| « | Respect For The Law |
»
|
|
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Transportation (Non) Security
In one of his previous lives (the law enforcement one) your humble blogster participated in several “covert” operations. That is the main reason that he finds the saga of the underwear bomber of Christmas day especially intriguing.
As “luck” would have it and much to the chagrin of our political masters, a material witness to the events concerning flight 253 happened to be an individual trained in both logic and evidence evaluation. Unless this witness can be either discredited or intimidated into silence, the entire bureaucratic farce designated “transportation security” and erected by the government will stand revealed for the sham that in fact it is.
The witness, an attorney by the name of Kurt Haskell who was a passenger aboard flight 253 avails himself of his legal training in opening his “case” by posing seven questions :
1. Who is the Man in Orange?
2. Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?
3. Was it intended that the bomb explode?
4. Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?
5. Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?
6. Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?
7. Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media?
I hope that you, dear reader, will follow Mr. Haskell’s discussion of these seven questions at the link provided above and supply your reactions in the comments at the end of this post.
Public perception of the workings of covert government operations have been severely distorted by the entertainment media. In other words: what one views on the entertaining episodes of “24” is so far from reality as to enter the realm of the absurd. In the real world and almost universally, those charged with supervising these operations have little to no hands on experience working “under cover”. The skills required of successful operatives are not necessarily congruent with supervisory abilities. The “bosses” have been promoted/appointed/elected into their supervisory positions on the basis of a variation of the Peter Principal which rewards those skilled in sycophancy and bureaucratic political maneuvering. The “supervisors” almost invariably experience difficulty in managing the often complicated operations. These difficulties arise chiefly from an inability to resist tendencies toward micro management. Political corruption is also an occasional factor. First hand examples of this theory will doubtless supply subject matter for future posts.
In classic Platonic fashion, Mr. Haskell discusses the implications of the possible answers to his seven questions and invites us to; (using an overworked cliche) “connect the dots”. Suddenly, Ms Napolitano’s apparently nonsensical statement that “the system worked” acquires the ring of perverse if partial truth.
In any event, the concept that ultimate transportation security can be achieved if only we surrender more liberty is revealed for the nonsensical fairy tale it has always been.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
cross posted at: Fighting in the Shade™
Comments
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
