"Naked" X-Ray Scans At The Airport.. Your Thoughts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You weren't right, just like I proved you want to profile based on name and you twisted my proof into some sort of apology.

The people in the list all plotted against us. It doesn't matter if they chose to use an airline of not, or if they succeeded or not. Why can you not get that simple little fact into your head? What matters is that they fit the profile of someone who would attack us (because they tried) yet they don't neatly fit into your "profile people with Muslim names more closely" little narrow minded ideology.

I asked if anyone on that list attacked an american airline. Give me ONE name.
Can you get that little question through your head?
My statement that ONLY people with Muslim names have engaged in these terrorist attacks against US airlines is true.
There was a robbery in town today by a guy named Bob. That is about as relevant as your post about Sam Byck or whomever.
 
You weren't right, just like I proved you want to profile based on name and you twisted my proof into some sort of apology.

.

What? You think you proved something? I have said all along we should profile based on name!
Here, let me make it easy for you next time.
"We should profile passengers on airlines based on Muslim names."
Shrubber 1/8/10

And there is no need to apologize, I don't think I even asked for one. But thank you anyway.
Apology accepted.
 
I asked if anyone on that list attacked an american airline. Give me ONE name.
Can you get that little question through your head?
My statement that ONLY people with Muslim names have engaged in these terrorist attacks against US airlines is true.
There was a robbery in town today by a guy named Bob. That is about as relevant as your post about Sam Byck or whomever.

I didn't provide the names on the list and never claimed they attacked an American airline. I gave you the name of an American born person without a Muslim name who walked onto an airline and shot two people before killing himself. It is irrelevant what his reason for doing so was.

Another list of people who have hijacked planes that were operated by American companies is below. The methods and reasons are irrelevant since we are attempting to stop the hijacking of planes by anyone for any reason, even if their aim isn't to kill but to hold hostages:

Zovonko Busic
Julienna Busic
Slobodan Vlasic
Billy Gene Hurst
John J. Divivo
Garrett Brock Trapnell
Unknown white male using the alias "Dan Cooper"

The next attempt could be made by Mike or Mohamed, we just don't know.

I'm sure the families of the people killed by Byck take solace in the fact he was not a terrorist but a nut job. God forbid we attempt to stop those kinds of people to. I don't care if the hijakcer/bomber is doing it for religious reasons of because the voices in his head told him to do it. I want both stopped and the name isn't going to do it.

We should not use the name, nationality, race, country of Origin, or any other physical attribute to profile anyone when it comes to our airports. We should use behavior.

As Richard Reid proved, any person can change their name to anything they would like and no one at the airport would ever know. It wouldn't matter if the person had 35 names, if the one that was used on their travel documents was legal that is the only one anyone in the airport would know.

When my mom flies the TSA don't know what her maiden name was. It could be Polish, German, Italian, Saudi, Pakistani, Berber, or anything else and they would never know. They know the name on her license and on the boarding pass. If she flies internationally they know the name on her passport. Even if the state department or public records knows the name on her birth certificate no one at the airport does so profiling her based on the name is meaningless. Names are very easy to change, look at "Chad Ochocinco".

I look forward to the illogical response that follows.
 
Wow. 43 pages. And so much anger.

My feeling on the matter is that flying isn't a right. It's a privilege. A service offered. If the airlines/airports/government wants to implement full body scanners, so be it. Don't like it? Don't fly. I have no problem with the scans. I would also have no problem with full body cavity searched for all...but I'm a weirdo.

YMMV.
 

I didn't provide the names on the list and never claimed they attacked an American airline. I gave you the name of an American born person without a Muslim name who walked onto an airline and shot two people before killing himself. It is irrelevant what his reason for doing so was.

Another list of people who have hijacked planes that were operated by American companies is below. The methods and reasons are irrelevant since we are attempting to stop the hijacking of planes by anyone for any reason, even if their aim isn't to kill but to hold hostages:

Zovonko Busic
Julienna Busic
Slobodan Vlasic
Billy Gene Hurst
John J. Divivo
Garrett Brock Trapnell
Unknown white male using the alias "Dan Cooper"

The next attempt could be made by Mike or Mohamed, we just don't know.

