Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Flag Burning In Oakland, Ca.

Occupy Oakland Flag Burning
Occupy Oakland protestors burn an American flag found inside Oakland City Hall during an Occupy Oakland protest on the steps of City Hall, Saturday, January 28, 2012, in Oakland, Calif. (AP Photo/Beck Diefenbach)
By TERRY COLLINS and BETH DUFF-BROWN, The Associated Press
OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) -- Many in the crowd outside Oakland City Hall shouted "Burn it! Burn it!" as masked protesters readied to set fire to an American flag. That's when a woman emerged from the scrum, screaming for them to stop, that it would hurt the cause.
Moments later, the flames began, and suddenly a movement that seemingly vanished weeks ago was back in the spotlight, this time for an act of protest that has long divided the nation and now the movement itself.
The images of the flag-burning went viral in the hours after Saturday's demonstrations on Oakland's streets, with Occupy supporters denouncing the act as unpatriotic and a black mark on the movement. Others called it justified.
The flag-burning, however, raised questions about whether the act will tarnish a movement of largely peaceful protests and alienate people who agree with its message against corporate excess and economic inequality.
"I'm quite confident that the general view is that violence of this sort – whether it's symbolic or otherwise – is contrary to the spirit of the movement and should be renounced," Columbia University sociologist Todd Gitlin said.
Gitlin, who is writing a book about the movement, noted that flags have had a prominent place at the Occupy Wall Street encampments that sprang up last fall. They are typically pinned to tents or waving from wooden flagpoles.
"I was thinking how they have come to embrace the American flag as a hallmark of this movement; it's very common to see American flags honored and elevated at these encampments," he said.
Flag-burning has been a powerful symbol since the days of the anti-Vietnam War movement. Congress at the time passed a law to protect the flag in 1968, and most states followed suit.
In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court decided such laws were unconstitutional restrictions on free speech. The court's decision set off a move in Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit desecration of the flag. An attempt in 2006 failed by only one vote in the Senate.
In Oakland, social activism and civic unrest have long marked the rough-edged city across the bay from San Francisco. Beset by poverty, crime and a decades-long tense relationship between the police and residents, its streets have seen many clashes, including anti-draft protests in the 1960s that spilled into town from neighboring Berkeley.
At Occupy Oakland, flag-burning is nothing new. A well-known Bay Area activist burned three during protests that temporarily shut down the Port of Oakland in November.
Troy Johnson, an Occupy Oakland member, said he arrived just in time Saturday to watch his friend, whom he would not name in order to protect his identity, emerge from City Hall with an American flag in tow.
"He asked the crowd, `What do you want us to do with the flag?'" Johnson recalled. "They said, `Burn it! Burn it! Burn it!'"
As many egged on the bandanna-masked men, lighters were passed around. A photographer on assignment for The Associated Press said a woman rose from among the crowd to urge against the flag-burning. She then threw the flag to the ground and tried to put out the fire, shouting at them that it would only hurt their cause.
The fire-starter is not an anarchist, but a typical member of Occupy Oakland who feels the system has failed them, said Johnson, who pulled out his cellphone to show his recording of the flag-burning.
"I would describe him as someone who loves his country, but also disappointed in the system that's running this country," said Johnson, who goes by the nickname "Uncle Boom" and was a sergeant in the U.S. Army.
Johnson said he wouldn't stop the flag-burning because the country is based on freedom of speech and expression.
"To the veterans who fought for this country, I wholeheartedly apologize," he said. "Because when they took the oath to join the military, they fought for the flag. But they also fought for the right to express ourselves."
Another Occupy member, Sean Palmer, who served in the Marines, said he opposed flag-burning. "I think they should've hung it upside down, because that's the international call for distress and that's what we are, in distress," Palmer said.
Saturday's protest culminated in rock- and bottle-throwing and volleys of tear gas from the police, as well as the City Hall break-in that left glass cases smashed, graffiti spray-painted on the walls and, finally, the flag-burning.
Police said more than 400 people were arrested; at least three officers and one protester were injured.
Police said Monday that they were still trying to determine how many of those arrested were from Oakland. In the past, the majority of those arrested in Occupy sweeps were not Oakland residents and this has rankled city officials. Mayor Jean Quan has called on the loosely organized movement to "stop using Oakland as its playground."
Officials said vandalism and activities related to Occupy Oakland have cost the financially strapped city $5 million since October.
Oakland Councilwoman Libby Schaaf said she was disgusted not to see the American and California flags atop the grand staircase inside City Hall on Monday. The destruction to her workplace couldn't have come at a worse time as the city is grappling with closing a $28 million budget deficit.
"To do this to us in a week were we have to lay off so many city workers is so unconscionable," Schaaf said.
Protester Julion Lewis-Tatman said he led the crowd in the plaza outside City Hall, but did not take part in the flag-burning.
"I love this country to death, but burning the flag means nothing to me," he said. "We're burning down the old system and we're starting a new country."
Beth Duff-Brown reported from San Francisco. Deepti Hajela contributed to this story from New York.
At last some people understand the truth.  The old system MUST be torn down, and a new system built in its place.  People are mad as hell, and are not going to take it anymore.
However, I fear that if they succeeded, they would simply replace the current system with a new version of the old.  
Comrades, if you went out and bought a new car model that had a design flaw that could not be corrected, the smart thing to do is demand your money back, and buy a different model than what you just returned, rather than replace a flawed vehicle with an identically flawed vehicle.  But I fear that that is what most people would do.  They would replace our current Judeo-Capitalist system with a revamped Capitalist system.  It may be free from Judeo-Capitalist influence, but how long before those greedy pigs gained control again, and we're right back where we started again.
We need a system free of Jewish influence, and that system is National Socialism.  We must continue to get the word out if people are to understand that Capitalism has an inherent flaw in it, and must be replaced - not by a new Capitalist system, but by a totally different one.
We must keep handing out our literature.  I realize that the weather can be a problem in some parts of the country, unlike here in California (I wore a t-shirt to work today - eat your hearts out).  But if you just left a few cards in the stores you go to, it would add up over a month.
When the good weather returns, we must get into full gear and hand out those cards/stickers/fliers.  That includes me as well.  I went out Friday night and dropped off about 100 fliers in nearby neighbourhoods and put up a dozen stickers as well.  I always carry a few cards in my pocket and leave one or two in every store I enter.
Every piece counts.  The more the better.  So let's keep that literature flowing folks!
Dan  88!

