You know this country is fucked up when. . .

[Fuzz]

Conservatives like Limbaugh and Hannity are arguing against higher security at airports and 'some' on the left are arguing for these 'enhanced techniques', all because of who is in the White House.

The arguments would be the other way around if the President was a republican.

So fucking weird.

I'm so glad most here at DU can see through this shit and call it for what it is despite the party labels.

[Skittles]

1. it is disgusting and pathetic

absolutely

[ixion]

3. Indeed. I can't believe I'm actually arguing with some DUers about something we agreed on

for years. It's quite lame.

[monktonman]

2. dont like it?.... dont fly....

[ixion]

4. Such is how dictatorships are born

you should be so proud. :eyes:

[TheKentuckian]

5. How long before you're hollering don't take the bus, don't hop a train, don't go to the mall,

and eventually don't go outside or even "if you have nothing to hide then you won't mind in house surveillance"?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheKentuckian]

19. Why? As soon as the fear inspiring targets change so do the areas where you'll find

civil liberties violations acceptable.

Or is their some unique aspect that only planes have that is a magic game changer for you?

Or are you saying terrorist or bound to using planes?

I don't think the logic is consistent.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aquart]

6. And I won't, either.

[the redcoat]

8. That's not the point.

What if they passed a law saying you could be shot on the spot for J-walking?

Would you just say "Don't like it? Don't J-walk."?

[monktonman]

10. thats just stupid

airlines are PRIVATE enterprises
they can ask you to do anything they want to
if YOU consent
then YOUR THE SUCKER

[Fuzz]

12. Um, the airline isn't the one 'asking'.

[monktonman]

13. so the big bad TSA is asking

YOU COULD SAY ..... NO

[jeff47]

26. And saying "no" results in an $11,000 fine. (nt)

[Angry Dragon]

17. You sound just like rand paul

saying private businesses can do anything they want.
Just what rights do you think we have as citizens??

[the redcoat]

20. So when credit card companies

started screwing people through ridiculous fees and rates, that was all the fault of the dumbass sucker Americans? When the housing market collapsed because of equally shady lending practices, that was all the fault of people who "fell for it"? Give me a fucking break.

[Skittles]

9. do you not get it, monk?

SOME PEOPLE HAVE TO FLY

[ShamelessHussy]

14. reminds me of another polemic, "love it or leave it"

[WillyT]

15. Your "Courage" In The Face Of The "Terrorist Threat" Is Underwhelming...

What other dignities and freedoms are you willing to give up to please/appease the terrorists?

:shrug:

And BTW - I DO NOT like it, and I WILL NOT fly. If they want to see my as, they can kiss it.

[flvegan]

23. OBEY!

[_ed_]

34. Michael Chertoff thanks you for your help

Are you in on the scam, too?

[Individualist]

36. You forgot to add fascism rawks!

[ShadowLiberal]

11. Yep, and yet come 2012 the GOP will still somehow claim Obama is weak on security

The worst part of people saying the opposite of what they usually do because of who's in the White House is imagine for a second if the TSA changed nothing in it's security regulations after the Underwear bomber. In 2012 the republican nominee would then have screamed that Obama is weak on security for not adding more airport security since the underwear bomber.

One guy who wrote an article about this had a great point, what if once the terrorists get into our country (like many of the terrorists who attacked/tried to attack us on Airplanes already were) they decided to attack us in some other way? What if for example they went to a busy grocery store and blew themselves up around a bunch of people, similar to how terrorists do it in the middle east. Would we have to put up with full body scans and pat downs at all our grocery stores then? The point is that to think that by merely protecting our airports and national landmarks we'll prevent a terrorist attack is foolish. If they can get into our country (or worse yet, if they can brainwash an American to do their bidding) then they can attack us almost anywhere. You can't just police the rest of the US like we do the airlines to stop a terrorist attack, it would cost way too much and stop far too few terrorist attacks, I mean compare the number of plots the media announces that the government successfully stopped from happening, compared to plots that either happened, or came darn close to happening (like the underwear bomber). You'll find far more plots that we're already stopping.

