More Good News From the TSA

“And, here’s ANOTHER fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Napolli!!” is likely what the bloated government would say to its sidekick.

Another TSA agent has been arrested and accused of rape.

Clifton Lyles, who worked at the Nashville International Airport, was arrested earlier this week in Rutherford County, Tennessee, and charged with statutory rape. His bond was set at $10,000, according to NewsChannel 5 WTVF-TV in Nashville.

Earlier this month, a TSA employee was arrested in Nevada and charged with six counts of lewdness with a child.

In March of 2010, a TSA worker was arrested in Massachusetts and charged with statutory rape, enticement of a child and indecent assault and battery on a person 14 or older, a Boston news station reported.

The agency has weathered a number of criminal accusations since its inception in late 2001 following the September 11 attacks.

In February, the TSA admitted in federal court that a supervisor and two TSA agents were arrested and charged with stealing thousands of dollars in cash from the luggage of travelers. Another employee was arrested and fired for assaulting a co-worker in a dispute over a parking space.

Several days before the TSA admission of guilt, a TSA security officer at Newark Liberty International Airport pleaded guilty to accepting bribes and kickbacks from a colleague who regularly stole money from passengers during security screenings, Reuters reported.

Passenger theft by TSA employees is a nationwide problem, writes Howard Portnoy. According to TSA records, press reports, and court documents, around 500 TSA officers have been fired or suspended for stealing from passenger luggage.

Airports in New York City harbor the most flagrant offenders, according to Portnoy, “but virtually no city in the nation is safe from the TSA’s sticky fingers.”

Violence is also a problem. In August, a former TSA employee was charged with a federal hate crime after he allegedly attacked an 83-year-old Somali man on May 4, 2010.

Another recent headline goes into how a black woman had to let TSA agents run their fingers through her hair. One gent I work with says that this is just part of the cost of living in a free society. This is an outrage! That we, the people, have to pay taxes in order to support an organization that is inept, has not found or foiled one actual threat, has repeatedly been found to not do adequate background checks, employs rapists, power-hungry abusers, pedophiles, molesters, thieves, and has even found some of its employees to be assisting drug couriers is a disgusting and absolute outrage! All this and more for a paltry 2011 proposed budget was $43.6 BILLION dollars. No terrorist acts caught at the gate for a price tag of $43.6 billion dollars just this year and our personal as well as national dignity is all it costs.

But, wait! There’s more! Call now and receive a signed picture of Michael Chertoff and Sam the Eagle titled Separated at Birth.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/?q=articles/news/the_black_diaspora_news/32673
http://www.infowars.com/another-tsa-employee-accused-of-rape/

Al-Assad to Obama

Bottom Line Up Front
Basher al-Assad wants nothing from the United States and, like Ah.edinijad of Iran, says that he sees Obama's efforts as attempts to wrest control of Sudan. Why would Obama do that? In the view of our enemies the Wesr wants to loot all resources from each country and kill all the people. That is what they are saying.

I want to know why Obama and Clinton are dumping and wasting billions of our tax dollars by trying to improve relations with and allow our restricted technologirs to be accessed by this homocidal criminal!
Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to U.S. President Barack Obama: Your Words Are Worthless
Following are excerpts from an interview with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, which aired on Syria TV on August 21, 211.

Background from MEMRI
"Reforms, as Far as All These Western Colonialist Countries are Concerned… Mean that You Give Them Everything They Want, Giving Up All Your Rights"

Bashar Al-Assad: "What is reassuring today is not the security situation, which, indeed, seems to be improving. What is reassuring is the fact that the scheme was entirely different: They wanted to topple Syria within a few short weeks. What protected the country was the awareness of the Syrian people. This is what we draw confidence from. Therefore, the escalation of events does not constitute a problem." [...]

Interviewer: "Why did the West respond negatively to these reforms?"

Bashar Al-Assad: "If we consider our past experience with the Western governments, we see that their traditional response to anything you do is: This is not enough. [...]

"They tell you that it is not enough because reform is not really their goal. The truth is that they do not want reforms, and some of them even get upset because they want you to refrain from reforms, so that your country will remain backward and will not develop.

"Reforms, as far as all these Western colonialist countries are concerned – and I'm not talking about the entire West, but only about the colonialist countries – mean that you give them everything they want, giving up all your rights. These are reforms as far as they are concerned: Give up the resistance, give up your rights, defend your enemies – all the things with which we are familiar, when it comes to the colonialist countries of the West.

"I say simply: Not in their wildest dreams – not now and not under different circumstances."

"The consequences of Any Action Against Syria would Exceed by Far what They Could Possibly Bear"
Interviewer: "Recently, Obama, by means of his secretary of state – and he was followed by Britain, France, and Germany – called upon you, loud and clear, to step down. What is your response?"

Bashar Al-Assad: "In several meetings with Syrian citizens in recent days, I was asked this question, but in a different way. They didn't ask me what my response was, but why I didn't respond.

"Sometimes one responds, and sometimes one doesn't. We deal with each case in the appropriate manner. When dealing with a friendly country, we sometimes respond in order to make our position clear, especially if we know that this country adopted a position that runs counter to its convictions, due to certain international circumstances.

"When dealing with non-friendly countries, we sometimes respond in order to convey the message that if they plan to take their policies too far, we are ready to go even further. In other cases, we want to convey the message that their words are worthless, by refraining from responding.