I'm sure the families of the people killed by Byck take solace in the fact he was not a terrorist but a nut job. God forbid we attempt to stop those kinds of people to. I don't care if the hijakcer/bomber is doing it for religious reasons of because the voices in his head told him to do it. I want both stopped and the name isn't going to do it.

We should not use the name, nationality, race, country of Origin, or any other physical attribute to profile anyone when it comes to our airports. We should use behavior.

As Richard Reid proved, any person can change their name to anything they would like and no one at the airport would ever know. It wouldn't matter if the person had 35 names, if the one that was used on their travel documents was legal that is the only one anyone in the airport would know.

When my mom flies the TSA don't know what her maiden name was. It could be Polish, German, Italian, Saudi, Pakistani, Berber, or anything else and they would never know. They know the name on her license and on the boarding pass. If she flies internationally they know the name on her passport. Even if the state department or public records knows the name on her birth certificate no one at the airport does so profiling her based on the name is meaningless. Names are very easy to change, look at "Chad Ochocinco".

I look forward to the illogical response that follows.

Your statements are so weak as to amusing.
The Busics hijacked a plane in the freakin '70's?!?!? Can you google somebody from this century even?!?None of the people you have mentioned are terrorists or are in any way connected to the greatest threat we are facing now. Islamic Jihadists. Again, somebody with an anglo name commited a crime and this defuses a point against islamic jihadists?
Since shortly after 9/11 procedure have been put in place to identify people like Abdul Raheem and prevent them from boarding aircraft. This most recent unerwear bomber aside.

And since then how many of these Islamic Jihadists have bothered to change their name? mmm?
The answer is none.
Waleed al-Shehri did not board the plane as Joe Smith now did he? He did not even bother to have two names like Abdul Raheem!

Are you really discounting the commonality here?
Is'nt it painfully obvious that there is a commonality?
Why do you refuse to see it?

Is'nt it foolish to ignore it?
Are you in fact saying that this commonality should be ignored?
 
Wow. 43 pages. And so much anger.

My feeling on the matter is that flying isn't a right. It's a privilege. A service offered. If the airlines/airports/government wants to implement full body scanners, so be it. Don't like it? Don't fly. I have no problem with the scans. I would also have no problem with full body cavity searched for all...but I'm a weirdo.

YMMV.
I think that I'm back to driving. You see, I agree with you. I don't have the right to travel by plane but I do have the right to reject travel by plane if it causes me discomfort.

It's not just the scanners. It's the lines, the tiny seats, taking away one comfort item after another, losing luggage, delays and just generally being a pain. I do hope that the electronic scanner is used someday though. That would make at least me a little happier with flying.

I wonder if I'm the only person who is just about fed up with flying in general? :confused3
 
John J. Divivo 1970Zovonko Busic 1976Billy Gene Hurst 1972Garrett Brock Trapnell 1972
And DB Cooper ?!! Really!
You find this relevant at all how? Bank robbers from 40 years ago relate to this discussion how? I suppose if someone had thrown a stick in front of Orville or Wilbur Wright that would prove your point to right? :)

You’ll have to google better than that
I noticed you must have passed by the list I assume you copied from Wikipedia from this century!

