[QwOpHGyZ]

I think ya'll are wanting to revert back to a pre 9/11 way of life and that is not going to happen. Heck, we should have been doing more at airports then. We were way, way to vulnerable and we paid the price for that. There are no "freedoms" being given up. Yes the patriot act made things a little easier but it is necessary to keep 1000's from being slaughtered. The terrorist have still not won anything. They are on the run, and getting killed. As a matter of fact, just saw where5 more were taken out in Yemen by a predator!

No one is saying go back to pre-9/11 at the aiports. We don't need people able to just amble up to the boarding area. That is retarded.

Do you listen to yourself? "Well yeah the Patriot Act makes it easier (to take away freedoms) but it's necessary." So what's your limit? When has the government reached the tipping point where you'll say "Whoa, wait a minute. I have rights."

I go through the scanner at airports, or metal detectors and I've had to get patted down once (I forgot I had bobby pins in my hair and metal detector went off and weren't sure why) but there has to be a point. I'm not willing to live in fear that danger lurks around every corner. I'm not going to say "Oh that guy "could" be a terrorist." No one knows what terrorists "look" like. Anyone can be a terrorist. Anyone could have evil intents in their brain to do harm. But I'm not going to become paranoid about it. What we need to do is like other countries and behavior profiling. They're going to test it out in Boston I think. That makes more sense than just suspect everyone (or people with certain apparel or skin color).

Ooh five more terrorists taken out in Yemen...you know there are about 10 to replace those five right? They're like cockroaches; they never die. So quite honestly we will never completely get rid of terrorism anymore than we get rid of the drug trafficking problem. Like I said they're weak - they're not defeated. And even if AQ does get defeated, there's always someone to take its place.

YOu do realize that the US as we know it will not last forever? Just like Rome fell, we'll probably fall too. Nobody stays on top forever...but if we do it will be from within because the government gets too powerful. I'm waiting for the second American revolution quite honestly...

[Muhabsssa]

Well I guess everyones limit is different. just as we all have varing opinons etc. I can see the necessity to spend a little more time at the airport then before. I have no problem with that if it keeps me and my family and you safe as well. I am still wondering what freedoms we are losing. I have lost none...

[JEWELMARGY]

Wow..this utopian world you want of peace and love is never going to happen. There are bad people out there who want to do bad things to us.

It will happen... eventually.

Pretty simple. Now you can be your usual USA hating self and try and blame us but that just goes to show how far out there you truly are. Blowback is the espionage term for the violent, unintended consequences of a covert operation that are suffered by the civil population of the aggressor government. To the civilians suffering the blowback of covert operations, the effect typically manifests itself as “random” acts of political violence without a discernible, direct cause; because the public—in whose name the intelligence agency acted—are ignorant of the effected secret attacks that provoked revenge (counter-attack) against them.[1] Specifically, blowback denotes the resultant, violent consequences—reported as news fact, by domestic and international mass communications media, when the actor intelligence agency hides its responsibility via media manipulation. Generally, blowback loosely denotes every consequence of every aspect of a secret attack operation, thus, it is synonymous with consequence—the attacked victims’ revenge against the civil populace of the aggressor country, because the responsible politico-military leaders are invulnerable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowbac...ntelligence%29

The term "boomerang effect" can be used to describe the effects of a deliberate change to an ecosystem, when these effects escape the control of those who introduced them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomerang_effect

The only valid point you made is the cost of the wars. And you don't care about the casualties?

We should be making Iraq and Afghanistan foot the bill for much of it, especially Iraq and the UN. Iraq (Sadaam) was in violation of over 17 UN sanctions and as such needed to be dealt with. Since it was the UN who authorized the attacks based on the UN sanctions they should be helping more. But in typical UN fashion, the US does all the work for everyone. That's like making a Jew pay the utilities bill for the oven.

And you really think they'd pay? They'd LAUGH at us.

And when they refused to pay, what would we be able to do about it? Tear down the government we just spent trillions of dollars establishing? Fight ANOTHER insurgency... this time armed with the hundreds of thousands of American weapons we just gave them?

