Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:26 am
With all due respect, Ryan,
Er, speaking from my experience of European history, there's not a single example where a socialist or communist organisation has started from a minor part of government and ended in dictatorship.
Without being rude, and trying to ignore partisan issues (in a country I don't have a stake) I am frankly amazed at the over-excitement by some Americans over what is a perfectly normal minor change of government and the need to ascribe party motives to a dubiously useful 'security' organisation with roots in both US parties.
BTW, it's 'socialist' and 'communist' not '..istic' - the problem (1917 - 1970) wasn't left wingers, anyway, but totalitarianism by and against fascism. (If you need a socialist to be your bogeyman you aren't actually looking at the political theory, but the problems of developing totalitarianism.)
Which is the second reason I suggested the gentleman in question should have known better - it's nothing like what happened there.
Thirdly, messing about with airport access and paperwork to fly wasn't an issue in Hungary at any stage. They were worried about much bigger issues - and no, there was no equivalent progression from one to the other.
Apologies for the digression (FWIW, I don't advocate, endorse, or (totally) despise any political system, and have no time for party politics.) - let's keep away from informed or ill-informed political comment and stick to defeating the bill.
Regards,
RyanShort1 wrote:...I am of the opinion that most of the wiser folks I know DO see it that way. If you look at the historical progression of socialistic, or communistic revolution - peaceful OR violent, there are plenty of similar examples.
Er, speaking from my experience of European history, there's not a single example where a socialist or communist organisation has started from a minor part of government and ended in dictatorship.
Without being rude, and trying to ignore partisan issues (in a country I don't have a stake) I am frankly amazed at the over-excitement by some Americans over what is a perfectly normal minor change of government and the need to ascribe party motives to a dubiously useful 'security' organisation with roots in both US parties.
BTW, it's 'socialist' and 'communist' not '..istic' - the problem (1917 - 1970) wasn't left wingers, anyway, but totalitarianism by and against fascism. (If you need a socialist to be your bogeyman you aren't actually looking at the political theory, but the problems of developing totalitarianism.)
The Hungarians actually had a LOT of history with that and may have a historically enlightened perspective there.
Which is the second reason I suggested the gentleman in question should have known better - it's nothing like what happened there.
Thirdly, messing about with airport access and paperwork to fly wasn't an issue in Hungary at any stage. They were worried about much bigger issues - and no, there was no equivalent progression from one to the other.
Apologies for the digression (FWIW, I don't advocate, endorse, or (totally) despise any political system, and have no time for party politics.) - let's keep away from informed or ill-informed political comment and stick to defeating the bill.
Regards,
Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:16 am
Sorry........my last post was written was too late & with too much wine (whine?). Little excited there 
.
James, youre on our side.......I hope you wrote TSA with your opinion !
Thx,
VL
.
James, youre on our side.......I hope you wrote TSA with your opinion !
Thx,
VL
Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:31 am
I noticed on the NBAA board that there was a motion filed against the LASP by a company and that the State of Alaska working on it as well. I hope so as I have a hard enough time just getting myself in my C-140A and now they don't want us carry golf clubs, guns, knives or liquids?? Shoot that's half the battle of flying just getting everything inside and wonder why you brought some much stuff. They have a hard time enough time just staying awake and looking at the xray machine and seeing all those shinny objects...
Lynn
Lynn
Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:47 am
For me personally, here's the "kicker" (from the EAA"s comprehensive comments document):
Constitutional and Societal Concerns
U.S. citizens have always been able to travel freely without having to seek government approval or permission. For the first time in our nation’s 233 year history, the federal government, in the form of the Transportation Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security, is proposing to force U.S. citizens to seek permission and approval before they may travel in their own
personal conveyance; in this instance an aircraft.
The LASP, as proposed, would require a pilot to submit the names of family members, close friends, and business associates to the United States government for security screening before they could board a personally owned and operated aircraft. Most U.S. citizens would object to doing this to their family and friends, and even more would object to having it done to them.
If the American public were made aware that the TSA is claiming authority that Congress never intended them to wield and is attempting the first step in regulating personal transportation in privately-owned vehicles, the LASP never would have gotten this far. The peasantry would be marching on DC with torches and pitchforks.
