Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

[tsetsefly]

Just like with proposition 19, seems the "leftist"media is not that progressive and not that concerned with civil rights...

More evidence for Radley Balko's thesis that the media is more statist than liberal (and for my contention that the unsigned newspaper editorial should go the way of the dodo bird): Los Angeles Times:

Shut up and be scanned

Baltimore Sun:

Whatever happened to the notion that we need to stick together to overcome extremists? U.S. soldiers are still dying for that cause in Iraq and Afghanistan on a regular basis. Under the circumstances, it seems a small sacrifice for the citizens back home to keep a stiff upper lip and voluntarily agree to measures that experts believe are needed

Boston Globe:

The new "enhanced" patdown by airport screeners has sparked an unfortunate backlash among some fliers and privacy advocates

Springfield Republican:

Let's consider these searches the 21st-century equivalent of a WWII rationing card.
Polls show that most Americans accept the scanners. The public and Congress can also insist that the TSA improve its technology and procedures.
But it's never easy to balance liberty and security, and 9/11 showed the need for vigilance. As the British would say, let's not get our knickers in a twist - even if the twist shows up on the scanners.

Santa Fe New Mexican:

Much of the outrage springs from ignorance: Protesters somehow think that the attendants around the machines are peeping Toms, staring salaciously at you, then your private parts. But the images taken by the scanners only show up in a separate room, there to be viewed by an inspector who has no idea who he or she is actually looking at.
B-b-but even if it isn't the indecency of it all, it's the principle of the thing, comes the bellowing from the would-be offendees. Well, yes — so, for the moment, you can stand, or bend over, on principle and suffer attendant indignities.

Sacramento Bee:

Would you rather board a flight with all passengers fully screened, or one for which they haven't?
If they're honest about it, the answer is obvious to even the most ardent civil libertarians.

Spokane Spokesman-Review:

TSA isn't at fault here, though. TSA is on our side. The underwear bomber and his allies and sympathizers, whoever they are, are the real culprits. [...]
[M]odest traveler inconvenience is a reasonable price to pay for a little added peace of mind.
Extra baggage fees? That's altogether different.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/22/ed...-to-the-little

[sunskyfan]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

"Propaganda to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level" -- Joseph Goebbels

http://reason.com/archives/2006/08/1...-be-terrorized

[KGW]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

Keep Fear Alive!!

And, it may be due to a self-fulfilling prophecy:

AN ATOL EXCLUSIVE
Pakistan opens its door to US ops
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

ISLAMABAD - The Pakistani Embassy in Washington has lifted all scrutiny mechanisms for granting visas to defense-related American officials. Under the new procedures, implemented two weeks ago, officials will be granted visas in 24 hours.

Previously, under pressure from the armed forces, all applications for visas by United States defense officials were passed on to Pakistan's Ministry of Defense, which in turn sent them to the directorate of Military Intelligence. After several months of scrutiny, visas were either granted or denied.

The new procedures were laid down on the direct intervention of the office of President Asif Ali Zardari to facilitate the Americans in their quest to directly hunt down militant networks in Pakistani cities, where Washington believes major attacks in Europe are being planned and also from where the insurgency in Afghanistan is being directed. Compared with 2009, US drones have doubled their air-to-ground attacks during 2010, to more than 100 on militant sanctuaries in Pakistan's tribal areas.

The development on visas occurred slightly before this weekend's Lisbon summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, where it emerged there was no clear end-game strategy for the mission in Afghanistan.

NATO leaders pledged to begin the process of withdrawal and handing over of authority for security to Afghan security forces from 2011, and to transfer complete control by the end of 2014, though they clarified that the date given for shifting authority to the Afghan government was not a deadline.

Between the lines, the declaration implies the continuation of the American-led war against al-Qaeda and Taliban with a new dimension from next year.

Over the past year in Afghanistan, NATO has to a large extent been fighting shadows, with the enemy hardly showing up other than to cause havoc with improvised explosive devices. The Americans now appear to want to turn the broader battlefield into a focused anti-insurgency campaign through targeted special operations. One major development in this regard is the expansion of the American embassies in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The US ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, announced recently that a US$511 million contract had been awarded to Caddell Construction to build the world's largest embassy in Kabul and that a contract worth $734 million had been awarded to B L Harbert for a new US Embassy compound in Pakistan, which would virtually be an American base in Islamabad complete with an air strip - all at a cost of more than $1 billion. (See US's $1bn Islamabad home is its castle August 4, 2009.)

