Post: #51

(04-21-2019 10:36 AM)trickster Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 10:22 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 09:21 AM)trickster Wrote:  Right. This makes more sense.

“The ruling does not mean that T.S.A. agents are totally above the law.

“This doesn’t protect these agents from criminal liability, for example, but it does give them immunity from being sued by people who feel they’ve been treated unfairly,” said Wendy Patrick, a lawyer who has handled cases involving assault and battery and a lecturer at San Diego State University.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/busin...unity.html

So, you cite a news story about a completely different case, where a passenger was criminally prosecuted for assaulting TSA agents, and you believe that this has some bearing on the case-at-hand?

If a TSA agent intentionally strikes a passenger in the groin without cause and the passenger cannot sue him for compensation (which is exactly what happened in this case), then it does, in fact, "mean that T.S.A. agents are totally above the law."

If the police refuse to arrest a TSA agent who intentionally strikes a passenger in the groin without cause and the TSA agent is instead given a monetary bonus for his actions (which is exactly what happened in this case), then the law does, in fact, completely protect TSA agents from criminal liability.

If the U.S. Supreme Court does indeed reverse the decisions of the two courts below it will likely be because this factual scenario was so damn egregious, i.e., assaulting an innocent airline captain who was was simply doing his job and following the procedures of the U.S. government by protecting access cards for classified government systems.

Are you serious? You clearly don't understand how the US legal system works. It was a federal court -- the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, not some county judge. Their opinion is precedent in their jurisdiction and applies to more than the case at hand. The person was acquitted by the way, not that it matters.

And it is quite clear -- TSA agents can face criminal liability. So no, they are not above the law. I realize this doesn't square with the narrative you want to believe but if you read the article and the opinion, you can easily see that TSA agents are immune from civil suits, not criminal liability.

Do you have zero reading comprehension? Did you not read the title of the very news article that you read: "Court Gives T.S.A. Screeners Immunity From Abuse Lawsuits"

Did you not read the content of the very news article that you read: "The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled on Wednesday that T.S.A. agents are administrative employees of the federal government and not law enforcement officers. They are therefore immune from being sued for misconduct in civil cases."

The case had nothing to do with criminal liability. Instead of actually citing the court decision, you cited some lawyer from the other side of the country (not even admitted to practice law in the circuit court that issued the decision) who gave her opinion about her understanding of basic criminal law, as if it has some bearing on the impact of this decision (which involved civil law, not criminal law).

Criminal law was not involved in the case cited in your article -- period. So, it has no impact on this discussion. In the case discussed in this thread, the police refused to arrest the TSA agent because they knew that he had government immunity for his actions. Sure, if a TSA murders or rapes someone, the police will arrest him. As a practical matter, and as proven by the facts of this case, TSA agents can commit felony-level groin strikes with impunity.

Post: #52

Quote:You failed to read the article. The entire article is about how the captain has a pending writ before the United States Supreme Court, asking it to hear the case -- and to decide whether TSA agents can be sued, at the very least, for an intentional inappropriate battery.

Of course I didn’t read the article. I read the title and laughed. I refuse to read news that will just piss me off.

Honk.

Post: #53

Here's what will happen...

Captain files a complaint with TSA

TSA disciplines the employee.

Captain sues the government at the US Claims Court.

Big payout on the taxpayer's dime

It's a disgrace to that agency that their employees are so unprofessional.

But apparently personal civil immunity is one of the quirks/perks of direct employment for the sovereign.

Ah man, getting hit in the balls is the worst, but I might consider taking the hit if the payout were anything north of say $70K.

Post: #54

(04-21-2019 12:10 PM)felix_vagabondo Wrote:  Here's what will happen...

Captain files a complaint with TSA

TSA disciplines the employee.

It is alleged that the employee received a $250 bonus from his supervisor for this incident.

The pilot also filed a separate lawsuit against that screener's supervisor for spoliation of evidence. I haven't gone too deep into it but it is implied in the articles that they also defrauded the court by altering evidence before filing it.

I just think it's pure lolz that this pilot has found a hobby he enjoys in recreationally and repeatedly suing the TSA pro se and appealing the cases through all levels of the court system while going about his aviation job. I wonder if he reads case law during long flights.

*scanner beeps* "OK sir, you can go right on through."

"I'm totally gonna get you fuckers." *finger guns*

Reminds me of that Italian astronaut who filed thousands of noise complaints against Reagan International, complete with flight numbers and air speeds, because come hell or high water, he was going to make his point.

https://theoutline.com/post/834/the-dc-r...complaints

Meticulous people on one-man missions would make a great documentary, with a Wagner score and narration by Werner Herzog.

Post: #55

(04-20-2019 08:56 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 08:54 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  If the TSA wins this case it’s a very strong indication that it’s time to pack your shit.

And go where?

This story is pathetic, I predict the TSA will keep growing and anybody who has the balls to fight the TSA let alone dismantle it will get crushed by the government.

