EPTBritish Couple Kicked out of the US for joking - Page 31
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
FlyingToilet
United States840 Posts
| ||
|
Prime`Rib
United States613 Posts
On February 02 2012 04:31 TurpinOS wrote: Not only is this post filled with spelling mistakes which makes it nearly impossible to read, but pretty much everything in it is absurd and or false. OT : Not much to add to the discussion in all honesty, I think its pretty obvious the whole situation is rather absurd, a tiney bit of common sense would have helped to avoid such a mess. It does show how careful you have to be when using any form or social media. edit : reading your last posts I probably wasted my time, you have to be trolling... You call me out for my spelling mistakes and look at your post. Why is my post absurd and/or false? I do not mind constructive criticism but you have not clearly provided a reasonable argument. My last post showed the relationship what is tolerable based on geographical location. Your best argument you can ever come up with is "you have to be trolling, i probably wasted my time". | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
The same thing as the people who wear said vest of dynamite. Ignorance, the only difference is they have no way of knowing better. | ||
|
KookyMonster
United States311 Posts
On January 31 2012 19:22 SolHeiM wrote: I wouldn't be laughing. I'd be scared shit-less I'd be thrown into some prison like Guantanamo Bay. Yeah it would be insanely scary to have people throw you out of a country. I agree with you completely. Paranoia or not, it's still scary. | ||
|
Zombo Joe
Canada850 Posts
If I said Crazy American I would be talking about him. Very unfortunate for this British couple, they just wanted to party and instead they got deported. The US is slowly turning into a fascist state, just look at these laws they are trying to pass lately and the ones have passed like this airport security bullshit. Not only that, all the republican candidates are trying to use authority and nationalism to gain support. This is exactly how you from a democracy to a fascist state. | ||
|
Prime`Rib
United States613 Posts
On February 02 2012 04:56 KookyMonster wrote: Yeah it would be insanely scary to have people throw you out of a country. I agree with you completely. Paranoia or not, it's still scary. Most European posters did not realize that the British couple got off with a slap on the wrist. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 allows the military to detain a person indefinitely without trial if that person is considered to be a terrorist. American is really sensitive about terrorism and the feds do not take it lightly. | ||
|
Chaosu
Poland404 Posts
On February 02 2012 04:33 FeUerFlieGe wrote: Not all countries have freedom of speech. In America we hold the term very highly so we can have neonazi rallies if we want. In Germany you get your ass in jail for that. do you think this means that Germany doesn't have freedom of speech? | ||
|
Jayjay54
Germany2296 Posts
On February 02 2012 00:50 Prime`Rib wrote: Why do a bunch of European posters crying about freedom of speech for those 2 British travelers? 1. You are not US citizen. The freedom of speech is not entitled to you. To United States, you are just a guest to our country. 2. Even if US excercises its 1st Amendment on forgeiners; you have to realize that there are things that gonna get you into alot of troubles for saying it. 3. Stop crying about British Slang. This is American. If you are visiting our country, stop crying about our government does not understand your slang. You are a guest here. If you are dumb enough to give DHS a reason to suspect you a terrorist, you deserve to be sent back home. wow, I read through the thread and found this gem here. 1. Are you seriously saying that freedom of speech should be conditional? As in 'not a human right', but a 'right you're born into'. Dude, that attitude is bad. Really bad. Like Reaaaally bad. "Yea, they are not from here, they might be spreading rumours", "Oh these news are from Europe, they might contain bad anti US ideas, you're not allowed to watch them". Do you realize the consequences of this general idea? Do you? 2. and 3. It was just fun. TBH, when my friends from chicago visited me, they posted similar stuff on facebook "Germans hide your daughters, we're coming" and so on. It's not unusual. IMO, it's quite common to say phrases like "let's go into foreign country and misbehave" or other stuff like that. We even have a song with a comparable text in Germany, we sing it when we get really wasted on vacation. It's things like that which makes the US the prime target for terrorist. I went to Vancouver this year, the border check was ridiculously nice. Do they have problems? Not at all. Some US guys here seem to get the illusion that they are safer with those checks, but the way I see it, terrorist thread increases. Chillax, don't act like you are the chosen ones and you cease to be the focussed country. Every other country in the EU, canada and so on, they're all fine without doing stuff like this. Not to mention that the homocide rate due to free available weapons crushes quite a bit of the safety in the US itself. Seems shizophrenic. e: also, @ feuerfliege: this isn't exactly freedom of speech. It's discriminating against someone and spreading wrong ideas which hurt foreigners and so on. This is against our constitution and therefore to punish. And I am glad that it is that way. If you just randomly say someone murdered someone in the US, it is a crime to (false accusation). Crime <> Freedom of speech. Apples and oranges. | ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
