It's simple: those paid to 'do security'

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #46,004

by Ashton

7/18/02 5:30:01 PM

It's simple: those paid to 'do security'

to 'search people' and stuff - are not Trusted (by those paid to Hire such) to even possess Common Sense\ufffd .. surely a vanishing commodity anyway.. in a an era of increasing dumbth (?)

Thus they revert to Bureaucracy 101F The Remedial Course (8000 BCE ---> 2002 ACE), the willful application of Boolean logic, no matter WHAT the eyes see, the brain deduces.. yada yada.

We are ALL now experiencing what Anyone who ever was so destitute as to need Official help.. must abide on a daily basis: including having their refrigerator examined (putatively to see if it works? Naah - to preach how often it ought to be Cleaned. With smarmy accompaniment which only a petty-satrap can Do So Well)

HTH,

Ashton

Post #46,022

by orion

7/18/02 7:14:27 PM

Those paid to 'do security"

make about $5USD or $7USD an hour, how much common sense do you think they have to get a job like that? Even Burger Flippers get paid that much. Still, more than I make per hour right now, as I am unemployed. If they had common sense, they'd have had a college degree or got trained to work at a higher paying job. Even Helpdesk people get paid $9USD or more to answer phones and give half-*ssed answers to user's questions.

I am free now, to choose my own destiny.

Get over it! - (wharris2) - (30) - July 18, 2002, 05:15:01 PM EDT

Security Checks - (orion) - July 18, 2002, 05:21:41 PM EDT

It's simple: those paid to 'do security' - (Ashton) - (1) - July 18, 2002, 05:30:01 PM EDT

Those paid to 'do security" - (orion) - July 18, 2002, 07:14:27 PM EDT

I'll disagree. - (Brandioch) - (14) - July 18, 2002, 05:48:05 PM EDT

Yours is better. I retract. -NT - (Ashton) - July 18, 2002, 06:05:39 PM EDT

Of course you'll disagree. - (wharris2) - (7) - July 18, 2002, 06:50:24 PM EDT

Pretty much. :) - (Brandioch) - (6) - July 18, 2002, 09:53:12 PM EDT

Further disagreements - (wharris2) - (5) - July 20, 2002, 12:49:55 AM EDT

As always. - (Brandioch) - (3) - July 20, 2002, 11:41:55 PM EDT

Re: Agree re the focus - IRA understood this well ... - (dmarker2) - July 21, 2002, 05:23:57 AM EDT

El Al - (wharris2) - (1) - July 21, 2002, 02:04:58 PM EDT

Capacity. - (Brandioch) - July 21, 2002, 04:43:49 PM EDT

%100 of little Timmy McV wasn't Arabic - (mhuber) - July 21, 2002, 02:40:05 AM EDT

that was how the lockerbie plane blew - (boxley) - (4) - July 19, 2002, 08:59:57 AM EDT

Exactamente! We don't *want* to face things ever. - (Ashton) - (3) - July 19, 2002, 04:07:48 PM EDT

Can't we just put better procedures in place? - (mhuber) - July 21, 2002, 02:42:27 AM EDT

You see, Ash, that's the problem! - (jb4) - (1) - July 22, 2002, 02:09:07 PM EDT

And it kinda makes discussion superfluous. - (Ashton) - July 23, 2002, 12:14:18 AM EDT

Are you just NOW getting to this? - (Simon_Jester) - (6) - July 19, 2002, 10:00:10 AM EDT

"Irregardless" is not a word. It's "Regardless". - (mmoffitt) - (5) - July 19, 2002, 12:37:19 PM EDT

Oooh! A nit war! :-) It's in dictionary.com - (Another Scott) - July 19, 2002, 01:09:00 PM EDT

Ya know... - (Simon_Jester) - (2) - July 19, 2002, 05:40:36 PM EDT

Huh? - (mmoffitt) - (1) - July 22, 2002, 07:59:44 PM EDT

That ain't 'murder', just a bit of battery. - (Ashton) - July 23, 2002, 12:23:23 AM EDT

Burns my butt also, sir Moffit -NT - (wharris2) - July 20, 2002, 12:51:17 AM EDT

I've said it before, I'll say it again. - (mmoffitt) - (4) - July 19, 2002, 12:38:32 PM EDT

There is no 100% secure. - (Brandioch) - (1) - July 19, 2002, 01:42:04 PM EDT

Obviously.. and thus far - Whole Const. Amendments-full.. -NT - (Ashton) - July 19, 2002, 03:51:43 PM EDT

Another exchange. - (inthane-chan) - (1) - July 19, 2002, 08:03:40 PM EDT

In that world - (boxley) - July 19, 2002, 09:18:30 PM EDT

iwethey.org

If I bought someone a G5 and they did this to it, I'd break their face.
50 ms