New Security Screening "Procedures" At Airports.

• justincredible

  

  
• I Wear Pants

  Haha, great!
• I Wear Pants

  http://gizmodo.com/5695522/tsa-screening-soaks-bladder-cancer-survivor-with-his-own-urine
• justincredible

  

  I Wear Pants;570363 wrote:http://gizmodo.com/5695522/tsa-screening-soaks-bladder-cancer-survivor-with-his-own-urine

  
  I already posted that. Dammit, man!
• I Wear Pants

  I'm dropping the ball. Slipping here.
  
  So embarrassed...
• isadore

  an anecdote and a cartoon, now there is the basis for policy. we have found a method, conceived by an agency of a government elected by the people to protect us from an obvious threat. The method is approved by the large majority of the American people. But on the other side we have some cartoons, skits and an anecdote and a bunch of whiners.
• I Wear Pants

  isadore;570385 wrote:an anecdote and a cartoon, now there is the basis for policy. we have found a method, conceived by an agency of a government elected by the people to protect us from an obvious threat. The method is approved by the large majority of the American people. But on the other side we have some cartoons, skits and an anecdote and a bunch of whiners.

  McCarthy's Red Scare was a method, conceived by an agency of a government elected by the people to "protect" us from an "obvious threat". Was that the correct thing to do?
  
  Writing off everyone who disagrees with you as a terrorist, whiners, or somehow unintelligent is a very childish thing to do isa.
• isadore

  Communism was a real threat both external and internal. There were several communist spy rings operating in our nation working to undermine America and give Communism a world wide victory. Their existence has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Read the Verona papers sometime. McCarthy's problem was not that he hunted America's enemies but that he was not very good at it.
  So many of the critics of the present policy fit so easily into the categories you listed.
• I Wear Pants

  You really do want a police state don't you?
  
  Are you an officer or something?
• isadore

  interesting the rather onesided view on this site of name calling, but hardly a surprise.
  protecting America from those who wish its destruction whether it is Nazi, Stalinist or Islamic fundamentalist has not and will not make us a police state. taking necessary actions to prevent American mass deaths does not make us a police state.
  in a world of North Koreas, Sadaam's Iraq and Ayatollah Iran, we have seen real police states in action. Using the term here is a joke.
  a term thrown around so easily here and without recrimination.
• I Wear Pants

  Have you ever read 1984? Or Brave New World for that matter?
• O-Trap

  

  I think all prisoners ... er, passengers ... ought to be locked into titanium boxes on the plane, and only let out upon touchdown.
  
  I mean, they would have to urinate and defecate in their own boxes, but hey, all in the name of faux-safety.
• I Wear Pants

  You clearly want terrorists to kill everyone for daring to speak out against a government agency's regulations. You anti-American bastard.
  
  Am I doing it right Isa?
• isadore

  I Wear Pants wrote: Have you ever read 1984? Or Brave New World for that matter?

  
  yes they are fiction books
  now if I wanted to observe a real police state I would check out North Korea (Communist) Iran (Shiite Theocracy) or maybe study what life was like under the Taliban ( Sunni Fundamentalist theocracy) places that are or were real police states. And not try to hyperbolically apply that term to the United States.
• isadore

  I Wear Pants;570473 wrote:You clearly want terrorists to kill everyone for daring to speak out against a government agency's regulations. You anti-American bastard.
  
  Am I doing it right Isa?

  
  don't worry, you got a free pass around here. But where it really matters you have been weighed in the balance and found wanting.
• isadore

  O-Trap;570470 wrote:I think all prisoners ... er, passengers ... ought to be locked into titanium boxes on the plane, and only let out upon touchdown.
  
  I mean, they would have to urinate and defecate in their own boxes, but hey, all in the name of faux-safety.

  another example of overstatement for no effect. Realistic measures have been taken to protect us, hopefully the giant whine from an inconvienced minority will not condemn thousands of Americans to slaughter
• I Wear Pants

  Haha, what does that even mean?
• isadore

  I cannot help the large amount of commentary that may go over your head. I thought you would be used to it by now.
• I Wear Pants

  See this is what gets you in trouble isa, in your last two posts you have condemned me to hell (I believe that's what you were saying) and called me stupid. Not very adult like.
  
  You also state that anyone who disagrees with you is a whiner who wants thousands of Americans to be killed. That's hyperbole at it's finest and doesn't make for very productive debate. In fact it isn't even debate. If you notice we've gone back and forth for many pages now and the only thing you've really said is that anyone who disagrees is a whiner, dumb, wants Americans to die, likes terrorism, etc.
• isadore

  obviously you do lack reading comprehension, because over those pages it has been me who has offered specific information and example to illustrate my points, current and historical. And specific quotations fro, you with citations.
• I Wear Pants

  You're way too much fun. I'll try to avoid this thread for the rest of the night.
  
  You can tell me how I'm a monster because I'd rather not low paid government employees be feeling up children tomorrow.
• O-Trap

  

  isadore;570483 wrote:another example of overstatement for no effect. Realistic measures have been taken to protect us, hopefully the giant whine from an inconvienced minority will not condemn thousands of Americans to slaughter

  
  1. Logically, it's just as sound.
  2. Who gets to determine what is "realistic?" And what gives them that authority?
  3. You misspelled "inconvenienced."
  4. This inconveniences everyone. Some (like you) simply prefer to be parented even as an adult, so they don't mind.
  5. I acknowledged earlier in this thread that this is (and should be) legal.
  
  Let me ask you this, are there ANY rights that you aren't willing to give up in the name of pacifying your fear?
• I Wear Pants

  Watch it with that questioning authority. That's the path to terrorism.
• isadore

  O-Trap;570507 wrote:1. Logically, it's just as sound.
  2. Who gets to determine what is "realistic?" And what gives them that authority?
  3. You misspelled "inconvenienced."
  4. This inconveniences everyone. Some (like you) simply prefer to be parented even as an adult, so they don't mind.
  5. I acknowledged earlier in this thread that this is (and should be) legal.
  
  Let me ask you this, are there ANY rights that you aren't willing to give up in the name of pacifying your fear?

  No its not sound.
  Those people capable of rational thought and understanding of the safety needs of the American people.
  I misspell quite a few words.
  No the large majority of members of our nation find it minor inconvience to put up with for their safety.
  
  Notice when Jefferson listed our unalienable rights which one he listed first.
• I Wear Pants

  Ah, so anyone who disagrees with you isn't capable of rational thought. Again, immature.