On February 02 2012 05:04 Prime`Rib wrote: You seem confused about the fact that most things in life are not black or white, or simple to an extreme. We generally have a strong preference for picking one of the two the most opposite categories, either people good or evil(probably never correct), either people agree with everything or nothing at all(almost never correct), either people are certain that someone is guilty or not guilty(the truth is usually the third main option, that they don't know) and so on.Most European posters did not realize that the British couple got off with a slap on the wrist. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 allows the military to detain a person indefinitely without trial if that person is considered to be a terrorist. American is really sensitive about terrorism and the feds do not take it lightly. Arguments like "they can, for no good reason, turn out to be terrorists" aren't necessarily always invalid but in this thread they are just arguing for the position that you should not let anyone enter(or leave) the US and that you probably shouldn't let Americans travel freely inside the US either. And that thousands and thousands of other things shouldn't be allowed because well, anyone could be a terrorist. The level of those types of arguments are probably the reason some say/think/feel it's not worth discussing. Let's say some should be allowed to enter and some should not, should the selection process be completely random or high accuracy? | ||
|
Prime`Rib
United States613 Posts
On February 02 2012 05:50 Akta wrote: You seem confused about the fact that most things in life are not black or white, or simple to an extreme. We generally have a strong preference for picking one of the two the most opposite categories, either people good or evil(probably never correct), either people agree with everything or nothing at all(almost never correct), either people are certain that someone is guilty or not guilty(the truth is usually the third main option, that they don't know) and so on. Arguments like "they can, for no good reason, turn out to be terrorists" aren't necessarily always invalid but in this thread they are just arguing for the position that you should not let anyone enter(or leave) the US and that you probably shouldn't let Americans travel freely inside the US either. And that thousands and thousands of other things shouldn't be allowed because well, anyone could be a terrorist. The level of those types of arguments are probably the reason some say/think/feel it's not worth discussing. Let's say some should be allowed to enter and some should not, should the selection process be completely random or high accuracy? This is just generalization. 1. The British couple got the airplane because they have a VISA. That also means the US embassy has no problem with the couple entering the country. 2. The British couple decided to tweet a unfunny joke on a sensitive issue. 3. The TSA now has a reasonable doubt to detain the couple. My thought is simple. Why would you let the TSA questioning your reason to entering the US? The US was totally fine with the couple entering but suddenly the couple brought upon themselves their intention to go to the US. Did the US stop the couple from entering in the first place? No Did the US randomly deport the couple without reasonable explanation? No Hence, your post is under the assumption that US selectively allowed people entering the country. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
On February 02 2012 05:35 Chaosu wrote: do you think this means that Germany doesn't have freedom of speech? I hate to make this sound like a positive thing, but there are neonazi rallys in germany too, and they only get thrown into jail if they start beating up people. There are some specific things you are not allowed to say, mostly revolving around denying that the holocaust happened and gloryfying the nazi regime. To be quite honest, i am not entirely convinced that i like that. The reasoning behind it is to not insult the survivors, or people who lost someone to it, which is reasonable. But i don't like the general concept of the state being allowed to punish people for not believing the official story. | ||
|
Chaosu
Poland404 Posts
| ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
