TSA Employ’s 67,000!

By Charles Tolleson
Nov 29 2010

The airlines used to do the security screening with minimum wage employees and high turnover, according to this 2000 report by the GAO.

After 9/11 there was a demand for the government to do the screening, which the airlines were glad to turn over to the government. The airlines had been following government requirements for screening. The airlines did not want the responsibility and liability. Liability insurance premiums would have been expensive. It's much easier to sue an airline than the federal government. Instead the airlines turned the expense, liability, and responsibility over to the government, where the passengers pay a ‘minimum’ of $2.50 and a maximum of $5.00 per boarding, up to $10 round trip, for security expenses.

"Did you know that the nation's airports are not required to have Transportation Security Administration screeners checking passengers at security checkpoints? The 2001 law creating the TSA gave airports the right to opt out of the TSA program in favor of private screeners after a two-year period."

The airlines should be responsible for screening passengers. The airlines can search you in order for you to use their property. The government should not search you in order for you to use someone’s property. Should the government be allowed to search potential customers of a shopping mall? No, but the mall owners have a right to search you before you go on their property. The airlines would have to become efficient at security to satisfy their customers or go out of business. Different security procedures would be used by different airlines if the government would get out of the way. As it stands now the government prohibits profiling. Without this government prohibition some airlines might be very safe and profitable by profiling, and paying a hefty insurance premium in case a terrorist sets off a bomb on board an aircraft. Here is a good article about Privatizing Air Security, by Robert Murphy.

Prior to 9/11 the government policy was for passengers to submit and cooperate with any highjacker. This contributed to the destruction of the World Trade Center and the loss of lives on 9/11. Now the passengers are not submitting to a highjacker, or any strange behavior of another passenger on an airliner. The passengers are acting as local security, something centralized planners are incapable of.

In 1999 there were about 8,000 private airport screeners. Today the TSA employees over eight times that many, 67,000! From 1999 through 2009 there was about a 19% increase in domestic enplanements. The TSA employees are thinking of forming a union. Once that happens the number of TSA government employees will increase dramatically.

"Pre-board screeners earn an average of $6 an hour nationally, often less than the starting wage in airport fast food restaurants. In 1999, according to the General Accounting Office, annual turnover among the nation’s 8,000 airport screeners exceeded 125 percent. At this rate, the average screener has been on the job for four and one-half months. At Boston’s Logan Airport, where two of the hijacked planes departed, the turnover rate was 200 percent; at Atlanta’s Hartsfield, it exceeded 400 percent."

One would think the low pay and private screeners caused 9/11. But, after the government took over security screening fake test bombs still got through. On October 22, 2007, Thomas Frank's USA Today article headlined, "Most fake bombs missed by screeners," saying: "Security screeners at two of the nation's busiest airports failed to find fake bombs hidden on undercover agents posing as passengers in more than 60% of tests last year, according to a classified report obtained by USA TODAY."

The Airline Pilots Security Alliance had this to say in a report, The Truth about Airline Security, "two recent classified TSA reports leaked to the public, confirm TSA screeners at multiple airports, failed to detect more than 90 percent of hidden weapons concealed by testers."

North and South Korea and War Lies

By Charles Tolleson
November 23 2010

Two recent books, “War is a Lie” and “The Culture of War”- http://www.nysun.com/arts/why-we-fight-martin-van-crevelds-the-culture/86443/ -came to mind when I saw the news about an exchange of artillery fire between North Korea and South Korea over some disputed maritime borders off the West Coast of Korea. Why was South Korea firing artillery rounds during a military exercise on a small island 80 miles from South Korea and so close to North Korea that North Korea could return artillery fire and hit the South Korean military? Could South Korea have been trying to provoke North Korea? “War is a racket.” General Smedley Butler

After the skirmish the U.S. dispatched a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the USS George Washington, which carries 75 warplanes, to join exercises with South Korea from Sunday to the following Wednesday, U.S. officials in Seoul said. "This exercise is defensive in nature," U.S. Forces Korea said in a statement. "While planned well before yesterday's unprovoked artillery attack, it demonstrates the strength of the ROK (South Korea)-U.S. alliance and our commitment to regional stability through deterrence." Now why would the U.S. plan a military exercise five miles from the North Korean coast? This is more propaganda to stir the passions of the tribe and promote the war lovers’ sport, war. The war lovers always say their wars are defensive in nature, or for humanitarian reasons. Instead, the war lovers simply get pleasure from war.

