See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On December 24th, 2010 at 9:49 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

   Confiscated his handgun and withdrew his Deputy status because he embarrassed them? County Sheriff revoked his Concealed Carry License for a NON Weapon reason? Fascism run wild-but that is what fascism is.

   There are Human Rights abuses all over this story.
   ===
   Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
   should be a convenience store,
   NOT a government agency.

2. #2
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:02 am, tre said:

   “And the message was you’ve angered us by telling the truth and by showing America that there are major security problems despite the fact that we’ve spent billions of dollars allegedly to improve airline safety,” Werno said.

   We can’t have that happen now can we.

3. #3
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:13 am, the_moll said:

   It’s ok because the people who service the plane are part of a union. They get a pass on everything.

   Now take off your shoes and prepare to be digitally stripped, you peasant! And someone pat down that nun over there!

4. #4
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:23 am, rambler said:

   The airport screeners were bad before 9/11 and they are worse now. Current policy hasn’t found any terrorists. The TSA will become the best employment opportunity for perverts.

5. #5
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:24 am, Cogs said:

   Thank the Tea Party movement; people have begun to realize that they can make a difference and they can change government. They can make a difference.

   People may complain all they want about past administrations, but there is only one word to describe the current one – incompetent! On the other hand, there is one more word – vindictive.

   The sooner these people get put to pasture the better for everyone. Keep fighting folks!

6. #6
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:34 am, right_on said:

   The confiscation of a firearm, and revocation of CWP without having committed a crime, nor having been accused or arrested for a crime?

   Totally unConstitutional, IMHO. I thought the Constitution protected us from unreasonable searches and seizures?

7. #7
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:57 am, letget said:

   right_on#8,
   Constitution? bho, his entire team, most d’s, and some r’s seem have scrapped that ‘outdated’ piece of paper our Republic was founded on! It is amazing to me we have any ‘rights’ left the way this bunch is taking them from us daily.
   L

8. #8
   On December 24th, 2010 at 10:59 am, Fenguri said:

   As far as I can see, TSA has not stopped a single terrorist attempt since their inception. They have however continued to grow in size and cost in direct proportion to the amount of fear that they generate among the sheep.

   This man tried to show those sheep a portion of what is behind the curtain, and is being attacked. What if folks actually came to believe that TSA is just a dollar sinkhole? Or that they are trading away their liberties for…nothing in return?

   TSA is not making our lives safer. They are in the business of curtailing liberty, of pushing that envelope to see just how much we will willingly give up. It is very sad to see how many Americans would prefer to be slaves.

9. #9
   On December 24th, 2010 at 11:09 am, robhic said:

   They say “Misery Loves Company” so I guess “Incompetence Loves Incompetents”, too.

   Obama has really demonstrated the one thing he seems to be good at: Surrounding himself with the cream-of-the-crop of incompetents!

   I guess everyone needs to have at least one thing they are good at…

10. #10
    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:21 am, corkie said:

    I don’t think most of you will like my take on this.

    Since he had a formal relationship with the TSA then he had a responsibility to voice his concerns through their channels.

    I also don’t think he should have decided to post a public video regarding security vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities will always exist. Deputies of the TSA shouldn’t be advertising these vulnerabilities.

    Many of you might disagree since it appears that his TSA relationship was limited to him being issued a handgun, but he assumed an extra level of responsibility towards the TSA when he willingly entered into that relationship.

    If he was attempting to be some sort of whistleblower because of his failed attempts to have his concerns taken seriously, then he should have chosen a different method.

    Anyone that has ever been in charge of a large operation know that nothing is ever perfect. Managers usually allocate resources to addressing their concerns in order of priority. Individual members of an organization sometimes fail to see the big picture and fail to properly understand the prioritization methodology. They sometimes only see the single problem that they’ve identified and believe that the full force of the organization should be brought to bear on that one problem.

11. #11
    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:37 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:21 am, corkie said:

    I don’t think most of you will like my take on this.

    Since he had a formal relationship with the TSA then he had a responsibility to voice his concerns through their channels.

    All of which has nothing to do with invading his house, pulling his Concealed Carry license or de-certifying his armed pilot status–that is all harassment and intimidation. Fascism run wild. He is an employee of the airline and NOT of TSA.
    ===
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
    should be a convenience store,
    NOT a government agency.

