Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : BuSab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alan Smithee who wrote (5666)	12/1/2010 2:20:40 PM
From: mph	Respond to of 23934

They only want to profile when it suits their interests.

To: Alan Smithee who wrote (5666)	12/1/2010 5:16:59 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23934

this is something that I am not in complete agreement with a lot of people. I don't think anyone should be exempt from whatever screening there is. As they say, if grey haired old ladies are exempt from whatever screening there is, grey haired old ladies will be recruited to carry bombs (recruitment can be forceful). Same with kids....can't exempt them either. And that is the point. If it is unacceptable to force children, old ladies and rape victims to go through the pornscan or gropescan AND it is also unacceptable to exempt anyone from whatever type of screening there is, the obvious conclusion is that the screening method is not acceptable. Nobody will complain if a dog sniffs at children or old ladies. And it is completely reasonable to ask each person to answer one or two questions to see if they get nervous and deserve more screening.