Egypt: Muslim Brotherhood Now Opposes Protests as Zionist Plot

How are views change when we get power! The Muslim Brotherhood which was held out of the circle of power under Mubarak and was one of the groups instrumental in his removal, now insists that protests are being done by outsiders. Meaning Israel.

One could, innocently, assume that once those who ousted Mubarak would be interested in presenting a pro-democracy face to the world for without global support, they could not have won their day. However, it appears they are going down the same road, not to establish a democratic society but rather to continue the dictatorship model with which they are comfortable.

The concern of the United States should be, will this become the model for all of the nations which experienced the "Arab Spring?"  Will we see other dictators arise in Yemen, Tunisia, Bahrain? Will we see Syria become more anti-American/Israeli, if that is possible?  And will Libya defeat NATO? If any or all of these events occur, the influence of America will fall significantly.

Egypt is a bellwether for this region. Its previous moderate attitude to Israel and the United States set the tone for the area.  If now the wind starts blowing from a different direction, things can only be worse for America.

What do you think?  Here is the article:

Egypt: Muslim Brotherhood, Sensing Power, Now Opposes Protests as Zionist Plot
From the Rubin Report  by Barry Rubin, July 20, 2011

Here’s how revolutions—at least ultimately undemocratic ones—work. During the initial phase, when protests are against the old regime, they are cheered as symbols of freedom. Once the old regime has been overthrown, however, protests against government policies immediately become actions by counterrevolutionary subversives that should be suppressed.
The scene switches to…the great Egyptian democratic revolution.
The official Muslim Brotherhood website, Ikhwan Online, has now accused former Mubarak government saboteurs and “their Zionist allies” of trying to destabilize Egypt by infiltrating ongoing protests in Tahrir Square. That opens the door, of course, to a future Egyptian government banning demonstrations on the grounds that they are being fomented by counterrevolutionary reactionary Zionist American imperialist running dogs.
When the Brotherhood gets into details, the absurdity of their charges is clear. But remember that in a place like Egypt, people believe this kind of thing. And in a place like the contemporary West, the mass media don’t report this kind of thing and don’t explain to their readers the dominance of this kind of “irrational” world view.
According to the Brotherhood, three knife-carrying infiltrators were caught trying to stir trouble. How did one know they were Israeli agents? I’m not making this up: they had Star of David tattoos! Even the Egyptian newspaper reporting this (a sign of progress?) pointed out that “tattoos are forbidden under Jewish law.” A reporter was also supposedly captured carrying bombs and tear gas marked with the Star of David trying to incite attacks on the Ministry of Interior. Presumably all Israeli secret agents carry bombs and tear gas so marked so they don’t get them mixed up with other bombs and tear gas.
But again remember that hundreds of thousands of people in the Arabic-speaking world believe stuff like this.
According to the Muslim Brotherhood’s military expert:
“The Western countries, including the United States and Israel, want to derail the revolution because Arab revolutions limit Western influence in the region, thwart attempts to control the Middle East and deplete its resources.”
But wait! Isn’t the Obama Administration 100 percent in favor of the Egyptian revolution, in fact not having made a single criticism of it?
Yes, and President Jimmy Carter kept praising the Iranian revolution of 1979, too, and yet within months the American embassy was stormed, seized, and everyone there was taken hostage.
And up until a few days ago President Barack Obama and his colleagues kept praising Syria yet after a couple of minor criticisms the American embassy was stormed and trashed.
Is it true, as the famous line in the film “Cool Hand Luke” put it, that what we have here is a failure to communicate?
Let’s summarize:
–The Muslim Brotherhood and many Egyptians (especially Islamists, the radical left and radical nationalists) are ideologically fixated on the idea that America and the West (not to mention Israel) are diabolical and fanatical enemies that can never be trusted and will never change.
–These forces also know that hatred of the West, America, and Israel are their most effective tools in mobilizing popular support and delegitimizing enemies. They will never give up such useful tools.
–They also know that no matter how much America and the West support the revolution now, they will not support their efforts to radicalize and Islamize Egypt. Once these policies kick in, there will be a conflict because they want a conflict.
–By the same token, America and the West will always prefer moderate politicians to triumph. In other words, even if they don’t know it yet, the U.S. and European governments are indeed “enemies” of the radicals. Thus, the hostages were seized in Tehran in 1979 largely as a result of a high-ranking U.S. official trying to show support by meeting with the Iranian foreign minister. The Carter Administration saw this action as being friendly; the radicals perceived it as an attempt to split and moderate their regime. The Obama Administration doesn’t understand this lesson.
These are some of the reasons why Islamists generally—and Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and the Muslim Brotherhoods specifically—will always be anti-Western and anti-American no matter what the Obama Administration does or says.
That’s a lesson Americans have been given since the American revolutionary Tom Paine went to France to support what he saw as a democratic movement there and almost ended up being guillotined. This time it would be preferable if the United States and the West could keep their heads.
PS: When even Slate notices the growing power of Islamism in Egypt it shows how far things have moved since January. But the article follows the new MSM line: the Salafists are a threat while the Muslim Brotherhood is centrist. That’s like saying in the 1930s that the (Stalinist) Communist Party is now moderate but watch out for those Trotskyists! LOL

