TSA: GOVERNMENT FASCISM at the AIRPORT

[SteveAJones]

8 hours ago, Fitha_whiskey said:

That's a pretty easy comment to make when you are a white male who will not be profiled or stopped and frisked and hassled for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Yet if it did happen to you, you would be ranting and raving somewhere, calling on your fellow "patriots" (lol) to start a civil war against the police state.

You spew some real horseshit man.

YOU spew some real horseshit. I mean what I say and I say what I mean. Racial profiling and stop and frisk are proven to be effective techniques to reduce crime. 

[DR DOOM]

Man, Steve here has a point.

Not very PC, but it's as plain as the nose on your face.

You know, people of "Middle Eastern Appearance" being singled out for security checks etc...well FUCKING DERR!

I guess it's racist/homophobic/whatever-phobic to point out that the majority of these fuckers blowing themselves up and shooting people over comics are of middle eastern appearance and dare I say it, "Muslim".

 

[Dan H.]

6 hours ago, DR DOOM said:

Man, Steve here has a point.

Not very PC, but it's as plain as the nose on your face.

You know, people of "Middle Eastern Appearance" being singled out for security checks etc...well FUCKING DERR!

I guess it's racist/homophobic/whatever-phobic to point out that the majority of these fuckers blowing themselves up and shooting people over comics are of middle eastern appearance and dare I say it, "Muslim".

 

Islam is a religion, not a race. There is no effective way of knowing someone is Islamic at a body scanner.

Also, the vast majority of Islamic people are not radicalized. Thus, if we just start deciding to go harder on brown folks in the security lines, inevitably we will be stopping 99.999% good, honest, regular people for no other reason than the color of their skin. This is the land of the free, won't don't just shake  a whole race of people down when we know there's only a .0001% chance of them being an enemy.

Its a waste of resources,  it sets a bad example to the world, and it almost never works anyways.

[SteveAJones]

2 hours ago, Dan H. said:

There is no effective way of knowing someone is Islamic at a body scanner.

True, but it is possible to know which passengers are men between the ages of 18 to 35 travelling alone and scrutinize accordingly. Only a moronic PC culture wastes time and resources shaking down infants and grandmothers. 

[Dan H.]

Just now, SteveAJones said:

True, but it is possible to know which passengers are men between the ages of 18 to 35 travelling alone and scrutinize accordingly. Only a moronic PC culture wastes time and resources shaking down infants and grandmothers. 

It wouldn't take much thought or effort for ISIS to start strapping bombs on infants and grandmothers tho, in order to beat the system. Pretty soon literally everyone and anyone is a suspect.

[SteveAJones]

Just now, Dan H. said:

It wouldn't take much thought or effort for ISIS to start strapping bombs on infants and grandmothers tho, in order to beat the system. Pretty soon literally everyone and anyone is a suspect.

Come on, man. Everyone gets scanned. I'm talking about the focus of the secondary screening procedures, such as those that the hot young journalist was subjected to. 

[Dan H.]

28 minutes ago, SteveAJones said:

Come on, man. Everyone gets scanned. I'm talking about the focus of the secondary screening procedures, such as those that the hot young journalist was subjected to. 

I don't think there should be secondary screening procedures at all. Body scanner, metal detector, shoes off, bags scanned, thats all good enough.

My point is just that racial profiling doesn't work.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Dan H.

[Orsys]

23 hours ago, Dan H. said:

White privilege means is that society typically caters more towards white people than minorities. An example of this is that people with foreign or black sounding names are drastically less likely to be called for a job interview than someone with a white sounding name.

In Georgy's comment, I assume he is saying that brown people are statistically more likely to be taken for extra screening and frisking than a white person. Thus, just being born white gives you that statistical benefit.

It was intially a phrase designed to draw attention to the fact that discrimination is still alive and well in the United States, but has turned into a condescending insult used by HuffPost liberals to trash on individual white people and make them feel guilty. Ultimately its a societal problem that has hung on in American culture from slavery, Jim Crowe, crack laws and manditory sentencing, etc etc.

