http://ssdp.org/news/blog/outrageous-drug-search-conducted-at-a-ct-high-school

Glory Days, please try to justify that.

BGFalcons82;944690 wrote:1. Yep, terrorists have a way of behaving if they know they could get shot before they detonate themselves into Allah-land. Did I say the armed agents would be openly displaying their tools? Did I say they would be identified prior to the flight taking off? Not the same as prison guards as no one would know the identity of the agents.

2. Why is the race card ALWAYS fucking played? Just can't resist throwing out labels, can ya? I know, it's in the playbook....if you can't defend a position, call the other side a racist and end the discussion. Is the Hitler reference next? :rolleyes:

1.Terrorist would more than likely detonate their bomb without the agent ever knowing.

2.race card? calling you a rasicist? man just keep making up stuff. the israeli's profile because they can. do you really want TSA looking at your race, your credit history, and travel habits?

Baker said: “Israeli agents focus on the traveler’s country of origin, their profession, visas that are stamped in their passports, places they have visited, people they know and the color of their skin. If you say you’re a Renaissance art scholar, they’ll ask you if you know who Titian is.”

http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2010/11/tsa_alternatives_israeli_airpo.html

At Ben-Gurion, some passengers have been searched so thoroughly that they have had to walk through the terminals, the gates and up to the doors of their planes with no handbags, wallets or even shoes.

and the other thing about Israel, they have 2...TWO airports. much easier and cheaper to have highly trained experts at 2 airports than 450 american airports.

I Wear Pants;944694 wrote:And I bet these new tactics will do nothing at all to catch them. Just cost more money and waste more people's time. This police state is getting ridiculous.

just like building a giant wall on the border will do nothing?

BGFalcons82;944701 wrote:In my 51 years, I can think of 1 time where this would have been appropriate...1 day out of (365 x 51) = 0.005% of the time. The government needs the ability to throw free speech into the shitter because...well...they might need it in case of an "emergency". Obama, and all future presidents, aren't elected king. Yet, when they act like one, the supporting political side thinks it's just fine and dandy.

in your 51 years, how many times has it been used?

I Wear Pants;945021 wrote:http://ssdp.org/news/blog/outrageous-drug-search-conducted-at-a-ct-high-school

Glory Days, please try to justify that.

justify what? a dumb idea by the school principle or the drug search a school? one was really dumb, the other was completely legal and has been for quite some time.

Glory Days;945096 wrote:in your 51 years, how many times has it been used?

We used to have routine air raid drills in elementary school. We had drills where we'd get under our desk and put our head between our knees....like that would save us from the flesh being stripped off our bodies in .1 nanoseconds. We used to have air raid sirens go off once a week and we had one of those damn things right behind our house. The public buildings, at least the ones stout enough, had "fallout zone" signs displayed prominently in case of a nuclear attack. One thing to point out, however. These were all locally done. There was never a national emergency wherein all 50 states were in desperate need of the same information. As I said, it would have been appropriate to a point on 9-11, but not a complete takeover of licensed communication networks for days on end.

So...it's never been used because there's never been a need for it. So why now? Why implement a takeover of free speech in the name of an "emergency" that they refuse to define? Seems to me it would be quite easy to define in a national sense. Why won't they define it? Better yet, why is only 1 person in charge of declaring an "emergency"? Hell, with the nukes, it at least takes 2 people to turn the launch keys.

pmoney25;944624 wrote:Once again I agree with Dr. Paul. How can any american constantly support the erosion of liberty. Some of you talk about making sure the terrorist dont get us again. In my opinion the more we travel down this path, the stronger terrorism will become.

This.

I may not agree completely with Ron on foreign issues, but I'll get behind him 100% for his stance on trading liberty for feigned security. Hell, if he keeps this up, I might join O-Trap's gang.

