TSA: More than 8000 VIPR operations in the last 12 months

sba55

sba55

En-Route
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
2,552
Location
Marin County, CA
Display Name
Display name:
sba55
"TSA conducted more than 8,000 VIPR operations in the past 12 months, including more than 3,700 operations in mass-transit and passenger-railroad venues,” boasted TSA Administrator John S. Pistole in June testimony before the Senate. His 2012 budget calls for expanding VIPR by 50 percent."

So much for taking the train or the bus. I'm amazed people can't see where this is going.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/26/tsas-power-grope/
 
sba55 said:
So much for taking the train or the bus. I'm amazed people can't see where this is going.
Click to expand...
Me too. I am telling you they will also stop private vehicles too. Did you also read today that Google has been getting requests from law enforcement to take down YouTube videos of law enforcement run amok?
 
Not only is this getting ridiculous. It ALREADY ridiculous, and needs to stop NOW. :mad:
 
Anthony said:
Not only is this getting ridiculous. It ALREADY ridiculous, and needs to stop NOW. :mad:
Click to expand...
I agree. But look at the OWS folks and how law enforcement is treating them with a whole group of people cheering on the trampling of rights. Do you really expect anything will change?

One may not agree with OWS and that is fine. But I would at least hope that we as Americans could all agree that the government shutting down and arresting those that are petitioning for a redress of grievances be allowed to do so without threat of violent police actions.
 
I spoke with our local TSA chief along with our transit police. They see no end to thier reach and all they did was complain how they have no authroity at the GA airports.

Given enough time, the TSA will be the largest remover of freedom next to the DEA.
 
I mentioned this several years ago on this board. I also mentioned civil unrest in our future.

Government has lost sight of who they actually work for, and through our own apathy it will continue. Civil unrest will be put down by force of arms. We will reach the point where the word freedom will mean we follow orders. Our Bill of Rights will be a museum piece that does not fit in a modern, controlled society.

People in their thirties now, will talk of the days of freedom and be regarded as old fools who have lost touch with reality by a brainwashed younger generation.

Implanted micro chips with GPS locater capabilities will be in every citizens body.

What we are witnessing now, is just the beginning.

John
 
Last edited:
John Baker said:
I mentioned this several years ago on this board. I also mentioned civil unrest in our future.

Government has lost site of who they actually work for, and through our own apathy it will continue. Civil unrest will be put down by force of arms. We will reach the point where the word freedom will mean we follow orders. Our Bill of Rights will be a museum piece that does not fit in a modern, controlled society.

People in their thirties now, will talk of the days of freedom and be regarded as old fools who have lost touch with reality by a brainwashed younger generation.

Implanted micro chips with GPS locater capabilities will be in every citizens body.

What we are witnessing now, is just the beginning.

John
Click to expand...
Very true, John.

About those GPS microchips - we pretty much have that now, except that those microchips are in people's cell phones. It's really the same thing since people are with their phone most of the time and often warrants aren't required for law enforcement to locate a phone.

Time to pack up and go somewhere else. There are still countries that haven't fallen as low.
 
denverpilot said:
The only way to stop government is to de-fund it. Follow the money.
Click to expand...

Lets see now. Government has the guns, and government wants their taxes. I think government will probably get what they want. They can also simply print more money, or borrow it from our good Communist friends over in China. You know, that country that is right now building a blue water navy to help us police the high seas.

Our government has grown way to large to consider cutting off it's funding. It's like the two hundred pound canary that gets to sit wherever it wants.

John
 
Last edited:
I didn't say it was achievable. I just said it was the only way.

Probably not in my lifetime but some of your kids just may get to live to see another very bloody Revolution... Or your grandkids.

The question, long-term, is always and will always be... Not whether the U.S. military will someday once again open fire on its own Citizens, they will at first, but for how long and what the "acceptable" death toll amongst the "dissidents" will be.

Texas put their first "ready to weaponize" Police UAV into service this week. Gotta keep your options open for killing "perps", you know.

Historically, we're just about overdue for a war on this continent again.
 
sba55 said:
Time to pack up and go somewhere else. There are still countries that haven't fallen as low.
Click to expand...