Two Staters Are Not Supported By Palestinians

It is amazing that those who believe in a two state solution think that once there are separate countries, all will be rosy and life will be good in the Middle East. Do they not understand what is really occurring in this region or are they just wishful, unthinking, uninformed pawns. The latter descriptor is my impression.

Whether it is President Obama or Hillary Clinton or my neighbor down the street, the impression one gets from these "two staters" is that somehow the magic of getting their own country will terminate the terrorists from fomenting terror. This could not be further from the truth or shall we say reality.

Those who hate Israel and by extension the United States will never rest until they control the entire region.  They feel it is their right, their time to control the world and no country or  agreement will stand in their way. If you want them to sign, they will but with the full intention of ignoring anything that does not promote their goal.


We, in the West, view a document as our word, our bond. We sign and  the presumption is that all parties who agreed to it will follow through. In the Middle East that is not the way it is.  You give your word as long as it is in your best interests, however, when that changes, you are allowed to change. It is like standing on shifting sands.

On top of that mindset, you add the indoctrination the peoples of the Middle East have had since 1947 against the State of Israel, one should not be surprised to find that the vast majority (see following article) are not in favor of the two state solution.  How in  bloody hell is a peace to be established when one party is sworn to destroy the other? To sign a peace with this background is to sign your death certificate.

Just like Afghanistan has be the deathbed of many great countries, the Middle East is also.  For the United States to support anyone but the only democracy in the region would say the our enemies that it is not good to be America's friend. We might not agree with all that Israel does (do we agree with all the United States does?) but their citizens are free, can vote in fair elections, and are prosperous (even Arabs.)  Why would we support regimes where their citizens are not free, cannot vote and are poor?  Makes no sense to me.

The following article published a week ago speaks to the poll on the two state solution. It is interesting reading.





6 in 10 Palestinians reject 2-state solution, survey finds By GIL HOFFMAN
07/15/2011 04:26

73% of 1,010 Palestinians in W. Bank, Gaza agree with 'hadith' quoted in Hamas Charter about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones, trees.

Only one in three Palestinians (34 percent) accepts two states for two peoples as the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to an intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip completed this week by American pollster Stanley Greenberg.

The poll, which has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points, was conducted in partnership with the Beit Sahour-based Palestinian Center for Public Opinion and sponsored by the Israel Project, an international nonprofit organization that provides journalists and leaders with information about the Middle East.

The Israel Project is trying to reach out to the Arab world to promote “people-to-people peace.” The poll appears to indicate that the organization has a difficult task ahead.

Respondents were asked about US President Barack Obama’s statement that “there should be two states: Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people and Israel as the homeland for the Jewish people.”

Just 34% said they accepted that concept, while 61% rejected it.

Sixty-six percent said the Palestinians’ real goal should be to start with a two-state solution but then move to it all being one Palestinian state.

Asked about the fate of Jerusalem, 92% said it should be the capital of Palestine, 1% said the capital of Israel, 3% the capital of both, and 4% a neutral international city.

Seventy-two percent backed denying the thousands of years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage, and 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools.