Funny you ask this. I live here in Illinois and am looking for other states to live in or if I should renounce my citizenship altogether. There are companies like Remote Year that let you test the waters by working in different countries. These companies act like a hybrid of a travel agency and a professional networking event.

Post: #56

TSA were always scumbags and especially in Newark (New Jersey) black female staff loves to shit on white guys calling you by your first name like you're a kid they can boss around rather than a grown man etc.

I refuse to visit the US at this point. Too many crazy people with broken minds from the clown programming and lets not even talk about the crazy costs of living that nobody without a top 10% job or inherited wealth can pay anymore in NYC, LA etc.

Post: #57

(04-21-2019 10:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 07:32 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  Republican party media (Fox Breitbart etc) has a constant flow of anti-TSA stories because TSA are unionized government employees, and the Republicans want them privatized for profit for their cronies and non-union.

I can tell you that you are dead wrong on this point. Civil libertarians on the right oppose the TSA because of their politically-correct policies. Instead of using the best possible proven-to-work policies (e.g., those used in Israel) by actually profiling and targeting those people most likely to engage in terrorist activity, the TSA would rather use policies that promote the sexual assault of grandmothers and that terrify toddlers.

It is the utter stupidity and political correctness of these policies, which results in the loss of basic human dignity for the many (when the problems are caused by the few), that rightly offends civil libertarians on the right. Republicans want these agents privatized so that agents who now have full government immunity can be held accountable for their criminal actions, which would also result in far better training for private agents (because of the legal liability involved).

This is a variant of the "some people think they should be exempt" objection to the TSA I talked about.

Have you ever been through Israeli airport security? I have. It sucks.

It takes five times as long as a TSA check. Basically, waiting in line for at least two hours to be interviewed by teams of two at least three times, and having to present all baggage, including checked baggage, to be searched by hand. I got shifted to a side room for another interview. That was in transit, I wasn't even trying to enter the country. I can't even remember if I had to go through a metal detector or got frisked, but that would be the least intrusive thing about the process.

And I was a white middle aged guy who was a US government contractor with a security clearance. I know three military / ex-military US government people who had the same experience, being detained, interviewed again and again, searched. One guy, a lieutenant in the US Navy, Naval Academy grad, again a white guy, almost missed his onward flight, had to pull his military ID out and ask "who the fuck do you think I am?" They were taking apart his luggage, running rods through the handles.

As Kona said:

(04-21-2019 06:03 AM)Kona Wrote:  In my Navy days, I had to take a flight that stopped over in the motherland. We had been spreading the globalist agenda, and I even had the under-orders passport. The folks at Tel Aviv airport did not fuck around. Those Jews had fingers on triggers.

The Israeli method is not easier and more respectful at all. What you call "civil libertarians on the right" against "political correctness" really want is for all Muslims to get reamed out, which the Israelis do because, beyond suspicion, they want to make all the Arabs in Israel and territories miserable.

Beyond that, how would you "profile" people and who could you trust? Do you gather more data on everyone, like read their emails and social media? Does Tim McVeigh get a pass, non-Muslim honorably discharged veteran? How about Steven Paddock? The USA has a lot of sickos who would exploit any vulnerability, they could put explosives on granny or little Johnny.

That's why no other country I know of uses the same method as the Israelis. Other countries pretty much use the same procedures as the TSA, which takes 5-30 minutes, depending on the line.

And, government contractors are not exempt from civil rights laws as agents of the government. They can't just ream the Muslims and let others stroll by.

People who say that shit are just parroting right-wing media, have no experience of Israeli security.

The real reason the Republicans hate the TSA is that (1) they're unionized government employees, and thus represent a source of union contributions to the Democrats, and (2) their cronies can't convert the full time jobs with health benefits that the TSA has to two part-time jobs with no benefits, and pocket the margin.

Post: #58

(04-21-2019 03:33 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 10:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 07:32 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  Republican party media (Fox Breitbart etc) has a constant flow of anti-TSA stories because TSA are unionized government employees, and the Republicans want them privatized for profit for their cronies and non-union.

I can tell you that you are dead wrong on this point. Civil libertarians on the right oppose the TSA because of their politically-correct policies. Instead of using the best possible proven-to-work policies (e.g., those used in Israel) by actually profiling and targeting those people most likely to engage in terrorist activity, the TSA would rather use policies that promote the sexual assault of grandmothers and that terrify toddlers.

It is the utter stupidity and political correctness of these policies, which results in the loss of basic human dignity for the many (when the problems are caused by the few), that rightly offends civil libertarians on the right. Republicans want these agents privatized so that agents who now have full government immunity can be held accountable for their criminal actions, which would also result in far better training for private agents (because of the legal liability involved).

This is a variant of the "some people think they should be exempt" objection to the TSA I talked about.

Have you ever been through Israeli airport security? I have. It sucks.

It takes five times as long as a TSA check. Basically, waiting in line for at least two hours to be interviewed by teams of two at least three times, and having to present all baggage, including checked baggage, to be searched by hand. I got shifted to a side room for another interview. That was in transit, I wasn't even trying to enter the country. I can't even remember if I had to go through a metal detector or got frisked, but that would be the least intrusive thing about the process.

