[excon]

Do you fly often? Do you want Muslims bringing more bombs on board....

Would you think differntly if the next two targets were the Space needle in Seattle and the Golden Gate bridge?

Flying is a privledge, not a right.

Hello again, smoothy:

You always manage to hurl an insult, don't you? You're simply incapable of civil discourse... To imply that I'm not a citizen of this great country of ours, and that somehow I wouldn't be bothered if, say Norfolk got bombed, is inflammatory, and wrong.. When I put on the uniform, I protected YOUR rights too.

Secondarily, to suggest that I'm not into security, is silly. As a matter of fact, I make my living in security. I'm just into doing it SMARTLY and CONSTITUTIONALLY. Ben Gurion airport is arguably, the most dangerous airport in the world, yet they don't do what we do. More importantly, WE don't do, what THEY do. I don't know why.

Thirdly, flying IS, of course, a right. We can argue that on another thread if you wish. But, for a Tea Partier, you certainly don't know much about your rights. And, the ones you DO know about, you're willing to give up.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello smoothy:

I'm a private pilot. They don't search me at my local airport. I don't like being searched. I avoid it at every opportunity.

But, I can't help notice some schizophrenia in your posts... On the one hand, you're really pissed because they actually SEARCH you... And, then on the other hand, you say it "beats not doing anything"...

As a dedicated Tea Partier, who thinks government is too BIG, and too INTRUSIVE in our lives, I'd think you'd be going along with me on this... No, huh?

excon

Insult? Exactly HOW is picking out Two WEST COAST landmarks an insult... because they already did New York City and Washington DC... why do you think the west coast is more important. Its easy to be so " big whoop" when its 3,500 miles away... when its in your back yard the reality would sink in. And who is to say... they would not consider those as future targets? It's the West coast people that have been the ones argueing "get over it" when it comes to 9/11 related issues... because for the most part... none of that happened in their front yard.

As a private pilot, you would be exempt, same with Charter jets... not as much fun for them to blow themselves up to take out just one or two (or a handful of)people. Its meant more for the cattle cars with wings. More bang for the buck.

Yes I am a bit torqued I can't carry certain things I used to be able to carry in the past... and none of them were dangerous. Its just that I do understand WHY they are doing it, and it was in fact due to a real threat based on real attempts.

I don't run the show or I'd make all Muslims walk... Particularly those that think women should wear body length grain sacks or head scarfs.

The threat is 99.99% Muslim in nature... not children or Grandmothers from Rottencrotch Iowa.

I actually agree with most of the security measures they take... or at least understand why they have to be done. An personally I've had more issues with idiots that work for Nortwest Airlines... than I have any individual I have met with TSA so far. I've actually had no negative incidents with actual TSA people yet. Only morons for certain Airlines, and only two airlines at that. I refuse to fly either of them any longer.

I may WISH we didn't have to do any of them... but I am not burying my head in the sand as to the very real threat we have, mostly from Muslims.

Flying is not a right... You have alternate means of getting where you have to go... its no more of a right than driving. They are both a privilege... huge difference between the two. YOu can get anywhere you have to go without flying. Sure its going to take you longer... but you can still do it.


The argument about driving being a priveledge and not a right has already been hashed out in the courts. Flying is no different.

[tomder55]

I think they should go back to pre 9-11 .Let the airlines take care of the security of their planes.
Then the free market could decide which airline was going too far ;not far enough ,or just the right amt. of security.

Smoothy is right in that air travel is not an inherent right. I got frisked by the private security at the Giants game. It was part of the deal . I could've taken a stand and not permitted it... and the Giants could've equally refused admission .

[smoothy]

Exactly... submitting to the security checks is voluntary... you can find alternate transportation if you don't want to go through it.

They aren't randomly stopping you on the street making you do it. THAT whould be a far different situation.

[excon]

I could've taken a stand and not permitted it ....and the Giants could've equally refused admission .

Hello again, tom:

I take that stand. I wish more of us did. Maybe then, I'd still have my Fourth Amendment rights. Most people lay down for authority. That's why the government is able to DO what it DOES to us. We are becoming a nation of sheep. We DESERVE a police state.

excon

[tomder55]

A 4:15 start gave tailgaters 4 hrs to get properly juiced before the game started.

I'm not into getting hit by projectile beer bottles while enjoying a game. I determine the private security at the Meadowlands was doing me a favor.

[cdad]

Hello again, tom:

I take that stand. I wish more of us did. Maybe then, I'd still have my Fourth Amendment rights. Most people lay down for authority. That's why the government is able to DO what it DOES to us. We are becoming a nation of sheep. We DESERVE a police state.

excon

I was going to a concert one time and they had random security in the crowds before you walk in and they would make a quick pass. To see if you were carrying bottles. The problem is they didn't tell anyone and I knocked the guy out before his hand got near enough to check. I had no idea what he was doing

They didn't arrest me for it because of the way they were doing it they had no recourse. They weren't even in uniform of badged in any way.

