The ongoing question is why. You'd think they would have a better list of potential employees to choose from in this economy.Originally Posted by Hazir
The ongoing question is why. You'd think they would have a better list of potential employees to choose from in this economy.
Yeah, so? You think the method used makes a difference? Twitter isn't set up so only your friends see things and that's the major reason it gets used. So that ANYONE who might find what you said interesting/titillating/face-palm amusing will see it. Guess what, security happens to be among the groups interested in what random people say/anyone says. Just like employers can be interested in what you put on Facebook.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Tbh I do think it makes a difference what methods governments use for their interventions, esp. when their preferred methods--in this case a ridiculously broad and obviously useless automatic "screening" system coupled with complete and utter idiocy (on the part of the officials rather than the tourists)--make it increasingly difficult for ordinary people to lead ordinary law-abiding lives without being hassled.
My remark was not in objection to your appropriate dismissal of the "spying" accusation; it was a comment on what, to me, looked like a dismissal of this incident as happenstance. As if someone from DHS accidentally came across these tweets and then started profiling them, pfft. But okay, you don't like twitter and chavvy Brits, who does
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
They revised it somewhat. However, you'll note that they still list the question: "Are you a member or representative of a terrorist organization as currently designated by the U.S. Secretary of State?"
Which terrorists do they hope to catch with this? The really, really dumb ones which wouldn't have a snow flake's chance in hell anyway?
More importantly: What the hell is a "dangerous physical disorder"?
The new thing is that now you have to watch your every post if you ever want to go somewhere. "Hey, that disgrunteled post you wrote two years ago where you said that the US really needs a new form of government, that just doesn't fly with us, y'know?"
Last edited by Khendraja'aro; 02-03-2012 at 06:32 PM.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
When they lie about it, they can use that as a reason to deport them.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
This.
Wigs this is where this can get silly.
Being a Twit on Twitter should not net you a fine of a couple grand (wasted tickets, reservations, and other misc) from DHS. It's Security Theater.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
I'd hazard a guess and say that anyone who checks "yes" gets deported anyway.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Oh, of course, but if they say no and do bad stuff and get caught, and the po-po find out they lied to get into the US, they have a convenient way of shipping them right out. Or into Gitmo, I dunno really. But anyhows. Lawyers...
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
To be fair, entering the US is a privilege not a right. And I assume they'd apply different standards to their own citizens. Right? Right?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
DHS didn't run across the tweets by happenstance, but they had a second trigger to cause them to focus on these travelers - at least according to CBP, they received a call to their tipline at LAX about them. It might have been a prank or them lying about it, but it does warrant a greater level of vigilance.Tbh I do think it makes a difference what methods governments use for their interventions, esp. when their preferred methods--in this case a ridiculously broad and obviously useless automatic "screening" system coupled with complete and utter idiocy (on the part of the officials rather than the tourists)--make it increasingly difficult for ordinary people to lead ordinary law-abiding lives without being hassled.
My remark was not in objection to your appropriate dismissal of the "spying" accusation; it was a comment on what, to me, looked like a dismissal of this incident as happenstance. As if someone from DHS accidentally came across these tweets and then started profiling them, pfft. But okay, you don't like twitter and chavvy Brits, who does
As Nessie said, it's a good way to deport/arrest people who entered the country under less-than-honest circumstances. If they can catch them for immigration fraud (i.e. lying on their entry form on that question), it's grounds for all sorts of legal proceedings. It's often easier to prove membership in a terrorist organization than other more dangerous behavior, and this is a convenient legal way to deal with it.
Most people don't post publicly that they want to destroy America. There's a distinction here: CBP would never stop someone if they posted a heated diatribe against the Obama administration. But they would stop them if someone posted that they wanted Obama to die. That's the important distinction here. A critique of, say, the way Congress works is rather different from calling for a revolution.The new thing is that now you have to watch your every post if you ever want to go somewhere. "Hey, that disgrunteled post you wrote two years ago where you said that the US really needs a new form of government, that just doesn't fly with us, y'know?"
I personally don't have problems refusing entry to people who meet this criterion; the vast majority of people don't, and entering the US is a privilege, not a right. Plenty of other countries refuse entry to people (including Americans) on the basis of things they've said or written - in fact, some of them are permanently blacklisted IIRC. I don't have a problem with that, either.
Subject to the restrictions legally allowed on the 1st amendment, citizens in this country can say whatever they want, and they receive entry into the country without having to deal with these issues. Obviously if their speech drifts into any number of prohibited forms of speech (e.g. hate speech), they can have other legal issues, but to my knowledge they wouldn't be denied entry into the country.