It should always have only been an observation for discussion, not a weapon for accusing individuals of racism just because they are white people.

I have wondered if the selection process is less about race and more about quotas. ie how can they screen as many as possible to reach their required numbers.. I have been pulled aside for the tap down 4 out of the last 5 times I have travelled. They have always been polite but thorough. I have not minded because they did it fast. I have never asked for a private room.. 

i travel very light, so no jackets with filled pockets or other things to make the search more complicated. You could typically look at me and see what I have on me. 

I am blond with blue eyes. Typical Dutch looking woman. Nothing that meets any profiles, but I have been pulled aside 80% of my trips. I honestly think it is more because they can get me through fast and get their numbers than because I meet a certain type of profile.

 

[downzy]

23 hours ago, Dan H. said:

I think the phrase itself is also needlessly aggresive. Systematic discrimination is a more accurate phrase IMO.

Unfortunately thats not as easy for the lazy aggro liberal trolls on tumblr to wrap their heads around. They gotta feel superior to everyone else first and foremost, rather than actually having genuine concern for the racial flaws in our system, and how best to communicate those ideas to skeptics.

In a year where a white old rich man became President by acting in a manner in which no black man ever could, it's absurd to me that the term "white privilege" is needlessly aggressive.  Seems more appropriate more than ever.  

I suppose the "aggressiveness" of the term depends on one's own circumstances.  To you and me, as white males, it seems galvanizing since we're essentially both the target of the term and the beneficiary of systemic discrimination.  But to those who suffer under the system, identifying the recipient isn't aggressive but necessary.  A discussion about race/racism/discrimination in which actual races aren't mention is no discussion at all (or at least one worth having).  White privilege is what systemic discrimination looks like in the United States (whereas it might take a different form or produce something different in other countries with respect to gender, sexuality, or other races).  They are not one and of the same and shouldn't be viewed as such.  

[Dan H.]

7 minutes ago, Orsys said:

I have wondered if the selection process is less about race and more about quotas. ie how can they screen as many as possible to reach their required numbers.. I have been pulled aside for the tap down 4 out of the last 5 times I have travelled. They have always been polite but thorough. I have not minded because they did it fast. I have never asked for a private room.. 

i travel very light, so no jackets with filled pockets or other things to make the search more complicated. You could typically look at me and see what I have on me. 

I am blond with blue eyes. Typical Dutch looking woman. Nothing that meets any profiles, but I have been pulled aside 80% of my trips. I honestly think it is more because they can get me through fast and get their numbers than because I meet a certain type of profile.

 

I'm sure they have a quota system, and also authorize agents to pull "suspicious" people out at their discression. 

The "at their discression" part is where racial profiling comes in. I'm sure its often not intentional. US society just kinda cultures people to be suspicious of Middle Eastern or Indian people.

[Dan H.]

1 minute ago, downzy said:

In a year where a white old rich man became President by acting in a manner in which no black man ever could, it's absurd to me that the term "white privilege" is needlessly aggressive.  Seems more appropriate more than ever.  

I suppose the "aggressiveness" of the term depends on one's own circumstances.  To you and me, as white males, it seems galvanizing since we're essentially both the target and the beneficiary of systemic discrimination.  But to those who suffer under the system, identifying the recipient isn't aggressive but necessary.  A discussion about race/racism/discrimination in which actual races aren't mention is no discussion at all (or at least one worth having).  White privilege is what systemic discrimination looks like in the United States (whereas it might take a different form or produce something different in other countries with respect to gender, sexuality, or other races).  They are not one and of the same and shouldn't be viewed as such.  

Thats not entirely unvalid either. However when I say needlessly aggressive, I mean its a poor choice in phrase for communicating the concept the skeptics and educating those who don't "believe" in it. I think when you're talking about systematic discrimination, you're still talking about race, and it doesn't really cheapen the subject matter.

