestinian parents, was embracing radical Islam.

According to officials, Hasan had been in email contact with al Qaeda leader Anwar Al-Awlaki, who was recently killed in a U.S. drone attack in Yemen. But FBI officials ultimately dismissed the communications as legitimate research and failed to inform Hasan’s superiors, the Senate report said.

“It is a sad commentary on our avowed war on terror that the government deliberately refused to take even minimal steps to neutralize the clear threat posed by Hasan,” New York attorney Neal Sher, who is representing the claimants, said in a statement. “It is a tragic irony that our government sought out and killed (Awlaki), while Hasan was promoted in the Army and put in a position to carry out his murderous terror attack.”

The question remains: When will our government get it?

Here’s an idea: let’s abolish the TSA – updated

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

While founded with the best of intentions after 9-11, the Transportation Safety Administration has become a source of outrage for Americans rather than a reassuring sense of security. In the past we’ve seen children groped, a breast-cancer survivor forced to remove her prosthetic breast, and a bladder-cancer survivor left soaked in his own urine. I’m sure you can think of others.

This latest incident had got to be a finalist in the “Let’s humiliate innocent travelers” contest: forcing a 95-year old woman to remove her adult diaper before allowing her on the plane:

[Jean] Weber said the two were traveling June 18 from northwest Florida to Michigan, so her mother could move in with relatives before eventually going to an assisted living facility.

“My mother is very ill, she has a form of leukemia,” Weber said. “She had a blood transfusion the week before, just to bolster up her strength for this travel.”

While going through security, the 95-year-old was taken by a TSA officer into a glassed-in area, where a pat-down was performed, Weber said. An agent told Weber “they felt something suspicious on (her mother’s) leg and they couldn’t determine what it was” — leading them to take her into a private, closed room.

Soon after, Weber said, a TSA agent came out and told her that her mother’s Depend undergarment was “wet and it was firm, and they couldn’t check it thoroughly.” The mother and daughter left to find a bathroom, at the TSA officer’s request, to take off the adult diaper.

Weber said she burst into tears during the ordeal, forcing her own pat-down and other measures in accordance with TSA protocol. But she said her mother, a nurse for 65 years, “was very calm” despite being bothered by the fact that she had to go through the airport without underwear.

Eventually, Weber said she asked for her mother to be whisked away to the boarding gate without her, because their plane was scheduled to leave in two minutes and Weber was still going through security.

TSA defended itself against complaints by saying its agents were following proper procedure, and it’s true that explosives have been smuggled in underwear before, as Ed Morrissey points out. But it’s not just the lack of common sense in the application of those procedures, as Ed argues, but the procedures themselves.

TSA screening procedures focus on the device, the means of attack, rather than the attacker himself. The myriad ways al Qaeda has dreamed up to deliver the explosives to their targets (shampoo, shoes, ladies’ lingerie, breast and rectal implants) have lead the TSA to increasingly invasive and outrageous efforts to find the weapon. And with each new means of attack, our response is yet another regulation that annoys and humiliates.

Let’s face it: while these procedures are incredibly effective against little old ladies in wheelchairs and young children, they don’t seem to be all that good against potential terrorists on a dry run.

What would be much more sensible and less intrusive would be the dread “P-word:” profiling. By looking at patterns of behavior indicative of a potential terrorist, we would concentrate on the person, not the weapon, an approach the Israelis have shown to be very effective.

The Transportation Safety Administration is in need of serious reform if it is to be able to actually carry out its mission, which, the last time I checked, was to make air travel safe, not leave innocent people crying.

And if it can’t be reformed, then it should be abolished and replaced with something that can do the job.

UPDATE: Courtesy of International Liberty, here’s video of Senator Rand Paul, who’s rapidly becoming a favorite of mine, taking a TSA representative to task for these stupid search policies:

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Pat Condell on Islamic cultural terrorism

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

There’s a category here at Public Secrets called “cultural jihad,” referring to the efforts of Islamic supremacists to condition Westerners to accept sharia law through grievance mongering and the exploitation of our generally tolerant customs and multicultural guilt. Robert Spencer has called this the “Stealth Jihad,” while former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy examines it at length in his book “The Grand Jihad.”