"A three-pronged American strategy is visible for Pakistan that clearly concerns Pakistan's security establishment," a senior security official told Asia Times Online on the condition of anonymity.

"The Americans increasingly want to have direct intervention and control in counter-terrorism operations and want to expand their operations from the tribal regions into the cities," the official said. He added that the US also aimed to broaden its influence through local private security contractors as well as by investing in think-tanks to motivate the Pakistani intelligentsia in favor of a regional anti-insurgency campaign.

"In this new campaign, the Americans aim to reduce the role of the Pakistani security forces and they want to directly deal with the insurgents," the official said.

This would be a third phase of the counter-insurgency operations the Americans have adopted in Pakistan since Islamabad sided with the US in the "war on terror" after September 11, 2001.

During former president General Pervez Musharraf's regime (June 2001-August 2008), broader counter-insurgency operations were essentially devised and controlled by Pakistani security agencies. The US Central Intelligence Agency did not have any input, and if it did receive a tip-off on any high-profile target, coordination with the Inter-Services Intelligence was a must.

Immediately after Musharraf stepped down as army chief and then as president in August 2008, the Americans adopted a policy of direct intervention and control through drone strikes. The Zardari government was completely on board with this and the weak military establishment in the post-Musharraf era did not have much space to oppose the drone operations.

American defense contractors were deployed to enhance the level of operations, but in the meantime the military gained strength and started to put its foot down over the largely unchecked American operations in Pakistan and tighter visa procedures were put in place.

Nonetheless, the Americans were desperate to jack up the level of their counter-terrorism operations in Pakistan. Initially, they worked some backchannels with the help of the Pakistani government to by-pass the scrutiny of military intelligence of defense-related personnel.

Asia Times Online broke the story that this year 50 foreign nationals, including officials of a private American defense contracting firm, had arrived in Pakistan even though they did not have security clearance from Pakistan's intelligence agencies. (See Peace sacrificed in shrine attack July 3, 2010.)

These people had earlier been denied visas by the Pakistani embassies they first approached, including in the US, Britain and India. However, they were apparently subsequently given visas by the embassy in Abu Dhabi and the consulate in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. This was done without the prerequisite clearance from the Pakistani Ministry of Interior, the Defense Ministry and the security agencies.

"These included over a dozen US nationals who had already been denied visas by our embassy in Washington on suspicion of them having links to Blackwater [Xe Services]," a source told Asia Times Online, adding that the visas had been issued for periods of six months to two years, although usually visas are only given for 90 days.

The report was later confirmed officially by the Pakistani government; Pakistani security officials investigated the matter and new checks were put in place - and are now lifted.

However, Washington is convinced that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won unless its sphere is broadened into Pakistan. Pakistan's economic compulsions - it receives extensive US aid and support - were sufficient grounds to exploit and when America recently applied pressure on Islamabad to lift the visa procedures, Pakistan quietly removed them.

"This is a litmus test for the Pakistani military establishment, which does not want to give the Americans a free walk inside Pakistan." a source close to Pakistan's military quarters told Asia Times Online. "At the same time, Pakistan does not want to lose its allies in Afghanistan, which are obviously the Islamist groups. However, the battle has reached a level where the Americans can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to Pakistan's soft handling of those Islamist groups. Also, the economic quagmire in the country is deepening, and antagonizing the Americans, who are aid masters, is no option either," the source said.

However, a clash of interests between the Pakistani military establishment and Washington now appears likely. Washington understands that during winter, fighting in Afghanistan slows down and a major chunk of insurgents goes to Pakistan's cities to see their families, especially in places like Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan. The Americans want to take action during this period, but the Pakistani military establishment cannot allow this to happen.

[If our death squads are inserted deeper into Pakistan's cities, we are likely to see increased retaliation at "home." Perhaps the TSA got the word from Washington...Ya think?]

Whether Pakistan is ready to pay the cost if it tries to impede American operations is another matter as the US is already upset with Islamabad's refusal to launch operations against the powerful Haqqani network in the North Waziristan tribal area. That is, is the loss of military and economic aid an affordable option?

Pakistan has already expanded its arms procurement base, notably with China, with which it is negotiating a submarine purchase deal, beside several air-defense system deals. These military ties are expected to deepen as an alternative to American military support.