You're on crack if you think the Iraqis would pay us for destroying their country and slaughtering their people.

And as for the veterans, I am in Iraq now (again)..this is what we signed up to do. While every death and every injury is tragic and I have the upmost respect for every single one of them...this is our job. And if you listen to any disabled vet they will tell you the same..no self pity, no complaining...nothing but honor, respect and courage. You do them all a disservice by discrediting why and why the served. This sounds like an emotional appeal, not one based on logic or reason.

[ONLINEPHARMACYCHEAPILLS]

Breast cancer or not she was tagged to be searched. She wants to fly she abides by the rules. The electronic screening showed something unusual and the TSA should react. Worse case, terrorist remove breast and inserts C4, if this was the case and your fam was on the plane the TSA would still loose. Let them dudes work if some people just shut-up follow direction it would be a none issue.

I hate when I get pulled over to be searched, knowing there's nothing suspicious about me, but does TSA know that, no they don't. I was even pulled to the side had to unpack my carry on piece by piece, even bomb tested my flashlight, in my head it was extreme but did I complain, nah because I needed to get o that flight. Now I think people see TSA as an easy way to get cash flow.

[TeLMgNva]

[merloermfgj]

Well I guess everyones limit is different. just as we all have varing opinons etc. I can see the necessity to spend a little more time at the airport then before. I have no problem with that if it keeps me and my family and you safe as well. I am still wondering what freedoms we are losing. I have lost none...

Not yet - but it could happen. Technically the Constitution doesn't mention privacy but Supreme Court decisions have established a right to privacy as a basic human right. Some say the right to privacy is inherent in the Bill of Rights, such as the third, the fourth and 5th Amendments.

It is said that a right to privacy is inherent in many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the 3rd, the 4th's search and seizure limits, and the 5th's self-incrimination limit.

I would call a body pat down an unreasonable search and seizure when a person has not provided probable cause to be searched. That's like seeing someone walk down the street and a cop says "oh he looks like a criminal, I better pull him over." That's not probable cause. Or we had this instance in college - town cop saw a kid walking down the sidewalk with a cup and the kid walked into a house where a party was going on. Cop followed him into the party, found a bunch of kids underage drinking and gave out MIP (minor in possession). Those kids went to court, the judge threw it out because he did not have probable cause to enter that house.

So those people like this woman with breast cancer did lose her privacy. Other people who are searched with no probable cause are getting their rights infringed upon.

[Skete]

Breast cancer or not she was tagged to be searched. She wants to fly she abides by the rules. The electronic screening showed something unusual and the TSA should react. Worse case, terrorist remove breast and inserts C4, if this was the case and your fam was on the plane the TSA would still loose. Let them dudes work if some people just shut-up follow direction it would be a none issue.

I hate when I get pulled over to be searched, knowing there's nothing suspicious about me, but does TSA know that, no they don't. I was even pulled to the side had to unpack my carry on piece by piece, even bomb tested my flashlight, in my head it was extreme but did I complain, nah because I needed to get o that flight. Now I think people see TSA as an easy way to get cash flow.

Except for they didn't follow their own procedures. She wasn't taken to a private area to be screened. They didn't even allow her to show her card. The TSA agent should have taken her to a private area to screen her and the supervisor should have been more reasonable. I have no problem with the body scanners - like I said - I've gone through them. No problem with a search if it's necessary. But don't fondle me up in front of the whole world to see like I'm a criminal.

That's my favorite line "Worst case scenario." So why don't we prepare for every "worst case scenario" in the world. Are you prepared for a nuclear attack? Or a chemical attack?

If a terrorist is able to blow up a plane, there's not much I can do about it and if my family was on it I'd be upset but I'm not going to blame the TSA.

"Just shut up and follow direction." Hmmm...there have been plenty atrocities committed in the past where people said "Just shut up and do what you're told or you'll make it worse."

Okay you want to talk about "worst case scenario" with terrorists - let's talk about worst case scenarios with our government when it gets too much power...