When given a quote from the Hamas Charter about the need for battalions from the Arab and Islamic world to defeat the Jews, 80% agreed. Seventy-three percent agreed with a quote from the charter (and a hadith, or tradition ascribed to the prophet Muhammad) about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones and trees.

But only 45% said they believed in the charter’s statement that the only solution to the Palestinian problem was jihad.

The survey’s more positive findings included that only 22% supported firing rockets at Israeli cities and citizens and that two-thirds preferred diplomatic engagement over violent “resistance.”

Among Palestinians in general 65% preferred talks and 20% violence. In the West Bank it was 69-28%, and in Gaza, 59- 32%.

Asked whether they backed seeking a Palestinian state unilaterally in the UN, 64% said yes. The number was 57% in the West Bank and 79% in Gaza. Thirty-seven percent said the UN action would bring a Palestinian state closer, 16% said it would set back the establishment of a state, and 44% said it would make no difference.



Israel Project president Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi said she was encouraged that the Arab Spring would bring more accuracy to Arab media and by the 59% of Palestinians who are on Facebook. The Israel Project has 80,723 friends for its Arabic site, which has had 9.5 million page views in two months.

“Some of the numbers in the poll are discouraging, but we are trying to change them,” she said at a Jerusalem press conference in which Greenberg presented the findings.

Greenberg said the survey proved that there was a big need for public education and leadership on the Palestinian side.




Greenberg and Laszlo Mizrahi have presented the findings to President Shimon Peres, opposition leader Tzipi Livni, Vice Premier Moshe Ya’alon and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s senior adviser, Ron Dermer.

Next week, they have meetings scheduled in the White House and the Pentagon.

Israeli leaders told Greenberg and Laszlo Mizrahi they were encouraged by Palestinian support for talks.

Is America Lost?

Are we losing what has been so great about America?  Are we no longer the hope of the world, the bright light on the hill as Ronald Reagan once so eloquently said?  There are many of us who are very concerned that the wonderful things that brought our forefathers (and to be politically correct, fore mothers) to this country were the freedoms that made this country different from all others in the world.

In Europe where my fore bearers came, my family could not own land. They could own a home but no acreage which made making a living hard since they were in the livestock business. So when they came to this country and could own ranches of thousands of acres, it was wonderful and they prospered.  Today, new immigrants would have a very hard time starting in the agricultural business due to the high entrance cost and the lack of financing due to the current state of banking.

Additionally, our freedoms are quickly being eroded.  Our freedom of speech is limited to what is politically correct.  Violate those strictures and see how long your freedom to say what you want lasts. The right to own guns is under attack daily by those who know better like Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama. 

Recently it was disclosed that in certain states, the police can enter your home without your knowledge over an eighteen month period, without a search warrant, to gather evidence.  So there goes our 4th amendment right.

Try drinking and driving and getting caught. Your fifth amendment right to not incriminate your self is gone, if you do not submit to the breathalyzer.  You are considered guilty and there is no way to avoid it.

And of course there is ObamaCare which requires you to purchase a product (health insurance) and if you do not, you are fined.  There is no way that our government should be able to do this. If this requirement stands, how long will it be before they will require you to buy a car from GM or Chrysler, to get your mortgage from Chase or Bank of America, or whatever other product they deem is in your (really the government's) best interests.

The loss of these rights has not occurred overnight rather they are like the Damocles Sword over the head of every citizen in the United States. Slowly but surely we lose more each and every day. It is not noticeable on a daily basis, but when looking back, it becomes frighteningly clear.

We must stop this eroding of our freedoms for if not, the United States will become another great civilization like Greece and Rome that ends on the junk heap of history.

The following article talks to more of the loss that the United States is experiencing.  What is your opinion? What will you do to change things? I am listening.

Segel: Thoughts on the Degradation of America

By Thomas D. Segel July 18, 2011 1:28 pm

          

Text Size: A A A

I know nothing about Ken Huber from Tawas City, Michigan. I do know a while back he wrote a letter to the editor of his local newspaper. That letter found its way to Japan. A friend living in that country scanned the copy and emailed it to me in Texas. Since I agree with everything Ken wrote, I will take the liberty of borrowing from his observations and pass them on to those who are of a similar mind.