Monday, January 30, 2012

Hitler Painting Sold At Slovak Auction

Published: 29 January, 2012, 21:29
Edited: 30 January, 2012, 01:55
A man looks on a computer screen at an image of a painting by Adolf Hitler, done before he became Nazi Germany's dictator, titled "Maritime Nocturno", on January 26, 2012 (AFP Photo / Samuel Kubani)
A man looks on a computer screen at an image of a painting by Adolf Hitler, done before he became Nazi Germany's dictator, titled "Maritime Nocturno", on January 26, 2012 (AFP Photo / Samuel Kubani)
A Slovak online auction has just proved that art by the world’s most vicious dictator is still considered valuable by some people. On Sunday Hitler’s painting ‘Maritime Nocturno’ fetched €32,000 at Darte auction house.
The picture entitled ‘Maritime Nocturno’ was sold to an anonymous buyer.
The 1913 work was estimated at €25,000 with a starting price of €10,000. It was put on sale by the family of a Slovak artist who had apparently met Hitler in Vienna, where the future Fuhrer was pursuing his ambition to become a professional artist. The 60x48cm picture depicts a glittering sea under a full moon.
“I look at him as an artist. In 1913, when Hitler painted this picture, he didn’t know what would become of him in the decades to come,” Darte owner Jaroslav Krajnak told Agence France Presse.
In 2011 the auction house sold another Hitler painting from the same collection for €10,200.
Hitler was interested in art from early childhood. As a young man he even painted for a living. In the late 1900s he attempted to enter the Vienna Fine Arts Academy but failed.
‘Maritime Nocturno’ by Adolf Hitler
‘Maritime Nocturno’ by Adolf Hitler


I don't just say this because I'm in the American Nazi Party, but I like this painting.  I think it shows talent.  I'm no artists, but as they say, you don't have to be a chicken to judge an egg.  I likes what I likes.  I like this.

Wouldn't you just love to know who bought it?  It would be great if the buyer were a National Socialist, and not some wealthy collector who will buy anything that may go up in value.  

Dan  88!

