• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

TSA ejects Oceanside man from airport for refusing security check

Boo Radley said:
yes, we all know claims equal fact. So, claims that 9/11 was an inside job must be fact. Gotcha.
Click to expand...



I lost relatives and friends in the 9/11 attacks, if you wan't to be low class and compare the plethora of complaints akin to conspiracy theories, that's on you hero. You show no intellectual curiosity with your posts hero, all you show is this penchant for whining about semantics, and discrediting victims of the TSA.


I find your tactics and your pseudo-intellectualism lacking any merit, or value. You have avoided my points and lied about your reasonings to do so. Then in a pathetic attempt at one upmanship, you come after me with this 9/11 conspiracy comparison?


what a disgrace.
 
Boo Radley said:
Different argument. Something can be unreasonable, even ineffective, and not equal the overreaction some here are expressing. It isn't molestation or anything like it. Once we argee to that, then we can actually have a reasonable debate.
Click to expand...

Are you finished with your derailment attempt? We've listen to this **** for 71 ****ing pages now.

Diogenes, you seem to be onto something.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...efusing-security-check-71.html#post1059127825

Bomb-sniffing dogs, yes. What does the military use should have been Question #1 from Obama.
 

So, now you throw out the fake outrage. And you call my point a pathic attempt. :roll:

Try just addressing the point. Claims don't equal fact. Never have and never will. Fondling actualy ahs to be fondling. Gropping ahs to actually be gropping. Molesting has to actually be molesting. Just as an inside job has to actually be an inside job. No amount of silliness changes that.
 

There isn't a single viable excuse for undressing a little boy.
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm done as soon as the hyperbolic exaggeration stops. Stop doing it and I'll stop commenting on it. Seems fair to me. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

You were done adding value after your first post.
 

Perfectly valid point, and not a bad idea, actually. It might reduce some of the fear if the images were visible at least to the person being scanned.
 
American said:
You were done adding value after your first post.
Click to expand...

How about being honest about the boy?

On November 19, a family was traveling through a TSA checkpoint at the Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC). Their son alarmed the walk through metal detector and needed to undergo secondary screening. The boy's father removed his son's shirt in an effort to expedite the screening. After our TSO completed the screening, he helped the boy put his shirt back on. That's it. No complaints were filed and the father was standing by his son for the entire procedure.


It should be mentioned that you will not be asked to and you should not remove clothing (other than shoes, coats and jackets) at a TSA checkpoint. If you're asked to remove your clothing, you should ask for a supervisor or manager.

The TSA Blog: Response to "Young Boy Strip Searched by TSA"

Agian, there are real issues, but you and others keep clouding it by exaggerating. Honest debate doesn't accept this kind of dishonesty.
 





Wow so specific about one incident. Perhaps you care to address the any of the last five I posted, Boo. impdaddy:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Wow so specific about one incident. Perhaps you care to address the any of the last five I posted, Boo. impdaddy:
Click to expand...

Go back and read, I've done this before with others, like showing the hands were outside the pants. Agian, we can play this, or we can start being honest. There may be reason to oppose the procedures, but exaggerating is not the way to go, and there is no need to go over every single one. I've shown errors in the reporting, defined what fondling, groppping and molesting mean, and shown that these procedures don't meet those definitions. So, we really need to put this to bed and move on. Concede the point, stop the exaggerating and let's debate something honestly and of substance.
 



Really? Which post numbers of mine did you address specifically. I am being honest, you are attacking the victims, hypocritically and dishonestly I might add. impdaddy:
 

No search necessary for little boys.
 
American said:
No search necessary for little boys.
Click to expand...

Your opinion, certinaly, but not the evil you presented. Not molestation, not a strip search, and not the exaggeration you claimed. This is the point.
 
Boo Radley said:
Your opinion, certinaly, but not the evil you presented. Not molestation, not a strip search, and not the exaggeration you claimed. This is the point.
Click to expand...



Your opinion. The "victims" all 900 of them to you are liars and frauds, the TSA is a perfect entity. kudos to you boo. :whothere:
 
Boo Radley said:
Your opinion, certinaly, but not the evil you presented. Not molestation, not a strip search, and not the exaggeration you claimed. This is the point.
Click to expand...

They shouldn't have done it. The fact that there is no profiling or protocol for children or elderly is troubling. They've had plenty of time to work this stuff out.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Your opinion. The "victims" all 900 of them to you are liars and frauds, the TSA is a perfect entity. kudos to you boo.
Click to expand...

Not convinced of the 900 number either. And what someone feels isn't equal to what actually occured. As I keep showing with your examples. How many wrong before you understand the difference between complaing, feeling, claiming and actual facts?
 
American said:
They shouldn't have done it. The fact that there is no profiling or protocol for children or elderly is troubling. They've had plenty of time to work this stuff out.
Click to expand...

Maybe, and on that overall point without the exaggeration, I might agree with you. So why can't you make the point without the exaggeration?
 
Boo Radley said:
Not convinced of the 900 number either. And what someone feels isn't equal to what actually occured. As I keep showing with your examples. How many wrong before you understand the difference between complaing, feeling, claiming and actual facts?
Click to expand...


ACLU Received Over 900 Complaints - “Enhanced” TSA Security Measures

I'm sorry you don't believe the ACLU's claims of 900 complaints. I really can't help you if you choose to be willfully ignorant. impdaddy:




You know if I shoot you in the face as an example, according to law, all I have to believe is that I was truly in fear of my life for a self defense and justifiable homicide?

why are you attacking the victims here? Do you think rape victims are liars too? :roll:
 
Last edited:
ReverendHellh0und said:
ACLU Received Over 900 Complaints - “Enhanced” TSA Security Measures

I'm sorry you don't believe the ACLU's claims of 900 complaints. I really can't help you if you choose to be willfully ignorant. impdaddy:
Click to expand...

yes, I saw that. I merely doubt 900 people actually called them without some coaxing from sommeone. But, that has nothing to really do with my point. It's one of those side things not meant as a serious challenege. I wonder if you can address the rest?
 


Wow. so when boo speculates, it's fact. But when victims file complaints, they must have been "coaxed"


Those rape victims dressing provacativley, those bitches deserved it too eh boo? :roll:
 
So, asking for someone to make the point without exaggeration is a shuffle? You have real funny ideas and views Rev. You really do. :lamo :lamo :lamo
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Wow. so when boo speculates, it's fact. But when victims file complaints, they must have been "coaxed"


Those rape victims dressing provacativley, those bitches deserved it too eh boo? :roll:
Click to expand...

Never said that. Reading comprehension is a valuable tool. You're making major leaps here. Major leaps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…