| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote:
I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. |
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. Concerts and sporting events, to name two. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 6:59*pm, BAR wrote:
In article 815c57c4-1a75-4339-947d- , says... On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. It's how our government does airport screening / security. What else do we want to turn over to them? |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:18:10 -0800 (PST), "Jack."
wrote: On Nov 24, 6:59*pm, BAR wrote: In article 815c57c4-1a75-4339-947d- , says... On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. It's how our government does airport screening / security. What else do we want to turn over to them? So, you think it should be turned over to a for-profit company? Who's going to regulate that? Do you really want Halliburton looking down your pants? |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 25, 7:43*am, BAR wrote:
In article aa0fbb58-8b90-4c9d-957c-48c214ce0541 @y30g2000prb.googlegroups.com, says... Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. You are thinking in the wrong direction. On 9/11 they didn't care about the number of passengers on board they used the airplanes as guided missles. A Cessna 182 can carry about 800 lbs of "cargo" besides the pilot. Of course that's possible, but a 767 @ 475 knots with 375 innocent passengers is a much more effective "terror" weapon (and is harder to stop) than a Cessna @ 140 knots with a single willing pilot and some cargo. If that ever happens look for private aviation to take a huge hit. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. *It's how our government does airport screening / security. *What else do we want to turn over to them? By confiscating nail clippers and bottles of shampoo. Their methods are questionable, but it's much harder for a real threat to make it through security. And I think it's always been about calming the herd. The real security work is not done by the TSA drones we see at the airport. |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack."
wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 8:39*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. The conversation is about TSA agents and security screening at airports. That's only about airborne security. Wider DHS measures are another thing completely. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| 10 years already?? hard to believe | General | |||
| Kayaking in Barbados, Bequia | General | |||
| On the Hard | ASA | |||
| Yo Ho is on the hard... | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