Ken Huber can no longer see the America of his youth reflected in anything that is presented to the public. From his and many American’s observations a dark change has overtaken the country. “The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave” remain only as the words to a cherished old song. Today, the double standards of this country shine out like a condemning light for all to see.

In the America of today, the President of the United States, his entire administration and every member of Congress can repeatedly lie to the people…and even when confronted with those lies our elected and appointed leaders can pass off the charges with little to no concern and justify their actions by claiming they “misspoke”. Let any citizen, from a sports celebrity to the average man on the street “misspeak” to Congress and he or she face perjury charges.

We have become a country where millions of dollars are spent to rehabilitate criminals, but there is no money available to ease the pain those criminals inflict upon their victims.

We cannot place troops on our border to protect citizens from the drug gangs and guard our country from an illegal invasion by foreign nationals. At the same time we have placed thousands of American military personnel on the border between the two Koreas to stop any invasion from the north.

The redistribution of wealth is alive and well in America. Our government works around the clock to take money from those who labor to support themselves and their families. It passes that same money on to those who neither labor nor contribute monetarily to the well being of the nation.

Class warfare abounds. Anyone who is conservative, industrious and works diligently to build a family fortune is labeled as the “greedy rich”. At the same time billion dollar companies such as General Electric, who are friendly to the Administration, are not even required to pay taxes.

The double standards surface in a multitude of ways across the country. Some scream out that abortion is killing the unborn. At the same time they support the death penalty. They don’t burn books, but they have offending passages deleted from the texts. They teach homosexuality in public schools, but punish those who may utter the word “God”.

These same voices speak out to allow pornography on television and the Internet, but bring litigation against those who may place a Nativity scene in the public square. They believe the human embryo should be used to advance science, but they are enraged at the idea of using animals for research.

These are the same voices that cry out a person is a racist if he speaks negatively about the actions of any minority. At the same time, when those same “racist” charges are challenged they suddenly become free speech. Protests against any liberal organization or individual are immediately labeled as anti American. That same type of protest against a conservative is the individual’s right to free expression.

We have a nation that was built from nothing by strong and freedom loving patriots. Today, instead of having leaders to defend our nation, we have a body of individuals in Congress who are afraid to even reduce our debt or balance the budget.

Ken Huber is right to think the way he does. America today is no longer free…. and its leadership is a far cry from being brave.

Bolton on Obama

It always has been clear to me that Obama is out of his element in foreign affairs as he had no experience in worldly affairs nor did he have a philosophy as to how America should react to world events, except to condemn the United States at every turn. This has enamored him to our enemies and distanced us from our friends. How can a President be against the very country from which he was elected?

John Bolton has always been outspoken supporter of Israel and in the following article written by Herb Keinon in the Jerusalem Post , he takes Obama to task in his handling of the conflict in the Middle East. It is apparent that Bolton feels no love for our current White House occupant.

Here is the posting, please tell us what you think.

