"Most Americans probably haven't heard much about the newest federal alphabet agency -- the Transportation Security Administration. That's good. Knowing about the TSA would just make them angry."
I'm pleased to see journalists finally working up the courage to critize this disgrace of an organization. It's about time the traveling public realized how badly they are being screwed by Normie and his Thugs.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
bdschobel
Nov 4, 02, 9:03 am
Me, too!!!
Bruce
FWAAA
Nov 4, 02, 12:00 pm
Me three!
tazi
Nov 4, 02, 2:02 pm
Four!
flowerchild
Nov 4, 02, 2:56 pm
Yes, but the airports *look* safer. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif
PSC 1K
Nov 4, 02, 3:03 pm
And with less space for people! But, look at all the nice new/neat machines. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif
thezipper
Nov 4, 02, 3:22 pm
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PSC 1K:
And with less space for people! But, look at all the nice new/neat machines. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif</font>
And nice Spiffy uniforms (sorry Spiff http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif )with 5 people pointing to a screen and trying to determine whats inside instead of just opening the d@mn bag! and keeping the machine going.
benoit
Nov 4, 02, 3:23 pm
To me the most interesting aspect of the article, is that it did not make a single constructive suggestion about how to make flying safer. If the federal agency is doing a poor job of making flying safer, what should it be do differently? Spiff?
Spiff
Nov 4, 02, 3:47 pm
They feel safer, too.
No, wait. That's the screener doing the feeling. Never mind.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by flowerchild:
Yes, but the airports *look* safer. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 11-04-2002).]
Spiff
Nov 4, 02, 3:57 pm
I've mentioned it many times:
Focus on real threats. Every item that is prohibited requires time and resources to keep it from getting on the plane or into the terminal. For every person/dollar we waste keeping cricket bats, pool cues and pocket knives out, we open ourselves to real threats elsewhere.
Stop randomly harassing passengers. It's not the current passengers' fault that 11 Sept happened. Rely on/improve the x-ray and magnetometer instead of harassing passengers who do not beep and whose luggage appears to be fine on the x-ray. Concentrate on keeping out the real threats like guns and bombs and people might even start flying again.
Stop clearing terminals on a whim. If someone might have gotten through with a knife, GIVE IT A MISS and let it go. The probability that the person with the knife is both a terrorist and could hijack a plane with it is so small that one should be buying asteroid insurance ahead of clearing a terminal to combat this 'threat'.
I am not advocating elimination of all security for all you TSA apologists. We need to take a good look at what constitutes a credible threat and what does not and then focus our efforts on real threats and not on stupid threats like pool cues. Hell, any object has a non-zero probability of being a credible weapon to hijack a plane. However, most of the items on the sacred prohibited list have probabilities that barely register, especially when compared with real threats.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by benoit:
To me the most interesting aspect of the article, is that it did not make a single constructive suggestion about how to make flying safer. If the federal agency is doing a poor job of making flying safer, what should it be do differently? Spiff?</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Plato90s
Nov 4, 02, 4:10 pm
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
I've mentioned it many times:
Focus on real threats. Every item that is prohibited requires time and resources to keep it from getting on the plane or into the terminal. For every person/dollar we waste keeping cricket bats, pool cues and pocket knives out, we open ourselves to real threats elsewhere.
Stop randomly harassing passengers. It's not the current passengers' fault that 11 Sept happened. Rely on/improve the x-ray and magnetometer instead of harassing passengers who do not beep and whose luggage appears to be fine on the x-ray. Concentrate on keeping out the real threats like guns and bombs and people might even start flying again.
Stop clearing terminals on a whim. If someone might have gotten through with a knife, GIVE IT A MISS and let it go. The probability that the person with the knife is both a terrorist and could hijack a plane with it is so small that one should be buying asteroid insurance ahead of clearing a terminal to combat this 'threat'.