BGFalcons82;945102 wrote:We used to have routine air raid drills in elementary school. We had drills where we'd get under our desk and put our head between our knees....like that would save us from the flesh being stripped off our bodies in .1 nanoseconds. We used to have air raid sirens go off once a week and we had one of those damn things right behind our house. The public buildings, at least the ones stout enough, had "fallout zone" signs displayed prominently in case of a nuclear attack. One thing to point out, however. These were all locally done. There was never a national emergency wherein all 50 states were in desperate need of the same information. As I said, it would have been appropriate to a point on 9-11, but not a complete takeover of licensed communication networks for days on end.

So...it's never been used because there's never been a need for it. So why now? Why implement a takeover of free speech in the name of an "emergency" that they refuse to define? Seems to me it would be quite easy to define in a national sense. Why won't they define it? Better yet, why is only 1 person in charge of declaring an "emergency"? Hell, with the nukes, it at least takes 2 people to turn the launch keys.

taking over of free speech? seriously come on. again, all it does is during a national disaster, have broadcasting companies report to the FCC so the FCC knows who can or cannot be broadcasting. for example, if lets say new york is destroyed one way or another, why would the FCC goto NBC to try and broadcast an emergency message when NBC no longer exist?

yes, duck and covering. you do know, those "local" drills were a created by the federal government and the agency that later became FEMA?

why is one person in charge of declaring a NATIONAL emergency? because one person is in charge of the nation. just like ONE person(the same person in charge of the country) is in charge of giving the order to launch a nuclear weapon, no matter how many people it takes to turn the key.

Why is anyone surprised? These are jobs Obama can actually create because, you know, profit isn't part of the equation.

Glory Days;945125 wrote:why is one person in charge of declaring a NATIONAL emergency? because one person is in charge of the nation. just like ONE person(the same person in charge of the country) is in charge of giving the order to launch a nuclear weapon, no matter how many people it takes to turn the key.

One person is in charge of the nation, eh? The Congress and Supremes are just there for advice and consultation now, eh?
Well, it's not that quite that easy for him to launch nukes, but he does hold the Constitutional role of Commander In Chief, so I've got no issues here. I used it as a foil; not in a literal sense. *sigh*

King Obama is in charge now. I wonder if he'll even allow an election next year?

BGFalcons82;945140 wrote: King Obama is in charge now. I wonder if he'll even allow an election next year?

just because i am on the other side of controversial topics doesnt mean i dont acknowledge they exist. to say Obama has taken away more rights, infringed on more rights, or just been more controversial than Bush or anyone else just isnt true.

If you were a woman, would you want the TSA seeing your packed vibrator? Or dildo? And then opening up your suitase and writing a little note about it?

http://gothamist.com/2011/10/24/woman_with_vibrator_in_suitcase_get.php

On a similar note...where I live, there has been traffic "check points" whereby every driver is pulled over and searched. That's not America. "Probable cause" no longer exits.

Glory Days;945211 wrote:just because i am on the other side of controversial topics doesnt mean i dont acknowledge they exist. to say Obama has taken away more rights, infringed on more rights, or just been more controversial than Bush or anyone else just isnt true.

I agree with this. If you want to call Obama the king, than by all means King George 43 was far far, far worse. Not even close.

The TSA does not discriminate against perverts.

I Wear Pants;945021 wrote:http://ssdp.org/news/blog/outrageous-drug-search-conducted-at-a-ct-high-school

Glory Days, please try to justify that.

The way they did the lockdown was atrocious, but the search is something that has been going on for years. The lockers are school property and you have no right to privacy in them.

majorspark;945245 wrote:

The TSA does not discriminate against perverts.

I wouldn't call a lady who enjoys beating off a pervert...just sayin.

Footwedge;945260 wrote:I wouldn't call a lady who enjoys beating off a pervert...just sayin.

I am not talking about the lady. The TSA does not discriminate against hiring perverts. That makes it a little more clear.

Glory Days;945093 wrote:1
and the other thing about Israel, they have 2...TWO airports. much easier and cheaper to have highly trained experts at 2 airports than 450 american airports.

True they only have 2 airports and the US has 450, but the US also has a much larger population and a much larger pool to draw from.

BGFalcons82;945107 wrote:This.

I may not agree completely with Ron on foreign issues, but I'll get behind him 100% for his stance on trading liberty for feigned security. Hell, if he keeps this up, I might join O-Trap's gang.

