IF this is true, it is very, very troubling (TSA 'watch list' anyone?)

wsuffa

wsuffa

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
23,615
Location
DC Suburbs
Display Name
Display name:
Bill S.
Link

I have no way of knowing whether it's true or not, but IF true.....

I was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.
...............
This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”
...............
For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.
Click to expand...
 
Sounds about right. It is how any group will react when its authority is challenged. That is to say that the group becomes defense and labels anyone not with them as an anti-whatever.
 
wsuffa said:
Link

I have no way of knowing whether it's true or not, but IF true.....
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if the "drama queen" label will be applied to the author(s) of such a directive/instruction/hint-from-on-high.
 
Unknown blogger, claiming to have a memo, not producing the memo, providing carefully selected snippets of text isolated from context...
-harry
 
ScottM said:
Sounds about right. It is how any group will react when its authority is challenged. That is to say that the group becomes defense and labels anyone not with them as an anti-whatever.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the 60's and 70's
 
mantakos said:
Unknown blogger, claiming to have a memo, not producing the memo, providing carefully selected snippets of text isolated from context...
-harry
Click to expand...

So you are saying there is absolutely no way this is at all possible?
 
It's very unlikely a modern bueracrat would use such language, or issue such a memo, knowing it would likely become public. It's not legit. Even if it were, i really dont care if the TSA knows i hate them, despise trading liberty for security(theater), and consider access to mass transportation a right, not a privelege. That's a list i would like to be on.
 
Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean that they're not after you.

This is the sort of reaction one expects from arrogant bureaucracies, so it surely would not surprise me.
 
Haven't there already been some stories form years back that people who had airport gate run ins with the TSA were warned that they'd be put on the list to be hassled from now on?

My first thought for Adam Savage is he has to fly a lot, and he's going to get a thorough search as he's asking for every time he flies from now on.
 
NotSure said:
It's very unlikely a modern bueracrat would use such language, or issue such a memo, knowing it would likely become public. It's not legit. Even if it were, i really dont care if the TSA knows i hate them, despise trading liberty for security(theater), and consider access to mass transportation a right, not a privelege. That's a list i would like to be on.
Click to expand...

The language doesn't read correctly to me. The names of the departments and divisions seem fake.
 
TMetzinger said:
The language doesn't read correctly to me. The names of the departments and divisions seem fake.
Click to expand...

They're real, Tim.

Check page 18 of this document.

-Rich

EDIT: Actually, the fact that they choose such ominous-sounding names for their internal divisions is troubling in itself.
 
Last edited:
"...the Extremism and Radicalization branch..." is the part that bugs me - all the other names ring like typical bureaucratese to me but this one doesn't.
 
TMetzinger said:
"...the Extremism and Radicalization branch..." is the part that bugs me - all the other names ring like typical bureaucratese to me but this one doesn't.
Click to expand...

That may have been descriptive, given the grammatical structure.

-Rich
 
TMetzinger said:
"...the Extremism and Radicalization branch..." is the part that bugs me - all the other names ring like typical bureaucratese to me but this one doesn't.
Click to expand...
I read that as inappropriate, gratuitous capitalization. Change it to "... the extremism and radicalization branch ..." and it no longer appears to be the name of a group, but a description of what the previously mentioned group does.
-harry
 
mantakos said:
I read that as inappropriate, gratuitous capitalization. Change it to "... the extremism and radicalization branch ..." and it no longer appears to be the name of a group, but a description of what the previously mentioned group does.
-harry
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking. Although it does indicate at least a cursory level of familiarity with DHS bureaucratic structure.

On the other hand, I achieved said familiarity in a few second on Google... so I'll just say that although it wouldn't surprise me very much to learn that the information is accurate, given TSA's company culture, I would want more evidence before coming to that conclusion.

-Rich
 
Since we're referring to appropriate songs:
Pink Floyd had some thoughts on the issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBkTUzKAiXQ

I'm trying to download an appropriate TSA ring tone to my 'smart phone'. Navy klaxon: dive, dive, dive!


Mother, do you think they'll drop the bomb?
Mother, do you think they'll like this song?
Mother, do you think they'll try to break my balls?
Mother, should I build the wall?
Mother, should I run for President?
Mother, should I trust the government?
Mother, will they put me in the firing line?
Is it just a waste of time?

Hush now baby, baby, don't you cry
Momma's gonna make all of your nightmares come true
Momma's gonna put all of her fears into you
Momma's gonna keep you right here under her wing
She won't let you fly, but she might let you sing
Momma's will keep Baby cozy and warm
Oooo Babe
Oooo Babe
Ooo Babe, of course Momma's gonna help build the wall

Mother, do you think she's good enough
For me?
Mother, do you think she's dangerous
To me?
Mother will she tear your little boy apart?
Mother, will she break my heart?

Hush now baby, baby, don't you cry
Momma's gonna check out all your girlfriends for you
Momma won't let anyone dirty get through
Momma's gonna wait up until you get in
Momma will always find out where you've been
Momma's gonna keep Baby healthy and clean
Oooo Babe
Oooo Babe
Ooo Babe, you'll always be Baby to me

Mother, did it need to be so high?
 
Last edited:
RJM62 said:
Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking. Although it does indicate at least a cursory level of familiarity with DHS bureaucratic structure.