So you'll be leaving... tomorrow?
 
Palmpilot said:
I wonder how many modes of travel have to be included before the courts recognize it as unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
Click to expand...


The TSA could conduct anal probing and the current courts would have no problem with it.
 
steingar said:
The TSA could conduct anal probing and the current courts would have no problem with it.
Click to expand...

and eventually the sheep will accept it because it's not as bad as the other technique TSA threatens us with.

But of course, airline travel is entirely voluntary.

I wonder what would happen if there was the threat of a labor strike (e.g., mechanics or baggage handlers) that could shutdown most of the airline industry.
 
Another civil war would solve nothing, it would just start the BS all over again.

Our only hope to make any serious change in the way we are governed is to use the tools they have given us, the vote. They keep us divided with their nonsensical offerings of people who can supposedly lead our nation, that is what really has to stop.

I'm convinced that every candidate for any office must be able to prove they are qualified to run that office. They can do this by taking classes, and passing tests, with their final score beside their name on the ballot. We as pilots sure the heck have to do it, yet we do not have the destiny of millions in our hands. Why don't they?

I think the worst possible solution to solving our internal problems is the use of arms. I hope it never comes to that. If there was just some way to unite us toward the single goal of regaining control of our government, it could be done a whole lot more effectively with the vote rather than the rifle.

Besides, in a civil war it's hard to get the stuff you need, like groceries, ice cream, gas, and such......Chocolate, where the heck would you find chocolate when things are exploding all around you?

John
 
Last edited:
Because we voluntarily decide to use a particular mode of travel, it should not mean we have volunteered to give up the rights and protection of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.

Who gave those in power over us, the authority to make that assumption?

John
 
Yet another thought on this subject.

We, according to the way I was taught in school, many, many, years ago, were given the right to keep and bear arms not for hunting squirrels, but to insure that we would never have a government more powerful than the people.

I don't believe it is legal to be taught that way anymore.

Anyway, we do now have a government that is considerably more powerful than the people. To imagine that we can mount an armed insurrection with the squirrel rifles they have allowed us to keep, but not bear without a permit, is just plain stupid, and should not be considered as a viable course of action.

I really hate the thought of a civil war. I hope it never comes to that.

John
 
John Baker said:
I'm convinced that every candidate for any office must be able to prove they are qualified to run that office. They can do this by taking classes, and passing tests, with their final score beside their name on the ballot. We as pilots sure the heck have to do it, yet we do not have the destiny of millions in our hands. Why don't they?
Click to expand...
What a great idea! Just a basic literacy test will rule out quite a few of the "candidates", and then maybe some basic political science questions.

But a related problem - candidates who are smart / qualified on paper don't necessarily make good politicians. In fact, they often don't. I'm not sure what to do about that....
 
sba55 said:
What a great idea! Just a basic literacy test will rule out quite a few of the "candidates", and then maybe some basic political science questions.

But a related problem - candidates who are smart / qualified on paper don't necessarily make good politicians. In fact, they often don't. I'm not sure what to do about that....
Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate that. Having a score by their name on the ballot itself would certainly help most voters decide who can do the job properly. It might also get rid of the three ring circus our electoral process has become, clowns and all.

We need our nation to be managed by clear headed thinking people, not a bunch of buffoons who's only goal is getting reelected and enjoying the many perks of their office. It reflects poorly on us as a nation and as a people, but worst of all, it is putting Democracy itself into question.

People world wide are constantly judging our country, I don't think we are getting the high scores we would like.

John
 
sba55 said:
What a great idea! Just a basic literacy test will rule out quite a few of the "candidates", and then maybe some basic political science questions.

But a related problem - candidates who are smart / qualified on paper don't necessarily make good politicians. In fact, they often don't. I'm not sure what to do about that....
Click to expand...

At risk of getting the thread moved <g>. Maybe they should show how they got into an elite Ivy League school and show grades reflective of that along with law school grades. They have been repeatedly requested.

Best,

Dave
 
John Baker said:
Yet another thought on this subject.

We, according to the way I was taught in school, many, many, years ago, were given the right to keep and bear arms not for hunting squirrels, but to insure that we would never have a government more powerful than the people.

