More American Hypocrisy

[DMX7]

So we're willing to send our troops out to the deserts of the middle east to die for our "freedoms" and "safety", but we're not willing to go through a full body scan at the airport to protect our "safety".

[Wild Cobra]

So we're willing to send our troops out to the deserts of the middle east to die for our "freedoms" and "safety", but we're not willing to go through a full body scan at the airport to protect our "safety".
The problem of using an airliner as a missile has been solved.

Really now. When they want to scan pilots also, what does that tell you. the pilot, locked in the cockpit, can do more damage than any terrorist getting an explosive on board.

The excuse that anyone can be forced is bullshit. We can never be 100% safe, so when does this authoritarianism stop? They are going too far, and anyone who agrees with the TSA has lost touch.

In the case of almost everything this administration is doing, the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.

[George Gervin's Afro]

The problem of using an airliner as a missile has been solved.

Really now. When they want to scan pilots also, what does that tell you. the pilot, locked in the cockpit, can do more damage than any terrorist getting an explosive on board.

The excuse that anyone can be forced is bullshit. We can never be 100% safe, so when does this authoritarianism stop? They are going too far, and anyone who agrees with the TSA has lost touch.

In the case of almost everything this administration is doing, the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.

Sincerley,

The team that stood by when Bush ran roughshod over civil liberties post 9/11

[Wild Cobra]

Sincerley,

The team that stood by when Bush ran roughshod over civil liberties post 9/11
You're an absolute moore-on if you can't distinguish the vast differences.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You're an absolute moore-on if you can't distinguish the vast differences.


The problem of using an airliner as a missile has been solved.


So tell me genious..how do we know if someone has a bomb in their underwear? Look for the pilot to step in?

[DMX7]

The problem of using an airliner as a missile has been solved.

That's been solved or it just hasn't happened since 9/11? Besides, that's hardly the main threat these days.

You're the one who has lost touched if you think airport scanners are part of an Obama authoritarian bureaucratic conspiracy.

[Wild Cobra]

That's been solved or it just hasn't happened since 9/11? Besides, that's hardly the main threat these days.

You're the one who has lost touched if you think airport scanners are part of an Obama authoritarian bureaucratic conspiracy.
Scanning like they are scanning was never attempted before. This is outrageous. How can you condone such violations of anyone at random without probable cause?

Do you have any concept of what probable cause is?

[DMX7]

There is no violation. We CHOOSE to fly; therefore we knowing submit to these scans for the safety of everyone onboard. Probably cause here is irrelevant.

[Wild Cobra]

There is no violation. We CHOOSE to fly; therefore we knowing submit to these scans for the safety of everyone onboard. Probably cause here is irrelevant.
You are being foolish in the way you are rationalizing your authoritarianism. If you wish to make that argument about something that the public in mass uses, then why not for public transportation also?

Where does your authoritarianism stop? Where do we draw the line if it isn't probable cause? What about employers? Do they get to use this technology on their employees?

I have to either assume you want to burn the constitution, or you are a pervert working for the TSA.

[DMX7]

You are being foolish in the way that you are rationalizing your bodily embarrassment as authoritarianism.

[boutons_deux]

More American Hypocrisy, namely:

Even with the bullshit TSA doing security since 9/11, there have been ZERO NADA US airliners hijacked, aka, a perfect record.

So what is to be improved upon by hassling Americans forever with this scanning and groping charade?

Dammit, you frickin conservatives hate government but love government to bugger its citizens. Bend over, asshole.

[Wild Cobra]

You are being foolish in the way that you are rationalizing your bodily embrasssment as authoritarianism.
Where do you draw the line?

[Wild Cobra]

More American Hypocrisy, namely:

Even with the bullshit TSA doing security since 9/11, there have been ZERO NADA US airliners hijacked, aka, a perfect record.

So what is to improved upon by hassling Americans forever with this scanning and groping charade?

Dammit, you frickin conservatives hate government but love government to bugger its citizens. Bend over, asshole.
If you watched Fox News, you'd see it's the conservatives that are steamed about this.

[DMX7]

If you watched Fox News, you'd see it's the conservatives that are steamed about this.

Yeah, and pretty much none of those conservatives would be steamed if these scans were being applied only to all Muslims... or anyone who isn't white.

[boutons_deux]

If you watched Fox News, you'd see it's the conservatives that are steamed about this.

