• 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!

Federal DHS Employee Instigating Race War!!!

And he is still working there?
Just going on websites like Stormfront would get most people fired. But being black, gives him special conciderations.
The type of conciderations that even MLK did not want.
 
tererun said:
you are the one who wants the government to be racist so badly please support your claim.
Click to expand...

Where would you get that ridiculous idea? I've already supported my claims. It's you who hasn't. Your dishonesty is really shining through. Please keep posting. :)
 
CRUE CAB said:
And he is still working there?
Just going on websites like Stormfront would get most people fired. But being black, gives him special conciderations.
The type of conciderations that even MLK did not want.
Click to expand...

No, he's on paid leave now. But he was working there for 4 years while running this radical hate website.
 
American said:
It is a heavy accusation, but that's my opinion. He thinks rugged individualism failed (so this country evolved not to his liking) because blacks were left behind, he politicized the killing of a young thug, he obviously doesn't think his power is defined by Article II because he's so enamored with himself and his agenda, he'll do anything to get it done. You have more people on Welfare than every before................."let's hate the rich agenda", he's a liar about supporting the middle-class (Obamacare), and typically liberal when he wants to pull everyone down to the lowest level, because that's how he justifies in his mind how blacks have been treated. Now he's floating the idea of college for free! Another leftwing idea to help blacks. Everything he does, he has blacks in mind. Everything is race with him. In my view he thinks the white man has ruled long enough and held the black people down, and he wants that changed. Doesn't matter whether it's true or not, it's all about a radical change in social landscape. And that's all I have to say about it.
Click to expand...

You make some good points, but because he wants to help black people doesn't necessarily infer a "racist" intent. I agree that he has involved himself in issues that he should have probably just left alone, but I don't see any evidence that he "hates" white people or any other ethnicity either.
 
ChrisL said:
I get the feeling you wouldn't be so patient if this was a white man with a website encouraging white people to kill blacks, would you? Answer honestly now. Don't lie. :)
Click to expand...

Actually, I would take issue whenever the govt did not follow the procedures it is supposed to follow, regardless of the persons' race.
 
ChrisL said:
No, he's on paid leave now. But he was working there for 4 years while running this radical hate website.
Click to expand...

That is not fired. That is not sent to sesitivity training. That is like the IRS chief. Kinda like a paid vaca.
 
sangha said:
Actually, I would take issue whenever the govt did not follow the procedures it is supposed to follow, regardless of the persons' race.
Click to expand...

So would I. If this was a white person calling for the murder of black people, I would feel the exact same way. It is just outrageous that this kind of person is employed by DHS, the department in charge of protecting us. :shock:
 
CRUE CAB said:
That is not fired. That is not sent to sesitivity training. That is like the IRS chief. Kinda like a paid vaca.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't know what other evidence you would need to fire someone. They have seen and know about the website and it's contents, and they know that it was started and maintained by this man. He should be fired immediately.
 
ChrisL said:
Where would you get that ridiculous idea? I've already supported my claims. It's you who hasn't. Your dishonesty is really shining through. Please keep posting. :)
Click to expand...

I was talking about support good enough for someone aside from yourself or a right wing sycophant.
 
ChrisL said:
So would I. If this was a white person calling for the murder of black people, I would feel the exact same way. It is just outrageous that this kind of person is employed by DHS, the department in charge of protecting us. :shock:
Click to expand...

You mean it's outrageous that the DHS didn't catch him sooner? That they were so incompetent?

I'm so over that! DHS has been shown to be incompetent too many times for me to get excited by it

Undercover TSA agent sneaks fake bomb in pants past Newark Airport security | NJ.com
 
ChrisL said:
So would I. If this was a white person calling for the murder of black people, I would feel the exact same way. It is just outrageous that this kind of person is employed by DHS, the department in charge of protecting us. :shock:
Click to expand...

And purchasing guns and ammo for the G. I wonder if we find out that some shipping lables got "mixed up" and a crate or 10 of M16s and a few hundred thousand rounds of 5.56 ended up at a friend of his house?
 
tererun said:
I was talking about support good enough for someone aside from yourself or a right wing sycophant.
Click to expand...

Just what claims did I make that I didn't support. You are talking nonsense as usual. If you can't stay on topic, then get lost.
 