Bolton: Obama worst president for Israel – ever

Herb Keinon - The Jerusalem Post, July 13th, 2011

US President Barack Obama is “the most anti-Israel president in the history of the state, without any question,” John Bolton, the former US envoy to the UN and a man considering entering the presidential race against Obama, told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.
“If you think that this is just a misunderstanding of where the green crayon went in 1949, then think again,” Bolton said of Obama. Bolton’s comments came during a meeting he had with the Post’s editorial board.
Bolton, who is currently a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a Fox News commentator, said that Obama bought in to what he said was the “European line” that if you make progress between Israel and the Palestinians “sweetness and light” will break out in the region, and every other problem from Iran to terrorism will be easier to solve.
“I think that is like looking through the wrong end of the telescope,” he said.
Bolton, in the country along with former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and Nobel Peace Prize laureate David Trimble from Northern Ireland as part of a delegation of international dignitaries involved in an organization called Friends of Israel Initiative, said he was considering running for the Republican nomination, and would made a decision by Labor Day.
“The problem is that we haven’t had an adequate discussion of national security issues for two and a half years,” he said, explaining why he was thinking about entering the race.
“It is not a priority for Obama, and I think that is a big mistake for the United States.”
Bolton said he conducted extensive “due diligence” about a possible race for the Republican nomination, including talking to fundraisers, pollsters, and campaign people in different states, including Iowa, where he has visited in advance of the Iowa caucuses, the first test in the US election calendar.
Some of Bolton’s harshest criticism of Obama had to do with the administration’s Iran policy, with Bolton saying he believed the Obama administration’s “real Plan B for the Iranian nuclear weapons program is that it can be contained and deterred, much as we contained and deterred the Soviet Union in the Cold War.
“I think that is fundamentally wrong,” Bolton said, adding that the only way to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons was through military action.
“Diplomacy and sanctions are not going to work,” he said unequivocally.
“The Obama administration certainly isn’t going to use force against the Iranian program, and Israel is obviously very reluctant to do it as well,” he said.
“If Israel is not prepared to strike, then get ready for an Iran with nuclear weapons, and you can draw your own conclusions. If you think Iran’s behavior is bad now, imagine what it will be if it gets nuclear capability. I think we are all sleepwalking past this.”
Bolton said the US would have an easier time destroying Iran’s control of its nuclear fuel cycle than Israel would, but that Israel has the capability to do this, and has had it for some time.
“If I had been in charge of the Israeli government, I would have attacked in 2008 for several reasons,” he said.
“First, it was three years ago, so you are much more likely to have eliminated the key elements of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”
Secondly, he said, “in 2008 you had a president sympathetic to Israel – so you calculate the next time that is going to occur.”
Bolton had equally strong words to say about the Palestinian bid for some type of statehood recognition at the UN in September, something he said should not – as it is in Israel and elsewhere – be getting more attention and energy than the Iranian nuclear threat.
Israel’s proper response to the move, he said, is “not to pay any attention to it, and to care no more about it than the grass you tread beneath your feet.”
Without referring directly to Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s oft-quoted comment that Israel faced a “diplomatic tsunami” in September, Bolton – who served as US envoy to the UN from 2005-2006 – said “if you make the General Assembly into something more than what it is, than you are giving it authority and legitimacy it doesn’t have.”
His comments were made against the backdrop of what is almost certain to be a US veto in the Security Council, the body whose approval is necessary for a state to become a UN member. In that case, the Palestinians are likely to take their bid to the General Assembly, which has no binding authority.
Bolton acknowledged, however, that the move did have political significance, similar to the “Zionism Equals Racism” declaration of the mid-1970s.

He said that a threat by former secretary of state and chief of staff James Baker, backed up by the first president George Bush, to cut off funds to the UN if the PLO was accepted into the UN system as a full member is what kept the PLO from gaining acceptance as a state in 1989.

Our Real Enemy Identified

This is an article that has been around since the 1980's however, with the debt limit crisis, it really is appropriate to resurrect. I believe it is well worth the read. 

The problems the country now face are major, however, they all can be traced to the desire of our elected "public servants" to be re-elected. They have done everything in their power to maintain their seats by returning dollars to their districts.  Now that the problems are significant, they refuse to face the music. Will they ever or are we destined to be another Greece?

If we don't fix the problems, will there be riots in the streets? Oh, I forgot about Wisconsin, that has already occurred.  So can we expect more disturbances and civil disobedience?  My guess would be yes, especially if major cuts in services, benefits and programs occur as a result of the debt limit and budget crises.

What do you think? We are interested in your opinion?

545 vs. 300,000,000 People”

                -By Charlie Reese

The Orlando Sentinel

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House now? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees...

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

     

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

Is The Little Boy Crying Wolf Again? Is This Emergency Number 4 or 5?

Every time the government wants to get our attention, they declare an emergency. First it was the banking crisis, then car companies, then stimulus crisis, and now it is the debt limit crisis. I am getting crisis'd out.  How about you?

Remember the old story about the boy crying wolf?  Well, the government has done it once too many times for me and now I do not believe a word they say.  Can the latest crisis, the debt crisis, be that bad? We have enough money to pay the debt payments, social security, and military. What we do not have enough is to pay our Senators and Representatives and our Presidential salaries and benefits as well as all those former public servant benefits.  I think that if the government needs to address debt, they start in their own offices!

We also do not have the money to pay for those special things that were great at the time they were proposed and passed. However, times are not great now and we need to get rid of them.  In a previous post we discussed the millions spent for Chinese Prostitute training so they would not get drunk before they met their johns. What a waste!  Add to that the wasteful grants to study shrimp exercise.

