Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Lisa Simeone, Sep 12, 2011.
There are salt mines somewhere, aren't there?
I think you are correct.
You may even be correct on the state and local level. When I was with local government, I was aware of several state court decisions that essentially stated that there was no such thing as a confidential settlement when a public entity is involved with a lawsuit. Nevertheless, confidentiality agreements still get included in local government settlements all the time. When they are included, usually one has to sue to get the public agency to release the terms of the settlement.
That would be good for the Federal players in this but that still leaves the airport authority and and local police agencies.
The nuke plants in Japan need cleaining up, a perfect place for these types.
Not much for me to chat about here. Just sayin' that the ACLU is probably considering action. Only time will tell.
I want to see the evil alliance between local police and the DHS well and truly broken. This case may be it.
This right here is THE problem in a lot of these cases. I know others have said it before me, but just want to chime in supporting this thought.
Everyone denies complicity here.
The police were just responding to DHS's need.
DHS was just responding to a report of "suspicious" activity.
Everybody's just doing everybody else's dirty work.
This is what you get when there are talking heads on infortainment news channels making provocative statements about profiling. People sit on the couch and nod their heads, while smugly thinking in the back of their minds they're smarter for watching a news channel instead of Dancing With The Stars. Oh, and cue the Better Safe Than Sorry sound effect.
I think OCP would do a better job with airport screening. Well, other than ED-209 shooting random passengers.
ED-209 was still smarter than the average TSA employee... which is why the idea of arming the checkpoint monkeys scares the crap out of me.
If it goes through the court system there can be confidential settlements. This happens when both parties agree to the confidential terms. You'll know that the parties 'settled', but you won't know the terms, or if there was a payment.
I have no problem with looking "longer and harder" at some demographics. If looking means just being careful with normal security procedures. Looking here by this couch potato evidently means looking at someone's orifaces when they're naked. But this person doesn't have the courage to come out and say it.
I toured one near Salzburg.
That would be risky, though. When a salt mine collapses, the salt can preserve bodies for hundreds of years. I'd feel sorry for any future generations that have to look at these people.
Correct, but when a party is the federal government, can the federal government keep them secret? If they try, there's always FOIA.
Welcome to my 2 years ago.
This is the same spokeshole that admitted they react to every threat as if the sky is falling, that way they never under-react.
What about "They didn't even check and just acted as if the sky is falling, since that's the safest thing to do"... like their airport spokeshole says they do there.
Lots of examples here both ways. The courts are all over the map.
Yeah, I thought of that, but didn't include it because I'd be surprised if that happened. If they didn't do any checks at all, just stormed the plane with a swat team, there would be huge liability issues. There are liability issues as it is, but not checking would make it infinitely worse.
Yeah, and FOIA helps keep the government honest.
When will you people learn that 9/11... changed... EVERYTHING...
It's TSA. It wouldn't surprise me one bit.
Separate names with a comma.