|
Re: OT - passports required
In article <it6dnQmND7GUQ_nYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> "dbu'" <repubs@waitfor08.com> wrote in message
> news:repubs-537010.16500022112006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...[color=green]
> > In article <1164227239.432777.287250@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> Seems like a good idea to me:
> >>
> >> [url]http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061122-021530-2672r.htm[/url][/color]
> >
> > We have been very sloppy in the past. Now finally with an
> > administration that is not afraid of it's own shadow, it has taken
> > action. Three cheers for GWB and the Bush administration. I wish we
> > could have him for another term.[/color]
>
> Ties in a bit, & is a bit tangential:
>
> In '86 I went on a vacation to the UK. This was 3 months after Reagan had
> bombed Libya, trying to get Ghaddaffi (but got his 2 yr. old daughter
> instead... anyway), & shortly after a pregnant woman had been caught trying
> to board a plane at Heathrow - unbeknownst to her, her Middle Eastern bf had
> planted plastic explosives in her carry-on (some bf... well shot of *that*
> guy!). Came back home, getting into JFK at 8:30 pm.
>
> No one, & I mean *no one* who worked for the airport/immigration was there,
> nevermind checking the passports of anyone who got off that plane. We
> literally just walked into the country, with the most lax security one could
> possibly imagine. It was a stiflingly hot July night, & we couldn't even
> find anyone to ask where the nearest available soda was! *No* one was
> around, at all. Took us a long while, walking around, to find anyone who
> worked there.
>
> This still ticks me off, 20 years later. Complete lack of security, & in
> huge contrast to the security we'd just seen at Gatwick (London). Since then
> witnessed tight security at Gatwick again, & at de Gaulle (maddening
> airport, IMO, but at least its security's decent!). But it appears the US
> still manages to continue to lag, hopefully making people feel like it's
> doing something (and managing to annoy many) by limiting the likes of
> toothpaste, while neglecting the stuff that matters!
>
> Cathy
>[color=green]
> >[/color][/color]
Blame it on the muslim terrorists. The TSB has to respond to threats
regardless if it's weak, rumor or real they have no way of really
knowing and have to take every crank call ect as a real threat. It's a
vastly different world from twenty years ago. Remember also we have
some here in the U.S. that seem to think our freedoms are being
compromised and yell loudly in protest when they get the shoes checked,
but would protest even more loudly if that A/C were one that was a
target of terrorism.
--
|