What about foreign aid to hostile nations? Let's get rid of that!

We need to get back to what government is meant to do.  The Feds must protect us (military), control interstate commerce, conduct foreign affairs. However,  as an example,  we don't need an Education Department as that is a local and state issue.  We need to look at every program in the government and decide if it is necessary. If not, it should be eliminated.

Can we expect that from Congress and the President, probably not. If not, I think it is dereliction of duty and each should be brought up on charges.

That is my plan, what do you think?

Human Bombs, What Is The TSA To Do?

The latest threat facing the invincible Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are bombs being surgically implanted in humans.  What are we going to face  the next time we try to board a plane?  An x-ray or maybe a CAT Scan or MRI might work better? Will the threat materialize or is this a straw man constructed by the agency to get more dollars, personnel or equipment? I am sure that no agency would ever try get more power, right?

If we are faced with exploding bodies on planes, it would be disastrous to the air travel business due to the fact that I doubt  frequent fliers would allow themselves to be x-rayed routinely.  What might the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) say regarding the safety of the multiple exposures? How long would it take to clear someone through the x-ray process? These and many more questions come to mind.

So, if blasting travellers with rays each time they try to take a plane, what other alternatives would the TSA have?  They would tell you none as they depend on technology to find the "bad guys" regardless of age, sex or malady. Of course, they could have us all strip searched before getting on a plane or we could all travel in the nude, not really a pleasant thought considering the percentage of people in this country who are overweight. So what is a poor overworked, underpaid agency to do?

My suggestion is that they go back to the basics. First of all, do the unforgivable, profile.  It was not five year old children or 85 year old women in wheelchairs who brought down the planes on 9/11. So let's start there.  If the profile changes, so must the screening.

Additionally, screen people like they do in Israel.  When I travelled there last year, we were allowed to take any water or liquids we wanted onto the plane, did not have to remove our shoes or go through back scatter strip searches. Rather they questioned us and looked for our reactions. They were human lie detectors and up to now, their methods have worked pretty darn well. Of course, that would make the agency hire a whole new bunch of inspectors--people who can think.  Can you imagine the uproar when all the current employees were terminated?

The TSA must look at alternatives or they will always be chasing their tail. Whether it is profiling or some other process but the current system must change. It was recently reported that there have been thousands of threats averted over the past ten years. But they also missed the Christmas Day attempted bomber and the shoe bomber. Both of which would have been picked up by the human lie detectors.

One last point, this past weekend I was coming back from Santa Fe and when I looked down on the floor that I had to walk on, it was filthy.  I think it is time for someone to see what petrie dish of infections we are subjected as we walk through the screening line. I think we will find out that we should not walk barefoot and definitely burn our socks after getting home.

What is your opinion?

US: Terrorists look to implant bombs in humans

By Eileen Sullivan July 6, 2011 1:04 pm

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government has warned domestic and international airlines that some terrorists are considering surgically implanting explosives into humans to carry out attacks, The Associated Press has learned.
There is no intelligence pointing to a specific plot, but the U.S. shared its concerns last week with executives at domestic and international carriers.
People traveling to the U.S. from overseas may experience additional screening at airports because of the threat, according to the Transportation Security Administration.
"These measures are designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same activity at every international airport," TSA spokesman Nick Kimball said. "Measures may include interaction with passengers, in addition to the use of other screening methods such as pat-downs and the use of enhanced tools and technologies."
Placing explosives and explosive components inside humans to hide bombs and evade security measures is not a new idea. But there is new intelligence pointing to a fresh interest in using this tactic, a U.S. security official told the AP. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security information.
When the U.S. government receives information suggesting terror tactics that could threaten commercial aviation, the TSA alerts companies domestically and abroad. Last December, the U.S. received intelligence that al-Qaida's Yemen branch was considering hiding explosives inside insulated beverage containers to carry them on airplanes. That warning was shared with domestic and foreign airlines so that security could be on the lookout, even though there was no specific plot.
Airport security has increased markedly since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. But terrorists remain interested in attacking aviation and continue to adapt to the new security measures by trying to develop ways to circumvent them.