And you know the worst part of the new airline regulations? Even the people who make the full body scanners admit that they wouldn't have detected the underwear bomber's bomb, because it was made of materials that don't show up in an X-Ray. So then why are we wasting millions of dollars on full body scanners that wouldn't have worked anyway? I mean duh, if you're the underwear bomber and you know your bomb won't show up in the full body scanner, of course you'll take the full body scan over the much riskier pat down.

[flyarm]

21. all the "SO CALLED OBAMA SECURITY" DOES NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION...

who in our government allowed the underwear guy ( he was not a bomber as he bombed nothing) onto an International flight , USA bound ..without a passport????????

Because as flight crew for 33 years, I know off no paasengers allowed on an International Flight of any kind where a passenger got on an Aircraft USA bound without a fucking passport!

That is unless they were escorted on the plane in handcuffs by Government officials, or customs agents.

So do pray tell us all about the OBAMA Security..who in the Obama Administration got that guy on that aircraft and USA Bound flight ..without a passport..because that is what it would have taken to get that guy on any flight I was working or any of my co-workers were working!

Ya know..bullshit is just that ..bullshit..and propaganda is just that propaganda.

Tell us all who the fuck got that guy through European security without a passport..who got him his boarding pass without a passport and who got him into the Gate area without a passport, and who got him boarded on that aircraft without a passport??????????????????

Please stop believing the propaganda and the fucking lies by our government.

This is all kabuki theater..and the end result will be you and every American loses their Constitutional Born rights!

[jeff47]

28. I really shouldn't be replying to this, but...

who in our government allowed the underwear guy ( he was not a bomber as he bombed nothing) onto an International flight , USA bound ..without a passport????????

Since the flight was outside the US, it would be up to another nation's government to stop him or allow him on the plane. His passport/visa, or lack thereof, would be discovered by US Customs after the flight landed.

Btw, he had a passport as well as a visa to enter the US, which he presented to Dutch customs before boarding flight 253. Since you're wrong on that particular aspect of this incident, your entire anti-Obama rant kinda falls apart.

[truth2power]

30. It's not about the passport...

Apparently there was some problem with him boarding the flight. Then a well-dressed man stepped in to give the ok. Who was that person?

Mr. Haskell, the attorney, said, "Let me see the security tapes." But that was denied.

Kinda like 9/11. How many times are they gonna run this same scenario?

[jeff47]

32. You guys should really get to work on synchronizing your conspiracy theories

'Cause according to the "passport" theorists, that well-dressed man was overcoming the passport problem.

In your scenario, what problem was he having boarding the flight?

[notesdev]

16. Amen

Really brings out who actually is thinking and who is just cheering for the team.

[Fla_Democrat]

18. I call that..

"it's not the what, it's the who."... you would be surprised how many times that comes up.


:smoke:

[TBF]

22. It's just more theatre from the money party ... nt

[Odin2005]

24. If Bush were doing this shit the apologists would be screaming.

But apparently it's OK if "Our Side" does it. The corruption of American politics is complete, it's all about personalities, now. When it becomes all about personalities then dictatorship and Caesarism is not too far behind.

We are replaying the fall of the Roman Republic to a T, and Obama is Gaius Marius.

[Fuzz]

33. And not just political personalities, talking head personalities that tell people

what to think, regardless of how hypocritical it is. That is what pisses me off the most. The logical twists one has to go through in order to argue a position, especially from the right, is mind numbing.

[Individualist]

37. +1

[customerserviceguy]

25. You are so right on

Threats to freedom can come from any political label.

What makes us better people than the Repukes is that we can figure that out, no matter if there is an "R" or a "D" after the names of the occupant of the White House.

[w8liftinglady]

27. I enjoy referring them to the Patriot Act...and asking them how they felt then

I had major issues with the Patriot act as well.

[TorchTheWitch]

29. Amen

Sick to see ANY DUers stooping to this shit though.

[Maru Kitteh]

31. +1