Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Don't Touch my Junk!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ed Shultz says this is all just racist.

http://blip.tv/file/4422733/

Nice to see.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isehtis



Joined: 07 Jul 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Honestly doesn't bother me in the slightest. If you don't want to submit to being searched, don't fly...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I traveled between two major airports for Thanksgiving (Dulles and SFO) and didn't have the body scanner or pat down experience. I feel let down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ditto. The scanners in all but one line (of 4) were turned off.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
visitorq



Joined: 11 Jan 2008
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Isehtis wrote:
Honestly doesn't bother me in the slightest. If you don't want to submit to being searched, don't fly...

Brilliant logic. So when they next start putting scanners in street-roving vans, and at their warrantless checkpoints, we should all just stay home?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/08/van-mounted-body-scanners-streets/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isehtis



Joined: 07 Jul 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The vast majority of us need to leave our houses to live our lives, go to work etc.

The vast majority of us don't have to fly to live our lives, it's a convenience.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Isehtis wrote:
The vast majority of us don't have to fly to live our lives, it's a convenience.


Yep, crossing the United States (or even half of it) via air instead of some other form of transportation is strictly for convenience. Wanna skip all that security? Suck it up and drive 3+ days! Come on people!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
visitorq



Joined: 11 Jan 2008
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Isehtis wrote:
The vast majority of us need to leave our houses to live our lives, go to work etc.

The vast majority of us don't have to fly to live our lives, it's a convenience.

Complete nonsense. Many people have to fly regularly for work (myself included). I also live and work in Asia, but my family lives in the US - so next time I want to visit them are you suggesting I spend two weeks on a boat? Or swim?

Sorry but your argument is bunk... If you reply that I should just suck it up, give up my constitutional rights and get body scanned (and/or crotch grabbed) every time I want to fly, then I assume you'll have no problem getting stopped on the street and scanned every time you drive down the street to the grocery store? (after all it's only a convenience, you could just work at home and order pizza hut every day). Same principle (slippery slope).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Madigan



Joined: 15 Oct 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh dear! This is only going to get worse.

Quote:
The two largest federal unions are going to slug it out to determine which will represent about 43,000 Transportation Security Administration employees.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) on Nov. 12 granted requests from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) to hold an election at TSA. AFGE expects the election to be held in early 2011.

TSA employees do not yet have collective bargaining rights, but the Obama administration has pledged to extend them those rights. The Homeland Security Department can choose to grant collective bargaining to TSA, and is now conducting a review on the matter.


If you think TSA are bad now, just wait until they're union.

http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20101128/PERSONNEL03/11280301/1051/PERSONNEL03

Last edited by Madigan on Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isehtis



Joined: 07 Jul 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="visitorq"][quote="Isehtis"]The vast majority of us need to leave our houses to live our lives, go to work etc.

The vast majority of us don't have to fly to live our lives, it's a convenience.[/quote]
Complete nonsense. [i]Many[/i] people have to fly regularly for work (myself included). I also live and work in Asia, but my family lives in the US - so next time I want to visit them are you suggesting I spend two weeks on a boat? Or swim?

Sorry but your argument is bunk... If you reply that I should just suck it up, give up my constitutional rights and get body scanned (and/or crotch grabbed) every time I want to fly, then I assume you'll have no problem getting stopped on the street and scanned every time you drive down the street to the grocery store? (after all it's only a convenience, you [i]could[/i] just work at home and order pizza hut every day). Same principle (slippery slope).[/quote]

It's a matter of scale, I accept there are going to be a minority of people for whom flying is a near necessity but for the vast majority it is not. You talk about constitutional rights and I'm fully behind that, but what about the rights of the victims of terror attacks? If I have to go through discomfort/embarrassment to make life more difficult for terrorists then that's fine, for me at least.

In answer to your second question, I'm living in a pretty rough part of England. I get stopped once every month or so by the police while going about my day to day business, sometimes I'm searched. I don't really have a problem with it, it's a compensation I make to allow for a safer environment.

If the political situation were different then I'd side with those not wishing to endure embarrassment or discomfort, but for as long as the threat is present I *personally* don't object to being searched.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Madigan



Joined: 15 Oct 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
^ Yes, but isn't there a better way to go about having more secure airports and flights. For example, it has been mentioned that just simply locking the cockpit doors is a simple effective way to prevent hijackings. Even when passing through security, having passengers pass through magnetometers, putting carry-ons through x-rays and then having the local police patrol the terminals with bomb sniffing dogs would be more than sufficient. Sufficient to to the point of making these intrusive searches not just superfluous, but insulting as well. It would be less time consuming as well.