I am not advocating elimination of all security for all you TSA apologists. We need to take a good look at what constitutes a credible threat and what does not and then focus our efforts on real threats and not on stupid threats like pool cues. Hell, any object has a non-zero probability of being a credible weapon to hijack a plane. However, most of the items on the sacred prohibited list have probabilities that barely register, especially when compared with real threats.</font>
Let's see...
You don't like random checks, but you're also against profiling.
You don't want air marshals, and you also oppose arming pilots.
Exactly what kind of security measure do you support other than "trust the mob of passengers", which has had the proven effect of killing everyone on board.
Your claim of "not advocating elimination of all security" is laughable given that your proposal is to basically act like 9/11 never happened. The world is just the same as before in your view.
Even the terrorist assault on Bali didn't change your mind.
You are living in the "best of all possible worlds", and turning a blind eye to the stark reality that things have changed. I think it's time to grow up and stop living in the golden glow of things-that-was.
bdschobel
Nov 4, 02, 4:29 pm
How about it's time to grow up and realize that all risk cannot be eliminated from life without eliminating life itself. Let's accept a certain level of risk -- as we do with respect to almost everything else -- and get on with living. What makes airports and airplanes so sacred that they should get presidential-level protection and all the associated inconvenience? Why not trains, boats, buses, cars -- you get the picture.
Stop it already. I'm safe enough right now. Leave me alone.
Bruce
Spiff
Nov 4, 02, 5:17 pm
You are correct on all counts except your last one: things have not changed. We are still the United States of America. The Constitution is still valid. The last time I checked, we did not negotiate with terrorists under any circumstances. Yet we now allow them to dictate what liberties we can and cannot have? And we allow them to make changes to how we treat guests in this country, the overwhelming majority of whom are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who treat us well when we visit their countries? I am deeply saddened by the terrorist events that have taken place over the last quarter-century, especially in the last 13 months. But there is no way I am ever going to give in to these murderers and change my way of life and the American way of life just for the possibility of a little more safety and security.
Bruce is right: life is about taking some risks. We don't need a wet blanket of constant security wrapped around our throats. And we need to stop treating our airports like they're the one magical place where terrorism is possible.
You don't like random checks, but you're also against profiling.
You don't want air marshals, and you also oppose arming pilots.
Exactly what kind of security measure do you support other than "trust the mob of passengers", which has had the proven effect of killing everyone on board.
Your claim of "not advocating elimination of all security" is laughable given that your proposal is to basically act like 9/11 never happened. The world is just the same as before in your view.
Even the terrorist assault on Bali didn't change your mind.
You are living in the "best of all possible worlds", and turning a blind eye to the stark reality that things have changed. I think it's time to grow up and stop living in the golden glow of things-that-was.</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Plato90s
Nov 4, 02, 5:58 pm
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
You are correct on all counts except your last one: things have not changed. We are still the United States of America. The Constitution is still valid. The last time I checked, we did not negotiate with terrorists under any circumstances. Yet we now allow them to dictate what liberties we can and cannot have? And we allow them to make changes to how we treat guests in this country, the overwhelming majority of whom are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who treat us well when we visit their countries? I am deeply saddened by the terrorist events that have taken place over the last quarter-century, especially in the last 13 months. But there is no way I am ever going to give in to these murderers and change my way of life and the American way of life just for the possibility of a little more safety and security.
Bruce is right: life is about taking some risks. We don't need a wet blanket of constant security wrapped around our throats. And we need to stop treating our airports like they're the one magical place where terrorism is possible.</font>
What a wonderfully self-centered answer.
Just because we're Americans, what the rest of the world does won't change how we do things. Does that about sum it up?
But we don't live in isolation and the actions of people outside the borders of the USA can and does change the way we live. The country adapts. We are not the same Americans we were 2 years ago or a century ago. Things change, Spiff, even if you don't want them to.
Let's call it like it is. It's not the "American way of life" you're protecting. It's your way of life. You don't like it that the government no longer does things the way you want them to do it. You're the minority opinion. The marginalized voice.