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Photos Of Our Fuhrer

Several never-before-seen photographs have emerged from Adolf Hitler's personal photographer, giving a first time look at Hitler's Berlin apartment and Bavarian estate.
                                                                                         Dinner With Friends
The Mirror reports that photographer Hugo Jaeger was one of the few photographers working with color photography at the time and was granted access to Hitler's living and study quarters, showing artwork and furnishings estimated to be worth millions even in pre-adjusted dollars. The pictures were taken in the two years leading up to the beginning of World War II.
It is rumored that Jaeger took as many as 2,000 photographs of Hitler and his possessions. However, in 1945 Jaeger is thought to have hid the photographs in a leather suitcase. As Life magazine reported:
In 1945, when the Allies were making their final push toward Munich, Jaeger found himself face to face with six American soldiers in a small town west of the city. During a search of the house where Jaeger was staying, the Americans found a leather suitcase in which Jaeger had hidden thousands of color photo transparencies. He knew he would be arrested (or worse) if the Americans discovered his film and his close connection to Hitler. He could never have imagined what happened next.
                                                                                Reichschanceller Interior

                                                                                  Berchstesgaden, Interior

                                                                               Berchstesgaden, Exterior

                                                                Reception At The Reichschancellery

                            The Fuhrer's Private Apartment At The Reichschancellery

Jaeger then allegedly buried some of the pictures in 12 twelve glass jars outside Munich, returning to retrieve them in 1955.

I hope you enjoyed the photos.  Feel free to download them if you wish.

Dan  88!

Saturday, January 28, 2012

More Proof That ZOG And The Judeo-Capitalists Are Deliberately Flooding The Labour Market With Foreign Workers

Obama Speech Brags About 3 Million New Jobs (Fails To Mention 3 Million New Foreign Work Permits)

Compared to the heavy-metal terror I used to feel listening to Pres. Bush's State of the Union immigratiion appeals, Pres. Obama's obligatory immigration section tonight was easy-listening music.  The verses and chorus pushing for amnesties for illegal aliens were nearly identical to last year's speech and just didn't sound like he had a thought in the world that any of it could happen. 
What really galled me, though, was Pres. Obama bragging about more than 3 million U.S. jobs created during the last 22 months. 
That could have been good news for unemployed Americans.  But during that same period, the Obama Administration issued more than 3 million work visas to new immigrants and other foreign workers (more than half of them permanent). 
What is the point of all that talk in the speech about creating jobs when the federal government is importing so many new workers? Although the number of work permits issued is primarily controlled by Congress, Pres. Obama could be asking for reductions to give relief to all those Americans who have been unemployed for such long periods. He said nothing. And he gave no sign tonight of having the slightest interest in how immigration affects the labor market.  In fact, he called again for "comprehensive immigration reform."  All bills with that name have included big increases over the already-bloated immigration numbers.
But on our TV screens tonight, the Culprit in Chief in giving away the jobs to foreign workers was not the Commander in Chief giving the speech. Rather, it was the Speaker of the House sitting behind him. 
The U.S. House of Representatives could easily pass several great bills that would immediately cut the foreign work permits to far below the job creation numbers.  But Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) refuses to bring a single one to the floor for a vote.
Yes, Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-Nev.) and Pres. Obama would push back, but the Republican-majority House could put this issue of giving away most new jobs to immigrants into the national spotlight and force a showdown.  Nearly every Republican sitting in that Chamber tonight has been part of a conspiracy of silence with Speaker Boehner to make sure that unemployed Americans don't get priority for new U.S. jobs.
I really liked this part of the speech:
I also hear from many business leaders who want to hire in the United States but can't find workers with the right skills.
This is the place where we usually hear that the answer is to let companies fill these positions with all those skilled workers around the world who would dearly love to move here.
But the speech took a refreshing turn:
Growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do the job. Think about that — openings at a time when millions of Americans are looking for work. That's inexcusable. And we know how to fix it.
I don't know whether that particular skill shortage figure is correct (businesses have a way of grossly exaggerating), and I don't know if the President will truly back up his words, but he was so right to say that corporations and colleges need to create partnerships to train Americans for the jobs that are actually available.  If a shortage does exist, America has the people to fill it, if leaders would provide for the training instead of taking the easy fix of bringing in more foreign workers.
Join me in a national commitment to train two million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job.
I think all American citizens who for so many years have been fighting theBush/Kennedy/McCain/Obama efforts to further enlarge  the foreign labor pool here should feel a real sense of victory in what wasn't said tonight.
We know that the President would dearly love to work with fat cats like FOX owner Rupert Murdock and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to dramatically increase the immigration flow above the current level. But there wasn't a word about that tonight.  Considering that this address was by all accounts a re-election campaign speech, the President wasn't going to dwell on things that would work against him at the ballot box.
And he basically acknowledged that a giant amnesty has no chance in Congress:
. . . if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let's at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, and defend this country.
This was his appeal for the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal alien young adults.  He didn't say the name of the amnesty because it has become something of a dirty word in the Republican presidential debates.  Just last night in Florida, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich joined Mitt Romney in pledging to veto the DREAM amnesty if it were to come to their White House desk.
The Republican House is not about to undercut its presidential candidates by even thinking about taking up a DREAM Act amnesty.
The flowery words about giving the young illegal aliens U.S. citizenship so they can "invent new products and create new jobs" were really just meant to help Mr. Obama's new domestic policy chief Cecilia Munoz get her former boss the National Council of La Raza to get out the vote in the fall. Not serious talk. Thus, not a serious threat, leaving me so much more relaxed than in the days when Pres. Bush uttered these words and had Republican Senate leaders ready to almost make it happen. 
Elise Foley over at the Huffington Post wrote a clever comparison of the immigration sections of last year's and this year's State of the Union addresses.  
The comparison makes the case that Pres. Obama no longer represents a serious threat on the amnesty front.
But, oh, how I long for a President who would actually be a source of hope for American workers -- who could even recognize that there is a connection between the millions of foreign work permits given out and the opportunities that are available for American workers.
The President does understand that there is a difference for the American people in whether a business ships a job overseas or creates it here in the U.S.   
My message is simple. It's time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America.
Why can't he see that importing an immigrant worker for a job is basically the same as shipping the job overseas? In both case, an unemployed American worker doesn't get the job.
Until Pres. Obama faces that reality -- or Speaker Boehner tries to force him to face it -- our government will continue to give out work permits to immigrants and other foreign workers about as fast as our economy creates new jobs.
What a state of the union!
ROY BECK is Founder & CEO of NumbersUSA