Join the "dark side" (or at least, the side that typical Washington would treat like the dark side).

O-Trap;945635 wrote:Join the "dark side" (or at least, the side that typical Washington would treat like the dark side).

This reminds me of a tax dispute I once had with the IRS. It started with a minor error on my business's end. The error increased our tax liability. Tax payments did not match. Long story short we were assessed penalties and interest. I tried to explain it to the low level minions. After rotting on hold. It was like pulling teeth. I got so pissed at one idiot that lacked math skills I blurted out, "you are driving me to the dark side". Not wise but I was young. An accountant that was aiding my business chided me, "you should not have said that".

Anyways I contacted the IRS and asked to speak to someone upstream. I rotted again on hold. In the end I got the ear of an IRS agent that spent the time to review the numbers. We worked the math together. Line by painstaking line. Eventually he spotted the error. He got it and was very nice and courteous. Took care of the bullshit and I was good to go. Bureaucracy at its finest. Literally.

majorspark;945648 wrote:This reminds me of a tax dispute I once had with the IRS. It started with a minor error on my business's end. The error increased our tax liability. Tax payments did not match. Long story short we were assessed penalties and interest. I tried to explain it to the low level minions. After rotting on hold. It was like pulling teeth. I got so pissed at one idiot that lacked math skills I blurted out, "you are driving me to the dark side". Not wise but I was young. An accountant that was aiding my business chided me, "you should not have said that".

Anyways I contacted the IRS and asked to speak to someone upstream. I rotted again on hold. In the end I got the ear of an IRS agent that spent the time to review the numbers. We worked the math together. Line by painstaking line. Eventually he spotted the error. He got it and was very nice and courteous. Took care of the bullshit and I was good to go. Bureaucracy at its finest. Literally.

Isn't that the kind of efficiency you want in the healthcare system?

In all seriousness, it seems to be an inevitability that where there is a federal agency or institution in control of an aspect of society, there is paralyzing inefficiency in that area. Can anyone think of an example where this is not the case?

O-Trap;945812 wrote:In all seriousness, it seems to be an inevitability that where there is a federal agency or institution in control of an aspect of society, there is paralyzing inefficiency in that area. Can anyone think of an example where this is not the case?

The only place I can think of is in the battlefield. Not sure if they are "in control of an aspect of society", but they are in control of their situation and they are highly efficient when given the proper orders to engage and destroy the enemy. If they are being used as food-distributors (Haiti), mediators/negotiators (Afghanistan), or "Advice and consult" missions (Uganda)...then they are far more inefficient.

BGFalcons82;945886 wrote:The only place I can think of is in the battlefield. Not sure if they are "in control of an aspect of society", but they are in control of their situation and they are highly efficient when given the proper orders to engage and destroy the enemy. If they are being used as food-distributors (Haiti), mediators/negotiators (Afghanistan), or "Advice and consult" missions (Uganda)...then they are far more inefficient.

I would contend that because of the bureaucracy toward the top of the military, it is INCREDIBLY inefficient in the very things you mentioned. I'd even throw in the nation building/policing that so many of our nation's best are ordered to do, but that's mostly because I think much of that is "Mission: Impossible," and not because of any ineptitude.

It is an able body with too much fat and a mental midget at the helm.

O-Trap;945913 wrote:I would contend that because of the bureaucracy toward the top of the military, it is INCREDIBLY inefficient in the very things you mentioned. I'd even throw in the nation building/policing that so many of our nation's best are ordered to do, but that's mostly because I think much of that is "Mission: Impossible," and not because of any ineptitude.

It is an able body with too much fat and a mental midget at the helm.

Yeah, I can see your point. I was only referring to the battlefied, where bullets, grenades, RPGs, and shells fly about with great regularity. On the management side, I agree with you.

BGFalcons82;945917 wrote:Yeah, I can see your point. I was only referring to the battlefied, where bullets, grenades, RPGs, and shells fly about with great regularity. On the management side, I agree with you.

And I with you.