And it's darn annoying to be subject to the majority opinion, so you throw around labels like thugs and terms like "gate rape".
It's not some mythical 'them' doing these things. It's us. The majority of American approve and support these changes. It's shown in poll after poll. Much as I dislike Bush and think he's an idiot, Bush enjoys the support of a majority of Americans despite doing all those things you despise.
Bottom line: life isn't always how YOU want it to be.
NoStressHere
Nov 5, 02, 8:05 am
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Plato90s:
....
It's not some mythical 'them' doing these things. It's us. The majority of American approve and support these changes. It's shown in poll after poll. ... </font>
People support it because they BELIEVE it is making them/us safer. If they had ALL the facts, they would no longer support it.
They are supporting a perception, not a reality. The sooner we understand that, the better off we will all be.
bdschobel
Nov 5, 02, 8:19 am
Absolutely right. People believe all kinds of things. As just one example, a surprisingly high percentage of the population believes that the moon landings -- all six of them -- were faked. Their belief, no matter how strongly held, does not make it true.
Similarly, a large percentage of the (generally) non-flying public may believe that the TSA has implemented wonderfully effective procedures that make the world safe for everybody, but that doesn't make it true. We frequent flyers realize how silly most airport-security procedures really are. And we realize that passengers are not the threat, so all of the searching is a waste of time -- our time!
Bruce
Spiff
Nov 5, 02, 9:06 am
Plato90s, if it had been up to people like you, our nation would never have been founded. We'd still be affixing stamps to our goods imported from England and no one would have had the "burden" of needing to vote on this day because the nice folks in England would still be calling all the shots for us, possibly to your delight.
You're so eager to embrace the perception of safety given by these new "random security" measures that you've forgotten what makes this nation what it is. People like you go about spouting "Comrade Napolean is always right!" and accepting whatever knee-jerk solution is implemented as the best.
Our nation has evolved over the past 200 years and will continue to do so. However, the changes of late are actually examples of de-evolution - we definitely are not embracing liberty and freedom when we implement them just for the sake of some possible additional safety. Moreover, some of these methods like the bomb-detection machines DO NOT WORK. Implementing bad security instead of no security borders on the criminal.
I accept that I'm not going to always get my way for this is a democracy (republic). But there's no way I'm just going to keep quiet about things that I feel contradict the principles upon which this nation was founded. As more and more Americans wake up and notice that the 'TSA wears no clothes' you're going to see fewer of your fellow syncophants agreeing with your 'safety at any cost' ideology.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Plato90s:
What a wonderfully self-centered answer.
Just because we're Americans, what the rest of the world does won't change how we do things. Does that about sum it up?
But we don't live in isolation and the actions of people outside the borders of the USA can and does change the way we live. The country adapts. We are not the same Americans we were 2 years ago or a century ago. Things change, Spiff, even if you don't want them to.
Let's call it like it is. It's not the "American way of life" you're protecting. It's your way of life. You don't like it that the government no longer does things the way you want them to do it. You're the minority opinion. The marginalized voice.
And it's darn annoying to be subject to the majority opinion, so you throw around labels like thugs and terms like "gate rape".
It's not some mythical 'them' doing these things. It's us. The majority of American approve and support these changes. It's shown in poll after poll. Much as I dislike Bush and think he's an idiot, Bush enjoys the support of a majority of Americans despite doing all those things you despise.
Bottom line: life isn't always how YOU want it to be. </font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 11-05-2002).]
Plato90s
Nov 5, 02, 9:26 am
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
Plato90s, if it had been up to people like you, our nation would never have been founded. We'd still be affixing stamps to our goods imported from England and no one would have had the "burden" of needing to vote on this day because the nice folks in England would still be calling all the shots for us, possibly to your delight.
You're so eager to embrace the perception of safety given by these new "random security" measures that you've forgotten what makes this nation what it is. People like you go about spouting "Comrade Napolean is always right!" and accepting whatever knee-jerk solution is implemented as the best.
