At the same time that the federal government is mandating the physical and constitutional violation of air travelers at our airports, they are prohibiting law enforcement officers in Arizona from asking for proof of identity and citizenship from those they suspect as being illegal aliens. 22 November 2010: “They” could not have planned it any better, initiating enhanced screening procedures right before the busiest travel time of the year. Our visceral reaction, outrage and chants of “don’t touch my junk” are understandable and warranted, but tend to overshadow our visibility of what’s really taking place, which is vastly more than meets the eye. The media seems to be stuck on reporting the more salacious aspect of TSA agents having a collective case of the “touchy-feelies” while the underlying motives of our government are barely addressed. Yet that’s exactly where we need to be looking. We need to identify and understand what is taking place behind the snappy sound bites and outrageous video snippets. We also need to understand why these things are happening so we will not be surprised at what is likely to happen next. As I wrote last week, the current TSA measures have very little to do with security. It is becoming much more apparent that the Department of Homeland Security itself, at its uppermost levels, has little to do with actual security. At the same time that the federal government is mandating the physical and constitutional violation of air travelers at our airports, they are prohibiting law enforcement officers in Arizona from asking for proof of identity and citizenship from those they suspect as being illegal aliens. They are also planning to remove the token presence of National Guard troops from our southern border by the end of February. So much for security. This entire scenario would be difficult to reconcile in logical terms, or to simply laugh off and blame it on the inefficiency of government, until you probe deeper into “their” agenda. FULL ARTICLE DHS & TSA: making a list, checking it twice 23 November 2010: Following the publication of my article titled “Gate Rape of America,” I was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Indeed, both the terminology and content contained in the document are troubling. The dissemination of the document itself is restricted by virtue of its classification, which prohibits any manner of public release. While the document cannot be posted or published, the more salient points are revealed here. The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.” The introductory paragraph of the multipage document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President.In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections. The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” FULL ARTICLE It’s gone too far Naked Scanners paid for by Stimulus money; George Soros holds financial interest in company It’s about control, not security Rapiscan is a wholly owned subsidiary of OSI Systems, Inc., a worldwide company based in California that develops and markets security and inspection systems. It is one of a handful of such companies trying to corner the market on security hardware for the air transportation industry – a market estimated to be worth $300 billion in the United States alone. As indicted by the per - market demand of the company’s stock, various divisions within OSI Systems, Inc., with the exception of Rapiscan were posting financial losses during the fiscal years 2007 through 2009. Month end stock prices of OSI Systems, Inc. (OSIS) fell from $27.35 per share in June 2007 to $20.85 in June 2009. OSI Systems, Inc. received a financial boost in September 2009 when it entered into a $173 million Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with the U.S. Transportation Security Administration. On October 1, 2009, the TSA purchased “multiple scanners” from Rapiscan at a cost of approximately $25 million under the terms of that contract. As shown by the following graph, demand for the scanners and the value of OSI stock did not take off until the attempted Christmas Day bombing. The demand sharply increased not only in the U.S., but worldwide. Rapisan suddenly grew as other countries contracted with Rapiscan for their scanning units. Most notably, perhaps, was a February 2010 deal between Rapiscan and the government of Nigeria, the very country of origin of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Immediately before that deal, OSI Systems, Inc. announced a deal with Great Britain for scanners at Heathrow and Manchester International Airports.Thanks to the worldwide scanner, the revenues of OSI Systems, Inc. grew nearly 25% during the first quarter of 2010 over the same period of 2009, to over $65 million as a direct result of major government investments. FULL ARTICLE Sad part is there are those among us that have and will continue to argue that exploiting terror is an honorable way to make a buck, or even a few million of em.