And I was a white middle aged guy who was a US government contractor with a security clearance. I know three military / ex-military US government people who had the same experience, being detained, interviewed again and again, searched. One guy, a lieutenant in the US Navy, Naval Academy grad, again a white guy, almost missed his onward flight, had to pull his military ID out and ask "who the fuck do you think I am?" They were taking apart his luggage, running rods through the handles.

As Kona said:

(04-21-2019 06:03 AM)Kona Wrote:  In my Navy days, I had to take a flight that stopped over in the motherland. We had been spreading the globalist agenda, and I even had the under-orders passport. The folks at Tel Aviv airport did not fuck around. Those Jews had fingers on triggers.

The Israeli method is not easier and more respectful at all. What you call "civil libertarians on the right" against "political correctness" really want is for all Muslims to get reamed out, which the Israelis do because, beyond suspicion, they want to make all the Arabs in Israel and territories miserable.

Beyond that, how would you "profile" people and who could you trust? Do you gather more data on everyone, like read their emails and social media? Does Tim McVeigh get a pass, non-Muslim honorably discharged veteran? How about Steven Paddock? The USA has a lot of sickos who would exploit any vulnerability, they could put explosives on granny or little Johnny.

That's why no other country I know of uses the same method as the Israelis. Other countries pretty much use the same procedures as the TSA, which takes 5-30 minutes, depending on the line.

And, government contractors are not exempt from civil rights laws as agents of the government. They can't just ream the Muslims and let others stroll by.

People who say that shit are just parroting right-wing media, have no experience of Israeli security.

The real reason the Republicans hate the TSA is that (1) they're unionized government employees, and thus represent a source of union contributions to the Democrats, and (2) their cronies can't convert the full time jobs with health benefits that the TSA has to two part-time jobs with no benefits, and pocket the margin.

What you just described, in Israel, makes perfect sense: Israel respects its own citizens (at least those unlikely to be terrorists) -- and it more intensively interviews everyone else. That is exactly how it should be. You don't like it? Then don't travel to, or through, Israel.

Quote:The visitors noted the main difference between the two countries - Israeli security openly employs profiling, singling out passengers for stricter screening based on their appearance or ethnic group, a practice that is banned in the U.S.

Since profiling is employed, stricter security checks are not random. Instead, Israeli citizens are passed through with minimal questioning, unless they are Israeli Arabs, who are often subjected to humiliating body searches and interrogation. The security process has triggered many complaints, but in a nation where security is the top priority, little has been done to ease the checks.

Foreigners almost automatically receive closer scrutiny, and racial or other types of profiling can trigger extensive questioning and searching.

The Israelis believe this is one of the keys to their success, and the airport officials from the U.S. could only speculate about how it would affect their work.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18559837/ns/tr...s-studied/


Is there any basis whatsoever for fondling grandmothers and terrifying toddlers other than posturing at the alter of political correctness? We all know the only groups who would "put explosives on granny or little Johnny." They are exactly the groups who should be targeted for extra scrutiny.

A nation's first priority should be to protect and respect its own citizens. Everyone else should be a second priority. Current TSA policy is fundamentally the same PC BS that has dogged the immigration debate in the United States. Egalitarianism, the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities (including illegal immigrants and guests to the country), is just another form of soft socialism that has ruined the West.

Post: #59

(04-21-2019 09:08 AM)VNvet Wrote:  TSA, in general, attracts the lowest caliber of federal employee. This is an objective fact.

1. Entry level pays $34,000/year and the average pay for non-supervisors is about $37,000/year. One of the lowest in the federal government.

2. No one says, "I want to be a TSA screener when I grow up." So there is no "fun factor" to make up for the low pay like you see in law enforcement.

3. Passing an FBI background check isn't difficult. At least not the one required to work as a TSA screener. It doesn't determine the quality of employee either. Just that they have a clean record.

4. There aren't any incentives to treat "customers" properly because it's a government agency.

Those four points combined, mainly 1 & 2, result in a large amount of bottom barrel employees. #4 allows these employees to treat people terribly.

Why would someone work for the TSA when they could work for any other federal agency and make more money at a better job?

First of all, have you ever looked for a federal job, on USAJOBS or otherwise? It's a mess, no way of reaching the decision makers directly.

It's not easy to get a GS-12 or even a GS-7 job. Even if you're highly qualified, you can get rejected before any interviews.

Second, the comparison isn't between the TSA and other federal workers, it's between the TSA and all workers. At $34 - 37k, TSA is below the average wage of private non-supervisory and production workers of about $40k, but it might offer more flexibility, overtime, health benefits, federal Thrift Savings Plan, pension.
I disagree on the "fun factor." It has a lot of stress and drudgery, but it would be interesting working in an airport, watching people if you were into people-watching in general.