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Comrades, this proves it without a doubt.  The government IS deliberately flooding the labour market with foreign workers.  Any idiot can see it after reading this.
The Obama administration creates 3 million new jobs, and then turns around and lets in 3 million new foreign workers.  If ZOG is not trying to destroy the White working class specifically, and the rest of the working class in general, then it's absolute madness to create 3 million jobs, and then turn around and let in 3 million more workers (who will get most of those jobs because they work cheaper than Americans).
It's like the man who lives paycheck-to-paycheck.  Then he gets a promotion and a big raise.  He can finally have a little money left over every month to put in a savings account.  But does he?  Nooo!  He "rewards" himself for his achievement with a brand new SUV, with a great big monthly payment, and he's back living paycheck-to-paycheck.  That makes no sense at all, but how many people would, and have done EXACTLY that?
I don't believe for a minute that Obama and his cronies are insane, so it's obvious they are trying to destroy the working class and turn us into Neo-Serfs.  Not that it matters to us whether the Republicans or Democrats take the presidency, but considering Obama's dismal record, if he is re-elected, I seriously fear that ZOG will succeed, simply because it will show the complete and utter stupidity of the American voter.  A better term would be the American Sucker.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that what we need is a government that looks after it's own FIRST and FOREMOST.  For the White Working Class, that system is National Socialism.
With National Socialism:  Know hope.  Without National Socialism:  No hope.
Okay, okay, I ripped that last line off from those Christian bumper stickers. lol  Hail Victory!
Dan  88!

Friday, January 27, 2012

McDonald's Charges Blacks More?

Comrades, there's no way this is for real, but it was found taped to the window of an actual McDonald's.  Someone's idea of a joke.  Can you imagine the uproar if McDonald's and their insurance company were really doing this?  Anyway, I thought I'd end the work week with a little joke.  If this is too small to read, try clicking on the image itself.

Dan  88!