In Europe, the process is farther along, now involving intimidation, violence, and even enclaves run by Islamic supremacists in which the police refuse to enforce the law. Hence the reason why, in the video below, British comic Pat Condell calls what’s happening in Europe “cultural terrorism.”

Pat really shouldn’t be so shy about his feelings.

NOTE: Keep in mind that when Condell refers to Islamic extremists as “the far Right,” he’s doing so in a European context, where “far Right” means “fascist.” In the US, on the other hand, I believe we’re coming to a more correct understanding — that “Right” means “limited government,” while Fascism is part of the statist, totalitarian Left. See Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” for an excellent discussion.

via The Jawa Report

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Suggestions for non-“offensive” names for future Navy SEAL operations

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

The code words “Geronimo – EKIA” were music to the ears of President Obama and members of his national security team who sat in the Situation Room with him on May 1 as Navy SEAL Team Six confirmed the termination of Public Enemy Number One Osama bin Laden. While most Americans are still celebrating what happened Sunday, some haven’t felt like they could fully bask in the news of OBL’s demise because the use of the name “Geronimo” to describe the operation offended them. ABC’s The Note reports on just how much this “issue” has escalated over the last couple of days as a result of the outcries from some in the Native American community:

The Senate Indian Affairs committee will hold a hearing Thursday on racist Native American stereotypes, a hearing that will now also address the Osama bin Laden mission and the code-name Geronimo.

While the hearing was scheduled before the mission, a committee aide today said the linking of the name Geronimo with the world’s most wanted man is “inappropriate” and can have a “devastating” impact on kids.

“The hearing was scheduled well before the Osama bin Laden operation became news, but the concerns over the linking of the name of Geronimo, one of the greatest Native American heroes, with the most hated enemies of the United States is an example of the kinds of issues we intended to address at Thursday’s hearing,” Loretta Tuell, the committee’s chief counsel, said in a statement.

“These inappropriate uses of Native American icons and cultures are prevalent throughout our society, and the impacts to Native and non-Native children are devastating,” Tuell said. “We intend to open the forum to talk about them.”

The Senate committee is chaired by Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii. Thursday’s 2:15p hearing will examine how Wild West shows, Hollywood films, and Indigenous-themed sports mascots have shaped the perception of Native Americans, according to a press release. […]

Good grief. Ok, so maybe in retrospect to avoid a potential “controversy” surrounding the use of the name Geronimo, the Powers That Be could have picked a more “neutral” name (cough) but, really, does the issue need to rise to this level? No. Most Americans across the country could care less about the name, probably don’t even remember it. All most people know is that OBL is gone forever, which is a comforting thought. Escalating it to the Congressional level draws unnecessary attention to an issue that probably could have been resolved with a single phone call, as Cato Institute Senior Fellow Dan Mitchell calmly explains:

In other words, some common-sense sensitivity is a good thing.

But is there any reason why the Chairman of the Committee, Senator Akaka of Hawaii, can’t make a quiet phone call and say, “I know you guys didn’t mean anything, but in the future please stay away from using code-names that link bad guys to American Indians.”

Perhaps because political posturing always takes precedence over common-sense approaches to resolving both real and imagined problems?

To throw a little humor in the mix, to the WaPo’s Alexandra Petri:

[…] But say what you will about the history of wildly misappropriated terms for Native Americans — Washington Redskins, anyone? — the objection boils down to the fact that a code name for Osama that referenced anything with any redeeming qualities whatever would be drawing fire from some quarter.

So in case this happens again, here are 10 totallly inoffensive code names to use instead:

10. Flo From Those Progressive Commercials.

9. Voldemort

8. IKEA, if only so that you can say, “IKEA EKIA!”

7. Windows Vista

6. That Time “Crash” Beat “Brokeback Mountain” for Best Picture

5. This Guy

4. Headbands That Make It Look Like You’re Wearing a Tiny Hat

3. TSA Patdowns

2. Metro Escalator Outage

1. Moroccan Scott Cannon

Your suggestions?