Third, it's tough to maintain a clean record nowadays. It's not like when we were kids, where the cops might take you to your parents or perhaps take you for a ride in a police cruiser to terrorize you with a baton. Nowadays, they arrest, arrest, arrest.
Even the military has problems recruiting because so many kids have records, and/or are fat or on meds.

I really don't see how privatizing these jobs will result in better quality people. It will be lower wages, part time jobs, no benefits.

Post: #60

(04-21-2019 03:55 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 03:33 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 10:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 07:32 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  Republican party media (Fox Breitbart etc) has a constant flow of anti-TSA stories because TSA are unionized government employees, and the Republicans want them privatized for profit for their cronies and non-union.

I can tell you that you are dead wrong on this point. Civil libertarians on the right oppose the TSA because of their politically-correct policies. Instead of using the best possible proven-to-work policies (e.g., those used in Israel) by actually profiling and targeting those people most likely to engage in terrorist activity, the TSA would rather use policies that promote the sexual assault of grandmothers and that terrify toddlers.

It is the utter stupidity and political correctness of these policies, which results in the loss of basic human dignity for the many (when the problems are caused by the few), that rightly offends civil libertarians on the right. Republicans want these agents privatized so that agents who now have full government immunity can be held accountable for their criminal actions, which would also result in far better training for private agents (because of the legal liability involved).

This is a variant of the "some people think they should be exempt" objection to the TSA I talked about.

Have you ever been through Israeli airport security? I have. It sucks.

It takes five times as long as a TSA check. Basically, waiting in line for at least two hours to be interviewed by teams of two at least three times, and having to present all baggage, including checked baggage, to be searched by hand. I got shifted to a side room for another interview. That was in transit, I wasn't even trying to enter the country. I can't even remember if I had to go through a metal detector or got frisked, but that would be the least intrusive thing about the process.

And I was a white middle aged guy who was a US government contractor with a security clearance. I know three military / ex-military US government people who had the same experience, being detained, interviewed again and again, searched. One guy, a lieutenant in the US Navy, Naval Academy grad, again a white guy, almost missed his onward flight, had to pull his military ID out and ask "who the fuck do you think I am?" They were taking apart his luggage, running rods through the handles.

As Kona said:

(04-21-2019 06:03 AM)Kona Wrote:  In my Navy days, I had to take a flight that stopped over in the motherland. We had been spreading the globalist agenda, and I even had the under-orders passport. The folks at Tel Aviv airport did not fuck around. Those Jews had fingers on triggers.

The Israeli method is not easier and more respectful at all. What you call "civil libertarians on the right" against "political correctness" really want is for all Muslims to get reamed out, which the Israelis do because, beyond suspicion, they want to make all the Arabs in Israel and territories miserable.

Beyond that, how would you "profile" people and who could you trust? Do you gather more data on everyone, like read their emails and social media? Does Tim McVeigh get a pass, non-Muslim honorably discharged veteran? How about Steven Paddock? The USA has a lot of sickos who would exploit any vulnerability, they could put explosives on granny or little Johnny.

That's why no other country I know of uses the same method as the Israelis. Other countries pretty much use the same procedures as the TSA, which takes 5-30 minutes, depending on the line.

And, government contractors are not exempt from civil rights laws as agents of the government. They can't just ream the Muslims and let others stroll by.

People who say that shit are just parroting right-wing media, have no experience of Israeli security.

The real reason the Republicans hate the TSA is that (1) they're unionized government employees, and thus represent a source of union contributions to the Democrats, and (2) their cronies can't convert the full time jobs with health benefits that the TSA has to two part-time jobs with no benefits, and pocket the margin.

What you just described, in Israel, makes perfect sense: Israel respects its own citizens (at least those unlikely to be terrorists) -- and it more intensively interviews everyone else. That is exactly how it should be.

Quote:The visitors noted the main difference between the two countries - Israeli security openly employs profiling, singling out passengers for stricter screening based on their appearance or ethnic group, a practice that is banned in the U.S.

Since profiling is employed, stricter security checks are not random. Instead, Israeli citizens are passed through with minimal questioning, unless they are Israeli Arabs, who are often subjected to humiliating body searches and interrogation. The security process has triggered many complaints, but in a nation where security is the top priority, little has been done to ease the checks.

Foreigners almost automatically receive closer scrutiny, and racial or other types of profiling can trigger extensive questioning and searching.

The Israelis believe this is one of the keys to their success, and the airport officials from the U.S. could only speculate about how it would affect their work.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18559837/ns/tr...s-studied/


Is there any basis whatsoever for fondling grandmothers and terrifying toddlers other than posturing at the alter of political correctness? We all know the only groups who would place explosives on granny or little Johnny. They are exactly the groups who should be targeted for extra scrutiny.

The respect for its own citizens should be a nation's first priority. Everyone else should come as a second priority. This is fundamentally the same PC BS that has dogged the immigration debate in the United States. Egalitarianism, the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities (including illegal immigrants and guests to the country), is just another form of soft socialism that has ruined the West.

So it's more about wanting to ream out Arabs than anything else.

