STUPID AIRPORT SECURITY

You have strange ideas on what is partisan, Revel. But this isn't the thread to discuss that either.

Well I'm 100% with the anti-terror police in Britain on this one. I don't often take my country to task without pointing out the good. But the leftist mainstream media in the USA has been so careless and irresponsible about what they report, they might as well be the promo and communications network for al-Qaida and all other terrorist groups. They sure as heck aren't on the side of the USA or democracy, freedom, and security of anybody anywhere. I can't find any good side to that.

That too. But whatever the local FBI is leaking wouldn't be common knowledge without the aid of a media who really doesn't care who gets hurt by what they publish. However, I think any person who intentionally leaks classified information, especially information critical to national security, should be subject to immediate prosecution for treason and subject to the full penalty of law for that.

But as you don't want to talk about it anymore, I'll now let it drop.

Revel, since when is "Left" or "Right" partisan? While either can be an ideological methodology utilized by a political party, I didn't menton any political party and did not imply any political party. Your assertion seems to be that the GOP cannot ever be left of center nor the Democrats right of center. Such is not and has never been the case. I do not see the issue of airport security as being a partisan issue.

I will stand by my original statement no matter how much you and Walter want me to be the straw man you can attack instead of discussing the topic of this thread.

Foxfyre wrote:

Revel, since when is "Left" or "Right" partisan? While either can be an ideological methodology utilized by a political party, I didn't menton any political party and did not imply any political party. Your assertion seems to be that the GOP cannot ever be left of center nor the Democrats right of center. Such is not and has never been the case. I do not see the issue of airport security as being a partisan issue.

I will stand by my original statement no matter how much you and Walter want me to be the straw man you can attack instead of discussing the topic of this thread.

Can you give me ONE example where the GOP was "left of center". I think Clinton swung right as a political trick to hijack conservative issues... i.e. welfare reform.

But the GOP has been pretty solidly run by conservatives since the Gingrich thing. You can find voices, but you have not seen Republicans as a group getting behind a single liberal idea.

BTW I wish the Democrats could figure out that the GOP strategy of playing to the true hard conservatives has been working-- and do the same. The Democrats continue the obviously losing strategy of being centrist while the GOP continues to move the debate to the right.

Revel, that's just plain silly and I won't hijack the thread further to discuss it. Ebrown, if you want to debate the policies/procedures of the GOP and Dems within leftist and rightist principles, please start a new thread. I'll be happy to participate there.

Meanwhile, I got to take tweezers on the plane yesterday, but I still couldn't take hand cream. It gets weirder and weirder.

(I can just imagine, however, hijacking a plane however "Nobody move! I've got tweezers!")

Already asked and answered Revel. I think terrorists should not be allowed on airplanes at all so that other people can safely transport normal everyday items. As we are unlikely to have assurance of that anytime in the near future, I do not mind the security provisions in place. I do appreciate it when they make sense. And I would just like them increased to include profiling and extra scrutiny of all those who are most likely to be terrorists.

I don't mind having my computer, cell phone, camera, and other equipment I travel with inspected in great detail. I don't mind if terrorists have tweezers. I think it rather ridiculous to ban tweezers and allow ballpoint pens which I think are much more dangerous. It isn't what we are allowed to carry or not carry that is the issue, but I am just funny I guess in that I like for things to make sense. Such as awhile back, fingernail clippers were conficated by security, and then you could purchase a replacement at one of the kiosks when you were walking on to your gate. Does that make sense? I think not.

I don't mind when I'm the one singled out for extra scrutiny though it still bugs me to be receiving the scrutiny while a couple of dozen far less innocent looking types breeze right through security without any extra scrutiny.

Whatever Amnesty International reports too often bears so little resemblance to the reality that I don't trust their report without verification from another source. (I don't mean to say they never get it right because sometimes they do. And they absolutely do some good work too right alongside their more flaky side.)

And to the best of my knowledge, it is still against the rules, at least in the United States, to profile Middle-Eastern looking guys or any other based on racial characteristics. That is the one rule I would like to see changed.

Final observation: There aren't a heck of a lot of Wal-marts at airports or near major hotels.

Foxfyre wrote:

I don't mind having my computer, cell phone, camera, and other equipment I travel with inspected in great detail. I don't mind if terrorists have tweezers. I think it rather ridiculous to ban tweezers and allow ballpoint pens which I think are much more dangerous. It isn't what we are allowed to carry or not carry that is the issue, but I am just funny I guess in that I like for things to make sense. Such as awhile back, fingernail clippers were conficated by security, and then you could purchase a replacement at one of the kiosks when you were walking on to your gate. Does that make sense? I think not.

I don't mind when I'm the one singled out for extra scrutiny though it still bugs me to be receiving the scrutiny while a couple of dozen far less innocent looking types breeze right through security without any extra scrutiny.

Whatever Amnesty International reports too often bears so little resemblance to the reality that I don't trust their report without verification from another source. (I don't mean to say they never get it right because sometimes they do. And they absolutely do some good work too right alongside their more flaky side.)

And to the best of my knowledge, it is still against the rules, at least in the United States, to profile Middle-Eastern looking guys or any other based on racial characteristics. That is the one rule I would like to see changed.

Final observation: There aren't a heck of a lot of Wal-marts at airports or near major hotels.

I am not surprised that you don't trust Amnesty.

I sincerely doubt you are going to find a source that you trust who actually looks into racial profiling in airports. However here is another one that I am sure you are not going to trust.



Muslim-Americans Say Racial Profiling Led to Detention, Harassment at Airport


Failing to find a local Wal-Mart, I am sure there are other stores to buy personal items such hand cream and tweezers or other personal toilette items.

I'm sure there are any number of people, when pulled aside for extra scrutiny, are going to complain about harrassment on any grounds they can think of.

Revel, since when is "Left" or "Right" partisan?.