• 2000: Ariana Afghan Airlines Boeing 727 is hijacked on an internal flight within Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, and ended up at London Stansted Airport, where most of the passengers claimed political asylum.
• 2000: Philippine Airlines Flight 812 was hijacked en route from Davao City, Philippines to Manila. The hijacker parachuted from the aircraft while still airborne; his body was later found.
• 2000, 11 November: an Vnukovo Airlines Tu-154 flying from Makhachkala to Moscow was hijacked by a man demanding it be diverted to Israel. The plane landed at Israil military base where hijacker surrendered. None of 59 people onboard were injured.[13]
• 2001, 15 March: another Vnukovo Airlines Tu-154 flying from Istanbul to Moscow was hijacked by a three Chechen terrorists demanding it be diverted to Saudi Arabia. After the plane with 174 people onboard landed at Medina the terrorist threatened to blow it up unless it would be refuelled for flying to Afghanistan. The Saudi authorities decided to storm the plane. During the assault 3 people were killed by Saudi police: one of the passengers (Turkish citizen), the stewardess Yulia Fomina (later the plane was named after her) and the leader of the terrorists.[14]
• 2001: September 11 attacks, eastern USA: 19 terrorists hijacked American Airlines flights 11 and 77, and United Airlines flights 93 and 175[citation needed]. The four heavily-fuelled aircrafts were used as missiles to attack targets of economic, military, and political significance in the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history. Two of the planes, UA175 and AA11 were crashed into New York City's twin towers of the World Trade Center, destroying the entire complex and killing 2,998 people. In Washington, D.C., AA77 was crashed into the Pentagon, causing massive destruction to the side of the building facing Arlington National Cemetery and resulting in over 100 deaths. Another attack on the US Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. was averted when passengers intervened and UA93 crashed into a field, but all those on the aircraft perished.
This marked a landmark in hijacking: the first successful hijacking where the intention was to destroy the aircraft and passengers, and use the fueled aircraft as a missile to destroy ground targets. It also marked a landmark in responses to the threat of hijacking: until then the recommended response was for the crew to obey the hijackers' demands so as to safeguard the passengers and buy time; after this the policy was more about preventing access to the cockpit and pilots, and aggressive responses. From this time air passengers worldwide were prohibited from having anything remotely like a bladed weapon in the passenger cabin: scissors, tweezers, nailfiles, etc.[citation needed]
• 2006: Turkish Airlines Flight 1476, flying from Tirana to Istanbul, was hijacked in Greek airspace. The aircraft, with 107 passengers and six crew on board, transmitted two coded hijack signals which were picked up by the Greek air force; the flight was intercepted by military aircraft and landed safely at Brindisi, Italy.
• 2007: an Air West Boeing 737 was hijacked over Sudan, but landed safely at N'Djamena, Chad.
• 2007: an Air Mauritanie Boeing 737 flying from Nouakchott to Las Palmas with 87 passengers on board was hijacked by a man who wanted to fly to Paris, but the plane landed in an air base near Las Palmas and the hijacker, a Moroccan, was arrested.[15]
• 2007: an Atlasjet MD-80 en route from Nicosia to Istanbul was hijacked by two Arab students, who said they were Al Qaeda operatives, one trained in Afghanistan, and wanted to go to Tehran, Iran. The plane landed in Antalya, the passengers escaped and the hijackers were arrested.[16]
• 2008: a Sun Air Boeing 737 flying from Nyala, Darfur, in Western Sudan to the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, was hijacked shortly after takeoff. The hijackers demanded to be taken to France where they reputedly wanted to gain asylum. The plane initially tried to land at Cairo but was refused permission. It subsequently touched down at Kufra, Libya. The hijackers gave themselves up almost 24 hours after taking the plane. There were no reported casualties.
• 2009: CanJet Flight 918, a Boeing 737-800 preparing to depart from the Sangster International Airport in Montego Bay, Jamaica to Cuba was hijacked by a gunman who forced his way through airport security onto the plane. His main motive was a demand to the crew to fly him to Cuba. Most of the passengers on the plane gave him money to buy their freedom. For the rest of the night, negotiations took place as 6 crew members were held hostage in the flight for several hours. Quick responses from the police force allowed them to disarm the hijacker and arrest him. There were no casualties.
• 2009: AeroMéxico Flight 576, a Boeing 737-800 flying from Cancún to Mexico City was hijacked by José Marc Flores Pereira, a Bolivian citizen claiming he had a bomb and demanding to speak to Mexican president Felipe Calderón. The plane landed at Mexico City International Airport where it then taxied to a remote stand where the passengers and crew were later released. Mexican officials stormed the plane where 5 men were taken into custody with only 1 being held. There were no casualties.


Not a 'Joe Smith' among them. Weird huh?
 
I am new to these boards so am nervous to post on such a sensitive thread. However - I can see this from both points of view.

I have a very Irish name so every time I pass through a British airport I am stopped and body searched - and I mean every time, for no other reason that I have an Irish name.

On the other hand if it meant that safety was ensured I was okay with it - not happy - but okay, but now I feel like I have to build in extra travel time to any journey as I am sure to be stopped and so that is just part of the journey.

As for the body scanners - I can assure you it is better than a search!
 
I am new to these boards so am nervous to post on such a sensitive thread. However - I can see this from both points of view.

I have a very Irish name so every time I pass through a British airport I am stopped and body searched - and I mean every time, for no other reason that I have an Irish name.

