Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary John Kelly has heard all of that criticism from Americans who are upset at the way his employees treat them and other people, and he has a response for all of you ingrates: Shut up.
If you've ever dealt with surly Transportation Security Administration (TSA) staff who treat you as though you work for them and not the other way around, such behavior goes all the way to the top. In a wide-ranging speech designed to reinforce President Donald Trump's attitude that America is under siege, Kelly spoke told an audience at George Washington University and pretty much told them that without the aggressive approaches of the DHS we'd all be murdered by drug cartels and terrorist groups. So can it with the criticism.
The whole speech is watchable here at C-Span for the so-inclined. His speech was essentially a combination of every single post-9/11 security state speech combined with every single '80s and '90s drug warrior panic speech. The media responses are highlighting his defensiveness to criticism. Via The Hill:
Personnel are "often ridiculed and insulted by public officials, and frequently convicted in the court of public opinion on unfounded allegations testified to by street lawyers and spokespersons," Kelly said.
"If lawmakers do not like the laws they've passed and we are charged to enforce then they should have the courage and skill to change the laws. Otherwise they should shut up and support the men and women on the front lines," Kelly said, to a burst of applause in the auditorium.
These comments came toward the end of his prepared speech, so it's useful to provide some context with the other things he talked about. He described the way Americans are treated by TSA when we travel as "a little bit of an inconvenience." He was not being sarcastic. He still believes that marijuana is a "gateway drug" and said so. He added that DHS will continue to force federal law on marijuana as long as it's against federal law, regardless of whatever the states may want. So keep that in mind if you're thinking of bringing some on a flight to anywhere. He also, incidentally, made a big deal that DHS employees swear an oath to defend the Constitution, which is notable inasmuch as there is no sign that the DHS has any respect for the Fourth Amendment whatsoever when it comes to searching Americans anywhere near the nation's borders.
Even further, a good chunk of his speech was full of fearmongering about drug cartels and recent increases in drug-related deaths to emphasize the rhetoric that our nation is under attack. He says at one point more people are dying from drugs than died during World War I, but his idea of dealing with increasing drug deaths is a "comprehensive plan to reduce drug demand." The problem is us, not them, you see. They have to figure out how to stop us from wanting to use drugs.
Kelly has a very typical cognitive dissonance issue we see a lot with law-and-order types. He insists that his people are enforcing the law, true enough. But his comments also make it very, very clear that he supports the drug war, though he does acknowledge at some point that America "can't arrest our way" out of the drug problem.
But who are the biggest opponents to changes in drug laws to maybe stop arresting people? Time and time again it's law enforcement lobbyists, whether we're talking about police, prosecutors, or prison representatives, who oppose any and all attempts to scale back their authorities to arrest and imprison people. The same folks who say "We're just enforcing the law" will fight tooth-and-nail any effort to crank back those laws. There's a tremendous amount of grant money and funding involved in "enforcing the law." They have strong incentives not to permit changes.
Similarly, Kelly therefore has every incentive to exaggerate the threats America faces, because his budgets depend on it, and President Trump is looking to spend, spend, spend on DHS and border security. In his speech he tries to suggest that DHS's budget has been cut to the bone. Though DHS's discretionary budget was cut during the sequester in 2008, DHS budgets and spending have been inching upward year after year (Check out this chart and read the text below to see which DHS agencies have been seeing the biggest boosts).
Kelly and his agents have every reason in the world to scare Americans into total compliance, every reason to insist that the drug war and terrorism is a constant threat, and every reason to suspect every traveler coming into the country could be a threat, and every reason to treat us as though we citizens are merely subjects of government authority. This also means that many of the domestic terror threats he mentions having prevented in his speech were frequently the result of undercover FBI stings that frequently are encouraging people to act out so that they can bust them, and it's not clear (and will never be clear) how many of these men would have actually done anything had undercover agents not been helping them along.
And the security theater driving the TSA's searches has long been exposed as ineffective, insulting, and incomprehensible. Their failures in catching actual threats compared to the inane overreactions they have to perfectly harmless objects are well known, and the result has been to actually dumb down procedures and make searches even more invasive rather than more effective.
Hey, Kelly, want to know why people hate you and your employees? Watch this video from ReasonTV. This is what you're telling Americans and lawmakers they should support:
Lets see who is telling what, so we can try to determine why
Scott Shackford is an associate editor at Reason.com. [Reason is a libertarian monthly print magazine].
Shackford comes to Reason after nearly a decade of serving in various editing positions for Freedom Communications, a libertarian-leaning media chain that may or may not still exist depending on when this profile is being read. Prior to moving to Reason, he was editor in chief of the Desert Dispatch in Barstow, California, where he wrote editorials focusing on libertarian issues like wasteful municipal spending, school choice, the drug war and abuse of police authority. He also editorialized about state and federal transportation and energy spending. Living in the midst of heavily subsidized solar developments in the Mojave Desert, he warned about potential problems with the Department of Energys guaranteed loan program months before Solyndra actually filed for bankruptcy. He was one of the few newspaper editors in California to endorse Proposition 19 to legalize marijuana.
Before becoming part of the massive libertarian media establishment, Shackford once weighed in on much more important matters as a show recapper at Television Without Pity. There, his dislike of Clay Aiken and his disappointment with the writing on Firefly earned him the enmity of the entire Internet. All of it.
