Obama: "The buck stops with me"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Jan 7, 2010.

  1. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    It saddened me today to learn that Bush and Cheney left behind as big a mess in our intelligence gathering and sharing systems as they did on the economy. His DHS is a scam and has wasted billions.

    Link


     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    While that's good to hear in a way, I wonder what that really means for our freedoms. Remember, the Patriot Act is still around.
     
  3. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #3
    It's freaking ridiculous. We spend billions on DHS, have had 7 years to improve our communications yet a guy, using the same MO as the "shoe bomber" boards a plane with explosives.

    All we did was create a new and bigger bureaucracy.
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    Because, as I stated before, safety and security are illusions. There will never be a time when you can be completely 100% sure that there isn't a terrorist on your plane who's found some way to get past security. There simply isn't.
     
  5. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #5
    True. But with the proper organization, danger can be minimized significantly.
     
  6. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #6
    I'm sure the kissing bandit is not going to make the government look good, either. :p

    I don't know. I always saw the DHS move as a very expensive and risky proposition that had a high likelihood of becoming a land grab against civil liberties, but it's less clear to me that one can say, just because the DHS did not prevent Abdulmuttalab, that this is evidence that the Bush administration screwed up intelligence.

    As for Obama and his promise, I think this administration wants to do the right thing vis-a-vis civil liberties, but there is a lot of work to do to fix the civil liberties infrastructure of our country, and they're being drawn off in a lot of other directions.
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    It can, but it doesn't need to be at the total expense of our freedoms or privacy. I mean, full body scanners now?
     
  8. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #8

    Of course not. We over-react to almost everything in this country. Great opinion piece on it.

    Link



     
  9. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #9
    Exactly. It's like some of my relatives when I go back home for a visit.

    "So- which suburb of Chicago do you live in?"

    "I live in the city."

    "Oh no! Oh why would you do that?"

    "It's beautiful and has tons of opportunities."

    "But aren't you scared all the time?"

    "No. Why would I be scared?"

    "Well, we hear about shootings in the city all the time!"

    "That's mainly in certain neighborhoods that I've never even been to."

    "But it could happen to you too!"

    "Yes, it could. And you could get trampled by a deer, or hit by a car."

    Ridiculous, but sadly true.
     
  10. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #10
    The government needs to dismantle the department of homeland security. It's a fear fueled waste.
     
  11. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #11
    I agree.

    I've got mixed feelings about the full body scanners. I don't really have a big problem with them. I haven't fully decided yet though.

    Are the full body scanner images recorded? If the answer is no, then I'm fine with that.

    Is the screen only visible to the trained agent doing the screening? If the answer is yes, then I'm fine with that.

    My concern has lied more with the dose of radiation that is given to the passenger as they are scanned. From what I have read, the radiation risk is extremely low:
    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60553920100106 and
    http://www.emaxhealth.com/1275/24/35041/do-full-body-scanners-pose-radiation-risk.html


    Besides Lee.... I'm sure you've got nothing to be ashamed of under those clothes.....;)
     
  12. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    Ha! No- but I don't need my full body scan showing up on the internet either. ;)

    Seriously, I would think that they would keep a record of those scans.
     
  13. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #13
    From what I've read, the images are not stored and the viewer of the images is in a room where he can't see who is in the machine.

    If this is the tech we need to stop explosives from getting on planes, then I'm ready for my close up Mr DeMille.

    EDIT: Pic of xray added.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    I've got great property in Florida for sale... ;)
     
  15. IntheNet macrumors regular

    IntheNet

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    #15
    Let us know when Obama plans to assume responsibility for his job.

    It worked fine from 2003-2008...
     
  16. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #16
    You can use it in the MacRumors Pics! thread.....:D


    Same here.

    They just need to figure out a way to screen quickly and efficiently.

    These new 'no carry on' rule is way over the top.
     
  17. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #17
    No attacks during that time does not mean it was working. It just meant that there were no attacks.

    Are you really trying to imply that as soon as Obama took over last year, a switch was pulled and the DHS stopped working? Don't be ridiculous.
     
  18. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    No carry on? I think my flying days are over. That's f***ing ridiculous, especially now that so many airlines charge to check your bags.
     
  19. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #19
    Sorry, my bad. I don't know why I said "no carry on".:confused:

    It pretty much is no carry on though. No more bringing a small suitcase so you don't have to check your bag. A woman can bring a small purse or a laptop, but not both. A man can bring a laptop, but nothing else. I don't think a man can bring a small bag as carry on.

    I think it's like that.
     
  20. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    I can handle that. But that's going to be a windfall for a lot of airlines. I think they should be required to do away with that fee.
     
  21. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #21
    I just don't see the point for the change. What was wrong before? The carry ons were being screened on the xray scanner and rummaged though by an agent if necessary. Why wasn't that good enough?

    I don't recall the underwear bomber having any carry on bags....
     
  22. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #22

    Both the 'shoe bomber' and 'underwear bomber' had no luggage and paid cash for the tickets, one way.

    Face palm, that's it. We ban people from flying who pay cash and have no bags. Wait, what?
     
  23. racers macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    #23
    Hows this for an idea, we ban people from flying. It just might work :rolleyes:
     
  24. Surely Guest

    Surely

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #24
    I guess this guy wouldn't be able to get on the plane and save the day then:

    [​IMG]

    "I'd like one ticket to Chicago. No baggage!"
     
  25. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #25

    No worries, he's always on board.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page