I really wasn't paying close attention to who else was in my long lines at Ben Gurion Airport, but I don't think they were all foreigners and Arabs.

So Tim McVeigh and Steven Paddock would get a pass while Ilhan Omar got raped with rubber gloves? I don't think that would work out in the long run.

You really couldn't trust US citizens, including and specifically white males 16 - 70, given the incidence of mass shootings among that demographic. Any slack security would be noticed and eventually exploited by the Sicko of the Week.

Thanks, I'll take my five minute TSA, belts off, shoes off, laptop out, hands-up scan process over letting potentially deranged people like me walk through while they ream out and grill Mohammed the taxi driver for three hours.

Post: #61

(04-21-2019 04:25 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 03:55 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 03:33 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 10:47 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 07:32 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  Republican party media (Fox Breitbart etc) has a constant flow of anti-TSA stories because TSA are unionized government employees, and the Republicans want them privatized for profit for their cronies and non-union.

I can tell you that you are dead wrong on this point. Civil libertarians on the right oppose the TSA because of their politically-correct policies. Instead of using the best possible proven-to-work policies (e.g., those used in Israel) by actually profiling and targeting those people most likely to engage in terrorist activity, the TSA would rather use policies that promote the sexual assault of grandmothers and that terrify toddlers.

It is the utter stupidity and political correctness of these policies, which results in the loss of basic human dignity for the many (when the problems are caused by the few), that rightly offends civil libertarians on the right. Republicans want these agents privatized so that agents who now have full government immunity can be held accountable for their criminal actions, which would also result in far better training for private agents (because of the legal liability involved).

This is a variant of the "some people think they should be exempt" objection to the TSA I talked about.

Have you ever been through Israeli airport security? I have. It sucks.

It takes five times as long as a TSA check. Basically, waiting in line for at least two hours to be interviewed by teams of two at least three times, and having to present all baggage, including checked baggage, to be searched by hand. I got shifted to a side room for another interview. That was in transit, I wasn't even trying to enter the country. I can't even remember if I had to go through a metal detector or got frisked, but that would be the least intrusive thing about the process.

And I was a white middle aged guy who was a US government contractor with a security clearance. I know three military / ex-military US government people who had the same experience, being detained, interviewed again and again, searched. One guy, a lieutenant in the US Navy, Naval Academy grad, again a white guy, almost missed his onward flight, had to pull his military ID out and ask "who the fuck do you think I am?" They were taking apart his luggage, running rods through the handles.

As Kona said:

(04-21-2019 06:03 AM)Kona Wrote:  In my Navy days, I had to take a flight that stopped over in the motherland. We had been spreading the globalist agenda, and I even had the under-orders passport. The folks at Tel Aviv airport did not fuck around. Those Jews had fingers on triggers.

The Israeli method is not easier and more respectful at all. What you call "civil libertarians on the right" against "political correctness" really want is for all Muslims to get reamed out, which the Israelis do because, beyond suspicion, they want to make all the Arabs in Israel and territories miserable.

Beyond that, how would you "profile" people and who could you trust? Do you gather more data on everyone, like read their emails and social media? Does Tim McVeigh get a pass, non-Muslim honorably discharged veteran? How about Steven Paddock? The USA has a lot of sickos who would exploit any vulnerability, they could put explosives on granny or little Johnny.

That's why no other country I know of uses the same method as the Israelis. Other countries pretty much use the same procedures as the TSA, which takes 5-30 minutes, depending on the line.

And, government contractors are not exempt from civil rights laws as agents of the government. They can't just ream the Muslims and let others stroll by.

People who say that shit are just parroting right-wing media, have no experience of Israeli security.

The real reason the Republicans hate the TSA is that (1) they're unionized government employees, and thus represent a source of union contributions to the Democrats, and (2) their cronies can't convert the full time jobs with health benefits that the TSA has to two part-time jobs with no benefits, and pocket the margin.

What you just described, in Israel, makes perfect sense: Israel respects its own citizens (at least those unlikely to be terrorists) -- and it more intensively interviews everyone else. That is exactly how it should be.

Quote:The visitors noted the main difference between the two countries - Israeli security openly employs profiling, singling out passengers for stricter screening based on their appearance or ethnic group, a practice that is banned in the U.S.

Since profiling is employed, stricter security checks are not random. Instead, Israeli citizens are passed through with minimal questioning, unless they are Israeli Arabs, who are often subjected to humiliating body searches and interrogation. The security process has triggered many complaints, but in a nation where security is the top priority, little has been done to ease the checks.

Foreigners almost automatically receive closer scrutiny, and racial or other types of profiling can trigger extensive questioning and searching.

The Israelis believe this is one of the keys to their success, and the airport officials from the U.S. could only speculate about how it would affect their work.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18559837/ns/tr...s-studied/


Is there any basis whatsoever for fondling grandmothers and terrifying toddlers other than posturing at the alter of political correctness? We all know the only groups who would place explosives on granny or little Johnny. They are exactly the groups who should be targeted for extra scrutiny.