Likewise, despite American opposition, Pakistan has signed on to an Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project to help meet its energy needs.

"Iran offered Pakistan all sorts of assistance, but Pakistan could not fully exploit that. It included offers of soft loans as well as support for building the infrastructure in Pakistan that would facilitate trade routes between Iran, Pakistan and Turkey," M B Abbasi, who was recently Pakistan's ambassador to Iran, told Asia Times Online.

"It is so sad. Iran allocated 1,100 megawatts of electricity for Pakistan and assured Pakistan that it had 5,000 MW in surplus energy that it could further allocate for Pakistan, but Pakistan did not take any interest to exploit that opportunity," Abbasi said.

Asia Times Online has learned that Pakistan refused this offer of Iranian support on American pressure, but Abbasi would not comment on this.

However, the Iranian card is still available to Pakistan if the Americans push through with operations inside Pakistan, something that now looks likely with Washington having managed to by-pass the military and use the government to facilitate a free flow of security operatives into the country.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief and author of upcoming book Inside Al-Qaeda and the Taliban 9/11 and Beyond published by Pluto Press, UK. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

Pakistan has already expanded its arms procurement base, notably with China, with which it is negotiating a submarine purchase deal, beside several air-defense system deals. These military ties are expected to deepen as an alternative to American military support.

It seems that China and Russia are ramping up their military involvement in this area (Iran, the *stans, through Pakistan, at least.)

I don't see this as a ramp up to a major war between (1) the US and (2) China and Russia.

Rather I see it as a shift in sourcing of the war against non-compliant Islams in this area, from the US to China/Russia.

[jk]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

It seems that China and Russia are ramping up their military involvement in this area (Iran, the *stans, through Pakistan, at least.)

I don't see this as a ramp up to a major war between (1) the US and (2) China and Russia.

Rather I see it as a shift in sourcing of the war against non-compliant Islams in this area, from the US to China/Russia.

tell that [this is a new shift] to the chechens and the uighers.

[don]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

The drones, the special ops, and most important, the public ass-kissing of India on Obama's visit, Pakistan's mortal enemy (and with good reason- see Bangladesh). The US strategy of choice, failed states, is alive and well. Iraq...Afghanistan...Pakistan? Slice and dice, just like the Brits did but with a smoother PR, at least outside the countries being cut up. Get the good stuff and the hell with the rest. It's not new. The real prize is Russia (Chechen-fueled and financed dissent) and China. Failed states is an effective strategy of empire on the cheap. We'll most likely be watching it play out over the next few decades....

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

tell that [this is a new shift] to the chechens and the uighers.

I'm unsure of your meaning here, mostly due to my own ignorance in these matters.

My first guess is that you are noticing that this shift is not so new. From what I can tell from a quick glance, the Uyghurs are already being ground under the Chinese heel, and the Chechans under the Russian heel.

[D-Mack]

Re: Editorial Boards to the Little People Complaining About the TSA: Bend Over and Take it Like a Man!

the US is nice to them

Top ally of Chechen separatist leader wins asylum in US

MOSCOW: Ilias Akhmadov, ‘foreign minister’ in the self-styled government of Chechen separatist leader Aslan Maskhadov, has been granted political asylum in the United States, he told AFP Friday. “I learnt (on Monday) that they had granted it to me,” Akhmadov said by telephone from the United States. Russia, which accuses Akhmadov of terrorism and of links to an armed incursion in the Russian republic of Dagestan in 1999, has been seeking his extradition since he arrived in the United States in 2002. “I am happy to have succeeded in convincing the American authorities that the accusations were unfounded,” Akhmadov said. reuters
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...-8-2004_pg10_5

SThe Pentagon determined last year that the Uighurs held at Guantánamo were not "enemy combatants", and since then they have been in legal limbo as Barack Obama sought countries willing to take them as part of his plan to close the detention facility by next January.
The Uighurs are from Xinjiang, a western region of China that borders Afghanistan, Pakistan and central Asia. The Turkic-speaking Muslims say they have long been repressed by the Chinese government and fear they would be arrested, tortured or executed if sent back to China.
China has said insurgents are leading an Islamist separatist movement in Xinjiang and wants them returned.
US-based lawyers for three of the released men praised Palau for giving them their freedom.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...antanamo-palau