TSA pat downs and body scans

[Zeb_Carter]

Irrelevant post. You're the one who claimed they couldn't do that. I don't have to prove a negative on that.

And of course the media is smart enough to do that. You can't have it both ways, Zeb. Accuse them of being diabolically clever and then deny that out of the other side of your mouth.

You're just the typical reactionary, recutting everything to serve your hatred-based world view.

P.S: I see that JackL answered your question--with graphic evidence--an hour before you asked me this question. Perhaps it isn't the media you should be looking at as not too smart.

And as usually you can read. I never said they couldn't...I said they wouldn't be able to without a ticket. And I'm the reactionary one. Asshole.

 

[sr71plt]

And as usually you can read. I never said they couldn't...I said they wouldn't be able to without a ticket. And I'm the reactionary one. Asshole.

Ah, then the problem is that your mind can't comprehend what your hand writes.

This is the direct quote of what you wrote: "the news orgs can only talk to the people before they get groped." And this was constructed to claim the media was being dishonest by only interviewing people before the scan. The wording of your statement was quite clear in what your charge was. You can try to be as mealymouthed about what you were up to as you like. You were caught in it.

"Can only" seems pretty explanatory to me.

If the media can get to the other side of the line (and JackL gave you a picture showing a member of the media getting her pat down so she could get to the other side and report on the experience), your original supposition falls flat.

And your turning it back on me as an assumption on my part that they'd go through the checks and get to the other side to interview other passengers was answered for you by JackL an hour and a half before you challenged me (duh).

This is all an illustration of how you hate-motivated reactionaries manufacture "evidence" to "prove" your points. A name was given to this insidious activity some years ago. It's call swiftboating. You do this thinking you fool people--but you're the only fools who you fool.

 

[amicus]

"The 'Pat-Down' Presidency..."

Heard that on the news, CNN, I think, so I can't claim it as my own.

There have been dozens of disgruntled passengers, before and after the act; one in particular, a very attractive brunette: "I usually don't let guys get to second base in the passenger line"

Also heard, but not confirmed, that fortunes are being made through the companies that manufacture the Scanner is question, and that lobbyist's in Congress are spreading money like manure to keep the enterprise fertile.

I predict the TSA, aka the Obama administration, will back down, both on the machines and the invasive fondling passing for a 'pat down'.

We shall see...

Amicus

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Ah, then the problem is that your mind can't comprehend what your hand writes.

This is the direct quote of what you wrote: "the news orgs can only talk to the people before they get groped." And this was constructed to claim the media was being dishonest by only interviewing people before the scan. The wording of your statement was quite clear in what your charge was. You can try to be as mealymouthed about what you were up to as you like. You were caught in it.

"Can only" seems pretty explanatory to me.

If the media can get to the other side of the line (and JackL gave you a picture showing a member of the media getting her pat down so she could get to the other side and report on the experience), your original supposition falls flat.

And your turning it back on me as an assumption on my part that they'd go through the checks and get to the other side to interview other passengers was answered for you by JackL an hour and a half before you challenged me (duh).

This is all an illustration of how you hate-motivated reactionaries manufacture "evidence" to "prove" your points. A name was given to this insidious activity some years ago. It's call swiftboating. You do this thinking you fool people--but you're the only fools who you fool.

That's because you're an asshat without a hat so that just makes you an ass.

Taking things out of context has been your MO since you got here. Keep it up asshat without a hat, it just shows everyone how intelligent you're not.

 

[Pure]

one can't take the alleged concerns of amicus, zeb, etc, very seriously. in every previous case of civil rights, vs. fighting terrorism, they had not a single problem. arrest without warrants; being held without charges; denial of access to the court system; american citizens denied habeus corpus, and let's not forget torture.

that they talk of patdowns is pure Fox new rabble rousing. ask yourself: does a guy like amicus who is happy to see an american citizen in jail for years without charges and trial, who's happy to see waterboarding, etc, REALLY care if your junk is touched by airport security guards?

I wish all these 'land of the free" and 'don't tread on me folks' hadn't crawled into the woodwork for 8 or more years, prior to their present tizzy. these "libertarians" seem active only when their favored party is NOT in power. in truth, ami, zeb, and the like are died-in-the-wool statists, who are happy with arbitrary exercize of executive and federal authority so long as it fits with their alleged patriotic goals.

 

[amicus]

Pure has been beating the dead horse of 'waterboarding' for years now, as a violation of the civil rights of enemy combatants from foreign countries that have no standing in American Courts.

There is another ethical/moral equation that Pure will not comprehend, or if so, deny it. If I captured a member of a terrorist cell holding one of my children, I wouldn't blink an eye at pulling out the fingernails of the terrorist one at a time until I broke him.