CRUE CAB said:
And purchasing guns and ammo for the G. I wonder if we find out that some shipping lables got "mixed up" and a crate or 10 of M16s and a few hundred thousand rounds of 5.56 ended up at a friend of his house?
Click to expand...

Let's hope not. That would be a really serious breach of security. :shock:
 
CanadaJohn said:
Paid administrative leave sounds like quite the penalty. Perhaps, in a few months, just like the State Department employees, he'll be back on the job.
Click to expand...

ChrisL said:
If that's sarcasm, then I agree. :mrgreen: He should be fired. This is outrageous IMO.
Click to expand...

One of the issues with all the various laws, cases, bargaining, etc over the years. Firing a federal employee outright is not an easy thing to do. And if you're wanting to get someone OFF the job while you begin the process of trying to put together a solid enough case to stand the scrutiny of law to actually get rid of someone OR at the very least sequester them off to a little empty room with nothing to do until they hopefully quit, then you have to pay them to go away because sending them home without pay is basically firing them.

Watched it happen with regards to a sexual harassment case. The guy got put on admin leave for MONTHS as the investigation occured
 
sangha said:
You mean it's outrageous that the DHS didn't catch him sooner? That they were so incompetent?

I'm so over that! DHS has been shown to be incompetent too many times for me to get excited by it

Undercover TSA agent sneaks fake bomb in pants past Newark Airport security | NJ.com
Click to expand...

That reminds me of the Boston marathon bombers. Supposedly they knew all about these guys beforehand and were forewarned about them as well, but never notified the proper authorities.

FBI, Homeland Security withheld information on Boston bombing suspects from local, state police - World Socialist Web Site
 
Zyphlin said:
One of the issues with all the various laws, cases, bargaining, etc over the years. Firing a federal employee outright is not an easy thing to do. And if you're wanting to get someone OFF the job while you begin the process of trying to put together a solid enough case to stand the scrutiny of law to actually get rid of someone OR at the very least sequester them off to a little empty room with nothing to do until they hopefully quit, then you have to pay them to go away because sending them home without pay is basically firing them.

Watched it happen with regards to a sexual harassment case. The guy got put on admin leave for MONTHS as the investigation occured
Click to expand...

Kind of like the teachers' union. :mrgreen:
 
sangha said:
You mean it's outrageous that the DHS didn't catch him sooner? That they were so incompetent?

I'm so over that! DHS has been shown to be incompetent too many times for me to get excited by it

Undercover TSA agent sneaks fake bomb in pants past Newark Airport security | NJ.com
Click to expand...

Your proof that DHS is incompetent is a link to an internal TSA testing process used to try and identify potential holes, issues, or problem employees to be able to fix issues? What you linked to is essentially continual quality control testing. This is like saying that Quality Assurence tests who find a bug in a video game prove that the gamers coders are "incompetent" rather than "when dealing with something that large there's going to be holes, so it's best to continually test for quality assurance to potentially address and fix as many as possible".

If anything, it's a sign of DHS/TSA is an actual decently functioning entity that is constantly attempting to improve itself. While the fake bomb getting through is not a good thing and is a mark against those screeners, the fact it was discovered by a TSA team purposefully attempting to test the field, determine vulnerabilities, and find holes is a mark in TSA's favor of actually properly testing itself.
 
Zyphlin said:
Your proof that DHS is incompetent is a link to an internal TSA testing process used to try and identify potential holes, issues, or problem employees to be able to fix issues? What you linked to is essentially continual quality control testing. This is like saying that Quality Assurence tests who find a bug in a video game prove that the gamers coders are "incompetent" rather than "when dealing with something that large there's going to be holes, so it's best to continually test for quality assurance to potentially address and fix as many as possible".

If anything, it's a sign of DHS/TSA is an actual decently functioning entity that is constantly attempting to improve itself. While the fake bomb getting through is not a good thing and is a mark against those screeners, the fact it was discovered by a TSA team purposefully attempting to test the field, determine vulnerabilities, and find holes is a mark in TSA's favor of actually properly testing itself.
Click to expand...

The fact that TSA runs tests is not a sign of incompetence

The fact that 12 years after 9/11, the screeners didn't catch a bomb they should have is.
 
Zyphlin said:
Your proof that DHS is incompetent is a link to an internal TSA testing process used to try and identify potential holes, issues, or problem employees to be able to fix issues? What you linked to is essentially continual quality control testing. This is like saying that Quality Assurence tests who find a bug in a video game prove that the gamers coders are "incompetent" rather than "when dealing with something that large there's going to be holes, so it's best to continually test for quality assurance to potentially address and fix as many as possible".

If anything, it's a sign of DHS/TSA is an actual decently functioning entity that is constantly attempting to improve itself. While the fake bomb getting through is not a good thing and is a mark against those screeners, the fact it was discovered by a TSA team purposefully attempting to test the field, determine vulnerabilities, and find holes is a mark in TSA's favor of actually properly testing itself.
Click to expand...

That's a good point, but wouldn't you feel a lot better if they had caught that? I know I would.

I suppose, if you look at the big picture, there have been several thwarted attempts, but there is always room for improvement obviously.
 
Zyphlin said:
Your proof that DHS is incompetent is a link to an internal TSA testing process used to try and identify potential holes, issues, or problem employees to be able to fix issues? What you linked to is essentially continual quality control testing. This is like saying that Quality Assurence tests who find a bug in a video game prove that the gamers coders are "incompetent" rather than "when dealing with something that large there's going to be holes, so it's best to continually test for quality assurance to potentially address and fix as many as possible".

If anything, it's a sign of DHS/TSA is an actual decently functioning entity that is constantly attempting to improve itself. While the fake bomb getting through is not a good thing and is a mark against those screeners, the fact it was discovered by a TSA team purposefully attempting to test the field, determine vulnerabilities, and find holes is a mark in TSA's favor of actually properly testing itself.
Click to expand...

I could do with a few less of these three letter alphebet agencies. Wait untill they get turned loose on our homeland with no restraints.
 
Zyphlin said:
One of the issues with all the various laws, cases, bargaining, etc over the years. Firing a federal employee outright is not an easy thing to do. And if you're wanting to get someone OFF the job while you begin the process of trying to put together a solid enough case to stand the scrutiny of law to actually get rid of someone OR at the very least sequester them off to a little empty room with nothing to do until they hopefully quit, then you have to pay them to go away because sending them home without pay is basically firing them.

Watched it happen with regards to a sexual harassment case. The guy got put on admin leave for MONTHS as the investigation occured
Click to expand...

This is true, by why send them home on salary? Why not send them to the mailroom or the cafeteria to do something productive while they're still getting paid?
 
sangha said:
The fact that TSA runs tests is not a sign of incompetence

The fact that 12 years after 9/11, the screeners didn't catch a bomb they should have is.
Click to expand...

That's a rather ignorant method of thinking if you're chalking up "incompetence" as the default answer thinking there can't be other factors.

TSO's have a RIDICULOUSLY high turnover rate, especially at your bigger Cat X airports. The pay is in the mid 20 range if you're full time, the public isn't always the easiest to work with and when it comes to the baggage side of things the conditions aren't always exactly great, and its kind of a thankless job. Some of those things factor into 1) the quality of individual you get applying for those jobs 2) the amount of time people actually stay in the job.

The amount of individuals who have actually been TSO's for the "12 years after 9/11" that we are is ridiculously low. There's a greater chance that the TSO's scanning those individuals are on their first 6 months on the job then there is that they're on their 6th year...let alone 12 years. With a workforce that size and with significant turnover and that pay level you're going to be having new people on all the time...and to expect perfection or "12 years" worth of expertise from each and every one is ludicrous. Chalking up the fact that they don't perform at that level to "incompetence" is even more ridiculous.
 
ChrisL said:
That's a good point, but wouldn't you feel a lot better if they had caught that? I know I would.
Click to expand...

I don't particularly feel any way about it, because I use some general common sense.

"TSA agents catches practice bomb at airport" is hardly a headline story you're going to be seeing.

As with all quality assurance testing, the reality is that they probably have caught a LOT more than they've missed...but those aren't going to be reported.

In a general sense would I feel better if TSO's caught every tester bag? Absolutely. I'd then begin to question if I'm still alive because I'd have suddenly entered into a world where there are perfect humans present.

