No need tell anyone about their mistakes. Mistakes correct themselves. For instance I thought loving someone was the right thing to do.

Then one day I lost someone I loved. It was the worst and most fearful point in my life. I felt that somehow I had the wrong idea about love and I was the only one who didn't get the message. The grief was terrible. Almost inescapable. I was stuck inside my own little world. If I had a gun I would have put it to my head and pulled the trigger. Luckily I had no gun but I did have a little more time to suffer over a decision.

Do I continue to love knowing the pain and nightmare of grief?

What do you think my choice was?

EDIT: Actually, you don't help by not forgiving inappropriate behavior. Forgiving is not condoning. It's really more of an exercise to keep from pulling the trigger or setting yourself on fire.

Your death has nothing to do with you and everything to do with those that love you.

Wow, I'm right there on almost every reason he gave there...but I can go one farther (being a luddite). When asked how/why I don't have a cell phone, I still quote my father from the late 80's when he said: (and this is no longer true, but still funny)...
"Cell phones are for those who are so un-important that they can't afford to miss a phone call."
I must admit I sometimes feel left out when I'm in a room full of people and I'm the only one not sealed off in my own little world glued to a tiny screen. It happens all too often.

He's got a good point though.It seems that every new game out there that is coming our way needs internet connectivity for the sole purpose of community interactment. I enjoy this but it now means I can't take my laptop with me and play the game. Sometimes I can't be online, what then???

And yes, sometimes we don't want to interact - just play in our own little world. Who are these people that are telling us we can no longer do that?

>> ^legacy0100:

...wtf is this bullshit. This man is spewing diarrhea out of his mouth. He is basing his argument solely on what little he knows about his own little world. I highly doubt this man has ever done any professional research over these matters, not even data collection. He's just conjuring up a theory solely based on what he has read and heard over the news media sitting in his own living room.
What he said towards the end really bothered me the most. "some religions have never had these extremists", what sources does he have?


You, sir or madam, are the one who apparently knows little to nothing about both Islam and Sam Harris. May I suggest you read "The End of Faith", or any of Harris' excellent (and researched) books, before "spewing diarrhea"-like criticisms without knowing what you're talking about.

As for Islam, look up one or many of the following effects of Islam in the world today: honour killing, fgm, suicide attacks, stoning, hate crimes, hate speech, punishments for "adultery", etc...

@bareboards2: yes, "at this moment" is a key phrase; when Christianity had Islam's age it was still all about the Inquisition and inter-faith massacres (oh, and witch-burning). But there can be no "redemption" for any religion whose core fundamentals are flawed, there can only be a watering down of its craziness with secular morality.

On the false problem of fundamentalists: http://videosift.com/video/The-problem-is-not-fundamentalists-but-the-fundamentals

...wtf is this bullshit. This man is spewing diarrhea out of his mouth. He is basing his argument solely on what little he knows about his own little world. I highly doubt this man has ever done any professional research over these matters, not even data collection. He's just conjuring up a theory solely based on what he has read and heard over the news media sitting in his own living room.

What he said towards the end really bothered me the most. "some religions have never had these extremists", what sources does he have?

I am not disagreeing with you. The video shows 1 guy being scanned before she was lined up to go through and refused. I think she was behind the blocks arguing with them at the start of the video or close enough to the start. We can say she was just in her own little world and didn't care that other people were being picked as long as she wasn't, which is a pretty common trait in all things lately.

She's young and she might even be on the coddled side. But I've personally seen women and especially "enforcement" women being harder on other women than anyone else in the vicinity, especially if the women are roughly the same age or a few years younger. It looked to me that the girl with her hair pulled back was demonstrating this, she seemed more agitated than any other person there aside from the girl being surrounded by however many people "against" her.