White privlage is an accurate term, but its not great for discourse. 

[Orsys]

2 minutes ago, Dan H. said:

I'm sure they have a quota system, and also authorize agents to pull "suspicious" people out at their discression. 

The "at their discression" part is where racial profiling comes in. I'm sure its often not intentional. US society just kinda cultures people to be suspicious of Middle Eastern or Indian people.

One thing Of note, all TSA reps who pulled me aside were females and I believe of middle eastern descent.   I don't believe race  entered into why they selected me as I have noticed all races pulled aside at one time or another.. They have always been respectful and polite towards me, even friendly. Which is why I think I am just picked because they can tap me down fast and move on.

It would not surprise me though if they have certain "looks" they watch for. And it can only be about look as they never discuss my circumstances or plans..  Just a short explanation of what to expect, tap, tap, tap, very similar to that video, and away I go.

 

 

 

[downzy]

Just now, Dan H. said:

Thats not entirely unvalid either. However when I say needlessly aggressive, I mean its a poor choice in phrase for communicating the concept the skeptics and educating those who don't "believe" in it. I think when you're talking about systematic discrimination, you're still talking about race, and it doesn't really cheapen the subject matter.

White privlage is an accurate term, but its not great for discourse. 

I suppose, but I think regardless of what you call it people are still going to believe what they want to believe.

It just seems wrong to me that in order to have a discussion on a very important issue we need to coddle the group that benefits from the situation.  

White privilege simply states that American society is structured/operated either subtly or directly to provide advantages to white people over all other races.  As you mentioned, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports this concept.  

If that's too inflammatory to some then they're likely not going to be all that receptive to the term systemic discrimination, especially when you get to the part when you talk about who is benefiting and who is disadvantaged by said system.    

 

[Dan H.]

1 minute ago, Orsys said:

One thing Of note, all TSA reps who pulled me aside were females and I believe of middle eastern descent.   I don't believe race  entered into why they selected me as I have noticed all races pulled aside at one time or another.. They have always been respectful and polite towards me, even friendly. Which is why I think I am just picked because they can tap me down fast and move on.

It would not surprise me though if they have certain "looks" they watch for. And it can only be about look as they never discuss my circumstances or plans..  Just a short explanation of what to expect, tap, tap, tap, very similar to that video, and away I go.

 

 

 

I'm sure you had your own experience at the airport.

Unfortunately many many many people have a bad experience in airport lines based on their race. Its our responsibility to listen to those people and respect their experiences as well

[Orsys]

1 minute ago, Dan H. said:

I'm sure you had your own experience at the airport.

Unfortunately many many many people have a bad experience in airport lines based on their race. Its our responsibility to listen to those people and respect their experiences as well

Yes I agree with that.. Maybe my blond hair and blue eyes were why my pat down was so easy and uneventful.   The "profile" just doesn't identify me as a risk.  And people have different sensitivity levels as well, that are valid for them.. I personally didn't see much offensive in the pat down in that video but she was clearly feeling some level of trauma as a result.

[AxlisOld]

14 minutes ago, downzy said:

I suppose, but I think regardless of what you call it people are still going to believe what they want to believe.

It just seems wrong to me that in order to have a discussion on a very important issue we need to coddle the group that benefits from the situation.  

White privilege simply states that American society is structured/operated either subtly or directly to provide advantages to white people over all other races.  As you mentioned, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports this concept.  

If that's too inflammatory to some then they're likely not going to be all that receptive to the term systemic discrimination, especially when you get to the part when you talk about who is benefiting and who is disadvantaged by said system.    

 

I'm not saying that a racial advantage doesn't exist. But when someone belittles or writes off what I worked my ass off to achieve, saving money from minimum wage and working up at companies, because it must have been handed to me because I'm white? They can suck a bag of cocks.