12. #12
    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:50 am, jamesgreenidge said:

    The gun thing doesn’t concern me — that wasn’t the threat in this case. I’d be four-square behind the pilot if he only just e-mailed those videos first to every member of Congress then the FBI and the airlines — or even The Times — first, but for heavens sake, YOUTUBE of all places? The lag-time for officials to’ve caught on to that could’ve been days — more than enough time for web-surfing terrorists and punks and sickos to’ve seen and taken swift advantage of that expose. He did right but to the wrong place. Hundreds could’ve died — and may be will since the idea’s been seeded now.

    Merry Christmas All!

    James Greenidge
    Queens NY

13. #13
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:13 pm, Truesoldier said:

    I.ve been saying this for years that the baggage handlers are were there could be a real problem. I worked as one for years when I was going to college and it is true. You had full access to secure areas with just a swipe of a badge at a magnetic card reader, bypassing all screening areas. The only thing that is supposed to be standing in the way is the 10 year background check that is done by the government. Of course a little known secret is that baggage handlers start working while their background check is being performed. They are supposed to be escorted by someone who has already been badged. The problem is that a terrorist could easily overpower an unsuspecting escort and do plenty before anyone even realized what was happening.

    And as for the background checks here are some articles that are interesting. Here, here, and here.

14. #14
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:41 pm, novaculus said:

    December 24th, 2010 at 11:21 am, corkie

    I don’t disagree with everything you said, but you are missing the point. There was no reason to send that many LEOs unless the the intention was to intimidate. All they had to do was call this guy in to the office. They meant to intimidate him, and everyone else who might dare to embarrass them with criticism.

    These guys were used as professional thugs by political thugs, against a man who apparently broke no laws, in order to send a message to all of us.

    Despicable.

15. #15
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:53 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    Wow! Corkie is completely wrong again on an entirely new topic. I did not see that coming.

    Anyone who thinks TSA security measures are effective is deluded.

    I just hope the next jihadi doesn’t try to smuggle a bomb up his wazoo because we all know how TSA will respond to that. But Corkie probably believes there is inherently nothing dangerous about anal bomb concealment if everyone is a consenting adult and neither partner is infected…

16. #16
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:53 pm, dan708 said:

    We’ve all known for some time that the TSA’s insecurity procedures were a joke. They were designed as a test; “Let’s see how far we can push travelers with this nonsense; it’ll give us some indication of what they’ll tolerate in other areas of life.”

17. #17
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:54 pm, pueblo1032 said:

    Sounds just about right for “THE REGIME”!!! I know that I, as a private citizen, have no wish to EVER embarrass “THE REGIME”… For the retaliation will be swift, and unmerciful!!! I believe it is time for O-BOZO to ask for JA-NO to resign, and time for the INCOMPETANO to submit her resignation…

18. #18
    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:58 pm, dan708 said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:21 am, corkie said:

    I don’t think most of you will like my take on this.

    Since he had a formal relationship with the TSA then he had a responsibility to voice his concerns through their channels.

    This would be a worthwhile way for Mr. Clapper to handle the situation if he thought his superiors would respond properly to his concerns. The captain’s actions would indicate otherwise; he knows the TSA is nothing more than a front to make us THINK the government is on the case.

19. #19
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:12 pm, Mister P said:

    This exposes the problem with governments running anything. The people know authority, but they do not know responsibility. So rather than solve a problem, they use it as an opportunity to get more authority. That is how they grow and the problem not only festers, but sprouts other more dangerous activities.

20. #20
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:12 pm, right_on said:

    What is Homeyland Securtiy, and the TSA going to do once terrorists product and use a Binary explosive device? There is nothing they can do to stop this this kind of attack, short of eliminating all aircraft travel.

    The Binary explosive is the size of a wooden matchhead, but it is extremely destructive, easily concealed, easily detonated, and will bring down any aircraft, post-haste.

    The current (non-)securtiy measures taken by the gov’t and TSA are only there to justify the existence of TSA, and to make it seem like the government is doing something proactive. Without an Israeli-type system of behavioral profiling adapted for the volume of American air traffic, we will continue to go through the motions, and roll the dice with anti-terrorist air safety.

    Once again the progressives in office are using the U.S. public as dupes to enrich their union buddies, their campaign contributing airline related businesses, as they spend handout billions of dollars for votes. Incompetence is expensive.

21. #21
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:22 pm, corkie said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:53 pm, WarEagle82 said:

    Wow! Corkie is completely wrong again on an entirely new topic. I did not see that coming.

    Actually, I’m right, and you’re irrational – again.

