Call to arms.
#166
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
I'm terribly confused then, for years and years (up until January this year) the front page of the TSA web site showed how many people were arrested for suspicious behavior that week. Which law is that under USC or CFR or any state that you can be arrested for "suspicious behavior"?
Sort of like your brethren screener in Milwaukee (MKE) who told someone with a Kippy baggie that she disagreed with that 1st amendment of the Constitution does not apply to the checkpoint?
But at least your brethren screener Alvin Crabtree did verify that at least the 2nd amendment is applicable. Now if only other screeners can realize that seizing items from unlocked bags and selling them on eBay is not allowed under the 4th amendment.
Sort of like your brethren screener in Milwaukee (MKE) who told someone with a Kippy baggie that she disagreed with that 1st amendment of the Constitution does not apply to the checkpoint?
But at least your brethren screener Alvin Crabtree did verify that at least the 2nd amendment is applicable. Now if only other screeners can realize that seizing items from unlocked bags and selling them on eBay is not allowed under the 4th amendment.
The first amendment applies everywhere unless detailed specifically by the laws of our nation. You are entitled to speak your mind wherever you go in our borders, if the TSO actually said that, they were wrong.
Any TSO (or TSA employee) caught stealing anything from anywhere (regardless of whether they sell it on Ebay or keep it at home), should be prosecuted under the local laws, period.
#167
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
I am quite certain that we would agree on many things, we would just have to find the common ground to work from, and beer makes many people agree on many things! Have you tried the Sam Adams Double Bock yet? It took me back to my days in Germany! If you are ever here, let me know and maybe we can find a place for a beer and agree on more things.
#168
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: boca raton, florida
Posts: 621
Suspicious behavior can be a cover-all for some agencies to include several misdemeanor activities (to save on space). I am NOT saying that this is necessarily the case for TSA, but it could be.
The first amendment applies everywhere unless detailed specifically by the laws of our nation. You are entitled to speak your mind wherever you go in our borders, if the TSO actually said that, they were wrong.
Any TSO (or TSA employee) caught stealing anything from anywhere (regardless of whether they sell it on Ebay or keep it at home), should be prosecuted under the local laws, period.
The first amendment applies everywhere unless detailed specifically by the laws of our nation. You are entitled to speak your mind wherever you go in our borders, if the TSO actually said that, they were wrong.
Any TSO (or TSA employee) caught stealing anything from anywhere (regardless of whether they sell it on Ebay or keep it at home), should be prosecuted under the local laws, period.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.427ee4f.html
Oh and perhaps you forgot to comment on Alvin Crabtree still working at DEN after violating a sundry of TSA & state of Colorado laws.
#169
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
Good to hear you feel that way. Too bad the US Department of Justice felt differently and directed the State of Texas to drop charges against a DAL TSA supervisor assaulting a screener. Is that the "equal under law" the TSA has in mind?
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.427ee4f.html
Oh and perhaps you forgot to comment on Alvin Crabtree still working at DEN after violating a sundry of TSA & state of Colorado laws.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.427ee4f.html
Oh and perhaps you forgot to comment on Alvin Crabtree still working at DEN after violating a sundry of TSA & state of Colorado laws.
#170
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: boca raton, florida
Posts: 621
I believe exactly what I stated earlier, anyone that steals should be prosecuted the same as anyone else. I don't know the background on that particular case for the DAL STSO, however if the STSO assaulted the TSO, then there should have been charges (unless the TSO refused to press charges). I refuse to speak on Alvin because I am woefully ignorant on the full situation. I tend to not speak on things (unless it is hypothetical) unless I have all sides and statements to cull from. I find that it makes me sound much smarter and keeps me from inserting my foot in my mouth (which I need absolutely no help with according to the woman).
As I said, how supervisors behave with passengers is always a good indicator of what will get done with complaints.
#171
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Nah, those official spokespersons are much better schooled in socially acceptable speech patterns than I am. I still cling to the fact that ain't is actually a word, and Ya'll can be used as singular, plural and mass amount with equal aplomb. I also don't do very well in front of crowds and cameras.
#172
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London uk
Programs: *A Gold, BA Silver, Avis President, Hertz President circle
Posts: 2,804
Watching Fox News (shut up, don't want to hear it) just now Lieberman and the rest of the Government officials and Representatives on the show are pushing the WBI.
Contact your Representatives and let them know they will lose your vote if they allow the further intrusion of the Nude-O-Scope style WBI.
Refuse the WBI at all costs.
Contact your Representatives and let them know they will lose your vote if they allow the further intrusion of the Nude-O-Scope style WBI.
Refuse the WBI at all costs.
You seem very complexed about something! What's up mate?!
(sorry wouldn't usualy give such a sharp response, but with the tone this bloke is using, I'd consider it quite moderate)
#173
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Let's make it clear, he may lose his vote, and you may lose your life if passengers aren't screened properly!