The respect for its own citizens should be a nation's first priority. Everyone else should come as a second priority. This is fundamentally the same PC BS that has dogged the immigration debate in the United States. Egalitarianism, the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities (including illegal immigrants and guests to the country), is just another form of soft socialism that has ruined the West.

So Tim McVeigh and Steven Paddock would get a pass while Ilhan Omar got raped with rubber gloves? I don't think that would work out in the long run.

You really couldn't trust US citizens, including and specifically white males 16 - 70, given the incidence of mass shootings among that demographic. Any slack security would be noticed and eventually exploited by the Sicko of the Week.

That is a red herring argument. You do not need to worry about white male active-shooters at airports. They rampage at the "gun free" zones created by liberal politicians, where law-abiding citizens cannot defend themselves. Why would white male active-shooters go to an airport -- or anywhere else -- where other people have guns?

Post: #62

(04-21-2019 04:41 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 04:25 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  So Tim McVeigh and Steven Paddock would get a pass while Ilhan Omar got raped with rubber gloves? I don't think that would work out in the long run.

You really couldn't trust US citizens, including and specifically white males 16 - 70, given the incidence of mass shootings among that demographic. Any slack security would be noticed and eventually exploited by the Sicko of the Week.

That is a red herring argument. You do not need to worry about white male active-shooters at airports. They rampage at the "gun free" zones created by liberal politicians. Why would white male active-shooters go to an airport -- or anywhere else where other people have guns?

So you don't think a white male US citizen rageaholic, incipient psychotic case, or political extremist would ever stroll onto a plane with a gun or a bomb if he could?

Guys like the Capital Gazette shooter in Maryland last year, or the guy who shot up the Congressional softball game, or Paddock, or the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, or that guy Sayoc with the pipe bombs last year?

Madmen out to kill people and become infamous would never take the opportunity to down an airliner with 300+ people?

OK, let all citizens just board without screening. It wouldn't last a month before disaster.

Post: #63

Yes, because the screening is just SO effective!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/inv...gh-n367851

5% effective to be exact.

Post: #64

(04-21-2019 04:57 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 04:41 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 04:25 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  So Tim McVeigh and Steven Paddock would get a pass while Ilhan Omar got raped with rubber gloves? I don't think that would work out in the long run.

You really couldn't trust US citizens, including and specifically white males 16 - 70, given the incidence of mass shootings among that demographic. Any slack security would be noticed and eventually exploited by the Sicko of the Week.

That is a red herring argument. You do not need to worry about white male active-shooters at airports. They rampage at the "gun free" zones created by liberal politicians. Why would white male active-shooters go to an airport -- or anywhere else where other people have guns?

So you don't think a white male US citizen rageaholic, incipient psychotic case, or political extremist would ever stroll onto a plane with a gun or a bomb if he could?

Guys like the Capital Gazette shooter in Maryland last year, or the guy who shot up the Congressional softball game, or Paddock, or the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, or that guy Sayoc with the pipe bombs last year?

Madmen out to kill people and become infamous would never take the opportunity to down an airliner with 300+ people?

OK, let all citizens just board without screening. It wouldn't last a month before disaster.

Again with the red herring arguments. Where did I ever say that citizens and their baggage should not go through a metal detector or other screening devices? The only thing that I emphasized is that intrusive hands-on body screening should be reserved for people who offer a higher probability of offering a serious threat -- and especially not to grandmothers and toddlers. I was quite clear on this point. There was no way to misinterpret what I stated.

But to answer your question: repeated experience shows that active-shooters, typically white guys, primarily attack soft (gun free) targets. They typically do not strike locations where someone is likely to be armed, much less an airport where people are absolutely armed. So, while they should definitely be screened by metal detectors or other scanners, they should not get kicked in the groin to ascertain whether a gun is hidden there.

Post: #65

(04-21-2019 05:21 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  Yes, because the screening is just SO effective!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/inv...gh-n367851

5% effective to be exact.

Yes, this is the insidious element that few people ever mention. All this loss of human dignity by citizens (in being groped and probed) for very little actual protection. Anyone with half a brain who wants to do harm is going to do harm (in the U.S.).

This is yet another reason that the Israeli model is better: "No successful hijacking has occurred on a plane leaving the airport, and no attack has taken place inside the terminal since the 1970s, although Israel and planes entering and leaving the country are prime targets for Islamic extremists." If you insist on losing your dignity as a people, at least do it for a methology that actually works.

Post: #66

The elephant in the room here is rude black people. We all know they make up the majority of the TSA at major hub airports like JFK, Atlanta, LAX etc.

Post: #67

(04-21-2019 10:19 AM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 12:43 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 12:36 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 12:21 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(04-20-2019 11:00 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  There's already multiple threads discussing this. Best option varies for each person but is generally limited by your ability to blend into the local population.

If shit goes south in America your citizenship will not grant you asylum and prosperity in other countries. You'll be fucked.