On the other hand, I achieved said familiarity in a few second on Google... so I'll just say that although it wouldn't surprise me very much to learn that the information is accurate, given TSA's company culture, I would want more evidence before coming to that conclusion.

-Rich
Click to expand...

Although, on the other hand, a search for the exact phrase returns more than 36,000 results, some clearly from wackos on both sides of the aisle, but some from usually credible (albeit often-biased) sources.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227314/right-winging-it-dhs/jonah-goldberg

Interesting... and troubling.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
... http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227314/right-winging-it-dhs/jonah-goldberg

Interesting... and troubling.
Click to expand...
Troubling that there's a government office with that name, or troubling that a report was issued on right-wing radicalism? The latter is an old story. The report was commissioned by the Bush Administration, and there was a comparable report on left-wing radicalism. And, clearly, both left-wing and right-wing radicalism are domestic concerns, as both have demonstrated a willingness to express their nutjobbery in violence.
-harry
 
The "troubling" part, to me, is when an agency identifies as "enemies of the state" those whose issues are solely with the agency itself, and who otherwise present no threat whatsoever to anyone at all. The agency thus places itself above its purposes, the reasons why it was formed, and the people and nation to whom it is ultimately responsible, and instead adopts the position that it exists unto itself and for itself. Whatever it asserts become law, and whoever questions those assertions becomes the enemy.

It actually reminds me of some churches, to tell you the truth.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
The "troubling" part, to me, is when an agency identifies as "enemies of the state" those whose issues are solely with the agency itself, and who otherwise present no threat whatsoever to anyone at all...
Click to expand...
So you're troubled by an allegation presented in a blog by an unknown blogger who claims to have a memo which he doesn't produce which he claims to have quotes which he presents out of context that purport to describe policies for actions that nobody reports happening?
-harry
 
Okay, look at it this way.

I happen to love the NYPD. Really. I love my city's police department. There's nothing I wouldn't do for them.

If, however, I were to walk into a precinct, walk up to the desk sergeant, and say, "I hate cops, and I think you're all fascists" the sergeant would probably say something like, "We're not too crazy about you, either. But have a nice day anyway, and there's the door."

If I were to say the same thing to a DHS agent, however, I think the consequences would be much more severe. And if I said the same thing to some preachers, they would tell me I was going to hell.

-Rich
 
Last edited:
mantakos said:
So you're troubled by an allegation presented in a blog by an unknown blogger who claims to have a memo which he doesn't produce which he claims to have quotes which he presents out of context that purport to describe policies for actions that nobody reports happening?
-harry
Click to expand...

It's only troubling in view of other examples of questionable behavior and practices within DHS / TSA. If someone alleged that the same memo came out of, let's say, the National Park Service, it would be dismissed as rubbish. But allegedly coming from TSA, there's enough of a history that I have to at least entertain the possibility that it's not.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
... But allegedly coming from TSA, there's enough of a history that I have to at least entertain the possibility that it's not...
Click to expand...
Given the history of accuracy and objectivity demonstrated by political bloggers, I have to take the position of "skepticism until evidence".
-harry
 
mantakos said:
Given the history of accuracy and objectivity demonstrated by political bloggers, I have to take the position of "skepticism until evidence".
-harry
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely. But the fact that the possibility is entertained at all is telling.

-Rich
 
I'm skeptical of the letter but I did notice that folks protesting the scanner and new procedure are being labeled as activists, extremists, and agitators in the media. Shades of the 60s. Not much mention of constitutional or health issues. Seems to be some spin behind the scenes.
 
ejensen said:
I'm skeptical of the letter but I did notice that folks protesting the scanner and new procedure are being labeled as activists, extremists, and agitators in the media...
Click to expand...
The term "activist" doesn't seem inappropriate. I'd be very surprised if you can find an instance of any mainstream media source using the word "agitators" to describe those who protest these policies, or applying the word "extremist" to somebody simply for opposition.
-harry
 
is the tsa bound by the foia; would they have to reveal such a list, or its existence if pressed?
 
TSA: How would you like it if somebody came to your work and disrupted your procedures? How would you like it if people took pictures of you at your work?
Me: I don’t work for the government. Government agencies need to be accountable to the public, and therefore suffer disruptions like this.
TSA: Not all parts of the government are accountable to the public, especially the TSA.
Me: Wow. No, ALL parts of the government are accountable to the people, especially the TSA. I’m not sure what type of country you think we live in.
Click to expand...

link to article
 
mantakos said:
The term "activist" doesn't seem inappropriate. I'd be very surprised if you can find an instance of any mainstream media source using the word "agitators" to describe those who protest these policies, or applying the word "extremist" to somebody simply for opposition.
-harry
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is but your right. I probably didn't remember the exact words I heard on the radio, I'm trying to convey the impression I was left with. It really reminded my of all the campus unrest during Vietnam being blamed on 'outside agitators' and any attempt at objective discussion dismissed out of had. Here's an example:

Some aviation security experts say the public firestorm is largely being fueled by a few privacy-obsessed individuals, many of them self-identified as libertarians, and is not emblematic of the larger feeling among Americans that such screening, although intrusive, is necessary to ward off terrorist attacks.
​
 
Are they so poorly trained that they don't know it's okay to take pictures or is it more like an authority complex?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top