Riiiight. And you really think that the same people who are unable to understand basic english slang even when it's explained to them, those same people are able to distinguish between a spirited dispute and an actual threat... a better joke has yet to be found.
You obviously would like to live in a police state.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
And, of course, re. employers being keen on knowing about facebook shenanigans, do you think they always get away with eg. firing employees over facebook comments?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The people who do the threat evaluations and filtering are not the same as the people who do the interviews.
You do realize, btw, that none of this applies to US citizens, so for the vast majority of people this would hardly qualify as a 'police state' even under your rather generous definitions.
If what they find is grounds for dismissal, why not? If it's just indication of unprofessional behavior, that's actually used more often to screen potential employees rather than to fire current ones.
With the TSA now screening passengers exiting trains, you really think that this kind of stuff does not relate to you? Heh.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
I'd like to point out the FBI's new literature surrounding "Communities Against Terrorism” which is being used to convince internet cafes and other public access locations (ie, libraries) that members of the public who value their privacy should be considered possible terrorists.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Actually, the US can't block a citizen from entering the US even if they committed crimes. That would make them a stateless person, which is against international law. That obviously wouldn't prevent the US from arresting the person as soon as they set foot in the country.
Hope is the denial of reality
For entering the US, yes, for boarding a plane? IIRC even the late senator Kennedy managed to be stopped from boarding a plane because his name resembled the name of a person on the no-fly list. It's not really malicious, it's just random pettiness of people with more power than common sense.
I'm going to do a Godwin here so you can't say you weren't warned. As far as I am concerned they are the KaPo's of our age, let's consider ourselves lucky they haven't gotten the right to decide on matters of life and death.
Also I would like to point out that the 'privilege' argument is sort of weak in a world where the US and most EU countries are operating under a visa waiver system. Legally the US is not obliged to let you enter, but if they effectively make it impossible for people with a silly sense of humour, it might easily reach the point where they are de facto not honouring the agreement any longer.
Congratulations America
Yeah, not letting in 2 people certainly passes that threshold.
Hope is the denial of reality
Which isn't what I said. I pointed out that the 'privilege' argument is a very weak one.
Congratulations America
Yeah, my contribution in that was solely intended to be objection toward labeling reading Twitter as spying. For the actual event, yes from one perspective it's stupid security, pointless, doesn't make us any safer, yadda yadda yadda. On that level I disapprove. From another perspective, as you say, it's behavior selection against a certain brand of drooling half-wittedness that I've never cared for, the "young, dumb, and obnoxious" routine. On that level I approve. Mostly my reaction is "what, is it a slow news day/slow outrage day"? There are innumerable things more worth getting worked up over, which make headlines or don't. Was anything even approaching a right violated or bent? Was anyone notably hurt physically, emotionally, or financially? No, two idiots are going to have to do their pub-crawling in Manchester or Liverpool or wherever rather than here for the week as they'd planned and are out the price of two plane tickets. It has no weight in and of itself, nor does it carry any additional weight as a representation of some greater problem beyond things we've discussed a half-dozen times before like the humorlessness of security, the inadvisability of appearing less than earnest and upright before security anywhere, or the general low opinion of those working in transportation security.Tbh I do think it makes a difference what methods governments use for their interventions, esp. when their preferred methods--in this case a ridiculously broad and obviously useless automatic "screening" system coupled with complete and utter idiocy (on the part of the officials rather than the tourists)--make it increasingly difficult for ordinary people to lead ordinary law-abiding lives without being hassled.
My remark was not in objection to your appropriate dismissal of the "spying" accusation; it was a comment on what, to me, looked like a dismissal of this incident as happenstance. As if someone from DHS accidentally came across these tweets and then started profiling them, pfft. But okay, you don't like twitter and chavvy Brits, who does
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Yeah, dismissal out of hand, that's a good tactic to deal with such problems... "I don't like those people so I don't care what happens to them!"
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
An utter failure. How depressing to read about this.
I have travelled to the US, and intend to travel again.
Do I now have to start filtering and restricting everything I write online?
What an absolutely idiotic state of affairs.
Of course someone was hurt financially
what the hell
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I guess entering the US is a privilege, even for its own citizens.
Can't tell whats worse, getting booted for a language barrier, skin color, or religion?
A Tigard businessman helping distribute medicine and supplies in his native country of Libya has been blocked from flying back to the United States, his family and attorney said Friday.