It doesn't even have to be her being attractive or not, but to me the whole thing seemed off. They can tell her scan or pat down or she needs to leave. If they thought she was trying to smuggle something onto a plane roping her off a few feet away from other passengers is doing nothing to contain the situation. It's an attraction, if you don't comply we'll rope you off and try to embarrass you and yammer at you instead of making our point and expelling you from the airport. Again if she was that much of a nuisance, they could no-fly list her. The video tape release being split and non-time stamped doesn't exactly eliminate all of my doubts. That they screen more often than the girl noticed (after she had already balked) is apparent, but no idea if they were doing this prior to the the beginning of the situation...one guy was scanned at the beginning. I'll say that for professionals to not be consistent would be doubtful, but professionals wouldn't consider a roped off area sufficient either or showing emotion toward a possible threat.

Most people being surrounded by a lot of unfriendly people after a disagreement would have a different perception than an onlooking, especially if they are young and sheltered. I think it was a lot of over-reaction on both sides part, except the TSA is supposed to a free pass because she might be packing a bomb as underwear......yet they leave her around the rest of the public and in the airport for 20+ minutes as shown in the video instead of isolating or removing.

>> ^nanrod:

You make some good points but I have to disagree with your conclusions. All the missing video in the world won't entirely validate her story. Why? Because the video we do see clearly contradicts her story. One of her main claims was that she was singled out ostensibly because she was a "hot chick". In the 13 minutes of footage where we see her in the screening area I counted 21 people going through of whom 12 were scanned. She certainly wasn't singled out period and while each to his own I didn't see her as being the "hot chick" in the group. She also stated that she was screamed at. What I saw was TSA staff who appeared to be speaking relatively calmly with her including a woman who appeared to be senior personnel who was handing her paper towels to dry her eyes. While at some times some of them looked annoyed with her I didn't see any evidence of screaming.
Bottom line; she was selected for scanning, was uncomfortable with that so had to go for more intensive pat down. She had heard horror stories of breasts being twisted painfully and was concerned about that and asked questions. Whether or not she got satisfactory answers she must have ultimately refused the pat down. No pat down , no scan, no fly. Now was she mistreated at any point along the way? Your absolutely right that without audio and any missing video we'll never know.>> ^Porksandwich:
>> ^ReverendTed:
Politics aside, what's the verdict now that we've seen the raw security camera video?

She said there were a dozen cops that showed up, that she was cuffed to a chair and that they ripped up the ticket. And I think she said it took an hour at least. That's only 12 minutes or so of video in one section and 10 in another. So I am not sure if that's the entirety of the video or if they bring her back to the chair when the cops show up..or take her to another section at that point.
The camera angles kinda suck.
The second video which is hard to tell how far apart they are...shows her with 3-4 people in white shirts who appear to have sheriff/police badges on their arms. Which holds with her story. It is extremely hard to tell what is going on in these videos, she's kind of hard to see with everyone being taller than her.
So I think there's about 10-20 minutes of missing video showing the cops arriving. And that could entirely validate her story.

A few things are clear, she was crying, one of the TSA agents was clearly angry at her, and the police did escort her out of the airport. Not enough video to disprove her story, but enough to make it look like she lied if you assume these two videos have nothing in between them.
At this point I side with the McLain because I think they are withholding portions of the video. And I would think video like this would have time stamps....being security footage and all.

I know when I'm walking down a street at night and hear a bunch of men dressed in dark clothes across the way yelling, I'm always 100% clear on what they're saying, who they are, and what the fuck is going on. That's how I always know to calmly sit on the sidewalk to let these men who I know are cops come over to check me out, because I have nothing to hide and no reason to be confused at all about their orders.

There's too little on the video to know exactly what started the chase, or why he ran. I don't like being in crowds or at concerts because I can NOT make out a majority of what's being spoken around me, because I can't process it. Someone yelling from across the street while I'm in my own little world isn't necessarily going to get their message across to me in the first (or second) yell.

stow it. they're both good games in their own little worlds.
even if, yeah, i'm a pc gamer.
and would much rather blast headcrabs, using the kind of pinpoint control that only mouselook can deliver.

but that 2x zoom pistol, from Halo? rocked house.