Stock markets declined as a result of the skirmish and the death of two South Korean Marines. I wonder how many politicians and generals who knew of the pending attacks and shorted the markets?

It is as if both countries are saying they own the waters around Yeonpyeong Island and the people in those islands are our resources which we derive our living from. Has anyone thought to ask those people living on the islands which country they want to belong to? Maybe they don’t want to belong to either owner. Maybe they want to belong to themselves. Maybe they want to trade and travel with both North and South Korea.

Those people living in the disputed territory should just declare their independence from both North and South Korea and call themselves just plain, Korea.

Of course the bully, the United States, said they would defend South Korea. The chest thumpers never miss and opportunity to build up and try to justify the trillions spent on war that gives them power, prestige, and nice retirements. “I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy.” John Adams

The U.S. has a treaty with South Korea to come to their defense. What a deal for a little country like South Korea! Why does the U.S. make these one sided treaties with these small countries that cannot help the U.S. equally in defense? The U.S. makes a treaty with a small country like Israel that cannot provide anywhere near the defense to the U.S. that the U.S. can provide for Israel. So Israel can become a bully in the Middle East knowing the U.S. is their big bodyguard. South Korea can provoke North Korea by carrying out military exercises in disputed territory knowing their big bodyguard, the U.S., will be happy to have a reason to justify their huge military expenditures.

I suspect somewhere in the treaty with these small countries is the stipulation that they must buy their war toys from the U.S. The U.S. is one of the world’s largest international arms dealers which recently extradited, from Thailand, Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout for selling arms. The U.S. just cannot stand competition in the arms trafficking industry!

The U.S. is all concerned about North Korea, Iran, and other small countries developing a nuclear bomb. Their concern is based on the realization that if these small countries have nuclear weapons then the U.S. cannot invade and occupy them without the consequences being too great. This is called mutual deterrence. It is what kept the former Soviet Union and the United States from creating World War III. The War Nation and their parasites love small wars as a way to create the most exciting sport in the world. After the sport is over there are parades, medals, monuments, and annual gatherings to drink and regale in past glories. “A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.” Napoleon Bonaparte

War Propaganda

By Charles Tolleson
November 21, 2010

This is from an Associated Press news story of November 21, 2010. “Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula is promising more small-scale attacks like its attempts to bomb two U.S.-bound cargo planes, which it likens to bleeding its enemy to death by a thousand cuts, in a special edition of the Yemeni-based group's English on-line magazine, Inspire.”

I searched for the online magazine Inspire and could not find it. The information fed to the AP was from Ben Venzke's IntelCenter, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/5/4336/97041 and the Site Intelligence Group. Both sites are run by Jews who advise the U.S. government. What these two sites sell to the government, the mainstream media sells to the public.

Why cannot we see the Yemeni based group’s English online magazine, Inspire, the same way Site Intelligence Group sees the site? I suspect it is blocked from the American public. The best way to get the public’s support for an unnecessary war is to prevent anti war information being available. Max Fisher, a writer for The Atlantic, even said Inspire Magazine was a hoax, yet the government and media are deeply concerned.

May be the online magazine, Inspire, is a phony magazine set up by the CIA to keep the American public alarmed. A fearful public will insure the government mob maintains its monopoly on the security industry.

Throughout history warriors and chiefs have made war. Then they always had to justify war to the populace. The best way to get the populace’s support is to keep them fearful. Many people in the war industry get rich and powerful. The troops are “loved and supported.” Would you lie in order to be loved and supported?

But, as Randolph Bourne said, “War is the health of the State”. With war the State gains power and prestige. This power and the sense of privilege the government mob feels leads to lies and corruption. It leads to more propaganda to keep the populace sending in their taxes to support the government mob and its parasites in making war. The book, “Cultures of War”, by John Dower, shows that all wars are the same. They have nothing to do with duty and honor. They have more to do with irrational group behavior instead of logic. If one dissents from the group’s desire for war that dissenter is often labeled a traitor. This punishment of dissenters is why the worst rise to the top, as expressed by F.A. Hayek in his book, “The Road to Serfdom.”