"In the case in question, we chose the latter approach, in order to tell them that their words are worthless.
"But since I am talking to Syria TV, which is very dear to every Syrian citizen, and for the sake of transparency, I can say that if I had wanted to discuss this, I would have simply said that this is not something you say to a president for whom being a president is not the main thing, a president who was brought to power not by the U.S. and the West, but by the Syrian people. This is not something you say to a people that rejects a high commissioner, whoever he may be. [...]

"The consequences of any action against Syria would exceed by far what they could possibly bear. The first reason is the geo-political position of Syria. The second reason is the Syrian capabilities, only some of which they are familiar with, and the impact of which they would not be able to bear.

"So we should draw a distinction between psychological warfare and facts, without underestimating this kind of intimidation. [...]

"The Syrian decision is far more important than any international resolution. This is a matter of principle. End of discussion. Security Council or not – we don't care. [...]

"The countries that make threats are themselves in a mess – militarily, economically, politically, and even socially. They are weak, much weaker than in the past. We did not give in to them six years ago, when they were at the peak of their might, so what, are we supposed to give in today?! Absolutely not." [...]

Week In Review September 2; Syrai, Iran, and America

BLUF

The West is worried about prolonged and ongoing violence in the Middle East.

The What and So What is that ur enemies are getting stronger and more numerous under the Obama administration while simultaneously mocking them.

The White House has worried that protracted political turmoil could provide an opening for additional influence by Tehran, as said in an article published at American Thinker. Turmoil, a synonym for chaos, is precisely what Iranian leadership wants! Ahmedinijad has stated that he wants to be the one to bring forth the Mahdi and, as explained to me by a Muslim cohort, for the Mahdi to return extreme chaos MUST exist. We can expect nothing less than that from a person who openly refers to violent martyrdom as the as beautiful and eternal art? "Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom?" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then Iran's President-elect, mused in a television address in 2005. "A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity." Both Obama and Clinton actively believe that they can talk sense to Ahmedinijad.

Assad allows the Iranian backed terror group Hezbollah to enter Syria without the need for visas.

Assad follows the lead of Ahmedinijad by slaughtering his own people, using not just Hezbollah, but also Iranian Guard Corps (IRGC) personnel and equipment.

Lebanon, a neighbor of Syria, has been allowed to exist simply because they appease Assad.

The primary activity is a spread of both chaos and despotism by way of ham fisted and wholesale slaughter of their own citizens, extorting money from neighboring countries to not attack them, and openly supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Big deal, some might say. The big deal is that this chaos is also being supported by Russia and China, who are both permanent members on the UNSC and maintain veto power. More importantly, these two countries that historically and currently see the US as their opponent see an opportunity for them to strengthen an openly volatile enemy of the US and to profit financially while doing so. Where else in the world are Russia and China involved in ongoing conflict for a profit? All across Africa as well as along the India-Pakistan Border, talk about your war profiteers.

Tehran is actively exploring ways to aid some Shiite hardliners in Bahrain and Yemen. Tehran is providing gear to suppress crowds and assistance blocking and monitoring protesters' use of the Internet, cell phones and text-messaging.

Iran is helping Syria to crack down on protestors. Hezb'allah and Iran was helping Syria handle anti-regime protestors. US government has confirmed some of this information,

But the idea that the Iranians are criticizing President Assad at all is remarkable when you consider some of their own Revolutionary Guards are helping the Syrian president in his crackdown

It is time for the West to confront these brutal regimes and openly support the people. But how, how can the West even begin to that since the appeasement policy so broadly pushed by Obama and Clinton, that has so greatly been ridiculed by Assad and Ahmedinijad, do anything in the Middle East and not be seen as impotent, impudent, and annoying? As unrest spreads in Iran and Syria; their leaders will try to draw Israel into an unwanted war. The West MUST stand in solidarity with Israel.

It is a place to begin. The US administration would also do very well to quickly and actively strengthen ties within the Western hemisphere, also. President Chávez of Venezuela, who is assiduously expanding the western hemisphere bridgehead of his Iranian ally, will certainly bring Hezbollah and Hamas into the West.

In short, Obama "provokes little confidence" among our traditional good-neighbor allies in the Middle East and brings much for our adversaries to laugh about and crow over.

Between appeasement and delegating to the UNSC power to defend American interests Obama has said that the West is nothing as we won’t even act to defend our interests. What does the West stand for now in the eyes of the Middle East?

The Assad regime's abuse and murder of its own population, Syrian involvement in bombings in Iraq which have killed US Forces as well as Iraqi citizens, support for Iraqi Baathists, and its permissiveness toward Al-Qaeda in Iraq have not made the Administration reconsider its Syrian opening, and that violence works.

The What and So What

Our enemies are getting stronger and more numerous under the Obama administration.

The Now What

Start by cutting off ALL foreign aid monies going to countries that are part of the OIC, OPEC, and those which are currently standing in opposition to US policy and interests abroad. Stand stridently shoulder to shoulder with nations which support the US. History shows this is a strong start. The road to safety is not going to be pretty, clean, or smooth; however, due to the ruinous policies pursued by Obama and Clinton, it is necessary.

The Now What

Start by cutting off ALL foreign aid monies going to countries that are part of the OIC, OPEC, and those which are currently standing in opposition to US policy and interests abroad.

US Foreign Aid