John Kelly is trying his best to keep America safe and while there are problems with TSA, he is working to correct those problems.
John Kelly and Homeland Security needs support and suggestions to make their tasks easier and less intrusive for the public.
Let us find reasons and ways to help with the problems .and not be a part of the problem offering only constant criticism and condemnation, which is of no help and solves nothing.
All you libertarians can ever do is piss and moan about everything .while never doing anything to correct any problems.
Oh, you ae helping by calling attention to the problems?
Thats a bunch of crap.
We are intelligent enough to already see the problems.
Damn, your repeated libertarian cry baby whining is really getting to be old stuff.
Hey, Gatlin - want to know why people hate the TSA and its employees? Watch this video from ReasonTV. This is what you're telling Americans and lawmakers they should support:
(A little French lingo there to demonstrate my fondness for little froggies.)
I'm intimating there that most of those who like the herding done by the TSA cowboys probably voted for Hillary.
Gatlin, you appear to be a thoughtful and intelligent man; however, one can't help but notice that you usually side with the central government on various issues. I, on the other hand, believe the central socialist government has spun out of control over the past 100 years and needs to be seriously reigned in.
The TSA and the Homeland (in)Security agencies are a knee-jerk reaction to the Islamic suicide episode of 9/11. How poorly that was handled when instead of going after Saudi Arabia and carpet bombing their oil fields Bush decides to go after Saddam who protected Jews and Christians and bombed Tehran on a regular basis.
There are at least 1 million federal loafers that need to be permanently furloughed and the agencies they work for shut down forever. That means to yank out the communication lines, sell off the furniture and fixtures and sell the buildings, or otherwise get out of costly leases.
The TSA and the Homeland (in)Security agencies are a knee-jerk reaction to the Islamic suicide episode of 9/11. How poorly that was handled
They are a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 .I can buy that.
It was handled at the time .how, I must ask?
Are you saying neither the TSAS or Homeland Security should have ever been formed at all, or formed differently? If formed differently, then how do you suggest they should have been formed?
I, on the other hand, say we had nothing to prevent more hijackers from taking over other airplanes with box cutters a week, a month, or sometime later .and we definitely needed something fast. Fast meaning a knee-jerk reaction? Yea .okay.
I think that we did need something fast. It has been said that Osama bin Laden (OBL) planned the September 11 attacks after being inspired by a chance discussion about a plane crash in the US. I can tell you that if I had been OBL, I would have had another 19 dedicated men in place in America also affiliated with al-Qaeda to repeat the attacks a month or so later. We will never know that OBL did not and that the formation of the TSA and Homeland Security prevented that. Nope, we will never know .will we?
Naturally, since the TSA and Homeland Security were so new and so extremely large, all kinds of mistakes were made at first and growing pains kept them improving over time. But still not perfect, even today.
So, what I am seeing here is that you are saying we dont need either the TSA or Homeland Security and I am saying we need something to do a job, or similar job, to what they are doing. Have I stated that correctly? I do think that both the TSA and Homeland Security are to too large and too inefficient .they need to be trimmed down to lean-mean and efficient counterterrorism fighting machines.
Now, again, it appears that you are totally against these government agencies and I am for some type of lean efficient government agency to do that job. So, if this makes me side with the central government .then I plead guilty in this case.
How poorly that was handled when instead of going after Saudi Arabia and carpet bombing their oil fields
Wow!
Forget forming the TSA and Homeland Security, just go carpet bomb all the Saudi Arabia oil fields .and that would have wiped out OBL and stopped all fanatical Muslims from conducting terrorist arracks world wide? I am missing something here what?
Bush decides to go after Saddam who protected Jews and Christians and bombed Tehran on a regular basis.
That you will need to explain to me so I can understand to respond .sorry about that.
The era of fake news was well on its way before and after 9/11.
I believe there is no debate that the Iraq War was sold to the American public with a collection of CIA and MI5 claims that ended up being proved false. Iraq was said to have weapons of mass destruction, but this wasn't the case. Advocates for the war insinuated that Saddam Hussein was colluding with Al Qaeda and was somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks. That, too, was false. Yet many Americans (and some of their leaders) still believe this stuff. It's a tragedy, but it's also a kind of natural experiment in misinformation.
Those insane terrorists were Saudis and their trip to America was from the Riyadh airport. Saudi Arabia has been financing terrorism against their once main oil client since the origination of Islamic terrorism.
Saddam funded Christian Churches worth millions of Dollars for Assyrians all over the world. His policy was tolerant as he was mostly Agnostic and not a practicing Muslim at all.
He had a tendency to support those who supported him.
Since Christians and Jews were a minority long persecuted in Iraq by Musllims, Kurds, and Turks they found security with Saddam and never opposed him, so much so, that he permitted Aramaic to be used freely but didn't allow Kurdish to be used. The Jews and Christians were well educated and contributed to the Hussein government. The chief of Iraq's air force was a Jew.
Had he not been removed by the oil hungry America , Iraq would have been a safe place for everyone, and not just the Christians and the Jews.
"For all who love freedom and peace, the world without Saddam Hussein's regime is a better and safer place." - George W. Bush