Jamal Tarhuni, a 55-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, was denied boarding a U.S.-bound flight at a Tunisia airport last month, his daughter said. After consulting with the U.S. embassy in Tunisia, Tarhuni met with FBI agents who interrogated him about his religion and intimated that he had information about terrorist plans, his daughter said. Tarhuni, who has lived in the Portland area for more than 35 years and ran a furniture store and import business, is Muslim.
The refusal to allow Tarhuni to fly home has stunned his family and Portland-based humanitarian organization Medical Teams International. Tarhuni is a committed and trustworthy volunteer who has helped the Christian nonprofit take supplies to hospitals in war-torn Libya on three trips over the past year, said Bill Essig, vice president of international programs.
Tarhuni also has coordinated with groups such as the Tunisian Red Crescent and met with Libyan health officials to identify other needs for Medical Teams International, Essig said.
"Based on our experience, we believe there must be some misunderstanding," Essig said. "He's always demonstrated integrity and concern" about those the agency is helping.
The FBI has no comment, said Portland spokeswoman Beth Anne Steele.
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden's office has asked the FBI for information on Tarhuni's situation, said Tom Towslee, Wyden's state communications director.
Tarhuni, who was born in Libya, came to Portland more than 35 years ago to study engineering at Portland State University and escape the regime of Moammar Gadhafi, said his daughter, Lina Tarhuni of Tigard. Last year, he helped organize a rally at Pioneer Courthouse Square to protest Gadhafi's crackdown on Libyans who sought to overthrow the dictator. Gadhafi was killed last October in the uprising.
Tarhuni, an importer, was moved to do something and approached Medical Teams International to offer his assistance, his daughter said.
He left last October on his current trip. But when he arrived at the airport in Tunisia on Jan. 17 to leave, the airport workers told him he could not board, his daughter said.
He thought it was a joke because they all knew him from the several times he had cleared medical shipments through customs before transporting them to Libya, she said.
After a few days, he met with FBI agents, she said.
When FBI agents told him he needed to take a lie detector test before being allowed to return to the United States, Tarhuni agreed -- against the advice of a Tunisian attorney and his Portland lawyer, his daughter said.
But he later refused after another FBI employee tried to get him to sign a paper without reading it, his daughter said. When he finally saw it, she said, it appeared to be a waiver of his constitutional rights, which angered him.
Portland attorney Tom Nelson said he is planning to fly to Tunisia on Monday to help Tarhuni and another Portland-area man, Mustafa Elogbi, who also has been blocked from re-entering the United States. The two men and an unnamed third client who also has been banned from flying all attend the same mosque, Masjed As-Saber, in Southwest Portland, Nelson said.
"This is something that happens with shocking frequency," said Gadeir Abbas, staff attorney with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has called on U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to intervene. His agency receives several calls each month from U.S. citizens who are Muslim and suddenly barred from re-entering the country if they travel abroad.
"Our sense is that the vulnerability of an American citizen in a foreign country is used as a point of leverage to solicit information that the government wouldn't otherwise be able to solicit inside the United States," Abbas said.
Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Portland that challenged the no-fly list on behalf of a Portland man and several other U.S. citizens who had been denied boarding without explanation. U.S. District Judge Anna Brown dismissed the lawsuit, saying the district court lacked jurisdiction over Transportation Security Administration's orders, which must be heard by an appellate court.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
I said "notably hurt." Were they forced to incur any expenditures they had not already intended? Did they not get a service or good that they'd paid for? As best I can see the only actual expenditures they're out are anything they don't get back from a late cancellation on reserved lodgings and whatever stickiness there may be about getting back the return portion of a round-trip plane ticket after you've used the first portion, if they even used one. I suppose they could be out more if they used some travel agency package but that sort of service isn't typically in keeping with "young, dumb, and obnoxious" behaviors, I expect they planned the vacation themselves.Of course someone was hurt financially
what the hell
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
If you cancel (very) late, you usually don't get anything back. That's why travel insurance exists.
And if you find "young, dumb, obnoxious" so detestable, I hope for your sakes you don't ever plan on adopting children or caring for them. I certainly wouldn't trust you with mine.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
For my next vacation I think I'll fly to Barcelona and then fly right back the next day without actually seeing any part of Barcelona
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
That´s not really the way tdonhings need to work in the US. Late cancellations are more common there than in Europe. Also, the airline is obliged to take them back to the UK, so they don´t loose out there either. What they ´loose´ is mostly what LF described.
Congratulations America
What they lose is their vacation. The plane trip is useless without the vacation. It's disingenuous to take the two separately and say, "Look, they lost nothing they weren't ready to lose anyway!"
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
But maybe we can charge Family Guy with inciting crime or something.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote