Go Back  Fodor's Travel Talk Forums > Travel Topics > Air Travel
Reload this Page >

Security list tracking travels of US citizens

Security list tracking travels of US citizens

Dec 25th, 2006, 02:02 PM
  #41  
HKP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,601
Happy to handle any inconvenience at all IF it's sanely organized, effective, and for a good cause.

And don't even bother to start ranting about terrorism being a true threat. IF the inconvenience truly stopped or even hampered terrorists, I would be quite willing to put up with whatever is necessary.

As it is, I have to put up with cattle-herding treatment in the terminals and on and off the planes, iron-maiden torture seating on the planes, Kafka-esque discussions on the phone with agents, and fares that bear no relationship whatsoever to distances traveled. Just for starters. And that all doesn't even touch on security issues.

We (including all the allies, not just the US) would never have won WW II with the incompetent image-driven approach to intelligence and security we now have.
HKP is offline  
Dec 25th, 2006, 03:29 PM
  #42  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 28
< IF the inconvenience truly stopped or even hampered terrorists>

Do you think it has or hasn't?
berry is offline  
Dec 25th, 2006, 05:13 PM
  #43  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,049
TSA killing people by making them drive (possibly true; I know of no one who has survived a drive from Newark to London), crowded seating and inexplicable fares (fares never have made sense, even before 9-11) as TSA mandated anti-terrorist measures!

Lunacy is rampant.
clevelandbrown is offline  
Dec 26th, 2006, 04:41 AM
  #44  
HKP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,601
If I could have edited my post to add the word "already," it would have been clearer that I meant we're already putting up with inconveniences that have nothing to do with security. If the added "inconveniences" imposed by TSA were justified and effective, it would compound an already miserable experience but with reason. If they are just window-dressing, it's insane and, frankly, abusive of citizens and their tax dollars.

As for knowing whether they work or not... I have an old piece of garlic wrapped in horsehair on my front door to keep the wolves and bats away. How do you know it's not working? A bat got into the attic, but it wasn't through the front door!
HKP is offline  
Dec 26th, 2006, 10:32 AM
  #45  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 290
TSA killing people by making them drive (possibly true; I know of no one who has survived a drive from Newark to London)

While it's clearly impossible to drive from Newark to London, it's entirely possible that the unpleasantness of air travel has induced at least some residents of the Tri-State Area to reconsider that trip to London in favor of a drive to New England or perhaps a few days in exciting Manhattan.

crowded seating and inexplicable fares (fares never have made sense, even before 9-11) as TSA mandated anti-terrorist measures!

The 9/11 murderers flew first class, so they weren't bothered by either crowded seating or inexplicable fares.

But you do have a point that "security" concerns have magically removed pressures on airlines to do anything about a whole host of annoyances. The TSA's increasing hassles have merely added new discomfort, inconvenience, and indignity to the ordeal of air travel. We're just supposed to be grateful that we got from Point A to Point B alive, within a few hours or days of the scheduled time, and with some probability of retrieving our luggage from the carousel. You can't ask for anything more than that in a time of War.

This would be a golden opportunity for Amtrak, if its management did not have a sole mandate to dismember it as quickly as possible so that its few profitable pieces can go to favored donors as a quid pro quo.

Lunacy is rampant.

You said it!
JBHapgood is offline  
Dec 28th, 2006, 03:44 AM
  #46  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,369
My unscientific security method involves hiring a bunch of observant (or nosey, depending on your definition) people to sit around airports, drinking Starbucks, and looking for things that just don't seem right. If you hire the right people, my guess is that they avert far more than searching grandmothers and xraying babies.
gail is offline  
Jan 6th, 2007, 10:37 PM
  #47  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 13,323
"Can we just accept certain risk when traveling? There are bad people outthere and we have to accept it as part of daily life."

NO, we can't. We should be doing more security, not less. If you don't have anything to hide, you got nothing to worry about. Learn to live with it.
degas is offline  
Jan 7th, 2007, 03:36 AM
  #48  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 867
I'll volunteer for the job Gail suggested -- sitting in airport Starbucks drinking
lattes and looking for suspicious activity!

In fact, this former Seattle girl is thrilled that a Starbucks (the first and only) opened up in Cairo a few days ago. I'm going there in a few minutes to practice my skills for the job.
sunshine007 is offline  
Jan 7th, 2007, 06:36 AM
  #49  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Posted by degas

If you don't have anything to hide, you got nothing to worry about

why don't we go a step further? Why don't we have the police stop by our house once a week and do a quick look around and check our papers? If we have nothing to hide??? then this would definitely be the way to make us totally safe.....


Those who are willing to give up liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security

Think about that........
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Jan 8th, 2007, 02:13 PM
  #50  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 545
"If you don't have anything to hide..."

This rather tired observation ignores the basic point of privacy.

That is, privacy is not concerned only about concealing "wrongdoing," but also about the basic human concept of liberty. In a world where one's every movement is watched, it's always easy for the watchers to abuse that info, either by defining what's wrong (changing the definition whenever and however it may suit the watchers), or by using that what they see to embarrass or blackmail a person. Regardless whether the observed's activities are perfectly legitimate.

When a Stasi, or a KGB, or a Gestapo is always watching, one does not feel free to be oneself -- even if one is doing nothing "wrong". Result: loss of liberty even for the innocent.

Fritzrl
fritzrl is offline  
Jan 9th, 2007, 02:00 AM
  #51  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
I note that all visitors to the US will have to give a full set of fingerprints on arrival so as to be compatible with FBI databases.

More data = more chance of cockup either by false positives (pissing off visitor) or false negatives (pissing off NY as it explodes)

When will folk learn that having more data DOESN'T mean better security - it's more likely that you end up not being able to see the wood for the trees
alanRow is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
soccr
Air Travel
9
Nov 20th, 2007 06:07 AM
chartley
Air Travel
13
Oct 29th, 2007 03:24 AM
gail
Air Travel
7
Aug 9th, 2006 02:26 PM
gail
Air Travel
14
Jul 29th, 2005 08:32 AM
RPE
United States
21
Apr 18th, 2002 08:42 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:57 PM.