Thought Crimes in Airports?
 

This is exactly where I hoped the war on terrorism wasn't going. People getting stopped and interrogated for acting nervous or sweating. Airports can sometimes be some of the most stressful situations for various reasons like late flights, fear of flying, holidays etc. and this now this makes you a terrorism suspect.

Also, people who are worried about so called civil liberties need to wake up and realize that the ACLU is a phony civil liberties group and always comprimises in the end, which leads to less liberty. These idiots aren't worried that police are now looking out for people who look nervous, but they are worried it will lead to racial profiling. As long as we make EVERYONE a slave it's ok in thier mind.

Sounds a bit Orwellian doesnt it?

And yeah, some of the blame for 9/11 was the fact that the ACLU was behind a lawsuit that kept airlines from profiling young Arab men who purchase one way tickets with cash and dont check any luggage

I recomend the TSA continues their policy of extra screening of hot young women. I believe this policy, which seems to be very well enforced, is the best way to catch future terrorists.

Remember, if we start to question people who act like terrorists, the terrorists have already won.

Funny thing even with all these so called security measures... I managed to make it all the way through the airport to my destination over xmas without even so much as showing my id. I used the automated kiosk check in, that delta uses (this allows you to retreive your boarding pass like you would get money out of an atm.. only requires a credit/atm/debit card that can be swiped), and made it through the gate, security, and onto my plane, no one even asked for it once.

Makes you feel good about airport security eh? No matter how many rules and new security techniques they create, if the people who are supposed to enforce them fall down on the job, nothing is going to matter.

I'm always given the third degree when i go through airports, i must look like a dodgy white hippy or something. That and for some reason i do actually get quite nervous when going through passport control. I have no idea why, probably because they always stop me.

I can't believe that they would want to closly look at everyone who looks nervous, flying is unnatural at the best of time, let alone having people following you and staring.

I'm the opposite. I could walk onto air force one with a supersoaker under my coat and all I'd get are smiles. I've walked around metal detectors at SF and San Jose airport before. I've even walked onto planes without showing my boarding pass. It's a good thing I'm honest. If this made any kind of sense, they'd be looking for guys like me, not people who are already terrified of flying. The idea that people are going to be FURTHER harassed at airports is only going to make the air travel buisness hurt more. The best way to protect planes is a simple: put up a "If you try to hijack this plane, the other passangers have legal permission to rape you" sign.

yeah, i'm normally one who would be all against something like this, but, i am completely against the original way of "SCREEN EVERYONE RANDOMLY" thing where you really do detain the 90 yr old lady in a wheelchair or the 10 yr old kid going with his family or whatever. I believe that many of the people on the job currently are extremely slack, as evidenced here by people who are able to board w/out even showing ids. I think they do need to be better screened and trained to pick up on the subtle cues of someone who is out to do some major damage. In interviews, the personell who allowed the 9-11 hijackers on the planes felt there was something 'odd' about the hijackers, but were unable to do anything about it. One gave a 1-time boarding pass meaning the guy would have to be checked in again when he transferred to his 2nd flight. Another committed suicide after she learned she let one of the hijackers on the plane. This could have been prevented if the officials were trained to pick up on the cues and allowed to act on them.

Admittedly, this would not and could not be 100% PC, but it would allow the screeners to actually use some common sense and training in order to more efficiently screen passengers. So, instead of hounding the harmless 90 yr old grandma and hte like, they can spend more time wit the people who are more likely to be trouble.

Then again, i can totally see how this could be abused...horribly. Israel's El Al airport uses a similar system and is considered to be the safest airport in the world


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2097352.stm

Oh, and i'm with will. I have ended up in super-restricted areas of hospitals bc i made a wrong turn and nobody stopped me. only when I asked someone for directions did they realize i was not supposed to be there. I haven't flown much, but in the 4 flights i've had since 9-11, i have waited a total of 3 minutes in security/check in/xrays/boarding. Seriously, i walk up, put my stuff in the bowl, walk through, pick up and go. My laptop had me stopped once for an extra 3 minutes while they handwanded it, otherwise, i have kept my nailclippers intact :) i've often wanted to go to GSO airport (very small, but is a main hub for usair) and try to sneak things on the planes. There are generally 200 people in the entire terminal at any given point and they all look bored out of their minds..