On the other hand if it meant that safety was ensured I was okay with it - not happy - but okay, but now I feel like I have to build in extra travel time to any journey as I am sure to be stopped and so that is just part of the journey.

As for the body scanners - I can assure you it is better than a search!

Don't be nervous, it's all in good fun. ( mostly ):)
You bring up a very good point.
 
I just feel that racial profiling is nothing new - as I say it is something that I have been aware of for years. This is not to say that I think it is to be totally ignored but must be taken into context with other characteristics.

However in an airport setting the staff have to work with whatever information that they have so rely on profiles and 'best guess', which is often where problems can arise.

GrillasGirl
 
It's interesting that you keep stating this, even though it's been proved to be untrue.
Richard Reid had a muslim name, it was Abdul Raheem

Richard Reid adopted a Muslim name (which, interestingly, he did not use on his passport).

Cassius Clay and Lew Alcindor adopted Muslim names as well. By your 'reasoning', combined with the fact that each has used the new name only since changing, each of them is more likely to be a terrorist ready to blow up a plane than is Mr. Reid.
 
shrubber said:
After a quick google, he was trying to hijack a plane to kill Nixon? Hardly a terrorist.
Huh? Someone trying to kill the most powerful person in the world is not a terrorist? Why? Is there some minimum number of deaths or intended deaths before an attack is considered terrorism? PLEASE keep us apprised of your travel plans.
 
shrubber said:
My statement that ONLY people with Muslim names have engaged in these terrorist attacks against US airlines is true.
Wrong. Richard Reid IS Richard Reid's name, and he attacked an American airline. That he happened to adopt additional names at various points in his lifetime does not make those his names. One can only have a single legal name.

Some American airlines hijacked, i.e. attacked/overtaken by terrorists:
November 24, 1968: Luis Armando Pena Soltren, Jose Rafael Rios Cruz and Miguel Castro coerced the pilot of Pan American Flight 281 out of New York's John F. Kennedy Airport.
March 17, 1970: Eastern Air Lines Shuttle Flight 1320, carrying passengers from Newark to Boston was hijacked around 7:30 P.M. by John J. Divivo who was armed with a .38 caliber revolver.
November 24, 1971: A man who became known as D. B. Cooper hijacked Northwest Orient flight 305, a Boeing 727-100 aircraft flying from Portland, OR, to Seattle, WA.
January 12, 1972: Braniff Flight 38, a Boeing 727, was hijacked as it departed Houston, Texas bound for Dallas, Texas. The lone armed hijacker, Billy Gene Hurst, Jr.
January 28, 1972: TWA Flight 2, Los Angeles to New York, was hijacked by con man and bank robber Garrett Trapnell.
1994: FedEx Flight 705 hijacked by disgruntled employee Auburn Calloway as it left Memphis, Tennessee, with the intention of using it as a cruise missile against FedEx HQ.

Not a single Muslim name among them.
 
I haven't read through the entire thread, so forgive me if this has been expressed. I personally, don't have an issue with the full body scanners. If it keeps us even a little safer, I'm all for it. I don't care who see's what. Yes..got kids, don't care who see's what's in their underwear either. If it prevents one nut job from turning his underwear into fruit of ka-booms then I'm all for it.

Just throwing this out there, but...
I know we are supposed to have air marshalls on some of the flights. How about allowing additional law enforcement officers (from local municipalities) to fly at discounted rates. We have law enforcement ride our rails and subways here in NYC. They don't pay the fare, but they are also expected to act when called upon in regards to unruly passengers, and crime that they encounter on the subways. (personally I'd rather pay the fare than deal with some of the scum of the earth they have to deal with..but that's another post) If properly certified and trained, it might be another added layer of protection to have law enforcement officers fly at discounted rates to help keep the skies a bit friendlier. Another set of trained eyes on board couldn't hurt. The incentive of a lesser fare, might generate interest by some for the position.:confused3
 
Richard Reid adopted a Muslim name (which, interestingly, he did not use on his passport).

Cassius Clay and Lew Alcindor adopted Muslim names as well. By your 'reasoning', combined with the fact that each has used the new name only since changing, each of them is more likely to be a terrorist ready to blow up a plane than is Mr. Reid.

