The Blogging Tories can be so adorable when they try to produce a coherent blog post ... and fuck it up entirely. Take this guy:
Using intelligence provided by the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, an advisory group led by Transport Canada will assess individuals who may pose an immediate threat to aviation safety.
After reviewing the intelligence, the advisory group, which includes senior officers from CSIS and the RCMP, will make recommendations to the minister of transport, infrastructure and communities about whom to include on the no-fly list...
So you've got to have a pretty nasty background in the first place to be grounded. A fact that will never be mentioned in the hysterical media reports to come, except with plenty of ironic "quotes".
Sure. Of course. After all, you're gonna have to be one mean sumbitch, evil, bad-ass motherfucker terrorist to end up on a no-fly list, right? Like, oh, this guy. And this guy. And this guy. And let's not forget this guy. And all of these evil bastards, too.
But, hey ... what can possibly go wrong?
7 comments:
Lots can go wrong if airlines are using an American list because of the lack of a Canadian one. But it is pretty damned funny that the Americans tagged Kennedy, Graham and Martin.
So you've got to have a pretty nasty background in the first place to be grounded. A fact that will never be mentioned in the hysterical media reports to come, except with plenty of ironic "quotes".
How did we ever end up breeding so many of these gullible fools? The security apparatus of the state can go right ahead and make up no-fly lists as long as WE THE PEOPLE get to see the evidence upon which the decisions were made, and I expect the media and defenders of civil liberties to go after that like a pit-bull. Otherwise, no deal.
Do these Blogging Boobs think abuses of power and totalitarism only ever happen somewhere else?
"Do these Blogging Boobs think abuses of power and totalitarism only ever happen somewhere else?" Ti-Guy
12:18 PM
That is *EXACTLY* what they think. One of the most infuriating thing about so many of the new NA conservatives is their faith that bad things like authoritarianism, dictatorship, torture of dissidents, etc simply can't happen here, or at least not turned against good old solid (white) Canadians as opposed to those dangerous immigrants especially Muslim ones. The mindset of "it can't happen here" is usually one of the cornerstones of having whatever "can't happen here" end up happening because people are too blind to the warning signs because of their faith that it can't happen here. Somehow the belief exists with these folks that because we in the west have currently democratic societies governed by the rule of law means we always will no matter what, which I find to be one of the scariest blind spots within the new conservatism outside of merely ideological ones. The price of liberty/freedom is eternal vigilance does not merely refer to military vigilance it also and I would argue primarily at that refers to watching out for those within our societies that would strip away those rights and living as equal citizens under the law usually in the name of national security or some other noble sounding basis. We have seen where not keeping that vigilance has taken America in the last half decade on their own rights and civil liberties and anyone that doesn't think that can happen here is clearly living in a fantasy land. It can happen anywhere, especially when there is a significant level of fear of something in the mix, and not coincidentally we have those most interested in surrendering our civil liberties and freedoms claiming we must do so out of fear of terrorists and terrorism because they hate our freedoms and free societies. Now how oxymoronic is that as well as clearly a dangerous path for any free society to follow?
I don't get it. I would be the first to jump to defend a righty's civil liberties and demand to see the evidence (even ol' KKKate), yet I get the impression if I were in the same situation, these bozos would be the first to suggest that I must have done something wrong (and then go back to watching television).
I swear, I don't think they should allowed to vote! ;)
Ti-Guy:
I don't get it either, and I would do the same as you to defend the rights of those I most strongly disagree with when I see their rights are being genuinely (I add the qualifier given the amount of faux examples we see from such sources about what they think their rights ought to be instead of really are) violated, yet I like you have every reason to believe the reverse would not only not occur but that our loss of our rights would be cheered on by such folks. These folks really do not comprehend that when any group within a society can be marginalized and treated as lesser citizens/humans then all are inevitably at risk. History has shown this time and time and time again so this should not be a difficult concept for anyone with even a marginal brain to get yet it is for these folks. It is one of the core reasons why I oppose the new conservatism and see it and its standard bearers in this country like Harper as such a grave threat to the long term security indeed viability of Canada as a free whole nation.
There is nothing more dangerous as those that refuse to see the logical/natural consequences of their actions while simultaneously claiming theirs is the only correct/moral path to follow. Worse in my view are those that surrender their critical thinking capabilities and become followers of a leader and/or ideology first instead of thoughtful people/citizens first. Currently I find that threat primarily within the Canadian political right and concentrated within the Reform/CA/Harper wing of the CPC and worse being masked in such a way as to suck in otherwise progressive conservatives into thinking their agenda is not significantly different than traditional conservatism in this country despite the reality of it being anything but traditional Canadian conservativism in truth. So I see them as the greatest political/social threat to this country’s long term viability/survival including our Charter rights and freedoms being sustained and oppose them accordingly and as clearly as I do here and elsewhere in the online AND offline worlds.
I can think of a few blogging tries that should be on that no fly list, cause I wuld feel a lot safer knowing that would never be allowed on a plane, Joel comes to mind, old anonallogue and the William Mackenzie blogger, those guys are seriously unhinged
No kidding. Imagine Roy Eappen on a flight? God forbid the "fiberal" flight attendant should run out peanuts. The shrieking would be unbearable.
Post a Comment