Safety over civil liberties priority #1

CHAINSAW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
60
Location
Miami, Florida
Folks,
It is time that we stop bending over backwards to appease the left wing bleeding heart liberals and the ACLU and make SAFETY priority #1. I have not seen or heard of a terrorist/jihadist over the age of, maybe 35. ALL of them have been between 17-30/34 years of age, so these are the people that should be screened, if suspicious. DO NOT hassle the frequent flyers, a family with small children in tow or the elderly husband and wife traveling to see their grandchildren. The TSA and Government is deathly afraid of the word "profiling", when that is EXACTLY what they should be doing. They know exactly what traits a suspected terrorist acts like when he is about to perform a terrorist act. But then, the actions of the Federal governments/TSA are NOT logical, never have been and never will be.

The actions of the TSA & Government are exactly what the terrorist wants, for everyone to be afraid and with each attempt and subsequent reactions of the Government they have achieved their goal.

Here is a novel idea - STOP ISSUING VISAS TO PEOPLE THAT MEET THE PROFILE OF THE TERRORIST HARBORING COUNTRIES!!!!

Another thing, waiting until a suspected person or one that is on the No-Fly or Person-of-Interest watch list is checked in and most likely already on-board an aircraft is TOO DAMN LATE!! I doubt very much that anyone really looks at the hundreds of thousands of names that are sent daily to the TSA are really looked at to make sure a name is not on the APIS. We have the technology to check every confirmed reservation days and even weeks before the suspected individual is scheduled to travel. Once he reaches the Airport he/she can be taken aside and questioned and, if required, searched/scanned to make sure they don't pose a threat and if required cancel their VISA into the USA. But this is logical, and as I said in the beginning, there is NOTHING logical about the actions/reactions of the TSA or the Federal Government. Another thing, something that has been a warning flag for over 25 years; if a person paid cash for a ticket, that person or persons are IMMEDIATELY targeted for secondary screening. This data is included in the passenger’s PNR (Passenger Name Record) in the reservations system of EVERY Airline in the world!

To the bleeding heart liberals that will, I am 100% sure, disagree with my comments, TOO DAMN BAD!!!

SAFETY PRIORITY #1 - CIVIL LIBERTIES OF SUSPECTED INDIVIDUALS #2 - PERIOD!!!!!!
 
Werbung:
The actions of the TSA & Government are exactly what the terrorist wants, for everyone to be afraid....
....Kinda the way BUSHCO operated, right??

:rolleyes:

WOWridgealert.gif

*
uspol_20060707.gif

*

*

You're gonna have to do better-than-this, "Junior".

:rolleyes:
 
The Terrorist won it seems, at least with you.

So scared your willing to give our rights, because someone may (will) succeed at sometime blowing up a airliner.....Of course I have a greater chance of being killed by lighting by a large amount, but still...Lets piss our pants and burn the constitution and throw out our values!

And as I stated over and over, your simplisitc idea of profiling...is a great way to tell them just how to walk in and blow up a plane...find someone who fails the proifle...done...

Also again Terrorism is not the only thing they are watching for....you watch evryone, and watch for signs that trained pros know to look for...and you make things random, becuse you can't plan against random.
 
The Terrorist won it seems, at least with you.

So scared your willing to give our rights, because someone may (will) succeed at sometime blowing up a airliner.....Of course I have a greater chance of being killed by lighting by a large amount, but still...Lets piss our pants and burn the constitution and throw out our values!

And as I stated over and over, your simplisitc idea of profiling...is a great way to tell them just how to walk in and blow up a plane...find someone who fails the proifle...done...

Also again Terrorism is not the only thing they are watching for....you watch evryone, and watch for signs that trained pros know to look for...and you make things random, becuse you can't plan against random.
I'm wondering how-much-longer, we wait, to make-use of The Pros.....or, at-the-very-least....start-paying full-membership to them??!!!!

:mad:
 
Lets piss our pants and burn the constitution and throw out our values!
That's what we're doing with Healthcare "reform", Financial "reform" and Cap and Trade legislation, just to name a few. I haven't heard you make a peep about the recent Executive order 12425.

It seems you are fine with violating rights and ignoring the constitution when you think the ends justify the means... its only when you disagree with a policy or program that you show any concern for rights or constitutional legality.
 
Folks,
It is time that we stop bending over backwards to appease the left wing bleeding heart liberals and the ACLU and make SAFETY priority #1. I have not seen or heard of a terrorist/jihadist over the age of, maybe 35. ALL of them have been between 17-30/34 years of age, so these are the people that should be screened, if suspicious.

I agree that such profiling is quite reasonable.

DO NOT hassle the frequent flyers, a family with small children in tow or the elderly husband and wife traveling to see their grandchildren. The TSA and Government is deathly afraid of the word "profiling", when that is EXACTLY what they should be doing. They know exactly what traits a suspected terrorist acts like when he is about to perform a terrorist act.

Agreed.

Here is a novel idea - STOP ISSUING VISAS TO PEOPLE THAT MEET THE PROFILE OF THE TERRORIST HARBORING COUNTRIES!!!!

Completely disagree. We should be encouraging more people from dangerous countries to come to the USA, not fewer. The more western culture they are exposed to, the harder it will be for groups like Al Q. to spread their lies and propaganda about us.

We have the technology to check every confirmed reservation days and even weeks before the suspected individual is scheduled to travel. Once he reaches the Airport he/she can be taken aside and questioned and, if required, searched/scanned to make sure they don't pose a threat and if required cancel their VISA into the USA.