[paydayloanfasters]

I am just curious why individual Airlines can't be entrusted with managing their own Security. You want to be a strong competitor in the industry, you take the steps you feel appropriate to keep your passengers safe. If those steps prove overly restrictive, you lose business because people instead fly with somebody else. You don't take enough, and an incident occurs (which seems to happen regardless) the word gets out and you go into face-saving mode trying to reassure customers that your services are safe (Kind of like Toyota recently with all the recalls). The only role the government would play is to provide a bunch of best practices and recommendations for ensuring the safety of the passengers in flight.

[Relsenlilky]

I am just curious why individual Airlines can't be entrusted with managing their own Security. You want to be a strong competitor in the industry, you take the steps you feel appropriate to keep your passengers safe. If those steps prove overly restrictive, you lose business because people instead fly with somebody else. You don't take enough, and an incident occurs (which seems to happen regardless) the word gets out and you go into face-saving mode trying to reassure customers that your services are safe (Kind of like Toyota recently with all the recalls). The only role the government would play is to provide a bunch of best practices and recommendations for ensuring the safety of the passengers in flight.

An interesting idea - as long as there were some reasonable minimal requirements that needed to be met. And of course ACTUAL TRAINING STANDARDS, a concept that seems to be totally beyond the TSA.

[gkruCRi1]

An interesting idea - as long as there were some reasonable minimal requirements that needed to be met. And of course ACTUAL TRAINING STANDARDS, a concept that seems to be totally beyond the TSA.

I think the minimal requirements would kind of surface regardless. Businesses have a funny way of taking action in the face of losing business to competitors whose operations are more effective and product/service are perceived to be of higher quality.

[SkeniaInhilla]

By "minimal requirements" I mean the absolute rock-bottom safety standards your security measures need to meet.

So while I agree the TSA as of now is completely out of control, there still needs to be some kind of security standard, metal detectors, a few random searches (within reason), training minimums, background checks for security employees... that sort of thing.

Think of it this way - what if one airline had no security whatsoever, so they could gain an edge over their competitors? That would be an incident waiting to happen.

[Suvaxal]

By "minimal requirements" I mean the absolute rock-bottom safety standards your security measures need to meet.

So while I agree the TSA as of now is completely out of control, there still needs to be some kind of security standard, metal detectors, a few random searches (within reason), training minimums, background checks for security employees... that sort of thing.

Think of it this way - what if one airline had no security whatsoever, so they could gain an edge over their competitors? That would be an incident waiting to happen.

I also think that would be a self-correcting problem in the long term. I think leaving "minimum requirements" has the potential to stifle some innovative methods that could be more effective and efficient, thus I do not personally recommend it. Think of it like a dirt-cheap jalopy on the lot that looks like it's going to break down before you drive it off the lot. 9/11 is pretty fresh on people's brains, the blogosphere probably would not be very friendly towards an airline that was too reckless with its security. Various magazines would trash them, and they would be forced to spend countless new dollars trying to repair that damaged reputation.

[BuyNetHosting]

Wooo there buddy. You remember all the heat I got when I posted a comic about priests and children.....

[DoctorDeryOne]

Wooo there buddy. You remember all the heat I got when I posted a comic about priests and children.....

I actually don't think I saw that one.

[unfolaReemoma]

Yes but using the same analogy, there are minimum requirements a car needs to meet. Safety and environmental standards it needs to meet before it even rolls off the assembly line, and even after you own it, it still needs to pass annual state inspections.



I actually don't think I saw that one.

Sure they exist now, but that still doesn't prevent someone from getting behind the wheel and driving something that is non-compliant. I think in many cases we might as well turn all Federal "regulations" into "recommendations" because quite frankly it's more realistic. Then for the knuckleheads who blow it off the judge can just shake their head muttering "dumbass, it's not like you weren't told" when that person gets sued to the stone age in a civil court.

[Indian Butt Magic]

I actually don't think I saw that one.