I don't believe it is legal to be taught that way anymore.

Anyway, we do now have a government that is considerably more powerful than the people. To imagine that we can mount an armed insurrection with the squirrel rifles they have allowed us to keep, but not bear without a permit, is just plain stupid, and should not be considered as a viable course of action.

I really hate the thought of a civil war. I hope it never comes to that.

John
Click to expand...

I'm not on the armed insurrection path John, but think you vastly under rate many including those with prior service and many in current service that see the light. The arms those folks now have would just be a vehicle to obtain others (by force if necessary). When I carried a pistol as a pilot, I looked at it as a vehicle to assist in the procurement of an automatic rifle if needed <g>. Not always possible, but a good tool.

If you look at successful armed insurrections, there usually was a point where the military would not fight (or continue to resist) the civilian populace.

Best,

Dave
 
A young fellow can attend the Harvard School of Law, and graduate at the top of his class, but unless he has had pilot training, he can not legally fly an airplane.

What makes everyone think he can run a congressional office without the proper training? Even if he was piloting the mother of all jumbo jets, whatever that is, he would not be risking as many lives as those of a Congressman.

The quality of our Congressional leadership is, in most peoples opinion, at the bottom of the barrel. That has to change with something other than a Congressional public relations campaign.

Most, if not all office holders, have no concept of ethics, nor of basic morality, much less what is involved with running the office they hold. They really are like a bunch of buffoons caught up in their own egos, accomplishing little or nothing, while charging us taxpayers a small fortune for their services.

They are taking our country to the brink, and yet we, the people, are doing nothing to correct how we select these people to be in charge of our nation. We vote out one buffoon only to replace him with an even more inept buffoon.

We have no way of judging the quality of these people.

John
 
Yes. You need many years of organized crime prior to running for Congress. Thus, the popularity of Chicago politicians on the National stage. :)
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I'm not on the armed insurrection path John, but think you vastly under rate many including those with prior service and many in current service that see the light. The arms those folks now have would just be a vehicle to obtain others (by force if necessary). When I carried a pistol as a pilot, I looked at it as a vehicle to assist in the procurement of an automatic rifle if needed <g>. Not always possible, but a good tool.

If you look at successful armed insurrections, there usually was a point where the military would not fight (or continue to resist) the civilian populace.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

Dave, thank you for the class on insurgent warfare, I have a little bit more than a basic understanding of what is involved and how to go about accomplishing it. I was a Recondo in the 101st Airborne.

Here is a photo of one of one Recondo platoon taken about a year after I finished the training. I found it on the net, and recognize a few of these guys.

John
 

Attachments

  • jengland1.jpg
    jengland1.jpg
    144.8 KB · Views: 13
John Baker said:
A young fellow can attend the Harvard School of Law, and graduate at the top of his class, but unless he has had pilot training, he can not legally fly an airplane.

What makes everyone think he can run a congressional office without the proper training? Even if he was piloting the mother of all jumbo jets, whatever that is, he would not be risking as many lives as those of a Congressman.

The quality of our Congressional leadership is, in most peoples opinion, at the bottom of the barrel. That has to change with something other than a Congressional public relations campaign.

Most, if not all office holders, have no concept of ethics, nor of basic morality, much less what is involved with running the office they hold. They really are like a bunch of buffoons caught up in their own egos, accomplishing little or nothing, while charging us taxpayers a small fortune for their services.

They are taking our country to the brink, and yet we, the people, are doing nothing to correct how we select these people to be in charge of our nation. We vote out one buffoon only to replace him with an even more inept buffoon.

We have no way of judging the quality of these people.

John
Click to expand...
Maybe make them start at the bottom- a young person has to be elected dogcatcher of Podunk and do well in that position before moving up to, say, city council. S/he would run against the person elected to repair streets, or a similar position. From city council, go to state legislature thence to US congress, followed by senate. Then consider him or her for president.
 
denverpilot said:
The only way to stop government is to de-fund it. Follow the money.
Click to expand...

It doesn't work. They just borrow more.