An Irish proverb says, “The believer is happy, the doubter is wise”. People are happy when they believe their war is necessary and it is for their God or other humanitarian reasons. They would be miserable if they found out all the death, debt, and destruction was completely unnecessary, like the unnecessary Vietnam War that killed millions. As the Vietnam War continued many people did not believe the Vietnam War was necessary. Because of the draft and television coverage the war supporters declined. But the big reason support for the war declined was the Viet Cong never attacked the United States. Had the terrorists never carried out 9/11 or other attacks on U.S. targets there would be less support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The United States leaders are good at using their massive power to provoke an attack by a small country like Vietnam, North Korea, Panama, Grenada, The Balkans, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Once a small country strikes back then the U.S. leaders have their best raison d’être, WAR! The mighty United States leaders know the small country will not win a victory and put the U.S. leaders on trial for war crimes. The U.S. leaders do know their tribal members will need the leaders in a time of war, even if the war is unnecessary and there is no real threat of invasion by the small country the bully U.S. is at war with.

The best way to end war is to allow all countries to become members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Any country attacked would be defended by all the other countries.

Another way to end all wars is to have the United Nations declare all weapons, except the stone axe, as illegal in war. The only people who can be used to invade or attack another country will be females, using stone axes. Males and females can defend their country, using only stone axes, against any invaders or attackers. This rule would end the insanity that causes unnecessary wars because no leader would send a country’s females into such a war.

I dream of giving birth to a child who will ask, Mother, what was war? Eve Merriam

Airport Security

By Charles Tolleson
November 17, 2010

Recent stories about the airport scanners said there are complaints from the traveling public. Some tribal members are appalled at the scanners and the pat downs as an intrusion of privacy. Others in the tribe think giving up privacy for an “expectation” of safety is fine. One woman said she would get naked for an “expectation” of safety because it was necessary as there was nothing else to do to fight the terrorists. Lady, if you are willing to go that far to fight the terrorists then the terrorists have won! They are laughing at us and they never have to have another successful attack on the U.S. to keep us trembling.

Lady, there is something else we can do. We can bring all of our troops home. As long as The American Foreign Legion is invading, occupying and killing innocent people in other countries just to support Israel's decades long religious war the terrorists will fight back. One will notice the terrorists do not threaten Costa Rica or Brazil, both Christian countries. The reason they threaten the U.S. is because the U.S. threatens them. If you are willing to give up your privacy to fight terrorism, an idea, what would you do if their Islamic army was occupying your country? Would you become a terrorist and fight the invaders?

The woman who is willing to undress in front of government strangers for a promise of safety reminds me of the 1950s when school children were practicing hiding under their desks in case of a nuclear attack. A neighbor of mine had a cement bomb shelter built and stocked with supplies. It was a great placebo. I suppose it is still there, waiting to be used.

The lady who is willing to undress in front of government employees for the “expectation” of safety has a greater chance of being killed by her spouse than by a terrorist. About 500 people in the U.S. are killed each year by their spouses and partners. Since 9/11 there have been no citizens killed in the U.S. by terrorists.

In 2009, before the government mob started scanning us and putting their hands on our private parts, there were over 700 MILLION passengers that boarded airplanes to, and inside the United States. Not one passenger lost their life to a terrorist carrying a bomb on board. Yet, the meek and the fearful think these astronomical odds against a terrorist carrying a successful bomb on board justify giving up their freedoms.

Though there has not been a death in the U.S. by a foreign terrorist since 9/11, it is only a matter of time until another successful major terrorist attack on the U.S. due simply to the United States’ arrogant policy of trying to tell other people in other countries how to live. If the United States grounded all airplanes the terrorist would find other targets in the U.S. as long as the U.S. invades and kills people in other countries.

If the world was all one race, religion, and one government, there would still be young men who would want to make a big “explosion” to win glory and martyrdom. Timothy McVeigh went happily to his death knowing he was a martyr, loved and respected by others like him who hated big government.