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Apple stock reached new highs Wednesday, leading the Cupertino tech giant to briefly reclaim the title of most valuable company in America, thanks to a record-breaking holiday shopping quarter.
Apple's share price jumped more than 7 percent in after-hours trading Tuesday, after the company announced that it had smashed records for revenue, profit and device sales in the final three months of 2011. The gain was sustained overnight and the stock opened at $454.45, more than $20 higher than Apple's previous high, $431.37, set last week.
Apple shares dipped a bit from that high through the day, closing at $446.66; however, that price still represents a gain of $26.25, or 6.2 percent, from Tuesday's closing price.
Apple's big morning bump helped it leapfrog Exxon Mobil for the highest market capitalization in the U.S. By the end of the trading day, however, Exxon's stock rose to a gain and put it barely back in front of Apple, $418.1 billion to $416.4 billion.
Apple originally passed Exxon in market capitalization for the first time in August, becoming only the second technology company to be crowned the most valuable company on the market, after Microsoft.
Apple's sudden leap in stock price was the direct result of one of the most stunning quarterly results in history:
The company Tuesday reported a 118 percent gain in profit to $13.06 billion, or $13.87 a share, for its first fiscal quarter, which ended Dec. 31. Revenue soared to $46.3 billion, up from $26.7 billion for the same quarter a year ago, putting Apple on course to become the world's largest technology company in terms of revenue, a title currently held by Hewlett-Packard (HPQ).
Apple set sales records for the iPhone, with more than 37 million sold, and the iPad, with more than 15 million sold, and took in a gross margin of 44.7 percent, leaving analysts agape with awe.
"This is more than spectacular," said analyst Tim Bajarin with Creative Strategies. "They had a record-setting blowout quarter with incremental upgrades to the iPhone and the Mac. Imagine what 2012 will be like with a new version of the iPhone, the iPad and maybe even an all-new Mac."
"Those numbers are just unimaginable," Michael Obuchowski, chief investment officer at First Empire Asset Management, told Bloomberg News.
ISI Group analyst Brian Marshall described it as "a pristine quarter" to The Associated Press, adding, "The investment community has never seen a company like this, inside or outside technology."
Staff writer Pat May contributed to this report. Contact Jeremy C. Owens at 408-920-5876.

For those who read my earlier report on Apple, you'll understand what I mean when I say, these profits are the result of American materialism, and corporate slave labour.
It seems that ZOG has been making some noise about putting a stop to outsourcing to countries using slave labour.  Well, I'll believe that when I see it.  Let's face it, there's too much money involved for the Judeo-Capitalists to give up without a fight.
In a National Socialist state, there would be no outsourcing.  With a few exceptions such as foodstuffs like sugar and coffee, if we can't produce it ourselves, we don't need it.   You can't expect Americans to give up their coffee!   Just thinking about it gives me the shakes.  lol
All this so-called noise the government has been making is just that - noise, and little else.
BTW, I heard they just rewrote the Pledge Of Allegiance:
I pledge allegiance to the Logos of the Corporate States Of America, and unto the profits for which they stand.
One nation, under the dollar, with liberty and justice for a few.

Dan  88!

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

TSA Calls This "Zero Tolerance?"

