8 pages on this junk?
Just from the very first post:
"We ban a lot of people from flying because of that," a clerk said.
No airline controls the Do Not Fly list.
The clerk responded, "That'll do it."
No it won't. If "Big Brother"
was really watching like that and that overly concerned about it, half the country wouldn't be able to fly.
How many discussions go on daily about Bush possibly breaking the Constitution? Both on the airwaves and on the internet? All of those people are banned from flying? Of course not.
The only possible way this story is true is if he dealt with a really stupid ticket agent. That has nothing to do with government.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:And other than to claim it happened himself, is there a way to prove it? Are the airlines going to grant interviews? Is the government going to release the list? How could one prove it did happen?
What do you want proven? Surely not that the story is correct or accurate.
He got delayed flying. Big deal. Happens. Doubt anyone disagrees about that part. *Yawn*
Absolutely Adequate wrote:That nobody has defended the Bush adminstration thusly, I think, shows that we've lost something.
There's been nothing to defend. I guess there's one thing that could technically be considered a defense, but that's later in the thread.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:We have not only lost something, but been further conditioned to accept authority and forget about freedom.
Freedom does not equal having zero authority figures, laws to follow, etc. You are describing anarchy, not freedom, if you don't think there should be people with higher authority than you defending this country.
Good post by Cu
. I agree. I don't buy this story at all. It doesn't make sense. You'd think with as highly touted as this guy is, the least he could do is make the pieces fit enough for this to be remotely convincing, but it's not.
Amazinz wrote:It doesn't matter. The burden of proof is on Murphy and unless you just love conspiracy theories you have to admit this story is pretty shaky.
Agreed. I wouldn't even call it shaky though, it's laughable at best.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:No it's not really shaky. The conditions exist and the source is credible.
Ian Kinsler could
hit 100 home runs this year. He will get the at bats, and pitchers will pitch to him. MLB is an official organization and company, the games are televised, so it doesn't get more credible than that.
Will it happen? Of course not.
Just because something is possible
, that doesn't mean it actually happened, or will. Huge difference in those two things.
Mookie4ever wrote:Seriously, what's the issue.
Some pampered law prof was delayed and got his panties in a bunch. So what?
Guess he needed a popularity boost, some controversy, or something (selling a book was mentioned, so maybe that's it).
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:Notice I do not imply McCarthyism is here, only that signs of its birth are possible.
There are signs that a large meteor is going to crash into the Earth (20 year or so down the line, the article is posted here somewhere). Are we already preparing to evacuate the planet? So there are "signs", so what?
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:He was able to fly that day.
The real story would be if he wasn't allowed to fly at all and his name really being on the Do Not Fly list. Then we'd have an interesting story here, instead of some noteworthy guy getting delayed and making a fuss about it.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:"(a) we cannot find out exactly how it’s compiled; (b) we cannot find out who compiles it; and (c) the Homeland Security agency or department refuses to explain what criteria they use. They’ll also not tell people who is or who is not on it. So we have essentially a secret list, compiled in secret by secret agents using secret standards."
A) - If we knew how to avoid it, so would the terrorists. Duh.
B) - If we knew exactly who compiled it, then we could do our best to avoid those people, blackmail them, kill them, etc, and the terrorists would be able to as well. Duh.
C) - Basically the same as A, but you really come across as a paranoid freak wearing an aluminum foil hat here. I know you're not, or at least I don't think you are, but this is really messed up.
The list is secret so that terrorists who are not on the list don't fly into or out of the country while they can. I mean really, think about it. Say we figure out who some big terrorist is and then learn he was able to fly out of the country two weeks prior to that, even though we suspected him. How stupid would the government look? This way, if he wants to fly out of the country, he's got to gamble. That's at least some kind of deterrant, rather than him knowing he can just fly out whenever he pleases.
Unless of course you personally are in charge of national security for the entire country? If so, then please let me know as I'll be moving. Publishing how the list is compiled, who exactly compiles it, and what criteria they use would be one of the dumbest moves in the history of the world and I want no part of that.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:This administration has proven it needs baby sitting, I'm not advocating more than that.
I won't turn this personal, but I'd put my trust and life in the hands of the government, and even in the hands of some other Cafe members, over yours without hesitation. No offense, but you're really acting high and mighty and above the goverment here, when you've proven time and time again that you're way too far out on a limb and grasping for anything you can.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:I think anyone will find my ideas quite American and quite prudent.
Actually no, it's not an "American" trait to distrust the government to the point of believing a story that makes zero sense and led to absolutly nothing substancial. The story is garbage since it cannot happen the way he said (barring one stupid employee of course) and he merely got delayed. Again, *Yawn*, what story? There is no story.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:If one does not see the seed of a list deeming American's as terrorists without substantial evidence and based only on speech or protest against the current administration
You lack the "substancial evidence" to even prove that happens to begin with. Pot meet kettle?
I mean prove it happened. Not some story that doesn't add up, and you cannot rewind the clock so that he didn't get to fly, so show me a credible story where someone was not allowed to fly solely due to speaking up against Bush and/or the government.
Chrisy Moltisanti wrote:Squashing the idea of even debating such potential only encourages the feeling of overbearing government.
Debating about something as silly as this is fine, no one's really questioning that.
Believing something this absurd is a totally different thing though.
Mookie4ever wrote:An overbearing silly Canadian like me needs these things pointed out for him.
This is all your fault. I know it is. Guess all the other mods and myself were slacking yesterday, and this is the price for us not pointing stuff out to you.
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....