If you give up your rights and air travel becomes perfectly safe from terrorists attacks the terrorists will just try softer targets, like the failed attempt at Times Square to set off a car bomb. After car bombs go off in crowded places the meek will then scream for all cars to be searched. When that fails to provide safety the meek will then demand for homes to be searched. They will give more of their power and freedom to the government mob for an "expectation" of safety. When their expectations are not met they will give yet more power and freedoms to the government mob and continue to wave the American flag and say America is the home of the free and land of the brave. Free people are not absolutely safe. Absolutely safe people are not free.

Since 9/11 there has been over 5 BILLION passenger enplanments to and within the U.S. Yet, not one passenger has lost their life to a terrorist carrying a bomb on board an airliner. Despite these odds passengers still are willing to give up their privacy for an illusion of safety.

In 1943 Abraham Maslow created his hierarchy of human needs pyramid. No where in the pyramid was the need for liberty and freedom. However, second in importance on his pyramid was safety. Our behavior and demands for safety prove Maslow was right.

Many people will pontificate about how our soldiers sacrifice to protect our freedoms. These same pontificators then meekly give those same freedoms away to the government mob.

The terrorists never threatened the U.S. until after 1948 when President Harry “Nuclear” Truman said Israel could take some Arab lands and form a Jewish state. This was in response to America’s guilt of not letting Jews immigrate to the U.S. from the Nazi persecutions in the 1930s.

“We kill because we are afraid of our own shadow, afraid that if we used a little common sense we'd have to admit that our glorious principles were wrong.” ~Henry Miller, The Wisdom of the Heart, 1941

Dining Out

By Charles Tolleson
November 15, 2010

I have had many wonderful dining out experiences. Some of the best have been in small elegant restaurants that were quiet.

In the past few years I have avoided dining out, unless social duties require so, because I no longer have a lady to frequent those quiet romantic restaurants with.

Last night social duties required I dine out with some friends. As I expected the food was good but the restaurant patrons were loud. Americans just seem to think loud boisterous behavior symbolizes happiness. I could barely hear my friends across the table talking because of the noise. There was a group close by of 14 people, half of them children, dressed as if they just came from lounging on their sofa or playing in their back yard.

The noise was so irritating that I wanted to stand up and say, “Attention please. We will now have five minutes of silence. Patrons will not be allowed to speak to each other, only to their servers.”

I also wanted to ask anyone who was dressed inappropriately to leave. Americans seem to think their sloven attire and boisterous behavior is something the public needs. I doubt if a restaurant with a dress code could stay in business today. Does anyone remember going to a restaurant that required a man to wear a tie? I do.

Can Troops Get Too Much Love

By Charles Tolleson
November 13, 2010

I have written before about the excessive and unnecessary praise given to our military and police.

There was a Christian Science Monitor news story on November 10, 2010 by By Anna Mulrine titled “Can troops get too much love?”

The story describes the adulation troops receive as causing troops to feel haughty enough to disobey orders from civilian leaders, like President Obama and Defense Secretary Gates. Troops who are in charge in an Afghanistan village feel like they are the law. They think and act like they are “Warrior Kings”, said a retired major general.

When you tell someone you love them you give them your power, unless you give them tough love. You should not give your power to people who have bigger guns than you have. Even if you tell the Sheepdogs you love them, the Sheepdogs should always know their master is the electorate. Former President Harry Truman did the right thing when he fired General Douglas MacArthur for disobeying an order from the President.

It is certainly true that politicians start wars for unjust reasons and the military can always argue the policies of the civilians in Washington D.C. are policies of folly. That does not mean the policies would be more reasonable and intelligent if they were made by military personnel. Nor would we have fewer wars if the military personnel were in charge. It could be said that some experienced ex military people like former President Eisenhower would end wars; he ended the Korean War, and avoided other wars. President Eisenhower stayed out of Vietnam when the French asked for America’s help at Dien Bien Phu. But, one must remember, President Eisenhower was a civilian at the time he made the decisions to avoid war. His actions were based on campaign promises and the need to get votes for his re-election in 1956.