LOL!

Funnehs aside, I'm not sure that I can disagree with the technique yet. Properly trained people in airports could look for behaviors that are somewhat greater than the typical "I hate flying" or "Shit - I missed my flight" crowd, and tag them for a friendly approach by staff. That person could simply say, "Excuse me sir. I'm an employee here with the aiport, and I noticed that you seem a bit distraught. Is there anything I could help you with"?

If these people are trained to be helpful and feeling, and can provide assistance to someone who is merely having a rough time with luggage or something, then BAM - improved security with a customer relations twist!

I also use the automated machines but i still have to show my id to check my baggage and get through security.

I'm lucky I have never had any problems in airports. Except Orlando, where the lines were pretty long (but compared to some of the lines in Disney they were nothing).

Is there always going to be a risk of hijackers? YES.

Is there any surefire security? NO.

If you profile, they'll just get around it by using the least suspectable people.

If you random, they'll just send 3-4 at a time and at least 1-2 will get through if not all of them.

If you look for the nervous types, you are an idiot, the hijackers are probably going to be the coolest people in the terminal.

If you look for the coolest people in the airport, they'll be the nervous ones.

We may complain about security and believe it is not up to standards, but how many more rights, long of waits and so on do you want?

I feel the security is as good as it can get given our freedoms and liberties. Taking anymore would be foolish.

If someone is determined enough they'll find ways..... thank God noone has since 9/11, but there will be another hijacking, it is inevitable. And then what? Do we give away more rights and liberties? Run scared and let the government control that much more of our lives? And the terrorists will still hijack, still create troubles....

I say no, the very fact we have freedoms and liberties maybe what is saving us. Look at how terrorism runs rampant in Isreal. They give up rights we have and still get it far worse than we ever will.

Our saving grace maybe the fact that with FREEDOM, comes laziness and more love and respect for us when they get here.

To me, 9/11 was an aberration (and you can hate me, you can view me as nuts, uncaring, whatever...... for this view). It was an abberation because I truly believe even those who planned it probably did not expect it to work.

We have had 3 major acts of terrorism on our soil...... WTC 1 (1993), OKC (1995), and WTC 2 (9/11/2001).

1 of the three was from one of our own.

The 2 "true Muslim terrorist attacks" occurred the year after a presidential change. (If you blame Clinton for the second, it would follow you would have to blame Bush I for the first attack).

Only once were airplanes involved.

My point is in the years I have been alive, the USA has been safe, in fact it is safe today. All the BS about raising the alerts and taking away rights, freedoms and liberties, is just that BS. The patriot Act and Bush with his illegal wiretaps and the security at airports and so on, only take away our freedoms.... In the end the terrorists will have more freedoms than we do. They are used to working in strict confines regarding freedoms, the loss of rights and freedoms will hinder and hurt us far more than ANY terrorist ever could.... and the fact when they get here and experience the freedoms we do have, perhaps, just perhaps, the freedoms end up meaning more than attacking us.

Pan might be ignoring me but let me sum up his post for ya'll.

"Nothing can be done to stop terrorism so lets do nothing and hope it doesn't happen again."

Brilliant.

WOW, where'd you pull that one from? All Pan said was that eliminating individual freedom is not the way to stop terrorism. There are far better ways than implementing a draconian government.

this must be the reason I was denied employment by the TSA....because I didn't have a psych degree. :'\

Oh really?

Translation, there is no way to stop hijackers if they want to hijack.

Again there is no way to stop hijackers, and it will happen again.

Very odd connection with Israel which is unrelated to anything we face but he brings it up anyways. Perhaps someone needs to look at a map of Israel and the region prior to bringing it up.

Must kill the infidels, must kill the infidels, must kill...oh curly fries!

America, come to martyr yourself, stay for the pie!

Ummmm they expected it to work, they didn't expect it to work so well that the buildings would fall, but the point is it DID work.

Ok and....

I know when I have to wait that extra fifteen minutes in line I KNOW THE TERRORISTS HAVE ALREADY WON! Give me a break.