[excon]

Hello again,

I THOUGHT the post was about security... Now, I think it's about politics... It seems the only people who are upset about the TSA, are the ones who thought the TSA was great when George W. Bush forced the TSA upon us.

But, since Obama is running the TSA, the Republicans have miraculously become civil libertarians... Something's fishy. The right wing thinks we have TOO MUCH security?? I ain't buying it. You'll notice they don't mention a thing about the NSA spying on Americans, which is a much more egregious Constitutional violation...

Nope. This is just another attack on Obama. Really... The Republicans worried about civil liberties... Bwa, ha ha ha...

excon

[tomder55]

I don't know how you divine that from the comments I've made.

Do I think passenger screening is necessary ? Absolutely . So I am not suddenly a born again libertarian .Do I think the TSA is the best means of doing it ? Nope . That makes me consistent with my conservative free market approach.

[spitvenom]

I don't know maybe it is cause I went to a lot of hip hop concerts but getting a pat down doesn't bother me. When I was younger I was going to concerts every night and every night I had some big burly dude grabbing my jawn (that's philly for junk). So to me an aggressive pat down doesn't mean anything.

[smoothy]

Having to deal with the lines is a PITA... and honestly would have been nice to NOT have to worry about Muslims that were brainwashed by so called Islamic Religious "leaders" whithout the balls to do for themselves what they sucker others into doing for them.

But I do fly often enough to NOT want to fly where everyone else isn't checked as well as they can be. I don't care if THEY die... the problem is they don't want to die by themselves, and I don't want them anywhere near where I am when they do it.

It's a balancing act... deal with the inconvienience or let the terrorists do what they want, where they want, when they want.

I think the inconvienience is the lesser of two evils. Until a better more reliable method is found and proven to be more efffective.

But I'd still rather have a good looking babe do the patdown than a guy.

[paraclete]

There is a simple method to overcome all of this smoothy, with minimum checks needed. Muslims can't fly, now the US has the technology to make that work, doesn't it?

[smoothy]

There is a simple method to overcome all of this smoothy, with minimum checks needed. Muslims can't fly, now the US has the technology to make that work, doesn't it?

Ah.. and HIGHLY effective... but that's not politically correct... and we all know how the liberals and the ACLU care about political correctness... as long as its not white people who are the target.

Problem with that is definatively identifying who is and who isn't a muslim.

But I do get the drift... and its profiling... most terrorists have been middle eastern as well as muslim. Not 80 year old Jewish grandmothers from Iowa.

It works for law enforcement... It works for the Isrealies... it would work here assuming they could hire enough people of sufficient intelligence to do it.

[excon]

Ah..and HIGHLY effective ...

Hello again, smoothy:

Politically correct?? How about illegal and unconstitutional?? I thought you Tea Party types loved the Constitution... Guess not. I can't imagine the kind of country YOU'D like this place to be. Ok, yes I could - WHITE and Christian...

Exco

[smoothy]

Where in the constitution is profiling unconstitutional... when it's the cornerstone of law enforcement and VERY effective.

I suppose you would prohibit even considering Middle eastern passengers as possible terrorists?


Because after all... most (nearly all) of them have been, younger men, Muslim AND Middle eastern or middle eastern decent.


How many have been white, female and elderly after all?

[paraclete]

.

It works for law enforcement....It works for the Isrealies....it would work here assuming they could hire enough people of sufficient intelligence to do it.

I knew you would find the flaw in the argument, you don't have enough people with the intelligence to think of it but seriously you could arrange for Muslims only aircraft, etc then if they want to blow something up, they only affect their own. Why is it profiling when we know that it is a specific group who act this way? If it became difficult to travel for all the rest of the Muslim population they would be brought to heal quickly, imagine no US Muslim allowed to fly to Mecca or return to the US by air

[excon]

Where in the constitution is profiling unconstitutional...

Hello again, smoothy:

For a Tea Partier, you sure don't know very much about our country or the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment says, "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".

That means racial profiling is against the law.. I know you don't understand it... But, that ain't my problem. Go take a Constitutional law class.

excon

[ITstudent2006]

Today was national opt-out day for the x-ray machine. Everyone at the airport was to opt-out of the scanner and get patted down. (wonder how that went)

I heard on the news a story where I am from where a female TSA punched another female in the vagina to confirm that she had nothing hidden in her crotch (a little excessive? I think so)

[ITstudent2006]

Today was national opt-out day for the x-ray machine. Everyone at the airport was to opt-out of the scanner and get patted down. (wonder how that went)

I heard on the news a story where I am from where a female TSA punched another female in the vagina to confirm that she had nothing hidden in her crotch (a little excessive? I think so)

[Stringer]

I heard on the news cast on the radio tonight that the 'opt-out' did not have any effect at all.