James Madison- “As the greatest danger to liberty is from large standing armies, it is best to prevent them by an effectual provision for a good militia.” (Notes of debates in the 1787 Federal Convention)

I think Madison’s concern was correct. Power also corrupts. The current U.S. Military Nation has too much power. It’s time to bring all U.S. troops home and downsize the military empire.

The danger of a military coup in the U.S. has been of no concern to the citizenry because the military has always reported to civilians who were up for re-election on a regular basis. But terror, the fear of terrorists, and the fear that Islam will take over the Christian world will create an opportunity for all kinds of evil.

If there is an attempted military coup in the U.S. there are millions of people who would support such a coup. All of those who hate President Obama would think having a “Warrior King” in charge would be a great thing. Those who would give up their liberty for a promise of order and protection should read, “The Discourse on Voluntary Servitude”, by Etienne De La Boetie, written in 1548.

Military Funerals

By Charles Tolleson
November 11, 2010

There was a funeral in an Illinois town for a soldier killed in Afghanistan. The local high school students lined the streets as the funeral procession, led by police cars, passed by.

Throughout history tribes have always honored those lost in battle, even if the battle is ten thousand miles from home while carrying out an unnecessary war.

The tribe does this to make sure there are always new warriors willing to sign up. The tribe is always fearful, a basic instinct, and they always want to make sure there are enough warriors to allay the fears of the tribe. They praise, encourage, and indoctrinate the young men to take on the task of protecting the tribe. However, the young men get used by old men in wars that have nothing to do with tribal protection.

When I joined the army as a young lad I had no idea where Korea was or why we were fighting there. I was just naïve enough to follow the orders of old demonic men. Now that I am older and wiser, and a veteran, I realize I was just a war enabler, enabling old men to send young men into foreign countries to kill strangers they had no arguments with.

Last night, on the eve of Veterans Day, my ten year old grandson called and asked what years I served in the military. I told him and asked why he wanted to know. He, only ten years old, was assigned by a government school to write the names of family members who were veterans. Each name will be a brick paper on a wall in the classroom to honor veterans. He is getting his indoctrination early. I would like to talk to his teacher. The children who do not have any family members who are veterans probably feel shame.

Providing respect with a parade, a police escort, and customers let out from the government schools to line the streets to show more respect as the fallen soldier passes by, is a great way to get future enlistments. Each young man has illusions of glory and fame, even if it requires risking his life. He is more afraid of shame than of bullets. If he shows his courage, a common quality in men, (men show courage in many ways as civilians) by putting on a uniform he will be rewarded with respect, medals, a pension, and a mate, all basic needs of a man.

I can imagine the thoughts going through the minds of those young high school males as they see all of the respect shown to a dead soldier. They know the odds of them finding this kind of respect in a normal civilian job are extremely low. Their minds start thinking of the risk/rewards. A small percentage of the young men are prime candidates to fulfill the State’s most basic function, to make war. Without them the State would have to compromise and negotiate with other states, just like individuals do.

My son said there should be an anti Vietnam War rally to remind the young people how easy it is for the government warmongers to dupe the young into dying in unnecessary wars.

"Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace". ~Charles Sumner

College Tuition Costs Increase, Again

By Charles Tolleson

(In 2008, there were gasps as Cal State fees were raised to $3,048 a year. Now the $4,200 yearly tuition is expected to rise by 5% next semester and an additional 10% the following academic year, climbing close to $5,000 — more than three times what it was a decade ago.)

Why is college tuition increasing faster than inflation? It’s because demand has outpaced supply. Why has supply not kept up with demand? Because the State college system is a quasi monopoly like many other cartels, such as the American Medical Association and the American Bar Association.

The demand for college degrees has been fueled by student loans and free tuition for poor students. The cost increases are to the middle class parents who have to pay the tuition for the poor students. The loans allow students to spend years paying back the loan. Many students do not think they will have any problem finding a job and paying back the loan. The student loan program is creating a bubble in education much like the housing bubble of 2008.

Even middle class parents can take out low interest student loans for their children to attend college.