Constitutional and Societal Concerns
U.S. citizens have always been able to travel freely without having to seek government approval or permission. For the first time in our nation’s 233 year history, the federal government, in the form of the Transportation Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security, is proposing to force U.S. citizens to seek permission and approval before they may travel in their own
personal conveyance; in this instance an aircraft.
The LASP, as proposed, would require a pilot to submit the names of family members, close friends, and business associates to the United States government for security screening before they could board a personally owned and operated aircraft. Most U.S. citizens would object to doing this to their family and friends, and even more would object to having it done to them.
If the American public were made aware that the TSA is claiming authority that Congress never intended them to wield and is attempting the first step in regulating personal transportation in privately-owned vehicles, the LASP never would have gotten this far. The peasantry would be marching on DC with torches and pitchforks.
Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:50 am
Dan K wrote:For me personally, here's the "kicker" (from the EAA"s comprehensive comments document):
Constitutional and Societal Concerns
U.S. citizens have always been able to travel freely without having to seek government approval or permission. For the first time in our nation’s 233 year history, the federal government, in the form of the Transportation Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security, is proposing to force U.S. citizens to seek permission and approval before they may travel in their own
personal conveyance; in this instance an aircraft.
The LASP, as proposed, would require a pilot to submit the names of family members, close friends, and business associates to the United States government for security screening before they could board a personally owned and operated aircraft. Most U.S. citizens would object to doing this to their family and friends, and even more would object to having it done to them.
If the American public were made aware that the TSA is claiming authority that Congress never intended them to wield and is attempting the first step in regulating personal transportation in privately-owned vehicles, the LASP never would have gotten this far. The peasantry would be marching on DC with torches and pitchforks.
Indeed, that is the kicker so far as I'm concerned.
Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:25 am
Do we live under the "Bill of Rights" or did I miss something. Have we become sheelpe!
"We should all surrender- the terrorists have won..."
"We should all surrender- the terrorists have won..."
Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:37 am
Randy Haskin wrote:Dan K wrote:For me personally, here's the "kicker" (from the EAA"s comprehensive comments document):
Constitutional and Societal Concerns
U.S. citizens have always been able to travel freely without having to seek government approval or permission. For the first time in our nation’s 233 year history, the federal government, in the form of the Transportation Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security, is proposing to force U.S. citizens to seek permission and approval before they may travel in their own
personal conveyance; in this instance an aircraft.
The LASP, as proposed, would require a pilot to submit the names of family members, close friends, and business associates to the United States government for security screening before they could board a personally owned and operated aircraft. Most U.S. citizens would object to doing this to their family and friends, and even more would object to having it done to them.
If the American public were made aware that the TSA is claiming authority that Congress never intended them to wield and is attempting the first step in regulating personal transportation in privately-owned vehicles, the LASP never would have gotten this far. The peasantry would be marching on DC with torches and pitchforks.
Indeed, that is the kicker so far as I'm concerned.
Aircraft owners now have a better understanding of what gun owners have been fighting for years. We have the Constitution saying we have a right to bare arms, and yet the govt just sees that as a speed bump. Last time I checked, there was no clause in the 2nd that said anything about "sporting purposes".
People need to stand up and remind the TSA who they work for. I sent my comment in as soon as the web site was up.
I look at it like this, We have everything to lose, they have nothing to lose.
If someone comes up and tells you that they are going to take your arm off at the shoulder, and you talk them into taking it off at the elbow, You still lost, and they won,
Now substitute aircraft or gun, for arm.
Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:12 pm
JDK wrote:Er, speaking from my experience of European history, there's not a single example where a socialist or communist organisation has started from a minor part of government and ended in dictatorship.,
Belarus is one. But the general point is precious few are the countries which are slowly progressing toward more freedom, it is virtually always the opposite regression.
JDK wrote:Without being rude, and trying to ignore partisan issues (in a country I don't have a stake) I am frankly amazed at the over-excitement by some Americans over what is a perfectly normal minor change of government and the need to ascribe party motives to a dubiously useful 'security' organisation with roots in both US parties.,
I could make some pithy condescending comment about Australian politics, but neither knowing enough to make a meaningful comment nor residing there, I will refrain. Please show us the same courtesy.
Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:35 pm
the hopeless stupidity we are up against here is a bit overwhelming. too many of us were to complacent in the days after 9-11 when the dept of Homeland Security was created and rammed through congress. Now its going to be hard getting the monster back in the cage.
Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:33 am
Dear Valdo - thanks - your opinion carries a lot of weight here; let's keep it your best opinion!
Exactly. Australian politics in all it's pointlessness has no place here - just like (non warbird specific) US politics is also banned.
I'm sorry to have touched on the topic, but, I'll mention again, it was in response to misleading remarks.
I'd be delighted to refrain - perhaps if everyone could refrain also from general remarks about 'freedom' (a highly subjective topic) we wouldn't lose threads or useful relevant discussion affecting warbirds.
You might be amazed at the number of posts not made by people on the topic of American politics - it's a pity a few can't follow that simple rule.
The TSA issue needs to be addressed - general vapourings and political point scoring is not acceptable on the forum, nor helpful, and is counter productive of action and communication.
In other words, and wearing.. [Mod Post:] ..my Mod's hat - keep it on topic - LASP and TSA action advised and communication - or the thread will have to be managed.
Thank you.
brucev wrote:I could make some pithy condescending comment about Australian politics, but neither knowing enough to make a meaningful comment nor residing there, I will refrain.
Exactly. Australian politics in all it's pointlessness has no place here - just like (non warbird specific) US politics is also banned.
I'm sorry to have touched on the topic, but, I'll mention again, it was in response to misleading remarks.
brucev wrote:Please show us the same courtesy.
I'd be delighted to refrain - perhaps if everyone could refrain also from general remarks about 'freedom' (a highly subjective topic) we wouldn't lose threads or useful relevant discussion affecting warbirds.
You might be amazed at the number of posts not made by people on the topic of American politics - it's a pity a few can't follow that simple rule.
The TSA issue needs to be addressed - general vapourings and political point scoring is not acceptable on the forum, nor helpful, and is counter productive of action and communication.
In other words, and wearing.. [Mod Post:] ..my Mod's hat - keep it on topic - LASP and TSA action advised and communication - or the thread will have to be managed.
Thank you.
Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:52 am
And now the waiting starts. Maybe if they just get a bunch of ear tags like the cattle ranchers use. You get a number, choice of color and your are good for ticks.... 
Lynn
Lynn
Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:05 am
Don't worry Lynn, there are lawsuits, injunctions, and Congressmen waiting in the wings if the TSA is dumb enough to go ahead with this.
But the guy in charge did work for the Post office for 36 years before joining TSA! And we all know how well the Post Office has done in those years!
But the guy in charge did work for the Post office for 36 years before joining TSA! And we all know how well the Post Office has done in those years!
Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:19 am
RickH wrote:But the guy in charge did work for the Post office for 36 years before joining TSA! And we all know how well the Post Office has done in those years!
They certainly provided a spur to the development of e-mail...
Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:16 am
James,
Back at you! With all due respect I feel compelled to respond...
1. It's too bad about the "freedom" thing. However, I suspect that if you attend most US airshows, warbirds and freedom - especially as regards WWII - have historically been linked arm in arm. Maybe that's why I and some of the other posters keep forgetting... I'll try to do better, but when it needlessly directly effects and threatens some of our favorite warbirds, not to mention the greater implications, it's easy to cross the line.
2. Perhaps in one sense of the word this has to do with politics, but I suspect most of the folks here don't view it that way. The issue has been going on under both major political parties here and there are people on both sides of the aisle quite fired up about it. I happen to not consider myself in either camp and did not vote for either major candidate this past election.
3. The sad truth is that General and Business aviation are far from the only areas where this agency is sticking their oily hands into the proverbial cookie jar and spoiling things. For instance, we are also seeing the DHS (TSA's parent) getting involved in agriculture of all places as well as other industries. It is their attitude of superiority, and elitist actions, and refusal to follow the traditional principles of liberty here that have earned them this wrath.