When a human being commits an atrocity against another human being, the criminal loses whatever civil rights a free society protects. We put them in jail, sometimes for life, we execute them, in some States, we deal with criminals as if they were criminals and not just misguided, abused children who grew up with a chip on their shoulders or who have been brainwashed by a brutal and inhumane religion like Islam.

If anything, based on previous Posts, Pure should be outraged at the violation of fourth amendment rights in the airport X-Ray machines and the invasive fondling of breasts and genitals in the pat down procedure.

It is also important to view this in context: all the security procedures for the past nine years are a direct result of Islamic Terrorist, here, there and everywhere around the world.

And yet Pure continues the pathetic apologies for terrorist brutality.

Go figure!

Amicus

 

[Pure]

ani: It is also important to view this in context: all the security procedures for the past nine years are a direct result of Islamic Terrorist, here, there and everywhere around the world.

logic, dear ami: if this is presented as a justification, which it seems to be, then surely it applies to pat downs as well as all the nastier things i've mentioned, like holding american citizens on american soil without charging them.

your libertarianism on privacy matters is entirely new found-- i challenge you to mention a single measure undertaken in the US during the Bush years, which you protested. examples would be wiretaps without judicial or the standard national security authorization.

 

[amicus]

ani: [I]It is also important to view this in context: all the security procedures for the past nine years are a direct result of Islamic Terrorist, here, there and everywhere around the world.

logic, dear ami: if this is presented as a justification, which it seems to be, then surely it applies to pat downs as well as all the nastier things i've mentioned, like holding american citizens on american soil without charging them.