The best way to lower college costs is for the American Chamber of Commerce to announce they will no longer require a college degree for employment. Instead of a college degree American businesses will now require an education. This education may be obtained by online courses, on the job experiences, reading Wikipedia, or reading articles found by searching the Internet. An interview for a job at an American business may require a test to prove an applicant’s education. By this action the Chamber of Commerce will have more applicants to choose from which should lower the cost of labor.

Education used to be done at home or by tutors. Then it became a government monopoly. Sesame Street on TV showed how mass education can be more efficient. There are all kinds of free education courses online today. YouTube has YouTube-Education. It’s time the government stopped running education and allows education to be run by consumer choices in the free market.

San Francisco Restaurant Health Inspectors

By Charles Tolleson

According to the San Francisco Visitors Bureau there were about 3500 restaurants in San Francisco in July of 2009. The number changes daily. http://www.sfcvb.org/media/downloads/travel_media/sf_facts.pdf
On November 8, 2010 there was a news story that said, “San Francisco health officials say restaurant inspections are lagging because of a lack of staff. The San Francisco Health Department has 19 food inspectors instead of the 23 it is supposed to. Health officials tell the San Francisco Examiner that retirements and disciplinary problems have whittled down the staff. The shortage means thousands of restaurants may only be getting one inspection a year, and eateries with problems may not be receiving follow-up visits. All restaurants and food preparation facilities are supposed to be inspected twice a year, with those where significant problems have been identified getting a third visit.”

With 19 inspectors to inspect 3500 restaurants twice each year means each inspector will have to make 368 inspections per year, or 31 per month, or 8 per week, or 1.53 per day.

It seems like the health department has too many inspectors and should reduce their staff further! How difficult is it for one person to inspect less than two restaurants per day? If this was a private run service you can bet each employee would be more efficient, especially for the amount of money and perks the government employees are currently receiving. No wonder local, State, and Federal governments are running deficits.

"What is the best government? That which teaches us to govern ourselves." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 - 1832)

Police Funerals

A San Diego policeman was killed on duty. His funeral on Nov 4, 2010 was attended by 3400 police people. Gov. Arnold Schwarznegger was one of the speakers at the services. Governor-Elect Jerry Brown was expected to attend, along with the city council, county board of supervisors and other dignitaries as well as law enforcement officers from as far away as Chicago, Texas and Florida. Police people from nearby cites patrolled San Diego so the San Diego police people could attend the funeral. There were over 800 police vehicles in the funeral procession.

Solid waste haulers rank third on the list of the riskiest jobs in the United States, according to a study by the Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Miami, and the University of Miami. Averaging 90 deaths annually per 100,000 workers, collection falls behind fishing, with 178 deaths, and timber cutting, with 156. Many trash haulers work for local governments and many trash haulers work for private companies like Waste Management. Aircraft pilots had death rates in 2004 of 92 per 100,000 workers.

The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund reported 2009 statistics. The fund, a non-profit group, reported that 125 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty in 2009. 56 of those deaths were from traffic accidents. There are about 800,000 law enforcement people in the U.S. This would equal a death rate of about 16 per hundred thousand, far below other occupations. Where are the public dignitaries and the media to cover the deaths and funerals of those people killed in the line of duty with higher fatality rates than law enforcement?

Why does a government employee killed on the job get such a big government paid ceremonial funeral and a private employee killed on the job is ignored? Commercial fishermen who provide us food and construction workers who build our homes and transportation workers who provide our fuel have higher occupational fatality rates than police people. So why does a funeral of a commercial fisherman not get the same attention as a police person’s funeral? Why do police persons’ heirs receive more and better benefits than the heirs of a commercial fisherman or a trash hauler?

The reasons are the powers of the government employee unions. They lobby for these State paid funerals and time off to attend the funeral of another government employee.

These government employees do what is in their best interest. They try to promote their value so others will invest in them. All humans try this tactic. The government unions have the power to pull it off and the private construction worker does not. The State always tries to glorify itself and its functions. It tries to lower the value of the individual private citizen and raise the value of the “guardians”. The State employees always have a marketing campaign that tries to sell their value so the private citizens will be glad to buy from the monopolistic State at higher prices than provided by a free market.

Charles Tolleson