You seem very complexed about something! What's up mate?!
(sorry wouldn't usualy give such a sharp response, but with the tone this bloke is using, I'd consider it quite moderate)
You seem very complexed about something! What's up mate?!
(sorry wouldn't usualy give such a sharp response, but with the tone this bloke is using, I'd consider it quite moderate)
Take a trip to my blog where I list 4 ways to beat the Nude-O-Scope. If I can easily beat the system, the terrorists can beat the system.
But what has "complexed" me is the fact that Lieberman or any other "leader" would push such an invasion in privacy when the costs are high and the benefits are negligible.
#174
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Let's make it clear, he may lose his vote, and you may lose your life if passengers aren't screened properly!
You seem very complexed about something! What's up mate?!
(sorry wouldn't usualy give such a sharp response, but with the tone this bloke is using, I'd consider it quite moderate)
You seem very complexed about something! What's up mate?!
(sorry wouldn't usualy give such a sharp response, but with the tone this bloke is using, I'd consider it quite moderate)
The sky's not falling. Whether these things are implemented or not, I'm in greater danger of dying on the way to my friend's house in a few minutes to watch a football game than I am if I were to get on a plane.
There are less intrusive ways of screening. TSA just doesn't want to do it. There are a lot of things that TSA should be doing that they're not - screening workers and screeners regularly, screening cargo, securing baggage, etc. Screeeners can't even find stuff now with the technology that they do have capable of finding items (like the immense failure of EWR screening - and even with advanced warning). Let's focus on those areas that already have gaping holes before going into a panic and fixing something that's already reasonably secure.
#175
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,595
Disgusting, but that's the way it is.
#176
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,111
Suspicious behavior can be a cover-all for some agencies to include several misdemeanor activities (to save on space). I am NOT saying that this is necessarily the case for TSA, but it could be.
The first amendment applies everywhere unless detailed specifically by the laws of our nation. You are entitled to speak your mind wherever you go in our borders, if the TSO actually said that, they were wrong.
Any TSO (or TSA employee) caught stealing anything from anywhere (regardless of whether they sell it on Ebay or keep it at home), should be prosecuted under the local laws, period.
The first amendment applies everywhere unless detailed specifically by the laws of our nation. You are entitled to speak your mind wherever you go in our borders, if the TSO actually said that, they were wrong.
Any TSO (or TSA employee) caught stealing anything from anywhere (regardless of whether they sell it on Ebay or keep it at home), should be prosecuted under the local laws, period.
#177
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
there's an easy explanation. No one in a position of authority wants to be accused of being soft on terrorism. Thus, when the "experts" say "our problems will be solved if we buy 1000 nude-o-scopes" and there are no voices in opposition to the "experts" - because the press are spineless weenies - the "leaders" follow the advice of the "experts."
Disgusting, but that's the way it is.
Disgusting, but that's the way it is.
#178
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
True, depending on location that is true.
That's the way it is. Welcome to politics in the age of the spineless. A real leader will tell the public what it doesn't want to hear. Chill out and take a breather since terrorism has been, is and will remain a public, ugly nuisance and we'll have to expect to live with the risks of it like we do with road accidents. The best bomb makers are still going to be able to sneak explosives by whatever security measures are put in place. There's no getting around that absent an impossible, totalitarian police state. Expect mitigation of the risk but don't expect it to ever be eliminated.
Last edited by Cholula; Jan 11, 2010 at 9:21 am Reason: Merging multiple, successive posts
#179
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Interesting tone here.
I hear there's a message out on the Web that urges al-Qaeda supporters to rise up and fight these new security measures, like WBI, by bombarding TSA and the airlines with objections claiming they're an "invasion of privacy."
Is that what this is all about?
I hear there's a message out on the Web that urges al-Qaeda supporters to rise up and fight these new security measures, like WBI, by bombarding TSA and the airlines with objections claiming they're an "invasion of privacy."
Is that what this is all about?
In my view, the TSA and its employees are the real al Qaeda assistants, having helped that organization achieve its goals ever since the TSA was formed. They don't call it Terrorist Support Agency for nothing, you know.
Last edited by FWAAA; Jan 3, 2010 at 4:54 pm
#180
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
It's the same way with my car. Yes, I've got a security system on it. That won't stop someone from stealing it if they're determined enough. Heck, all they've got to do is get a tow truck and they can steal the whole thing. But since most thieves don't have tow trucks, all I'm trying to do is discourage the guy who wants to break into my car enough so that he decides that the risk of detection isn't worth the effort.
That's what airline security should be trying to achieve. Absolute security is a myth. The question really should be: what levels of security are possible, at what cost (both in terms of restriction of liberties as well as money spent)? And then we can have a rational discussion as to whether the benefits of a given level of security justify the cost --- and reasonable people can hold different positions on those questions.