Well, that is why you educate yourself and plan ahead. Obtain residencies, citizenship, bank accounts, investments, real estate, and businesses in other countries. Diversify. This is not rocket science. It just takes some education, planning, and boots on the ground. Life is all about creating options.

It is comparable to rocket science. If the US goes to shit, or any other western country you may be a citizen of, your citizenship will amount to jack squat. You will lose that westerner status. You think the Vietnamese, for example, will let you live in their country when yours has gone to shit? You're going to need some mega game to make that work.

Good luck.

This is likely accurate. The South African passport became pretty useless as their country went to shit. Our ability to travel (and stay) so easily is based on our country being an economic powerhouse.

This is why crypto is such an important development. Your country doesn't have to be an economic powerhouse if you personally have the capital to make substantial investments in your new community, and can easily carry it across national borders. Money will always talk.

Post: #68

(04-21-2019 06:46 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  The elephant in the room here is rude black people. We all know they make up the majority of the TSA at major hub airports like JFK, Atlanta, LAX etc.

I was going to imply something similar without the race part. I fly out of regional airports in small midwest and southeast cities. TSA folks are always polite enough.

When I have had to go through TSA type checks in Toronto and Chicago...surprise, they are assholes and visibly hate their lives.

The issue might not be the TSA, the issue might be the caliber of people in large cities who get hired for these TSA jobs...white, black or other skinned.

The solution may be to just move out of the city instead of to another country.

Last, SP5, always brings facts instead of hyperbolic opinions. Excellent poster.

Post: #69

(04-21-2019 04:05 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(04-21-2019 09:08 AM)VNvet Wrote:  TSA, in general, attracts the lowest caliber of federal employee. This is an objective fact.

1. Entry level pays $34,000/year and the average pay for non-supervisors is about $37,000/year. One of the lowest in the federal government.

2. No one says, "I want to be a TSA screener when I grow up." So there is no "fun factor" to make up for the low pay like you see in law enforcement.

3. Passing an FBI background check isn't difficult. At least not the one required to work as a TSA screener. It doesn't determine the quality of employee either. Just that they have a clean record.

4. There aren't any incentives to treat "customers" properly because it's a government agency.

Those four points combined, mainly 1 & 2, result in a large amount of bottom barrel employees. #4 allows these employees to treat people terribly.

Why would someone work for the TSA when they could work for any other federal agency and make more money at a better job?

First of all, have you ever looked for a federal job, on USAJOBS or otherwise? It's a mess, no way of reaching the decision makers directly.

It's not easy to get a GS-12 or even a GS-7 job. Even if you're highly qualified, you can get rejected before any interviews.

Second, the comparison isn't between the TSA and other federal workers, it's between the TSA and all workers. At $34 - 37k, TSA is below the average wage of private non-supervisory and production workers of about $40k, but it might offer more flexibility, overtime, health benefits, federal Thrift Savings Plan, pension.
I disagree on the "fun factor." It has a lot of stress and drudgery, but it would be interesting working in an airport, watching people if you were into people-watching in general.

Third, it's tough to maintain a clean record nowadays. It's not like when we were kids, where the cops might take you to your parents or perhaps take you for a ride in a police cruiser to terrorize you with a baton. Nowadays, they arrest, arrest, arrest.
Even the military has problems recruiting because so many kids have records, and/or are fat or on meds.

I really don't see how privatizing these jobs will result in better quality people. It will be lower wages, part time jobs, no benefits.

The comparison is between TSA and all jobs, of course. TSA is still lower than other federal workers AND everyone else. You even stated that.

You also previously stated that TSA workers have more to worry about and additional stress because people die if they fail.

Why get a job that pays less and is more stressful?

Because they can't find another job. You can blame the hate on Breitbart, Fox News, the libertarian movement, and anti-union stuff all day.

Or maybe very few quality people want to work a shit-tier job for terrible pay. This leads to low-quality people and incidents like this.

Post: #70

(04-21-2019 07:32 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  Some people really do think airport security searches of any kind are outrageous and unconstitutional, or that they should be exempt because they're white/old/ young/veteran/rich.

Generally speaking, they should be to a large extent.

I don't see many western born and raised old/young white people trying to blow up airports, crash trucks into people, and hijack planes and smash them into buildings in the name of a particular religion. Profiling is a perfectly legitimate security practice but the US is so cucked and politically correct, TONS of virtually zero risk folks get the 3rd degree from TSA all the time. It's not effective and it's a waste of limited time and resources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Is...st_attacks

That said, TSA folks are some of the most unprofessional and sloppy security people in the modern world. It's fucking embarrassing. The standards for dress and appearance, custom and courtesies, general conduct, and professionalism is appalling.

In some airports, it looks like they took people straight out of the ghetto and trailer park, gave them no baseline testing to make sure they are qualified for the job, and just said: "Put on this wrinkly uniform and get to it."