Now for the translation again.

#1 We can never stop terrorists.

#2 Our only defense is that they get here and have such a hunky dory time that they decide not to kill the infidels.

#3 Therefore we should give up looking for terrorists as it only makes us suffer.

This is wishywashy feel good BS. I think they need to start showing people jumping to there deaths on 9/11 hand in hand again to remind some of you with short memories of WHY we would like to not see this sort of thing happen again. Of course the media is afraid that it would just 'stir hatred' to show those images again. Might stir some sense into the left too. Saying we can stop all attacks is foolish, but so is saying there will be no prevention either, and the harder we make it for them, the less damage to life and the nations economy we will suffer. Perhaps they will think of a new way to attack us that we are not looking for, but it would be criminal to let them do it the same way again.

It's ok all Ustwo can do is attack me, he thrives to do so. He'll make no sense, he'll try to add things to what I say or try to put his own meaning to it.... yet, all he shows is his continued attacks and hatred.

I ignore him, it's easy to attack those who ignore you, trying to beg for their attention.

The people jumping to their deaths on 9/11 does stir hatred. The problem is the hatred should lie similarly on the shoulders of al qaida as well as our government. The events of 9/11 could of unfolded 100 times a year and should have been stopped 100 times by the hijackers being arrested or the planes being shot down. Instead the government failed to the point of actually being complicit in the attack. You might call it incompetance, but I call it crimminal negligence or treason.

There are far too many unanswered question regarding 9/11 for me to ever buy into any methods to combat terrorism. Lets figure out who needs to be fired before we lavishly promote everyone in the intelligence agencies. The attacks could of been stopped before post-9/11 legislation so lets stop sacrificing our liberties until we have accountability. Anti-terrorism as it stands today is the wrong solution for the wrong problem. The real problem is government negligence and lack of accountability not our freedoms.

Ah, but some people are now proving in what they say, that they are willing to give up their freedoms and TAKE YOURS AND MINE AWAY, because instead of looking at it as you have eloquently stated, or by simply listening to the commissions that say government isn't doing their job..... these people would rather point to us and our freedoms and allow government to use this as an excuse for doing so. Oh and blame the party not in power and all the evil Libs. (Liberals not Libertarians because oddly enough as our rights are being taken the Libertarians aren't saying much) who voice concern for the loss of our rights, something EVERYONE should worry about, it isn't a Left or Right issue......it is an issue of what is CORRECT and what is WRONG.

And taking away the rights and freedoms from the innocent is wrong.

Luckily the flock is starting to wake up
Those who would trade liberity for security
are fewer each day. I hope not to late.

On the case of libertarians......
We have been voicing concerns
for many years now.
The majority of us have joined forces
with the liberals, due to common cause.
So we may "seem" invisible
The more extreme right among us
have...."gone quiet" not because they agree...
But because their warnings have fallen on deaf ears
And they have decided the time for talk is over
and, the time to prepare is here.

samcol your words show great wisdom

Libertarians would never join forces with socialists, peroid. Its cutting off ones nose to spite your face.

And your 'time to prepare' is here, um prepare for what? The great libertarian revolution? Not going to happen anytime soon.

Small government + social consciousness = me. I'd consider myself a combination of Libertatian and socialist, soooo I am living proof that there can be a joining of ideals.
Time to prepare to fix the big mess we let ourselves get in to. No revolution. Most Americans are too lazy for a revolution right now, anyway.

Yes I am well aware of your postings on 9/11 in paranoia, and there is a reason why those sorts of theories end up there and not politics.

No explanation is to straight forward, that it can't be twisted and distorted by people who want it to be something else. Every major 9/11 theory has been shot to shit except for the obvious one, but don't let that stop anyone.

Ustwo, if you don't want the 9/11 stuff in Politics, then I suggest you stop baiting people about it. I wrote a 9/11 thread starter about it, preped it for politics, and even had it mod approved almost a year ago. It's still ready to go. I only kept it out for the sake of avoiding an all out brawl in Politics. I stand by my position, but if I feel there is enough support I will reconsider.

