BearX220

She has unkind words today for Matt Drudge in particular.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshge...n_privacy.html

N965VJ

"We want to be conscious of civil liberties and civil rights protections—and we are," Napolitano insisted. "We don't do anything without kind of running it through our own civil rights and privacy office. We're one of only two departments in the federal government that actually has a presidentially-appointed privacy office and officer."


This is an actual graphic from the TSA's own internal privacy program. Sure, go ahead and answer a bunch of personal questions to get into the Trusted Traveler program. These guys are really on the ball.

nachtnebel

what a ridiculous statement by Napolitano. "We wanted do do strip searches and sex organ and full body gropes so we asked our own people if these were constitutional".

Newsflash Janet: Nobody else thinks what you are doing is either reasonable or constitutional. Hence the backlash that has forced you idiots to back off.

Saying " We want to be conscious of civil liberties and civil rights protections" while violating them is just like the screening clerks telling us they'll feel our genitals only "with the back of the hand". The words do nothing Janet. The actions are there for all to see.

goalie

Memo to "Big Sis":

When was the last time you flew commercial and had to put up with all the mishegas, chazerai and other assorted bullsh*t that the regular passenger has to deal with? And no, I don't mean a dog and pony show for the media where you show off for the camera saying "see, look at me, I have to do it do"

mikeef

I'm not a big fan of Drudge, but this is always how it starts: those in charge try to paint people protecting their civil liberties as "the bad guys."

Mike

mikemey

Americans to Nappy: Drop Dead.

WChou

And of course she refuses to get into her own body scanner during some media dog and pony show. Instead, she sends a flunky into the machine. If they are "safe." what is she trying to hide? (okay, I know what the joke will be but I am avoiding it.)

RadioGirl

Well, it's hard to refute incisive arguments like that.

You "kind of" run it through? How does that work? Is it different from actually "running it through"?


Good lord, if her skill with words reflects her mental processes, calling her an idiot is an insult to actual idiots.

Dan_E

The OPs post of a Politico blog post on the subject seems kind of OMNI-ish, here is a more balanced report of the same subject (personally I dont think much mainstream news is balanced anyway, but this oughta do).

Napolitano confronts Drudge Report over ‘Orwellian…Big Sis’ View

RadioGirl

If by "more balanced" you mean that ABC selectively edited the quotes by Janet so she didn't look quite as stupid...

Let's go to the video, Bob. It's linked on the Politico site. Compare the way Politico quotes her to the way ABC does:
Video says: Politico is right; she stated "he's just wrong" twice. ABC has simply cut the quote short which is forgivable but the full version of her defending her position by just repeating "he's just wrong; he's just wrong." offers an insight into her (lack of) logic.

Video supports Politico's version where she hedges on how much scrutiny actually occurs. ABC should have at least put an ellipsis in the quote.

Politico provides the whole rambling incomprehensible sentence I quoted earlier before getting to "we're always striking that balance." ABC just quotes the latter part.

greentips

This tells me that they are conscious of our civil liberties and constitutional rights. They actually have an office that advises them on this. What they do with that advice is perhaps another matter: How far can DHS/TSA push over the line and violate them before they're called on it?

I have to agree with the commentors in the ABC article.

Has anyone noticed that much of the comments on many of these articles sound like FT.TSS comments several years ago? Are we really becoming the mainstream?

And Napolitano has a pet name for Drudge that wasn't made public. Wonder what she thinks of this site?

And if things are as she says they are, then why are they so afraid of the Administrative Practices Act and advance publication of rule making (NPRM) and still keep hiding behind perpetually SSI?

BearX220

Can I ask why ABC News should be considered balanced, but not Politico? How is Politico "Omni-ish" (whatever than means), but not ABC?

myadvice

I'm with you; I don't understand why people get hung up on media sources. Balanced journalism is a myth. It is much better to go to the original source (like radiogirl did). How many times does one need to see propaganda selectively edited by the media to make people look good or bad depending on the viewpoints? Same thing goes for with lifting one-line out-of context quotes. All media sources (left, right, "main-stream") do this to one extent or another. Once you go to the original source though, the writers (or the publications) biases become obvious.