Agreed, it's stupid for us to not be using the technology to assist us in this.

SAFETY PRIORITY #1 - CIVIL LIBERTIES OF SUSPECTED INDIVIDUALS #2 - PERIOD!!!!!!

I disagree. Convenience should be #1, safety should be #2. When did the USA become so frightened of everything? Even accounting for the one-time 9/11 disaster, about the same number of civilian Americans have been killed by deer as terrorists. To quote a recent study:

Americans worry intensely about "another 9/11," but if one of these were to occur every three
months for the next five years, the chance of being killed in one of them is two one-hundredths of one
percent: the posited attacks would kill 60,000 which is about .02 percent of 300,000,000.

Personally, I would rather accept a slightly increased risk of terrorism than a slightly increased risk of missing my flight because I had to wait in longer security lines. Maybe you guys want to spend your lives fearful of low-danger things like asteroid strikes, choking on peanut butter, and terrorist attacks. Personally, I would rather not.
 
I rest my case regarding the Liberals and their opinions regarding this subject. Though I respect everyones opinion and comments.
The people that make this a Bush vs Obama policy are just, to put it mildly, ignorant.

I reiterate the matter:

SAFETY IS PRIORITY #1 - CIVIL LIBERTIES PRIORITY #2 PERIOD
 
If safety is your number one priority, I have an idea that would actually make you more safe. Lower the speed limits on the roads in this country. Unlike imposing stricter airport security measures, pushing for a policy like this could actually save a significant number of lives.
 
The people that make this a Bush vs Obama policy are just, to put it mildly, ignorant.

My appologies for responding to PFOS's inconsistent position on our constitution and our rights without responding to your post. It wasn't about Bush vs. Obama, it was about PFOS being consistent his defense of the constitution and our rights.

As for your post, I found Mr.Sheepish to have a very reasoned rational response. I too would prefer a tempestuous sea of liberty to the calm ocean of despotism.
 
That's what we're doing with Healthcare "reform", Financial "reform" and Cap and Trade legislation, just to name a few. I haven't heard you make a peep about the recentURL="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Obama-gives-Interpol-free-hand-in-U_S_-8697583-80291137.html"]Executive order 12425[/URL].

It seems you are fine with violating rights and ignoring the constitution when you think the ends justify the means... its only when you disagree with a policy or program that you show any concern for rights or constitutional legality.

and you seem to think that you saying something is against the constitution overrides what in fact the courts have already said was not.

Goverment has provided for and regulated health care for , actuly quite a long time...yet somehow it only is against the constituion when Obama does it?

what part? taxing some high end plans? sorry but pretty sure taxing things has been around some time now, seems to pass the courts

Telling the Insurance industry that they can't drop people becuse they get sick or saying they can not get coverage becuse they have a pre existing condtiont...where was that in the constitution, becuse last I checked goverment has for quite some time had the power to regulate things like insurance. But maybe you can come here to MN where goverment regulates that you must have insurance to drive, it must be unconstitutional right? of course the courts have not agreed with that, but if you say so, I am sure they will listen :)

And Financal Reform? Gasp I keep forgeting how the govement is not alowed to have any power over regulations of the market like that...Lets go back and revoke evry law or reform since the Deppression...even though they also have never been found illegal now have they?


But I guess mabe you don't care about this one, search anyone based on race, and anything we do must be legal if its done for "Security" right? your all on board right? I just guess it must be true, since rather then agree, you chose to attack ...
 
I rest my case regarding the Liberals and their opinions regarding this subject. Though I respect everyones opinion and comments.
The people that make this a Bush vs Obama policy are just, to put it mildly, ignorant.

I reiterate the matter:

SAFETY IS PRIORITY #1 - CIVIL LIBERTIES PRIORITY #2 PERIOD

Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither. ... If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.

Ben Franklin...that godless liberal commie pinko
 
Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither. ... If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.

Ben Franklin...that godless liberal commie pinko

Why do you believe this only applies to physical security and not to other forms of security, such as Health security and Financial security?

you seem to think that you saying something is against the constitution overrides what in fact the courts have already said was not.

"It is a very dangerous doctrine to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions. It is one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments coequal and cosovereign within themselves." - Jefferson

FDR threatened to pack the supreme court with hand picked judges when the court ruled his welfare state unconstitutional. As a result, the supreme court buckled under the pressure and our government, once limited by the constitution, was now deemed to have unlimited power to tax, regulate and violate individual rights.

See Pocket, more than just being unconstitutional (a document that is supposed to charge government with protecting our individual rights rather than granting government carte blanche to violate them) the violation of individual rights for any purpose is an immoral act.

But to demonstrate once again your inconsistent position... Your argument is, "the court said it was constitutional", so by that standard, you have no grounds to complain about the Patriot Act or any other government program or institution that violates your individual rights.
 
Executive order 12425

You should start a thread about this. I read your link and it was rather disturbing. Did no one else in this thread read it? Maybe if you start a thread about it people will read it.

That makes me sick that I would not have known about it except for your post.

This is the most secret administration our country has ever had IMO
 
Werbung:
You should start a thread about this. I read your link and it was rather disturbing. Did no one else in this thread read it? Maybe if you start a thread about it people will read it.

That makes me sick that I would not have known about it except for your post.

This is the most secret administration our country has ever had IMO
Way to go Obama!!!! Another screw up.!!!!

Ammendment to Executive order 12425

Another dip$hit move from our dip$hit President.
 
Back
Top