One of my biggest pet peeves with those surely fucks is that they will borderline refuse to change their gloves when digging through my luggage and touching sensitive objects like the inside of my razor kit. I had one TSA cocksucker one time straight up ignore me (he clearly heard me) when I politely asked that he put on new gloves before digging in. I ultimately had to raise my voice and ask again very sternly to get him to cooperate. He huffed and puffed like he was doing me this huge favor by utilizing basic hygiene standards.

Fuck TSA.

Post: #71

(04-21-2019 08:38 PM)Dr Mantis Toboggan Wrote:  ...
This is why crypto is such an important development. Your country doesn't have to be an economic powerhouse if you personally have the capital to make substantial investments in your new community, and can easily carry it across national borders. Money will always talk.

Everyone places their bets and rolls their dice. You might set yourself up in one of the best chosen spots in the world but you're only ever one corrupt judge and a well-bribed extradition order away from being dragged back to Uncle Sam kicking and screaming.

As usual the nail that stands up tallest gets hammered down first. Personally I think that participants in this forum underestimate how high their presence here places them on the shit-list of the totalitarians. If those assholes end up with enough power then rounding up the lot of us will be a presumption rather than a question, and it wont really matter where you are at all.

The soviets rounded up every man and his dog who was even slightly politically unreliable. Back then you could flee to places like Western Europe or the US because there were legitimate ideological competitors to the communist blocs.

Now? Not so much.

If I were committed to dodging totalitarianism via travel then I'd go as far as to change my identity and live somewhere that was never going to have serious CCTV assets in place.

Once Uncle Sam starts really hurting for money then the "repatriation and asset confiscation teams" he gins up will be a pretty scary thing to behold. They'll get your passwords to your crypto accounts with nothing but a hammer and a bag full of nails on the promise to 10 percent of anything recovered. Privateering has a long and storied history and every psychopath likes to have a harbor where he can hang his hat without having to look over his shoulder.

Post: #72

(04-21-2019 05:21 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  Yes, because the screening is just SO effective!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/inv...gh-n367851

5% effective to be exact.

TSA screening is a ritual or ceremony, a symbol, designed to commemorate the rules, and to deter people from breaking them.

We put our bags on this conveyor belt, take off our shoes and get our nuts patted... all in the name of a cultural expression of shared recognition and respect for the rules and regulations governing our flight.

It's like a lock on a door. If some guy really wants to break in, he can. But the law-abiding person won't enter through a locked door.

An open, unlocked door is an invitation. This is the situation in a subway where the turn-style is not guarded and enforced. People will learn that the rules do not really apply and jump over, risking the slight chance of a citation in order to retain the fare money.

TSA screening is a government program just like "The Wall."

A wall will not stop the people that tunnel under it or go over or around or through. But it is a symbol of what the country will and will not actively tolerate. That is why Democrats--many of whom are placing their bets on a new constituency of immigrants--hate the idea of a wall. Having relatively open borders sends a symbol to the world that immigrants are welcome, and they want foreigners to feel welcome to come here and register to vote. Laws are programs for human conduct, like codes for a machine. Police, walls, etc. embody an extension of the words, a physical message to the people--this is what you are required to do, this what you're prohibited from doing. Citizens learn the rules a little bit every time they hear of somebody going to jail on the news. Like a computer program with no hardware, a law is nothing if the people do not on some level willingly comply, but they need to know and internalize the rules, which happens when they finally "get the message" when law-breakers are pulled over, beat, punished, etc. and when random citizens are searched. The search might find something, but more importantly it's a way for the government to communicate what the law-abiding citizen can and can't carry.

The murderous person is often deterred from killing by the knowledge that he might be punished, but knowing that the TSA might throw away my toothpaste makes it rather unlikely I'll bring a bomb.

Post: #73

(04-22-2019 12:41 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  In some airports, it looks like they took people straight out of the ghetto and trailer park, gave them no baseline testing to make sure they are qualified for the job, and just said: "Put on this wrinkly uniform and get to it."

You don't remember the infamous pizza box recruiting campaign?

Post: #74

The pathetic nature of the TSA is standard fare for the entire security industry below the rank of "my job requires me to carry a gun".

What can you do? Nobody is paying some fatass 60k a year to pour his lard-ass into some dress pants and a short sleeve shirt then do monkey work for five shifts a week. Because in reality that's all it takes. A lard-ass in dress pants and a short sleeve shirt. If you paid twice as much you could be more picky but then you're paying twice as much and you wouldn't see any real improvements in anything other than attitude, which the bean counters don't give a fuck about because they're not the ones suffering it.

Post: #75

(04-22-2019 08:45 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  The pathetic nature of the TSA is standard fare for the entire security industry below the rank of "my job requires me to carry a gun".

This is really the heart of the issue. You can't do much damage without a gun, so the hiring process is much simpler.

Plus, the TSA is a federal agency. Federal agencies are more tyrannical because they are run by unelected bureaucrats not from the local community. This is the same reason your local Sheriff's department is (generally) less tyrannical than the city police. Both are less tyrannical than the state police.

The Founding Fathers wrote the (mostly ignored) 10th Amendment for a reason.