Exactly. Not to mention that terrorists aren't stupid. If we start to profile only people with Muslim names, something said, denied, then stated again by the poster you quoted, more of them will just change their names. It isn't all that hard to do. It is also very backward thinking. To think that because something happened one way in the past doesn't mean it will continue to happen that way in the future. Security needs to be forward thinking and proactive, not reactive.

Heck, a group of 10 terrorists would only need one person with a westernized name in their group to thwart the profile. The 9 with the Muslim names could have nothing on them and sit there getting a body cavity search and nothing would happen. The one person with a changed name or the one American born member with an "American" name could have all the equipment but since we don't care about his behavior and only his name he gets through fine (assuming he beats the scans). Meanwhile, looking at behavior we have can observe all of them acting suspiciously. That, along with the increased chance that the machines will pick up the danger make me feel much safer than just pulling everyone who fits a narrow definition over and searching them. It's just too easy to change the superficial. The recent terrorists have also had dark hair and eyes. If we used that as criteria some colored contracts and hair dye would be all that is needed to trick us.

We have had home grown terrorists in the past and there will be more. If we use names to profile the targets will just change them, if we use race they will recruit people who either aren't or don't look the race we are profiling, if we profile country of origin they will recruit from countries we aren't flagging as a problem. If we profile behavior it isn't so simple. Sure, people could learn to trick us just like they do psychologists and lie detectors, but it wouldn't be so easy. When you use something superficial and easily changeable as screening criteria it will just get changed.

If the poster had bothered to do any research he/she would have learned that the intent of Byck was to hijack the plane and fly it into the White House. So someone wants to hijack a plane and fly it into a building to kill a target and they aren't a terrorist. Interesting. Even if we don't label them a terrorist it is still important to stop that kind of attack just as much as the jihad attacks. But then again, what do you expect from someone who contradicts themselves like:

shrubber said:
I read the entire thread....can you show me where someone said
"that only people with Arabic Muslim names can be terrorists"???????

shrubber said:
My statement that ONLY people with Muslim names have engaged in these terrorist attacks against US airlines is true.

It is a complex problem that requires complex solutions and not just a glance at a name and decision based on the sound of the name.
 
Huh? Someone trying to kill the most powerful person in the world is not a terrorist? Why? Is there some minimum number of deaths or intended deaths before an attack is considered terrorism? PLEASE keep us apprised of your travel plans.

I read about Lee Harvy Oswald as being a terrorist all the time.
 
Wrong. Richard Reid IS Richard Reid's name, and he attacked an American airline. That he happened to adopt additional names at various points in his lifetime does not make those his names. One can only have a single legal name.

Some American airlines hijacked, i.e. attacked/overtaken by terrorists:
November 24, 1968: Luis Armando Pena Soltren, Jose Rafael Rios Cruz and Miguel Castro coerced the pilot of Pan American Flight 281 out of New York's John F. Kennedy Airport.
March 17, 1970: Eastern Air Lines Shuttle Flight 1320, carrying passengers from Newark to Boston was hijacked around 7:30 P.M. by John J. Divivo who was armed with a .38 caliber revolver.
November 24, 1971: A man who became known as D. B. Cooper hijacked Northwest Orient flight 305, a Boeing 727-100 aircraft flying from Portland, OR, to Seattle, WA.
January 12, 1972: Braniff Flight 38, a Boeing 727, was hijacked as it departed Houston, Texas bound for Dallas, Texas. The lone armed hijacker, Billy Gene Hurst, Jr.
January 28, 1972: TWA Flight 2, Los Angeles to New York, was hijacked by con man and bank robber Garrett Trapnell.
1994: FedEx Flight 705 hijacked by disgruntled employee Auburn Calloway as it left Memphis, Tennessee, with the intention of using it as a cruise missile against FedEx HQ.

Not a single Muslim name among them.

How silly of me
You mean those that happened in the 1970!
Like, when you could still smoke on a plane?
Anybody from this century?
Again, if somebody waved a stick in front of Wilbur Wright you could say "oohh looky a terrorist' but, like now, you would be wrong.
 