    Anyone who thinks TSA security measures are effective is deluded.

    I never said that they were effective. I said that his relationship with the TSA required him to handle his concerns differently.

22. #22
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:26 pm, corkie said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:58 pm, dan708 said:

    This would be a worthwhile way for Mr. Clapper to handle the situation if he thought his superiors would respond properly to his concerns.

    It doesn’t matter if you think that your concerns will be properly responded to or not if you’ve accepted a position of responsibility with the agency then you have a duty to handle your concerns properly.

    I agree 100% with this.

    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:50 am, jamesgreenidge said:

    The gun thing doesn’t concern me — that wasn’t the threat in this case. I’d be four-square behind the pilot if he only just e-mailed those videos first to every member of Congress then the FBI and the airlines — or even The Times — first, but for heavens sake, YOUTUBE of all places?

23. #23
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:28 pm, corkie said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 12:41 pm, novaculus said:

    I don’t disagree with everything you said, but you are missing the point. There was no reason to send that many LEOs unless the the intention was to intimidate.

    I didn’t miss any point. Reread my comment.

    I never said that I thought the TSA’s reaction was appropriate. I didn’t comment on it at all.

    I merely stated that I didn’t think this guy’s actions were appropriate.

24. #24
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:32 pm, prendad said:

    Boy, I bet Janet wet her boxer shorts over this one.

25. #25
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:40 pm, rambler said:

    I think that every new gov policy should be tried on the elected officials first. Before implementing the groping and x-ray policies, every czar, cabinet member and member of congress and their staff should have personally had to experience the groping and scanning. They should not be exempt.

26. #26
    On December 24th, 2010 at 1:55 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    If you look closely at the agents outside the house, the one next to the dog looks a lot like the guy with the machine gun who grabbed Elian Gonzales in the middle of the night.

    Yeah, I made that up.

    There isn’t a SINGLE THING in this video that is a security risk or isn’t OBVIOUS to anyone who travels.

27. #27
    On December 24th, 2010 at 2:02 pm, purplepeep said:

    corkie said:

    I don’t think most of you will like my take on this.

    Since he had a formal relationship with the TSA then he had a responsibility to voice his concerns through their channels.

    Corkie, about the only thing I can tell that might be legitimately problematic is if he video-recorded “off-limits to the public” areas. I’m not sure, but it seems he did.

    Other than that, I think he did a good thing here.

28. #28
    On December 24th, 2010 at 2:34 pm, rightisright said:

    so the skies will be safe for at least the next 364 days. Rest easy, America!

    that pretty well says it all…if it’s a government program you have to know it’s a failure. So, the governments way to fix the problem is to punish the person that brings it to the attention of the agency and the public? poppycock…that is a spin move by Nappy. I bet if you checked out the same areas today that were in the vid you see the same crap going on.

    —–
    what does this video have to do with the sheriff taking away the guys ccp, did he violate a rule for the right to carry a weapon? NO!

    Folks this is tyranny.

29. #29
    On December 24th, 2010 at 3:44 pm, Freddy said:

    We need to have a congressional investigation placed on the docket immediatly!

    We need to make sure this whistleblower is not harassed to the point where nobody will ever mention problems with airport security again! Giving him a guaranteed public forum to air his concerns is a nice two edged sword that will protect him from internal attacks as well as exposing him to appropriate scrutiny.

    Does the TSA ever responds to internal complaints regarding security? Was the TSA ALREADY AWARE of this loop hole in their own security? Is it the policy of the TSA to IGNORE these kinds of internal complaints until they show up on youtube?

    There are many questions and I simply do not trust the management of the TSA to say ANYTHING BAD about their own government agency!

30. #30
    On December 24th, 2010 at 4:49 pm, rambler said:

    The TSA suffers from to “close enough for gov work” syndrome. The cure is to get the gov out of everything that is not mandated by the Constitution. The airlines are safer are because the cabin door can be secured and the passengers will stomp on anyone trying to do something suspicious on the plane.

31. #31
    On December 24th, 2010 at 5:01 pm, traffic_robot said:

    NICE. The revoked CCW was just icing on the cake. If this guy did in fact break TSA rules, I still don’t see an admission from TSA that they themselves are failing. Baggage and ground handlers go through background checks (I work for a service provider), but seriously, the a*** probe pilots and flight attendants go through in comparison is more than an imbalance. Good enough to entrust a plane and human lives with daily, but not a gun. I can’t even repeat the name I have for Janet.

