August 12th, 2006


danthered posted about a comment he made in jawnbc's blog about fear and apprehension when coming to a border checkpoint. Go read it first, then continue reading this. It reminded me of something that occurred to me months ago at the Atlanta airport, I just forgot about it as there were other, more important things going on that day.

I felt this feeling he mentions upon arriving at the world's busiest airport, the ghastly Hartsfield Atlanta, to pick up my Grandmother earlier this year. It crept upon me whilst walking into the terminal from the parking structure and viewing the sign that essentially said "If you so much as say the word terrorist here, TSA will arrest your ass and throw you and your civil rights in Guantanamo Bay before you can say 'War on Terror'". This feeling quickly became disgust that we've been spun into this out-of-control climate of fear, the majority of which is unnecessary.

Sure, we could all stand to be more cautious - but the powers that be have created this atmosphere wherein a trip by plane turns from mere travel into OMG THAT MAN IS WEARING A TURBAN HE MUST HAVE WMDS UNDERNEATH IT WERE ALL GONNA DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE!!!!!! (at the ticket counter, no less) and really it's just a guy wiping his forehead with a handkerchief because it's ridiculously fucking hot these days and he's just sweating.

As for the borders, it's the same scenario the Neocon Republicans have thrown us into - start cranking out border hysteria, it detracts the people away from the Iraq nightmare and Bush's (again-all-time-low) 33% approval rating, and doesn't address the inherent racist slant that few will talk about - the outright lie that the illegal immigrants are taking jobs from Americans. Yes, that's another fucking load of crap from the conservatives in yet another lame attempt to disguise racism. A new study confirms as much. What will the terror alert look like when our borders get crossed by the biggest impending threat to Americans, Katrina II?

Want more on this terror alert horseshit? Here you go. Another thing to take into account, and here's the asskicker:
Bush Cutting Bomb Detection Budget - feel safer yet?
While the British terror suspects were hatching their plot, the Bush administration was quietly seeking permission to divert $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new homeland explosives detection technology.

Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of steps by the Homeland Security Department that has left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.
The department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money this summer.

The administration also was slow to start testing a new liquid explosives detector that the Japanese government provided to the United States earlier this year.
More here.
It's "No Child Left Behind" all over again, make a big stink and then cut funding to make it smell better, resulting in more noxious stink!

As far as I'm concerned, the only place we need to have terror alerts is in movie theaters, adding a special Pepto Bismol pink to the color code chart to denote that Paris Hilton is going to make a cameo in the movie. Because if that motherfucker doesn't scare the everliving shit out of you, nothing will.

Not that any of this matters, because knowing that "attacks are imminent" Bush has "no plans" to cut short his vacation. Hey, you gotta have priorities, and he sure as fuck needs MORE vacation time. What a fucking horror of a man.

Want to protect marriage? Ban divorce then, stupid assholes!

Attention Terri Schiavo Republicans: You can't have your "activist judge" cake and eat it too, so FUCK OFF ya sad cunting bastards.
State board won’t put gay marriage on ballot

State elections officials voted Friday to keep a gay marriage referendum off the November ballot, but supporters of the measure want a federal court to intervene.

The State Board of Elections agreed with a hearing officer’s findings that there weren’t enough valid signatures to put on the ballot an advisory referendum asking voters if the state constitution should be amended to ban gay marriage.

“Unless they pull a rabbit out of a hat in federal court, it’s not going to be on the ballot,” said Patricia Logue, senior counsel for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.

A 1996 Illinois law already prohibits same-sex marriage, but gay-marriage opponents say they fear courts could overturn the law unless the state constitution is changed. More than 40 states have taken steps to define marriage to ban same-sex marriage either through constitutional amendments or with statutes.

Organizers of the gay marriage referendum are claiming in federal court that getting a referendum on the Illinois ballot is both burdensome and unconstitutional because of the complicated process to gather and verify petition signatures, said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the conservative Illinois Family Institute and Protect Marriage Illinois.

But LaBarbera and other gay marriage opponents were rebuffed earlier this month when a district court judge dismissed their claim so now they want a federal appellate court to intervene.

“It’s not near over,” LaBarbera said.

[DIY News post format]