• 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

apdst said:
An Arizona state trooper can stop a Mexican, who doesn't have a driver's license, nor a green card and doesn't speak English and that trooper can't ask if that Mexican is an illegal alien; yet we can force three y/o little girls to get finger ****ed at the airport.

This adminsitration is a ****ing joke!
Click to expand...

DO you not see your hyperbole? Sad. Really sad.
 
Grant said:
Do you feel you debate honestly, Boo?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do since you asked. Of course, I'll respond in kind to those I debate with. But I try very hard to explain my position and why I think the way I do with exaggeration or nisrepresenting the person I'm debating.

But this is another example. What was written that I responded to was clear hyperbole. No little girls have been molested as apdst suggests. It's wild and dishonest hyperbiole. Yet, you seem to have a problem with me pointing it out and not with him for throwing it out there. Do you see the problem with that at all?
 
I agree it's not actual molestation, but it is still the "feeling up within folds and genitalia" that damn well feels like it. The feeling is what matters, and if you stifle the outrage of the people by this inconvenience, I can see further backlashes.
 
Wake said:
I agree it's not actual molestation, but it is still the "feeling up within folds and genitalia" that damn well feels like it. The feeling is what matters, and if you stifle the outrage of the people by this inconvenience, I can see further backlashes.
Click to expand...

No, it really doesn't. It's an onverraction, a misrepresentation fo what is going on.
 
American said:
It's unreasonable search.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...



So while the junk is touched and groped, you want to argue semantics to feign just what exactly?
 
Boo Radley said:
Nothing has been gropped. This too is exaggerating. :roll:
Click to expand...




When was the last time you flew? Perhaps you would be taken more seriously if you actually did fly and have been subjected to this 4th amendment violation. :shrug:


Don't you find it odd that passenger security be damned that they shut down the operation during the travel holiday?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
When was the last time you flew? Perhaps you would be taken more seriously if you actually did fly and have been subjected to this 4th amendment violation. :shrug:


Don't you find it odd that passenger security be damned that they shut down the operation during the travel holiday?
Click to expand...

Words have actual definitions. I'm sorry that you have trouble with this. But exaggeration is not a good argument tactic. I'm sorry, but it just isn't. :roll: :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
Words have actual definitions. I'm sorry that you have trouble with this. But exaggeration is not a good argument tactic. I'm sorry, but it just isn't. :roll: :coffeepap
Click to expand...



So no response to my actual points just more nonsense on what you want to cackle on about. :pimpdaddy:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So no response to my actual points just more nonsense on what you want to cackle on about. :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...

When you start off with an exaggeration, there is no real point to respond to. Iff you want to cahnge the subject, fine, just don't use the hyperbole as the backdrop. Concede that no one has been gropped, fondled, or molested, and then we can move on. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
When you start off with an exaggeration, there is no real point to respond to. Iff you want to cahnge the subject, fine, just don't use the hyperbole as the backdrop. Concede that no one has been gropped, fondled, or molested, and then we can move on. :coffeepap
Click to expand...



So run away from actual discussion boo. it's ok, it's expected from someone who doesn't fly on anything but the sofa. :pimpdaddy:
 
Are the scanners even safe? A lot of doctors and such have been saying they're not proven to be so. According to one radiologist at Emory, probably 2-3 out of a 1000 people who are scanned will develop skin cancer from going through the full-body scanner, because of the radiation types used. Now, if a million people go through the scanners in one year... you do the math.

Second, if the scanners are so non-detailed, why do airports always assure people in news articles and videos, "Oh, the guy who's at the checkpoint doesn't see the image, and your face is blocked for privacy, the person viewing the image is in a locked booth far off, the images can't be saved or photographed, ect."

Seriously, it's not just what people do, it's what they don't do. If the images were blurry blobs, why not show them at the checkpoint? Like, "Hey, here's your scanning image right in front of you, you can see it with us"?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So run away from actual discussion boo. it's ok, it's expected from someone who doesn't fly on anything but the sofa. :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...

No, you jump in on the discussion of the exaggeration and then tried to change the subject when confronted. I can't prevent you from doing that, but won't pretend for you either. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
No, you jump in on the discussion of the exaggeration and then tried to change the subject when confronted. I can't prevent you from doing that, but won't pretend for you either. :coffeepap
Click to expand...





Still no response to the points put forth by boo. Nothing to see here folks, nothing at all. :pimpdaddy:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Still no response to the points put forth by boo. Nothing to see here folks, nothing at all. :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...

Again, concede that there is no gropping,. fondling ot molesting and then, and only then can we move on. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
Again, concede that there is no gropping,. fondling ot molesting and then, and only then can we move on. :coffeepap
Click to expand...


The :failpail: is all yours. :pimpdaddy:


hiding behind your semantics game is rather pathetic, and quite telling, hero. :thumbs:
 
Boo Radley said:
All you have to do is concede the point. :coffeepap
Click to expand...



I will concede that folks touching your junk may not be "Groping", but us not so desperate for attention, do indeed see examples of "groping", that you convientley ignore. :pimpdaddy:

3 Women Say TSA Screeners Groped Vaginas During Pat-Down - Gothamist

US woman claims airport security singled her out because of her boobs


day after day, reports come in, and you close your eyes to protect your god-king. I'm sure this too you will claim as exxageration and gloat about "facts" when in fact you have none.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I will concede that folks touching your junk may not be "Groping", but us not so desperate for attention, do indeed see examples of "groping", that you convientley ignore. :pimpdaddy:

3 Women Say TSA Screeners Groped Vaginas During Pat-Down - Gothamist

US woman claims airport security singled her out because of her boobs


day after day, reports come in, and you close your eyes to protect your god-king. I'm sure this too you will claim as exxageration and gloat about "facts" when in fact you have none.
Click to expand...

yes, we all know claims equal fact. So, claims that 9/11 was an inside job must be fact. Gotcha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom