HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Two Canadians learn that ... » Reply #59

Response to KurtNYC (Reply #45)

Sat May 12, 2012, 02:18 PM

59. You totally ignored what for me was the main point of the

my remarks and went out on your own tangent.

The police or border crossing official wanted to know the particular name of a particular store. Otherwise he was going to put this couple into the "box" that they were possible terrorists.

Isn't this ridiculous? I mean, stop for one minute and think about it... How does it make us safer - that the border patrol is now mainly concerned with the attitudes of people crossing the border.

If they discover someone to be a free spirit -why detain the fuck out of them. Meanwhile the real terrorists are walking the required walk and talking the required talk. If they were terrorists, you better beleive they would have an answer. The fact that the man didn't have a name of a a store means they were just casual tourists. If they were terrorists, they would have had a complete and totally accountable profile of what their visit entailed.

What this shows me is that we have gone from a nation of common sense, to a nation where these bureaucrats can detain us on account of not fitting into the very narrow margins of their training manual examples. Detention should be employed only in the most extreme cases, but as this video shows, it is now routine to hassle regular people.

I used to visit relatives who lived six miles short of the Canadian border, and we went back and forth over the border a dozen time sin two weeks. Never any hassle. But the war on drugs,which let's admit it, is a phony setup, that causes the young and those of color to end up jailed for very little, while those most guilty are sent here from south of the border, cleaned up and then become the owners of banks, so their illustrious drug cartel parents can launder money.

And the war on terror is basically phoney too.

You can avoid discussing what I am discussing and make your points, which are not invalid of themselves, but which are invalid in terms of what I am talking about. Hit reply to the main OP and not these remarks of mine

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 59 replies Author Time Post
Courtesy Flush May 2012 OP
yesphan May 2012 #1
truedelphi May 2012 #2
HopeHoops May 2012 #13
truedelphi May 2012 #15
HopeHoops May 2012 #18
teddy51 May 2012 #3
bigmonkey May 2012 #23
teddy51 May 2012 #25
xtraxritical May 2012 #52
Courtesy Flush May 2012 #36
teddy51 May 2012 #37
KurtNYC May 2012 #43
Serve The Servants May 2012 #40
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #46
BeliQueen May 2012 #42
think May 2012 #4
teddy51 May 2012 #5
think May 2012 #9
teddy51 May 2012 #11
truedelphi May 2012 #14
KurtNYC May 2012 #45
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply You totally ignored what for me was the main point of the
truedelphi May 2012 #59
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #47
bec May 2012 #41
HopeHoops May 2012 #6
rexcat May 2012 #7
teddy51 May 2012 #10
rexcat May 2012 #16
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #48
sharp_stick May 2012 #8
Xipe Totec May 2012 #22
sharp_stick May 2012 #53
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #49
sharp_stick May 2012 #54
peace13 May 2012 #12
jberryhill May 2012 #17
peace13 May 2012 #57
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #50
AsahinaKimi May 2012 #19
Dragonfli May 2012 #21
AsahinaKimi May 2012 #33
Meiko May 2012 #20
rationalcalgarian May 2012 #24
Meiko May 2012 #51
southmost May 2012 #26
rationalcalgarian May 2012 #27
Dragonfli May 2012 #29
teddy51 May 2012 #31
klook May 2012 #28
Dragonfli May 2012 #30
klook May 2012 #35
southernyankeebelle May 2012 #32
The Wielding Truth May 2012 #34
truth2power May 2012 #38
AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #39
teddy51 May 2012 #44
teddy51 May 2012 #55
KurtNYC May 2012 #56
Sen. Walter Sobchak May 2012 #58
Please login to view edit histories.