I suppose, if you look at the big picture, there have been several thwarted attempts, but there is always room for improvement obviously.
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely! By no means is TSA or its practices perfect. Far from it. But there's a gigatnic difference between suggesting that a group can still improve and get better and suggesting that it's just rife with incompetence.

Incompetence to me would be not bothering to test these things at all and having some actual live ones getting through and causing problems. That would be an indication that they're not testing examples based on intel to see how they may be caught or missed, that they're not looking for potential holes, that they're not keeping the workforce on their toes or identifying potential weak employees, etc.

This isn't incompetence to me. It's an example of parts of the outfit that needs to continue to improve as well as an example of parts of the outfit that is doing a refreshingly useful job.
 
CanadaJohn said:
This is true, by why send them home on salary? Why not send them to the mailroom or the cafeteria to do something productive while they're still getting paid?
Click to expand...

I agree with the sentiment, but let me try to step outside the box a bit of my own general view point and try to take a stab at answering from the realities of the federal world...

First, not every office place has a mail room or cafeteria or some such place you can easily just shuffle the person to. Additionally, when an active investigation is going on, sometimes the need is for that person NOT to be present for the investigation to actually function right. The person still being in the workplace can make other employees that need to be questioned perhaps feel less apt to speak truthfully. Or that person still being there while clearly under investigation can simply help foster a negative atmosphere and moral as they begin to spread their gripes all through the office. Additionally, IF you're giving them work that actually NEEDS to be done then you're essentially taking someone elses jobs and duties and giving it to this other person which can cause some problems in a whole variety of ways. Not to mention, if it NEEDS to get done then it sets up a way for that person to continue to cause trouble as they'd hardly be a motivated party. If you just gave them busy work, then you run into an issue of oversight in terms of waste of tax payers money. "Now that's foolish" you say, becuase we're wasting their money by sending them home...and yet, having them do "work" that isn't actually "work" cause bring rise to waste/fraud/abuse type issues as strange as it may sound.

Rationally, you'd say you'd want to send the person home without pay and go about everything because then nothings being harmed. But there's too many limitations on the feds to be able to do that. As such, strangely enough, during the investigation typically the least amount of harm and potential harm is done by keeping them AWAY even if you have to pay them.
 
Zyphlin said:
I agree with the sentiment, but let me try to step outside the box a bit of my own general view point and try to take a stab at answering from the realities of the federal world...

First, not every office place has a mail room or cafeteria or some such place you can easily just shuffle the person to. Additionally, when an active investigation is going on, sometimes the need is for that person NOT to be present for the investigation to actually function right. The person still being in the workplace can make other employees that need to be questioned perhaps feel less apt to speak truthfully. Or that person still being there while clearly under investigation can simply help foster a negative atmosphere and moral as they begin to spread their gripes all through the office. Additionally, IF you're giving them work that actually NEEDS to be done then you're essentially taking someone elses jobs and duties and giving it to this other person which can cause some problems in a whole variety of ways. Not to mention, if it NEEDS to get done then it sets up a way for that person to continue to cause trouble as they'd hardly be a motivated party. If you just gave them busy work, then you run into an issue of oversight in terms of waste of tax payers money. "Now that's foolish" you say, becuase we're wasting their money by sending them home...and yet, having them do "work" that isn't actually "work" cause bring rise to waste/fraud/abuse type issues as strange as it may sound.

Rationally, you'd say you'd want to send the person home without pay and go about everything because then nothings being harmed. But there's too many limitations on the feds to be able to do that. As such, strangely enough, during the investigation typically the least amount of harm and potential harm is done by keeping them AWAY even if you have to pay them.
Click to expand...

Two points:

Firstly, I have no problem with a suspended employee being paid while a determination is being made about whether or not they did something sufficiently serious to lose their employment.

Secondly, I worked in education where we occasionally had teachers accused of misconduct and we always took them out of a school and placed them in an administrative office until the matter was investigated or adjudicated. The federal government is VAST and I refuse to believe that there is no productive function in another environment that this person can't be assigned while his status is being determined - shouldn't take long either, considering the facts as outlined, but then appeals can be time consuming.

Even police here, when accused of wrongdoing, are assigned other duties and rarely sent home on "paid leave". A bureaucrat sitting at a desk is not in a unique position where he can't do something else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom