This is actually a brilliant idea. And it's constitutional. 😀 😀 😀

The perp would admit to carrying explosives with intent to commit a capital crime of murder.

There is a quick and public trial in the booth.

And there is swift justice with no prosecutors who love to convict and fry innocent folks.

Great idea.

Deserves a Nobel prize of some sort.

BobT

Thanks for posting the whole article which proves that the cargo plane scam was just that.

It not only comes just before the election, and ironically, if the scam were true, proves that the politicians cannot protect an aircraft from sabotage.

But, its timeliness also helps to scare people into allowing themselves to be infected with x-rays that accumulate in the body or to be sexually battered by intellectually challenged TSA “officers” who could not get employment until the government came along and “created jobs”.

Can you imagine how many pedophiles now will apply for a TSA position so they can grope all those adolescents and children? Or how many lesbians will apply to feel up women all day long and how many gay men to grope the genitals of the male passengers?

Mr. Janet Napolitano, the author of this sexual spree, has to be one of the sickest individuals in the entire present administration.

Americans who accept these measures are brain dead when it comes to air travel and security. You cannot secure an airplane.

First, there is a cleaning crew that gets on the plane before anyone else does and does whatever it wants to do with whatever they may have brought on board. They are not given naked body scans or felt up before boarding an aircraft. Anyone can hang a fake ID around their neck.

Second, the x-rayed or groped flight crew gets on, and then opens the galley doors to complete non-xrayed, non-groped strangers who are then invited to load locked metal cannisters onto the aircraft. These cannisters have traveled by closed truck to the aircraft and could have been compromised along the way.

Third, the apparent food cannisters contain food that may have been compromised by non-xrayed, non-groped kitchen employees. Pilots eat the meals from those cannisters. A little cyanide in the kool-aid would not be too difficult to arrange.

Fourth, then there are the open luggage carts which have traveled unattended around the tarmac and could easily be compromised. Then two non-exrayed, non-groped individuals start loading the luggage onto the aircraft. One climbs into the belly of the aircraft where he or she cannot be seen to unload the luggage…or anything he or she may want to unload.

Anyone who has ever flown can observe these activities with their own eyes and know that any aircraft can be compromised before even one sexually battered, xray-infected passenger steps aboard.

So when you read the reactions of interviewed passengers who say things like “Well, it's ok if it keeps us safe” it is easy to become filled with despair at the lack of active IQ points in their 15-watt brains. 🙁

Dr. Brooks's essay is simple and elegantly written so that a smart high school freshman could understand it enough to ask a searching question or two.

Americans tend to blame the politician/lawyers, to whom they show great reverence whether or not they are even competent in their profession, for lawlessness.

And the People try to correct the problems and mayhem created by their beloved politicians, First, by removing them and then, by replacing them with more of the same liars with different names.

That way the People can experience anew that sense of reverence toward idols that they cherish; something which has plagued humanity since its inception.

However, the beginning of the Declaration of Independence starts with the sovereign's “We”…”We the People…”.

This opening says quite plainly that the People accept full responsibility for what follows in that document. And they did.

Accordingly, the People need to stop whining that those they revere and put into office have betrayed them. They did no such thing.

The revered politicians lied to get into office and lied to stay in office. They are very consistent in this.

It is when a politician/lawyer's lies 'seem' to contradict each other that the People become restless and throw a tea party to replace their trust in someone whose lies will be consistent…and the People will not have to think.

(OB's problem in the public polls is a result of the wide gap between his campaign lies and his in-office lies.)

The people want lies that conform to their needs. Cutting social security cost of living raises violates this principle in the social contract of lies between the People and the politician/lawyers.

The People, and no one else, are responsible, in their individual capacities, for the demise of the common law as a guide to an orderly society.

No politician can claim success in killing off the common law in daily life, because no politician/lawyer could accomplish such a feat without the express command and consent of the People.

And the People shower that consent on devilish politicians every day and in every way they are asked to do so.

Here's an example from yesterday.

Yesterday I was talking to an educated woman, a Nurse Practitioner, on an airplane. She was fun and friendly and returning from a trip where she was helping her siblings to care for their mother who is in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease.