By Christopher Elliot
Huffington Post, January 23, 2012
Here are two more reasons you should never check valuables in your luggage when you're flying: Michael Pujol and his wife, Betsy Pujol Salazar.
The couple was arrested last week and charged with grand theft. Investigators say Pujol, a TSA agent at Miami International Airport, stuffed items from passengers' luggage inside a hidden pocket in his work jacket.
The Pujols were caught after a missing iPad was traced to them through a Craigslist transaction. Pujol Salazar admitted that she and her husband had taken items stolen from luggage and sold them online for the last three years.
Back in 2008, when I started reporting about TSA's little crime epidemic, the agency strongly denounced the actions of its thieving agents, insisting it had "zero tolerance" for their actions.
The thefts "in no way represent the overwhelming majority of hard working officers in airports around the country," the agency declared on its blog.
Since then, I've wondered: What does TSA mean by "zero tolerance"?
I think actions speak louder than words.
Just a few days ago, a screener at LaGuardia Airport was arrested for allegedly swiping a pricey laptop from a college student at a screening area. TSA employee Edwin Rosario, 27, was charged with grand larceny and possession of stolen property for taking a $1,300 computer a passenger had left behind.
A few weeks before, the TSA was accused of taking money out of a Florida couple's luggage. No arrests have been made yet, and the agency refuses to release security camera footage that could implicate the thief because of "security" concerns. The agency also told the passengers that its screeners "never steal."
Last month, another TSA worker in Memphis was arrested and charged with theft. Police say Ricky German, 48, tried to swipe a laptop that had been left at his screening station. Surveillance video showed German carrying away the laptop and throwing away papers with the owner's name on it. After police arrived and said they would view the surveillance video, German then claimed he "found" the laptop.
This fall, a passenger going through security at Phoenix Airport left the screening area $200 lighter. He thinks one of the agents helped himself to his cash when he was checked. Surveillance video didn't implicate the TSA, but the passenger, Tyson Tibshraeny, is unconvinced. "Where I have a problem is they wanted to separate me from my wallet," he says.
A few weeks earlier, a TSA agent lost his job and is facing grand theft charges for allegedly pocketing a $450 pen owned by Rick Case, a prominent South Florida car dealership owner. Investigators say Toussain Puddie, 30, admitted to taking Case's pen after it was left behind during a checkpoint screening at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport.
"Finders keepers doesn't apply when you are a public servant and have the public's trust," a Sheriff Department spokesman said.
It's easy to see how agents like Puddie might think otherwise. After all, Congress allows the TSA tokeep the pocket change air travelers leave behind -- why not their pens or laptop computers?
I could go on. There are dozens more documented cases of TSA agents being arrested and charged with theft in 2011, but you get the idea. (And never mind the items that TSA confiscates from uslegally, like cosmetics, liquids and other, so-called prohibited items.
Bear in mind that these are just the agents that are caught. Chances are, there are many other TSA workers who are getting away with their thieving ways. Pay attention to the reported convictions, too. Even the agents who are caught are often given a slap on the wrist. It might be reasonable to assume that now more than ever, the TSA is afflicted by a theft epidemic.
Is this what "zero tolerance" looks like?
Look, I get it. Insisting the TSA doesn't tolerate theft makes for a catchy TV sound bite. But if you really think about it, it's nonsense.
Saying the TSA now has "zero tolerance" for thefts -- which it proclaimed back in 2008 -- implies that before then, it had some tolerance for it. (Actually, that's a whole lot closer to the truth; if TSA's policy were truly "zero tolerance" then it would summarily dismiss any agent who takes a pencil from a desk or "borrows" a pair of those latex gloves they use for patting us down -- that'szero tolerance.)
I think "zero tolerance" might just be empty rhetoric designed to make us think our federal screeners will be held to a higher standard. They're words that are meant to soothe us, to convince us to stop worrying about our property being spirited away by a screener.
They are words we should question.
Why do the very people who are supposed to be protecting us also steal from us with such frequency? They do it because they can. They do it because, despite what their mouthpieces tell us on the evening news, they know they'll probably get away with it.
We hear "zero tolerance." But the TSA workforce hears "zero accountability."
There's an old saying, "Who watches the watchers?"
I wonder how many thefts go unnoticed and/or unreported?  Quite a lot I'd imagine.  TSA wields an obscene amount of power.  Just questioning TSA's rules and methods can get you expelled from an airport.  
A few years ago when I was taking a flight home from Atlanta, I started questioning as to why we (the passengers) have to do some of the things TSA requires.  A screener then told me that complaining about it can get you ejected from the airport, even though I was asking in a respectful, rather than a whiny manner.
Comrades, we may still have some freedoms left in this country, but in airports, we enter a totalitarian state without even the right to question the authorities.
But I guess it's okay.  After all, it's for our own protection.  Yeah, right.  Sure it is.
TSA will soon be expanding its power to trains, subways, buses, and ships in the near future.  
There is no question about it.  Fascism is here, and is spreading like a cancer.  National Socialism is the best treatment, and the ANP is best qualified to administer it.   
Many who die of cancer do so because they ignored the warning signs hoping they'd go away.  The same is true of the problems of this country.  Our politicians aren't going to help us.  I watched part of the State Of The Union address today, and Obama was shoveling the manure pretty deep.
BTW, just an observation.  The cameras focused on Shrillary Clinton a few times, and I swear she had an expression on her face that was like, "What a load of baloney the president is serving.  I hope the sheeple swallow it this time."
No one is going to help us but ourselves.  Don't look to others, look to yourself.  You can either be a lion and do what must be done, or you can be an ostrich and bury your heads in the sand.  I choose to be a lion.  How about you?
Dan  88!