Besides, our goal should be CONTROLLING government, and getting it to do what's needed with the least cost to our freedoms and our pocketbooks. STOPPING government would be anarchy. Look at Somalia for example.
 
John Baker said:
Yet another thought on this subject.

We, according to the way I was taught in school, many, many, years ago, were given the right to keep and bear arms not for hunting squirrels, but to insure that we would never have a government more powerful than the people.

I don't believe it is legal to be taught that way anymore.
Click to expand...

They've outlawed teaching history? :confused:
 
Dave Siciliano said:
At risk of getting the thread moved <g>. Maybe they should show how they got into an elite Ivy League school and show grades reflective of that along with law school grades. They have been repeatedly requested.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

What difference would that make? If a politician gets good grades, the opposition will say he's an elitist. If a politician gets poor grades, the opposition will say he's stupid.
 
denverpilot said:
Yes. You need many years of organized crime prior to running for Congress. Thus, the popularity of Chicago politicians on the National stage. :)
Click to expand...

We're lucky that our current president was not part of the Chicago in crowd.
 
Palmpilot said:
It doesn't work. They just borrow more.

Besides, our goal should be CONTROLLING government, and getting it to do what's needed with the least cost to our freedoms and our pocketbooks. STOPPING government would be anarchy. Look at Somalia for example.
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about de-funding all of Government. Just DHS.

Nothing like a budget crunch to decide your real priorities.

As mentioned before, it's not going to happen so...

Hopefully I'll be dead and gone before the shootings in the streets start. They will. History repeats.
 
The larger the government, the smaller the citizen.
 
Palmpilot said:
Besides, our goal should be CONTROLLING government, and getting it to do what's needed with the least cost to our freedoms and our pocketbooks. STOPPING government would be anarchy. Look at Somalia for example.
Click to expand...

Somalia is not the case example.
Too many equate the FEDERAL government with government generally.

The states and local governments are fully competent to do 75% of what the federal government does. Cutting the federal government by 50% would not result in chaos in the street.
Law and order are functions of the local governments, and it will not change.
 
denverpilot said:
Wasn't talking about de-funding all of Government. Just DHS.

Nothing like a budget crunch to decide your real priorities.
Click to expand...

Now that's a proposal I could definitely get behind!

I also think Congress should amend the law to prevent the TSA from gutting the fourth amendment. If they keep extending searches without the normal legal protections to more and more forms of transportation, "implied consent" will be nothing more than a fiction.

As mentioned before, it's not going to happen so...

Hopefully I'll be dead and gone before the shootings in the streets start. They will. History repeats.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, my crystal ball has been INOP for a long time.
 
PilotAlan said:
Somalia is not the case example.
Too many equate the FEDERAL government with government generally.
It turns out he wasn't even talking about just the federal government, just DHS.

The states and local governments are fully competent to do 75% of what the federal government does.
Click to expand...

Maybe, I don't know. I do think that there are severe limits on the extent to which medium size and small states could be effective in preventing abuses on the part of corporations that operate nationally.

Cutting the federal government by 50% would not result in chaos in the street.
Click to expand...

Maybe if it's done gradually. Doing it suddenly would definitely bring chaos in the streets.

There's no doubt that the federal government has become bloated, and judging by their track records, neither party seems capable of shrinking it even a little. This seems to be true of some state governments as well.

Law and order are functions of the local governments, and it will not change.
Click to expand...

Enforcement of federal laws is a federal responsibility. My understanding is that states are not required to arrest people for violations of federal law.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Dave Siciliano said:
At risk of getting the thread moved <g>. Maybe they should show how they got into an elite Ivy League school and show grades reflective of that along with law school grades. They have been repeatedly requested.
Click to expand...
At least that would limit the field to candidates who have some intelligence. These clowns on the national stage ruin our international reputation, and they are bad for our domestic political discourse. Some of the topics under serious discussion during presidential debates are unbelievable. If you're lucky enough to think that debating basic scientific principles is laughable, then imagine what people abroad think.

Of course, the really scary thing is that most candidates privately aren't actually this stupid. They're simply catering to their constituency. Unless the constituency gets a clue, nothing will change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top