32. #32
    On December 24th, 2010 at 7:12 pm, Hadenough said:

    Seems corkie is on the fed payroll. In what capacity? one has to wonder.

33. #33
    On December 24th, 2010 at 11:24 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    Isn’t there something going on during the lame duck session that REVOKES the protection afforded employees that report fraud, etc. under the Whistleblower Protection Act? I’ll do some research on this. This is so “up against the wall redneck mother” by the inept TSA/DHS…

34. #34
    On December 25th, 2010 at 1:21 am, nraendowment said:

    I recall already having read of the problems this pilot reports, a few years ago. It’s nothing new and was already out there if one looked. What the Government is doing to him is meant to send a message to us serfs: Obey or be destroyed. A lot of Obama’s minions should be fired and then prosecuted for what they are doing to this pilot. Disgusting.

35. #35
    On December 25th, 2010 at 2:10 am, corkie said:

    On December 24th, 2010 at 7:12 pm, Hadenough said:

    Seems corkie is on the fed payroll. In what capacity? one has to wonder.

    Yeah, me and Allahpundit from Hot Air.

36. #36
    On December 25th, 2010 at 12:35 pm, Blackstone said:

    On December 25th, 2010 at 2:10 am, corkie said:

    From your HA link: “The gun was issued to him by the feds pursuant to his status as an FDO”. That’s not quite exactly right. His authorization to carry the gun in the cockpit was pursuant to his status as an FDO, but not his CCW permit. That was issued under state law, and revoked by his county sheriff.

    Now obviously, the feds aren’t responsible for every decision a county sheriff makes, but there needs to be an inquiry as to whether the sheriff faced any kind of political pressure to revoke the guy’s license. The was simply no justification for doing that, so I think somebody needs to be investigated.

37. #37
    On December 25th, 2010 at 2:33 pm, corkie said:

    On December 25th, 2010 at 12:35 pm, Blackstone said:

    None of which has anything to do with weather or not the pilot’s actions were appropriate.

38. #38
    On December 25th, 2010 at 3:40 pm, Blackstone said:

    Is that the only subject of this thread? You’re perfectly free to be more bothered by the actions of the pilot than by the actions of the government, but that doesn’t entitle you to demand that everyone else here make that their main focus also.

39. #39
    On December 25th, 2010 at 7:03 pm, RAH said:

    If this pilot had worked for the New York Times instead of the airlines, he would be up for a Pulitzer, or, if he worked for THE ONE, he would be up for a Nobel Peace Prize, now, he will probably be in the unemployment line with the rest of us….

40. #40
    On December 26th, 2010 at 12:16 am, corkie said:

    On December 25th, 2010 at 3:40 pm, Blackstone said:

    Is that the only subject of this thread? You’re perfectly free to be more bothered by the actions of the pilot than by the actions of the government, but that doesn’t entitle you to demand that everyone else here make that their main focus also.

    How could anyone consider my statement some sort of demand?

41. #41
    On December 26th, 2010 at 7:33 am, Mach1Duck said:

    What airline security secrets??? Most of this stuff anyone could video. The biggest secret of all is that TSA has done absolutely nothing, they have not caught one terrorist, confiscated one bomb and have felt a lot of people up.

42. #42
    On December 26th, 2010 at 10:55 am, rambler said:

    The gov doesn’t want its weaknesses exposed. They are the all powerful nanny state which has to provide for all. When the gov doesn’t like the message, the messenger needs to be silenced rather than addressing the problem which was exposed. From the very beginning, airline security was built on scrutinizing the very people who would be least likely to commit acts of terrorism. The gov hasn’t gotten it right since the 70s, so why would anything have changed? Inept people don’t solve problems.

43. #43
    On December 26th, 2010 at 12:19 pm, spaceycakes said:

    F*%$ you all & the plane you flew in on

44. #44
    On December 26th, 2010 at 12:27 pm, rambler said:

    In other news, Janet-the-joker says that the groping and scanning will continue so get use to it and the TSA has a 70% weapons detection failure rate at some airports. I say that we need to change what constitutes safety screening at the airports. This x-ray or be groped policy has to go along with Janet.

45. #45
    On December 26th, 2010 at 10:50 pm, maisy said:

    Those of you thinking it is incompetence are missing the mark. It is willful ignorance born of soft tyranny. Mark Levin called it and he is dead on.
    Fat Janet needs to hand out SS armbands to her “troops”.