your libertarianism on privacy matters is entirely new found-- i challenge you to mention a single measure undertaken in the US during the Bush years, which you protested. examples would be wiretaps without judicial or the standard national security authorization.[/[/I]QUOTE]

~~~

Since 9/11 there have been no successful terrorist attacks on American soil. Thus, one must conclude that the policies to protect America were successful and I am duty bound to support the methods used to secure a nation.

Unlike the Liberals, I welcome your objections and even those of the ACLU, to defend civil rights as you understand them. Check and Balance is the mainstay of American government.

Researching for an upcoming novel of mine, I found a surprising amount of intelligence data on the internet. There is hard evidence that terrorists, weapons, plastique explosives, PETN, and others, Rocket Propelled Grenades, Surface to Air missiles, even radioactive materials are coming in from both our Northern border with Canada and our Southern Border, as long as coastal areas along both coasts.

Sometime in the near future you will be confronted with the necessity to consider just what actions the US government can take to protect the citizens, which is its' primary constitutional obligation of the highest order.

If you could but grasp the central concept, documented time and time again, that Islam has declared war on all western societies, and that no atrocity is beneath Islamic terrorists in their Jihad.

An honest man, a nation with integrity, when forced to defend themselves, are at a disadvantage because a free nation worships human life. Osama Bin Lauden himself flaunted that as an advantage, "The US cherishes Life, We cherish Death"

That is why millions of American households are incorporating surveillance systems in their homes and more and more are arming themselves.\

You come on my property to steal and perhaps rape and murder? Don't doubt for an instant that I will take your life in any way I can.

I will.

Amicus

 

[3113]

TSA says only 3% pat-downs

So, TSA is now saying that the pat-downs have been blown way out of proportion (bold mine):

TSA aims to ease passengers' worries
Most people won't be subjected to full-body scans or pat-downs at airport security, the government says in an effort to counter widely circulated Internet videos of screenings gone wrong.

Reporting from Washington and Los Angeles — As the busy Thanksgiving travel days approach, government officials went on the offensive Monday to quell passenger complaints about full-body scans and aggressive pat-downs at airports, saying the hype swirling around a few highly publicized cases does not reflect the reality of the new safety inspections.

In the first two weeks after the enhanced screening measures began Nov. 1, the Department of Homeland Security said about 700 of an estimated 28 million airline passengers lodged complaints with the Transportation Security Administration. The TSA released a public service announcement Monday with advice for travelers, emphasizing that the pat-downs are rare — involving 3% of all airline passengers — and that travelers can request that they be done in a private room.

Of the passengers asked to submit to a full-body scan, 1% have chosen to instead undergo a pat-down, which includes TSA agents using their hands to check sensitive areas such as the groin and bra area.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Yep, you betcha, sure, I believe dat, yahey there.

 

[sr71plt]

That's because you're an asshat without a hat so that just makes you an ass.

Taking things out of context has been your MO since you got here. Keep it up asshat without a hat, it just shows everyone how intelligent you're not.

I can see why you are having a tizzy fit. Got caught with your muckraker pants down again.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I can see why you are having a tizzy fit. Got caught with your muckraker pants down again.

As the number of people as a whole rises so does the number subjected to getting their pants pulled down.

So approx. 2 million people fly per day in the US, that's 30,000 people per day who get groped. As a percentage of the total it appears to be insignificant, but if you are in the 30,000 it doesn't. That's almost as many TSA agents employed the the Federal Govmit.

 

[3113]

So approx. 2 million people fly per day in the US, that's 30,000 people per day who get groped. As a percentage of the total it appears to be insignificant, but if you are in the 30,000 it doesn't.

Ah, but there are something like 14,000 airports in the U.S. That means that only 2-3 people per airport per day get groped. Meaning the likelihood of your being groped really is pretty insignificant.

 

[sr71plt]

As the number of people as a whole rises so does the number subjected to getting their pants pulled down.

So approx. 2 million people fly per day in the US, that's 30,000 people per day who get groped. As a percentage of the total it appears to be insignificant, but if you are in the 30,000 it doesn't. That's almost as many TSA agents employed the the Federal Govmit.

The relevance to anything I've posted here is what, exactly?

 

[sr71plt]

Ah, but there are something like 14,000 airports in the U.S. That means that only 2-3 people per airport per day get groped. Meaning the likelihood of your being groped really is pretty insignificant.

You can be sure he's safe from me groping him.

 

[Alley881]

Is it bad?

Is it bad that I knod of get turned on by the thought of being groped in public in an airport by someone I don't know?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Is it bad that I knod of get turned on by the thought of being groped in public in an airport by someone I don't know?

Yes. You need a spanking now.

 

[wet_special]

The 'Pat-Down' Presidency...

Haha, I like it. There's no mistaking that this TSA business is really at the bidding of the executive branch. It gives the media something to talk about while he gets caught with his pants down in the rest of his foreign policy from Kabul to Seoul. What a joke this administration is.

What we need are TSA agents who aren't looking for water bottles, but are in fact looking for TERRORISTS. In order to do this, they need to look granny in the eye and say "Ma'am, where are you headed today?" "Who are you going to see?" Get some answers. Look at their background. Talk. Profile. It's what they do in Israel.

If you don't speak English well enough to answer the questions, scanner booth or pat down is probably still not in order. Reason being, if you ARE a terrorist, the scanner/pat down really probably won't foil whatever plot they have.

And let's not forget the Christmas Bomber was on a terror no fly list to Great Britain. So before we get to the groin checks how bout some assurance the TSA is doing their best to really screen passengers before it comes to pat-downs for vast numbers of people who obviously are no threat.

If you have any doubt as to whether the TSA used common sense while writing these rules, ask yourself why pilots, who don't need box cutters or bombs or bottles of shampoo to make that plane go splat, are forced to get the same security treatment as passengers.

 

[Guest]

*deleted*

 

[amicus]

The TSA Director, Pistole, stated on television yesterday that the procedures would apply to everyone, not the mythical three percent someone posted.

Even so, just one person being sexually molested in an airport is sufficient reason to challenge the TSA and the administration over this gross violation of personal privacy rights.

Where the fuck is that ubiquitous ACLU who sues at the drop of a scented hanky?

Amicus

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Ah, but there are something like 14,000 airports in the U.S. That means that only 2-3 people per airport per day get groped. Meaning the likelihood of your being groped really is pretty insignificant.

But the distribution of that 30,000 is not even. The bigger the airport the more people get groped and/or scanned. Therefore it's not 2-3 per airport. There is a mathematical formula to produce a number or groped at each of the 14,000 airports across the nation, but I don't have it handy. Also the smaller, yet big enough to be counted, county facilities procedures would be significantly less stringent as most flight are private aircraft.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I just wish I'd been groped the last time I flew, instead of the bag checker making me toss my brand new bottle of Aveeno moisturizer with lavender, chamomile and ylang ylang.

Bummer.

Come on down to Texas...I'll grope you.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Come on down to Texas...I'll grope you.

And grab hold of some moldy truck nutz up her skirt. Maybe I have her confused with STELLA.

 

[JackLuis]

The terrible thing is that it is all unnecessary. The TSA uses horridly inefficient screening tactics, but that is the way of a bureaucracy.

The Israelis, shake their heads at "Those Stupid Americans" and they are correct.

Obama should appoint a new TSA head to change tactics and establish measurable goals. Continuing the retched excess of poor tactics is counter productive.

 

[CharleyH]

So we here at Lit are generally fond of groping, but is the TSA's approach false security or will it truly help?

The USA is over-reacting, as usual. Bunch of cry-babies.