She was a decent very American lady and we traded stories about the nightmare air-travel had become.

And we both noticed in the newspaper that the scatter-back x-ray machines would be installed in JFK airport in New York.

I asked her the following question: “Do you have any objection to these machines being unreasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment, and that you have a right to be secure in your person from such unreasonable searches?”

She asked: “Why is it unreasonable given the terrorist threat?”

I answered: “Because REASONING plays no part in the policy. The alleged threat is almost always qualified by the politicians as being unsubstantiated, and is based on fear-mongering, not on reason. So it seems the Fourth Amendment applies to these machines.”

She said candidly and smiled: “I don't know enough about the Constitution, I guess you think I should, right?”

I smiled back and said: “I do think that but even without the Constitution, let me ask you this”:

I took this tactic: “Would you object on MEDICAL grounds to submitting to a virtual strip search using x-rays that accumulate in the skin and underlying organs? Would you submit to a medical procedure prescribed by Janet Napolitano, a non-physician, for a non-diagnosed medical purpose, and carried out by poorly educated people most of whom cannot get jobs in the private sector?”

I thought I had her boxed in. I hadn't factored in how lazy and slothful the People are…even the very nice decent ones like my traveling acquaintance.

She said wearily: “Today air travel is a nightmare. I don't care what they do as long as it makes it easier to get through the airport”.

CONSENT GRANTED to bureaucratic 'law' as the source of an orderly life. COMMON LAW turned on its head: “You can injure me with carcinogenetic x-rays and I will not assert my rights against such injury if I can feel you are making my life easier 🙄 .”

The common law is comatose, because that's the way the People want it.

Happens all the time. 😡

Looks like one of those people whose every action puts the burden of proof on themselves. Trying to beat government at its own game from within the system. While an indictment is not a conviction (as Hillary pointed out after she was hauled before the grand jury), the guy will probably go down in flames.

This is just another hoax to track the average person (the greatest threat to any government because they are the greatest number).

Banks transfer billions of units of currency between themselves all day and all night long. For example, Chase is incorporated in the Netherlands Antilles, it moves its money offshore to its holding company. That way rapacious lawyers cannot find any assets lying around to seize.

When was the last time you heard of a major bank being sued for anything. When was the last time you heard of a Rockefeller or a Rothschild or Skoros or Murdoch or Gates or Buffet getting sued. There's nothing to get…because they transfer their funds to safe havens. And the technique is simple.

So, when a wealthy person, such as Skoros, or Murdoch wants to move money out of the reach of legal eagles, the bank they are dealing with simply includes that person's money in with its own transfers of funds under a bank transfer and separates them out at the other end. No paper trail in the name of the one making the transfer. Simple.

So it is not the wealthy alleged financiers of “terrorism” that the government wants information on. They want to know where Mrs. Jones got the $1000 she transferred to a grandson spending his third year of college overseas and whether she paid taxes on it. Simple.

The war on terror is bogus, so all the intrusive measures to combat that boogeyman are bogus also.

When you enter a sterile zone at an airport, you have given your consent to the TSA for you and your property to be searched.

Accordingly, the fourth and fifth amendments arguably would not support a refusal to have you open the drive — much the same way they ask you to open your suitcase.

So, you would still have to encrypt the data.

However, I dimly remember there being a federal case, when the TSA was downloading hard drives from laptops. Viewing the contents and taking the computer to download the drive are two different things. They don't get to take your suitcase, view it at their leisure and return it months later like they were doing with laptops.

The point in the court ruling was that when the government demanded the person to utter a password to view the contents of the drive, a refusal was sustainable on the ground that uttering the password was potentially giving testimony against oneself, which is not the same thing as an agent finding admissible evidence by viewing the drive.

Before I relied on that principle, though, I'd have to go back and find the case which is encrypted somewhere on one of my drives :ph34r:

Taxpayers who signed up for tax benefits in the form of deductions or who signed up to “pay their fair share” should NOT cheat on their taxes — EVER.

Those people probably also steal paperclips, pens, pencils, paper and other things for the other company, besides the IRS, Inc., that they work for.