Steve Davies Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) What do my colonial cousins make of this? A complete failure to contextualise things and act in a reasonable manner by Homeland Security, or a stupid mistake by the Tweeter and a proportionate response by HS? Caution on Twitter urged as tourists barred from US Edited January 31, 2012 by Steve Davies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiFlyer Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Probably some of both, but clearly some level of over-reaction to the "destroy America" comment. This is always the problem in these situations. Where do you draw the line, and once drawn, how do you determine on which side a middle-of-the-road situation is placed? One thing for certain though...security people have little sense of humor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfargin Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Steve, I vote overreaction. It was probably silly to make/write comments that could be potentially mistaken as a threat, but with some questioning at the airport coupled with the background check required to get the visa in the first place, they should have told the guy that even joking about such things can get you undesired scrutiny and then allowed him entry. But, at every airport in the US there are warnings against making any kind of comment in jest about bombs or blowing things up. We've taken the zero tolerance approach (used with incredible success in schools across our country - ) and applied it to public transit (and most entertainment) environments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I landed in Amsterdam/Schipol this morning, didn't fill out a single piece of paper, didn't wait in a single line, talked to the passport control dude for 6.9 seconds, bought a train ticket, went downstairs and caught a train to Brussels. I wish it was that easy to get back into my own country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Over reaction for sure. I'm glad the cops didn't bust in my door when I told my wife over facebook that I was going to destroy her pussy when I got home from my deployment. Sidenote- how the fuck did the DHS know about his twitter message? Was it found by some intel mainframe which flagged this guy's name and sent it to LE agencies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I told my wife over facebook that I was going to destroy her pussy when I got home from my deployment. Why would you say something like that...to your wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I told my wife over facebook that I was going to destroy her pussy when I got home from my deployment. Ah...l'amour... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PapaJu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I landed in Amsterdam/Schipol this morning, didn't fill out a single piece of paper, didn't wait in a single line, talked to the passport control dude for 6.9 seconds, bought a train ticket, went downstairs and caught a train to Brussels. I wish it was that easy to get back into my own country. Personally never found the process to get back in the US to be that onerous, though I hear coming in as a non-citizen sucks. Also, I vote overreaction. Yet another reason that the DHS needs to be disbanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Why would you say something like that...to your wife? Just wanted to give her a heads up... ya know so she could stretch and what not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I don't think it's possible for TSA to have a fair and rational reaction to anything except people kotowing to their au-thor-i-tah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grind Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm not saying the response was proportional...but you have to have been living under a goddamned rock for the last decade to think you can make statements like this and not be detained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnetfreezer Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm not saying the response was proportional...but you have to have been living under a goddamned rock for the last decade to think you can make statements like this and not be detained. Most of us know (or should know) the need for OPSEC/discretion on social media, but it's a little unreasonable to expect that TheMan would be checking the TwitFaceSpace of random travelers - a little different than saying it in an airport, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backseatdriver Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm not saying the response was proportional...but you have to have been living under a goddamned rock for the last decade to think you can make statements like this and not be detained. You can't tweet "bomb" on an airplane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Davies Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 Personally never found the process to get back in the US to be that onerous, though I hear coming in as a non-citizen sucks. Asides from the long queues and the two ridiculous forms you have to fill in before landing (I particularly like the question, "Are you, or have you ever been, a member of a foreign intelligence agency?"), it's not usually a big deal for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 DHS is buying MRAPs for domestic use in serving warrants in high risk situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jice Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 I'm all for agencies getting what they need to get the job done; however, it does seem to hurt the credibility of this acquisition that they bought a "Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected" vehicle, then modified it to place the agents on the outside. Is this standard practice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kchsload Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Ohh, they're "operators" now. Guess "agent" sounds too...law enforcementy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 They're already paid for. DHS and other federal agencies could have a fleet of MRAPs for every state at a fraction of the cost. There may even be enough to equip the IRS. I watched that video thinking they were using a few of the thousands of MRAPs we have sitting over in the desert. I didn't realize they bought new ones. I cannot believe government inefficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slander Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 It's not inefficient, the MRAP vendor has done a good job lobbying DHS to buy new ones rather than use the old ones. Jobs "created" in 'Merica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoo Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 In the same vein: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Here in Texas we take our watercraft rules and regulations seriously. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 If you don't have your life jacket on, we'll make you need it! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Don't get me wrong, I think our DHS soldiers deserve the best equipment available when we send them into harm's way fighting the enemy, but why not equip them with surplus serviceable weapons and vehicles that have already been war-proven? What enemy will they be going into harms way against? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddy Spike Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 What enemy will they be going into harms way against? This. Why do we need DHS "soldiers" ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now