Oh, nevermind. It was funny and relevent and people got their nickers in a twist.

I actually don't see the problem with going back to pre 9/11 safty standards. It was a horrible loss but at the end of the day, shit happens and no matter what safty measures you put in place, someone with the know how and motivation will eventually get the drop on us. There is no use creating a false sense of security at the cost of real rights.

[Dwencejed]

By "minimal requirements" I mean the absolute rock-bottom safety standards your security measures need to meet.

So while I agree the TSA as of now is completely out of control, there still needs to be some kind of security standard, metal detectors, a few random searches (within reason), training minimums, background checks for security employees... that sort of thing.

Think of it this way - what if one airline had no security whatsoever, so they could gain an edge over their competitors? That would be an incident waiting to happen.

Exactly and I don't think anyone thinks there should be absolutely no security.

[cheapphenonline]

Wooo there buddy. You remember all the heat I got when I posted a comic about priests and children.....

I must have missed that one...

[Adimonnna]

The TSA agent should have taken her to a private area to screen her and the supervisor should have been more reasonable. But don't fondle me up in front of the whole world to see like I'm a criminal.

That's my favorite line "Worst case scenario." So why don't we prepare for every "worst case scenario" in the world. Are you prepared for a nuclear attack? Or a chemical attack?

… it I'd b upset but I'm not going to blame the TSA.

"Just shut up and follow direction." Hmmm...there have been plenty atrocities committed in the past where people said "Just shut up and do what you're told or you'll make it worse."

Okay you want to talk about "worst case scenario" with terrorists - let's talk about worst case scenarios with our government when it gets too much power...

Maybe the gate supervisor was reasonable, we don’t know what kind of attitude she gave or the words that came out of her mouth, we also can’t say the gate should have done this or that. If we look back on history and say what people should have done it would be a perfect world. The gate supervisor is under stress to keep the lines moving; maybe he didn’t have the man power to send her to a private room. I’m sure she had enough privacy and I’m sure she wasn’t being groped, so she lost 1 minute of privacy – get over it.

Yes, I’m prepared for a nuclear attack I completed the CBT, got chem. gear and I work in a bunker, I’d call that pretty ready. I’m sure I’d know it’s coming before most.

Yes maybe you won’t blame TSA but many will as many blame the airlines for the attacks of 9/11. All types of people will have all types of blame and conspiracy theories.

Yes at times people should just shut and follow direction, I’m not talking about killing someone because you’re told, I’m talking about getting searched by TSA, like it or not they will determine if you’re riding the plane of not, that puts them in the authoritative position

The government already has too much power.

[Ygd2qr8k]

Maybe the gate supervisor was reasonable, we don’t know what kind of attitude she gave or the words that came out of her mouth, we also can’t say the gate should have done this or that. If we look back on history and say what people should have done it would be a perfect world. The gate supervisor is under stress to keep the lines moving; maybe he didn’t have the man power to send her to a private room. I’m sure she had enough privacy and I’m sure she wasn’t being groped, so she lost 1 minute of privacy – get over it.

Yes, I’m prepared for a nuclear attack I completed the CBT, got chem. gear and I work in a bunker, I’d call that pretty ready. I’m sure I’d know it’s coming before most.

Yes maybe you won’t blame TSA but many will as many blame the airlines for the attacks of 9/11. All types of people will have all types of blame and conspiracy theories.

Yes at times people should just shut and follow direction, I’m not talking about killing someone because you’re told, I’m talking about getting searched by TSA, like it or not they will determine if you’re riding the plane of not, that puts them in the authoritative position

The government already has too much power.

I'm pretty sure if someone says they are uncomfortable with getting a pat-down in public, the TSA agent is supposed to take them to a private area. Oh yeah enough privacy that the agent could yell out loud enough to the people in line what was going on.

So the government has "too much" power you want to allow them more? Yes people always blame and yes hindsight is 20/20. But in THIS situation, there is a pretty reasonable response - the agent should have taken her somewhere private and they should have at least checked her medical card. Every organization has rude employees but they represent the company.