4. All the references to the Gstpo should be a red flag to folks. There definitely are comparisons that are being made. It doesn't make sense for ordinary Americans with ordinary names to suddenly show up on the "watch list" and get harassed at airports. It is even more suspicious when folks who have had no problem before and who are known to their friends to be patriotic, freedom (sorry James!) loving folks suddenly start having trouble after even the most minor criticisms...
5. In the EAA's brief something is touched on that is pretty significant and related to this. The TSA has recently done some stuff related to airports that has directly affected ALL aircraft, including warbirds at more major airports, like where I'm training at now. The problem here is that they're issuing directives without any recourse, and actually overstepping their congressional authority.
6. I will try not to post any more on this thread in this manner, and keep it to more factual stuff and keep it directly related. However, as a parting shot, I do think this stuff, if not checked and responded to promptly, will likely be the end of significant warbird's flying careers, if not through direct results, as a result of the total impact on aviation. I believe that the discussion is related because we need to get to the underlying root of the problem, rather than just dealing with the symptom.
To finish on a "historical" note, here's are some quotes from one of the founding documents to which the Congress that birthed the TSA owes it's very existence:
...all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves...
...erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people...
Some of my ancestors have lived here since before that document was written, and several have risked their their blood in it's cause. Figure out what the document is, read it, and you'll know why some of us Americans are really concerned!
Ryan
Back at you! With all due respect I feel compelled to respond...
1. It's too bad about the "freedom" thing. However, I suspect that if you attend most US airshows, warbirds and freedom - especially as regards WWII - have historically been linked arm in arm. Maybe that's why I and some of the other posters keep forgetting... I'll try to do better, but when it needlessly directly effects and threatens some of our favorite warbirds, not to mention the greater implications, it's easy to cross the line.
2. Perhaps in one sense of the word this has to do with politics, but I suspect most of the folks here don't view it that way. The issue has been going on under both major political parties here and there are people on both sides of the aisle quite fired up about it. I happen to not consider myself in either camp and did not vote for either major candidate this past election.
3. The sad truth is that General and Business aviation are far from the only areas where this agency is sticking their oily hands into the proverbial cookie jar and spoiling things. For instance, we are also seeing the DHS (TSA's parent) getting involved in agriculture of all places as well as other industries. It is their attitude of superiority, and elitist actions, and refusal to follow the traditional principles of liberty here that have earned them this wrath.
4. All the references to the Gstpo should be a red flag to folks. There definitely are comparisons that are being made. It doesn't make sense for ordinary Americans with ordinary names to suddenly show up on the "watch list" and get harassed at airports. It is even more suspicious when folks who have had no problem before and who are known to their friends to be patriotic, freedom (sorry James!) loving folks suddenly start having trouble after even the most minor criticisms...
5. In the EAA's brief something is touched on that is pretty significant and related to this. The TSA has recently done some stuff related to airports that has directly affected ALL aircraft, including warbirds at more major airports, like where I'm training at now. The problem here is that they're issuing directives without any recourse, and actually overstepping their congressional authority.
6. I will try not to post any more on this thread in this manner, and keep it to more factual stuff and keep it directly related. However, as a parting shot, I do think this stuff, if not checked and responded to promptly, will likely be the end of significant warbird's flying careers, if not through direct results, as a result of the total impact on aviation. I believe that the discussion is related because we need to get to the underlying root of the problem, rather than just dealing with the symptom.
To finish on a "historical" note, here's are some quotes from one of the founding documents to which the Congress that birthed the TSA owes it's very existence:
...all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves...
...erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people...
Some of my ancestors have lived here since before that document was written, and several have risked their their blood in it's cause. Figure out what the document is, read it, and you'll know why some of us Americans are really concerned!
Ryan
Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:17 am
Ryan,
Many of us will not respond to your thoughts on "freedom" out of respect for the board's rules on political discourse, as reminded by James.
Please do not interpret the silence as agreement with your position, or even as respect for it.
I wish all of you luck in fighting this silly legislation.
August
Many of us will not respond to your thoughts on "freedom" out of respect for the board's rules on political discourse, as reminded by James.
Please do not interpret the silence as agreement with your position, or even as respect for it.
I wish all of you luck in fighting this silly legislation.
August