Our nation has evolved over the past 200 years and will continue to do so. However, the changes of late are actually examples of de-evolution - we definitely are not embracing liberty and freedom when we implement them just for the sake of some possible additional safety. Moreover, some of these methods like the bomb-detection machines DO NOT WORK. Implementing bad security instead of no security borders on the criminal.
I accept that I'm not going to always get my way for this is a democracy (republic). But there's no way I'm just going to keep quiet about things that I feel contradict the principles upon which this nation was founded. As more and more Americans wake up and notice that the 'TSA wears no clothes' you're going to see fewer of your fellow syncophants agreeing with your 'safety at any cost' ideology. </font>
The revolution for independence had wide popular support, as well as strong minority opposition by Crown Loyalists. The two groups fought, and the separatists won after a prolonged war. The opposition largely left for Canada, but those who remained were re-integrated into American society.
What does any of this have to do with the fact that your position appear to be self-serving rather than reflecting the principles you have claimed to support?
I never questioned the fact that you should feel free to mark your opposition. I just think your opposition isn't based on any principle other than self-interest and personal gall. I don't use personally derogative terms like "sycophant" and "thug" which you liberally sprinkle into your responses.
Nobody told you to keep silent. I'm just telling you that your diatribes make no logical sense and is laughable in the extremes you take to "prove" a point which appear to have only a tenuous connection to reality.
It's hardly surprising that you've twisted my words into an attempt to silence you, given that taking things out of proportion has been your tactic thus far. Again, I know you won't be silenced, and I'm not trying to silence you - merely to point out how ridiculous your rants are.
Plato90s
Nov 5, 02, 9:37 am
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
Absolutely right. People believe all kinds of things. As just one example, a surprisingly high percentage of the population believes that the moon landings -- all six of them -- were faked. Their belief, no matter how strongly held, does not make it true.
Similarly, a large percentage of the (generally) non-flying public may believe that the TSA has implemented wonderfully effective procedures that make the world safe for everybody, but that doesn't make it true. We frequent flyers realize how silly most airport-security procedures really are. And we realize that passengers are not the threat, so all of the searching is a waste of time -- our time!
Bruce</font>
Like Spiff, you claim to be against "ineffective security measures" but not against security in general.
The reality, however, is that you oppose ALL security measures, including ones proven to work. For example, an air marshal is a security measure proven to work to stop hijackings. Yet you oppose the program.
So tell me, Bruce. Exactly what security measure do your support?
I would venture to guess your answer is similar to Spiff's.
"Go back to pre-11 Sept. security."
the.fluffy.bunny
Nov 5, 02, 10:05 am
It was written:
You don't like it that the government no longer does things the way you want them to do it. You're the minority opinion. The marginalized voice.
My reply:
Gee, I guess I am part of the marginalized-minority opinion too. But then again I like the company. Re:
They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety.
--Benjamin Franklin
TFB
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers"
bdschobel
Nov 5, 02, 10:27 am
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Plato90s:
Like Spiff, you claim to be against "ineffective security measures" but not against security in general. So tell me, Bruce. Exactly what security measures do you support?</font>
Plato,
I have always supported reinforced cockpit doors and arming pilots. You can find a whole string of posts to that effect back to 9/11/01 (and maybe even before!). I also support careful checking of airport and airline employees, so that "sleeper" terrorists cannot easily infiltrate those groups.
On the other hand, I believe that passengers -- 99.99999% of whom are perfectly law-abiding -- should largely be left alone, other than having to go through pre-9/11 style security. We don't want guns in the cockpit, but I'm perfectly comfortable with pool cues and even small knives. The fact of the matter is that nobody is going to hijack a plane with such devices today, and you know it as well as I do.
What passengers are forced to endure at airports today is making people reluctant to fly and ultimately will kill the airlines. That bothers me a lot!