Sunday, November 21, 2010

Don't opt out. Wear a burka.

Fanatical Muslims want us dead.  That is a fact.  Our government has responded to that threat by turning the TSA in to a bunch of gropers and child molesters.  In addition to feeling up little children we have stories of a beast cancer survivor who was forced to remove her prosthetic breast and a bladder cancer survivor who was treated so roughly and inhumanely that his urostomy bag leaked urine all over him.

Travellers and non-travellers alike have reacted with outrage.  Janet Napolitano on the other hand has reacted to complaints with a shrug and a "go pound sand".  This in turn has led to National Opt Out Day.  Flyers are being urged to opt out of the full body scans on the day before Thanksgiving, the busiest travel day of the year.  I have a better idea.  I got it while watching Stephen Green, Scott Ott and Stephen Kruiser discuss the TSA on Trifecta.  Listen to what Janet Napolitano doesn't say when asked if women wearing hijab will be subjected to full body scans and pat downs:

Janet Napolitano doesn't affirm that women in hijabs and burkas will be subjected to the same indignities as other travellers.  We are expected to "show our all" if we want to fly but Muslim women, because of their religious convictions, the same religious convictions sited by jihadis as justification for killing us, well, Napolitano gets a little, in the words of Scott Ott, "squishy". 

I say a test is in order.  Don't opt out-wear a burka.  Man, woman and child.  Tell TSA that your convictions won't allow full body scans or feel ups.  What are they going to do-say that you can't be Muslim because of your eye color or name?  That is "profiling" and we all know profiling is strictly verboten.

Make a statement.


Quite Rightly said...

Not so sure about this idea, Carol.

Hussein would like nothing better than to get women into burkas.

It's easier to get into burkas then out of them, I'm thinking, and it also allows Muslims to hold the "superior" to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist--and everybody else-position that they are demand as a matter of course.

There already are British women who put on burkas in the UK so they are not harassed and molested when they have to go through Muslim neighborhoods to get home--or when their homes are in neighborhoods that Muslims have taken over.

I'm not aware of any religion which requires women to be groped by strangers. Overarching our religous freedom is our 4th amendment right to freedom from search of our persons without a warrant.

Carol said...

We absolutely have a 4th Amendment right to privacy and freedom from unlawful search. It is Janet Napolitano's hesitation to guarantee equal treatment that I am objecting to here.

Napolitano's refusal to answer the question when asked if women in hijabs will be searched suggests a double standard. I am protesting the idea that my seven year old granddaughter is subject to greater scrutiny than a woman in Muslim garb. Surely no one would claim that little Olivia presents the greater threat to security but TSA treats her, and other children, to indignities that others are exempt from.

Don't you think it is interesting that with all the TSA horror stories we've heard that not one of them has involved a Muslim woman? Coincidence?

Quite Rightly said...

No coincidence, none whatever. All anyone needs are eyes to know that Muslims are being given a wide berth at airports, and just about every place else you can think of. It is infuriating. Like you, the thought of any little child being manhandled by gov't officials makes me sick. And, I will add, the reality that parents and onlookers permit such intrusion makes me sicker. Since you have a grandchild, I presume that you are old enough to remember when that could never happen in a U.S. airport because the passengers would vigorously stand together to protect the innocence of their children, the safety of their elderly and ill, etc., etc.

Napolitano won't admit the existence of the Muslim "exception," of course; she is coyly pretending that's a policy she will "consider" in the future. And we are all supposed to "forget" that a video of a Muslima getting patted down with a bunch of American men watching would start riots all over the world.

I do think that if Americans are going to stand up for the few rights we have left, we should stand up for them as Americans. Christian or Jewish or any other kind of modesty is no less sensitive to pat downs than any Muslim "modesty" (so called), but everyone else's dignity is being openly and viciously mocked by Hussein and his accomplices.

The nature of Islamic "missionary" efforts wherever they go is to make it so inconvenient to be anything but Muslim that people start "acting" Muslim for convenience sake. In Muslim countries, it costs more money to be non-Muslim, it is less safe to be non-Muslim, and non-Muslims have considerably less legal protection.

That's what's going on now: legal (4th amendment) protection for Muslims only (and their high-ranking politico "friends"). I don't think we should pretend we are Muslims to get legal protection. I think we should demand legal protection because we are Americans.