IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New for feks sake
http://www.judicialw...airport-pat-downs
Calling the searches “invasive” and “humiliating,” the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) advises Muslim women wearing religious head covers known as hijabs to reject full-body checks before boarding planes.

Those who are selected for the secondary screenings should remind Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers that they are only supposed to pat down the head and neck and that they should not subject Muslim women to a full-body or partial body pat-down, according to CAIR’s advisory. It further says that, instead of a body search, Muslim women can request to check their own hijab and have officers perform a chemical swipe of their hands.

While Americans are forced to deal with the degrading searches, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is actually considering exempting Muslims as per CAIR’s demands. Madame Secretary confirmed this week that there will be “adjustments” and “more to come” on the issue of Muslim women in hijabs undergoing airport security pat-downs.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
New If I have to fly, I'ma gettin me a burka
--

Drew
New Re: for feks sake
Actually, the official charge is leaving the airport’s security area without permission, which is prohibited to prevent terrorism.

This makes no sense at all - the TSA had the police escort him out of the security area.

New It makes perfect sense
if the intent is to intimidate others out of non-compliance. Who wants and can afford the hassle and expense of a protracted trial/suit?
New Wait... I thought...
the whole intent of this security theater was to catch the Terrierists.

Exceptions for Islamic people? WTF. Kind of defeats the purpose.
New No, that's not the point
The point is to annoy people enough that they object and the authorities have a "well, you wouldn't let us protect you" excuse next time.

Any inconvenience to terrorists is a regrettable side effect.
---------------------------------------
I think it's perfectly clear we're in the wrong band.
(Tori Amos)
New Why yes! You are right!
Thanks for setting me straight.
     for feks sake - (boxley) - (6)
         If I have to fly, I'ma gettin me a burka -NT - (drook)
         Re: for feks sake - (SpiceWare) - (1)
             It makes perfect sense - (jake123)
         Wait... I thought... - (folkert) - (2)
             No, that's not the point - (mhuber) - (1)
                 Why yes! You are right! - (folkert)

Powered by Kikkoman!
136 ms