And not every 9/11 conspiracy interpretation has been shot to shit. I invite you back to Paraioa for further discussion, so as not the threadjack.

/end threadjack

politics make strange bedfellows
tradeing liberty for security is
"cutting off ones nose to spite your face"
is everyone not belonging to the church of bush a socialist? :rolleyes:

To think you have traded any real liberty in this is in itself debatable. Your life has not changed nor has mine, but that being said, Bush may be a disapointment to Libertarians, but any Libertarian worth there salt isn't going to switch to the socialists (democrats).

At worst for the republicans, fewer of the libertarian types will vote republican next election but due to the poor showing in 2004, I don't even think that will happen. In fact if Hilary runs, my guess is even more Libertarians will vote Republican in 2008.

Right.....To add to lazy also a fearful...to much to lose..attitude.
Not to mention survival
Peak oil, economic crash, endless wars, police state, natural disaster
the list goes on....
Our own goverment has even raised the amount
of emergency supplies we should have on hand

I considered it a significant change when the US Postoffice began opening my mail and packages. If that is not a loss of privacy rights, please tell me what is?

You maybe right...it depends on who the republican is
cheney not a chance....McCain yes
I would support him.
otherwise....after so many liberitairians crossed
party lines to vote against bush in 2004
I doubt..(I hope :hmm: )...they wouldn't be so foolish again
And for once stand behind the independant/Libertarian cannidate.

Moved to here: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=1#post1972916 (post 330)

Self edited because I felt it was more appropriate there then here.

Of course you have to put the explanation of what you mean by socialists - they're so different to socialists that nobody would make the connection otherwise.

Have you checked the Political Compass threads lately? Most people are either in the Authoritarian-Right or the Libertarian-Left quadrants, so when you talk about libertarians switching I hope you don't mean from the Republicans. Well-informed libertarians would have gone for the Authoritarian-Right Kerry as the most electable opponent to the even more Authoritarian-Right Bush.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...itical+compass
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...itical+compass

http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/poli...uselection.php

my take on airline security is that its no longer necessary to 'profile'. The main objective for security should be to ensure that no weapon of any kind gets on the plane. Since 9/11 we've heard many stories about how average citizens have had to restrain unruly passengers and it's my belief that if a cell of people attempted to hijack yet another airliner, they'd be in for a serious beatdown by those same average citizens. I know that if I'm ever on a plane and someone thinks they are going to take it over, I'm rolling.

airport "security" is basically an expensive, useless bit of sustained agitprop from those lovely folk who brought you the "war on terror" in general. it is always the purview of groups who hold power to use infrastructure as a type of argument for the legitimacy of their politics. in this case, you get the material translation of the meaningless bushphrase "resoluteness"---you know, erect and prepared for something--the what is irrelevant--whether being erect and prepared in the context of a "war" that is not a war in any meaningful sense translates into actual prevention of anything is obviously an open question.
i suppose that you could follow the path ustwo takes above and try to correlate this theater of erectness you encounter at airports with the absence of attacks since 9/2001 on us soil--but you could equally easily correlate that with astrological data or the implications of microscopic changes in walking patterns unconsciously adopted by us citizens since 9/2001 as well.
that is the beauty of the arbitrary--you can use it as you like.
so once again this comes to a matter of dispositions: if you enjoy submission, as ustwo seems to, to folk in uniform (so long as the cause of the intrusion of folk in uniform into everyday lilfe is a republican) then you will be inclined to make sense of aerodrome "security" irritation as he does.

but you could also see it as follows: much of the "enhanced security" nonsense that one encounters when trying to get to your gate in an airport is run by private contractors who have benefitted greatly from this absurd "war on terror"---i suspect that even these companies understand at some level the absurdity of the situation--but they also understand the bottom line and have an evident interest in appearing to be increasing some function as time passes, if only to justify the continued expense. the expansion of types of "profiling" (stop those evil nervous people!) is a way to generate the illusion of progress in a situation whose arbitrariness otherwise does not admit of such notions. it's all about the cash. what it is not about is protection of anyone from anything--except in one case: these moves do protect private contractors who like their employees to wear uniforms from decreased cashflows.