On February 02 2012 06:03 Prime`Rib wrote: There are selection processes and they got sent back to the UK because of one.This is just generalization. 1. The British couple got the airplane because they have a VISA. That also means the US embassy has no problem with the couple entering the country. 2. The British couple decided to tweet a unfunny joke on a sensitive issue. 3. The TSA now has a reasonable doubt to detain the couple. My thought is simple. Why would you let the TSA questioning your reason to entering the US? The US was totally fine with the couple entering but suddenly the couple brought upon themselves their intention to go to the US. Did the US stop the couple from entering in the first place? No Did the US randomly deport the couple without reasonable explanation? No Hence, your post is under the assumption that US selectively allowed people entering the country. The question about completely random or high accuracy selection was of course rhetorical since I assume everyone wants it to be as accurate as possible. To be less rhetorical: Assuming the information in the thread is correct it seems like the selection process was pretty close to completely random in this case to me. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
On February 02 2012 06:09 Chaosu wrote: Well that's not the point so please don't go off topic. He suggested that Germany have no freedom of speech because certain things are forbidden. Freedom ends where someones else freedom begins and that's the case here. People generally aren't censored in Germany and they can criticize government etc. Well, sure. I never disagreed with that. I was explaining how things are here, because apparently there are some misconceptions about that, and afterwards gave my opinion on it. Also, this thread is supposedly about 2 brits who were deported from the US, so i don't see my post as being more or less offtopic then the one before it. | ||
|
LuckyCharms45
United States37 Posts
On February 02 2012 04:26 Dont-Panic wrote: I find it alarming, that the US government not only listens in on private conversations but also uses them to flag someone as a terrorist threat depending on certain keywords. This all being worldwide and with no approval of some kind of judge or court.We had some thing like that in East Germany, it was called Stasi. They were also suspicious of everyone, they also listened in on private conversations, they also acted based on this information and they also weren't controlled by any judge or court. I am not saying that the Stasi and the HLS are the same but there are similarities which should at least get you thinking. Twitter is probably the furthest thing from a private conversation. I will start worrying about my privacy when the government starts wiretapping everyone's house. There is also no need for a Judge or Court since no criminal charges were pressed, the couple was only denied entry to the country. | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
| ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
No doubt they are monitoring youtube as well, because some insane do post videos before their crime. | ||
|
rOse_PedaL
Korea (South)450 Posts
| ||
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1187 Posts
On February 02 2012 14:25 furymonkey wrote: No doubt the government would try to tap into those private conversation, but that doesn't rule out Twitter as a place to look. Sure it sounds dumb, why would anyone say stuff so openly. But remember, there are cases where people announce their intention on social medias, before committing their massacre. There are people who wants to reach out to the public, so even it sounded dumb, but you can't rule out possibilities. No doubt they are monitoring youtube as well, because some insane do post videos before their crime. I don't think too many people are worried that they are monitoring social media, the US certainly uses far more clandestine ways to obtain information regarding potential terrorists. I think the problem people have, is that this debacles shows a complete lack of competence in using that information however they obtain it. Did they seriously believe they had a plan to 'destroy america' and 'dig up marylin munroe' ?? even after questioning them??? | ||
|
Friedrich Nietzsche
Germany171 Posts
1. Is the reaction of the Security Personnel standard and defined per protocol on such instances? 2. Are there processes included to ascertain observance of basic human rights in relation to said protocols against threats, that is, did the authorities go to the same lengths to actually verify the degree or presence at all of threat after the initial flaggin 3. In cases of false alarms, are there furthere protocols, like apologizing to the aggrieved and inconvenienced parties, possibly with just compensation, Now, to the immediate issue, people have to understand that the world has change. We live in highly unstable times, not because there is an actual threat anytime to America or other countries, but that we do not know exactly, and it can happen anytime or not at all, and technology is used to heighten the tension and confusion. The internet and new media and the anonimity and mobility it provides should not be an excuse to jest or take things for granted. I understand that kids, certainly my students, use "destroy" to mean get wasted or party hard, but its use has to be parallel to its context. The UK couple could have avoided this situation. At the same time, again, those earlier questions need to be addressed. | ||
| ||