[toroymoi]

7 hours ago, AxlisOld said:

I'm not saying that a racial advantage doesn't exist. But when someone belittles or writes off what I worked my ass off to achieve, saving money from minimum wage and working up at companies, because it must have been handed to me because I'm white? They can suck a bag of cocks.

No one is belittling the effort you put in by saying you have white privilege. It just means that a POC who does the same wouldn't have the same result.

[downzy]

1 minute ago, toroymoi said:

No one is belittling the effort you put in by saying you have white privilege. It just means that a POC who does the same wouldn't have the same result.

Yeah, I thought my example of Donald Trump winning the election was obvious enough.

No one is saying that Trump's accomplishment in winning isn't impressive or that he didn't work his ass off to become President.  White privilege simply argues that a member of another race would not have succeeded speaking and acting in a similar manner.  What is considered acceptable behaviour, and hence grants greater leeway, depends on race.  As studies have shown, a white person with a criminal record is as just as likely to receive a call back to a job interview than a black man with no criminal record.  

Anyway, this is getting a little off topic so my apologies for that.  

 

[Dan H.]

6 minutes ago, downzy said:

Anyway, this is getting a little off topic so my apologies for that.  

 

Alright, but you only get one warning before I tell the admin 

[SteveAJones]

11 hours ago, downzy said:

In a year where a white old rich man became President by acting in a manner in which no black man ever could, it's absurd to me that the term "white privilege" is needlessly aggressive.  Seems more appropriate more than ever.  

I suppose the "aggressiveness" of the term depends on one's own circumstances.  To you and me, as white males, it seems galvanizing since we're essentially both the target of the term and the beneficiary of systemic discrimination.  But to those who suffer under the system, identifying the recipient isn't aggressive but necessary.  A discussion about race/racism/discrimination in which actual races aren't mention is no discussion at all (or at least one worth having).  White privilege is what systemic discrimination looks like in the United States (whereas it might take a different form or produce something different in other countries with respect to gender, sexuality, or other races).  They are not one and of the same and shouldn't be viewed as such.  

If they want to enjoy the same opportunities as Donald Trump they can start by pulling up their pants and finishing high school. 

Edited December 20, 2016 by SteveAJones

[SteveAJones]

11 hours ago, Dan H. said:

US society just kinda cultures people to be suspicious of Middle Eastern or Indian people.

With damn good reason. 

[SteveAJones]

11 hours ago, Dan H. said:

My point is just that racial profiling doesn't work.

It does. Rewind the tapes and watch who is hijacking the airplanes.

[username]

White privelege is a useless term. What am I supposed to do? Feel sorry and apologize for every fucking thing that happens to me ever just because I happen to be a white straight male? I'm sort of tired of hearing that. I think the whole movement is pretty fucking insulting to how hard millions of people actually work to get where they are. It's also REALLY based on feeling. I'm going to touch a lot of nerves here, but sometimes people's first reaction to not getting something is to point towards their race, skincolor, sexuality, gender and say it's discrimination. Now, surely in some cases it is. But just as surely for some people it's just an excuse to not face the harsh reality that you didn't get something or something shitty happend to you. White privelege, male privelege, all sorts of privelege. But as a white straight male, I don't really have any excuses. And I'm annoyed with the growingly over-sensitive society we seem to live in. 

[KiraMPD]

3 hours ago, SteveAJones said:

With damn good reason. 

A damn good reason to suspect Indians? What- why? 

[DR DOOM]

17 hours ago, Dan H. said:

Islam is a religion, not a race. There is no effective way of knowing someone is Islamic at a body scanner.

Also, the vast majority of Islamic people are not radicalized. Thus, if we just start deciding to go harder on brown folks in the security lines, inevitably we will be stopping 99.999% good, honest, regular people for no other reason than the color of their skin. This is the land of the free, won't don't just shake  a whole race of people down when we know there's only a .0001% chance of them being an enemy.

Its a waste of resources,  it sets a bad example to the world, and it almost never works anyways.

Dan H for head of security.