Exactly. Not to mention that terrorists aren't stupid. If we start to profile only people with Muslim names, something said, denied, then stated again by the poster you quoted, more of them will just change their names. It isn't all that hard to do. It is also very backward thinking. To think that because something happened one way in the past doesn't mean it will continue to happen that way in the future. Security needs to be forward thinking and proactive, not reactive
.
Did I deny that? you are continuing to put words in my mouth which is not helpful in this discussion.
Heck, a group of 10 terrorists would only need one person with a westernized name in their group to thwart the profile. The 9 with the Muslim names could have nothing on them and sit there getting a body cavity search and nothing would happen. The one person with a changed name or the one American born member with an "American" name could have all the equipment but since we don't care about his behavior and only his name he gets through fine (assuming he beats the scans).

Who said 'we don't care about his behavior'? Again you seem to be twisting things here
Meanwhile, looking at behavior we have can observe all of them acting suspiciously. That, along with the increased chance that the machines will pick up the danger make me feel much safer than just pulling everyone who fits a narrow definition over and searching them. It's just too easy to change the superficial. The recent terrorists have also had dark hair and eyes. If we used that as criteria some colored contracts and hair dye would be all that is needed to trick us.

See above, I agree with you, Including profiling based on name in conjunction with other security measures only makes sense.
We have had home grown terrorists in the past and there will be more. If we use names to profile the targets will just change them, if we use race they will recruit people who either aren't or don't look the race we are profiling, if we profile country of origin they will recruit from countries we aren't flagging as a problem. If we profile behavior it isn't so simple. Sure, people could learn to trick us just like they do psychologists and lie detectors, but it wouldn't be so easy. When you use something superficial and easily changeable as screening criteria it will just get changed.

Very true, but why deny the commonality of all these attackers?

If the poster had bothered to do any research he/she would have learned that the intent of Byck was to hijack the plane and fly it into the White House. So someone wants to hijack a plane and fly it into a building to kill a target and they aren't a terrorist. Interesting. Even if we don't label them a terrorist it is still important to stop that kind of attack just as much as the jihad attacks. But then again, what do you expect from someone who contradicts themselves like:

Byck was an attempted assasin. So John Hinckly Jr. is a terrorist by your definition I suppose?
It is a complex problem that requires complex solutions and not just a glance at a name and decision based on the sound of the name
.

I agree!
 
I think that I'm back to driving. You see, I agree with you. I don't have the right to travel by plane but I do have the right to reject travel by plane if it causes me discomfort.

It's not just the scanners. It's the lines, the tiny seats, taking away one comfort item after another, losing luggage, delays and just generally being a pain. I do hope that the electronic scanner is used someday though. That would make at least me a little happier with flying.

I wonder if I'm the only person who is just about fed up with flying in general? :confused3

Flying to me Plano has always been sort of a necessary evil. :goodvibes
I'm 50'ish so I remember back before airlines were deregulated, flying was horrible expensive. The average american just did not pop on a plane to go 600 miles, the way we do now. Service was probably higher on the list. Have you ever seen those old commericials? Big wide seats, gourmet meals. skycaps for your luggage. That came at a price.
I went to college at the University of Pittsburgh and the cost to fly from Pgh to NYC (my home town) was astronomical. Easy 300-400 bucks and this was in the early 70's. No way could we afford some thing like that regularly.

Now, people almost feel that flying is a constitutional right. ;) It's quick and with the advent of discount airlines some times it can be down right economical. Before, a family of 4 to go from NJ to Orlando would drive to save money. now thanks to SW or airtran, 600 bucks and my entire family is there in 2 hours. No kids screaming in the car, no stopping every so many hours. No finding places to eat. You get the picture.

I think flying has changed to accomadate US. Kids now routinely have european destinations as senior trips, all possible due to flying. Spring Break in Cancun Mexico is almost a god given right to many college kids courtesy of flying.

I can't even think of limiting myself by saying I'm going to stick to driving. All the places I won't see. Nah IMO it is a necessary evil.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrubber
I read the entire thread....can you show me where someone said
"that only people with Arabic Muslim names can be terrorists"???????

Quote:
Originally Posted by shrubber
My statement that ONLY people with Muslim names have engaged in these terrorist attacks against US airlines is true.
[/B]


.

Perhaps if you reread those posts you can realize that they are not contradictory. Quite the oppposite. I think you already know that though.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE







New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top