If dubya were Pres, Fox's lying propagandists would support TSA harassments and yell down anybody who objected as "soft of national security"

[TeyshaBlue]

If dubya were Pres, Fox's lying propagandists would support TSA harassments and yell down anybody who objected as "soft of national security"

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/DaveBowman.jpg

[DarrinS]

Number of bad guys captured or killed by US military: too numerous to list


Number of bad guys stopped by TSA: Zero



But, nice thread.

[DMX7]

Number of bad guys captured or killed by US military: too numerous to list


Number of bad guys stopped by TSA: Zero



But, nice thread.

Number of strawman arguments made by DarrinS: too numerous to list


Number of time he's made a good point: Zero



But, thanks. :lol

[Blake]

number of youtubes used to attempt to make a point....

[DarrinS]

When all else fails, bitch about youtubes.

[Blake]

When all else fails, bitch about youtubes.

when youtubes fail, post more youtubes

[DarrinS]

when youtubes fail, post more youtubes


youtube smack is lamer than grammar smack

[Blake]

youtube smack is lamer than grammar smack

I don't think so. I don't know anyone that tries to use grammar to make a point.

You tend to use youtubes.....or in this case, strawmen.

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah, and pretty much none of those conservatives would be steamed if these scans were being applied only to all Muslims... or anyone who isn't white.
Wrong.

They are even more steamed that it appears that the Muslims get a free pass on the topic, being afraid of appearing to profile.

Ever see this applied to someone who looks Muslim?

[Wild Cobra]

I'm avoiding your question
For the third time, where do you draw the line?

[LnGrrrR]

If you watched Fox News, you'd see it's the conservatives that are steamed about this.

As is that group that you hate, the ACLU. I guess they're all conservatives now.

[Parker2112]

So we're willing to send our troops out to the deserts of the middle east to die for our "freedoms" and "safety", but we're not willing to go through a full body scan at the airport to protect our "safety".


People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither.

Dont be such a chickenhead, DMX. You dont need a Big Brother Big Govt to keep you safe, little buddy. You need to accept the risks that come in life...and keep hold of what little freedom you and yours still have.

Doesnt the mafia charge for "protection" too? Didnt Hitler claim he would make the people safe with a strong military? Sacrificing freedom for safety aint always a good thing.

And I hear you sayin: But Parker....That would never happen in the US!

Man, just wait until some serious shit goes down...a run on the banks, a mass outbreak, a major terror attack, and you will see just how capable our govt is of trampling the shit out of the constitution to make us safe.

You love our country? Then stand up for the Constitution, because thats the only thing that seperates us from tyrannical govt and third world conditions.

[TheSullyMonster]

Holy shit, I'm agreeing with WC.

You know something is fucked up when everybody across the entire political spectrum is in an uproar.

[DMX7]

Dont be such a chickenhead, DMX. You dont need a Big Brother Big Govt to keep you safe, little buddy. You need to accept the risks that come in life...and keep hold of what little freedom you and yours still have.

Doesnt the mafia charge for "protection" too? Didnt Hitler claim he would make the people safe with a strong military? Sacrificing freedom for safety aint always a good thing.

And I hear you sayin: But Parker....That would never happen in the US!

Man, just wait until some serious shit goes down...a run on the banks, a mass outbreak, a major terror attack, and you will see just how capable our govt is of trampling the shit out of the constitution to make us safe.

You love our country? Then stand up for the Constitution, because thats the only thing that seperates us from tyrannical govt and third world conditions.

You've just equated CHOOSING to fly and go through an airport scanner with SACRIFICING MY FREEDOM.

You must be kidding.

Maybe you should think about that for a little while longer. Let that sink in.

[Stringer_Bell]

Scanning like they are scanning was never attempted before. This is outrageous. How can you condone such violations of anyone at random without probable cause?

Do you have any concept of what probable cause is?

As if Bush's handlers didn't want to do the same things? I mean seriously, we gotta put liquids in little travel sizes and in plastic bags when the same small amounts could take a 747 out of the sky. It's all about control, always has been, but "conservatives" act like it only got real bad after Obama.

I flew for 24+ hours this week, didn't have a single problem with anything I saw or was instructed to do, and although I didn't get jacked off by the TSA I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's our choice to fly. The time to be outraged was 8 years ago, now I'm just waiting for house to house searches to start so I have a new level of outrage to reach. As for this shit coming up the last month or so, I'm not sweating this.

[baseline bum]

That's been solved or it just hasn't happened since 9/11? Besides, that's hardly the main threat these days.

You're the one who has lost touched if you think airport scanners are part of an Obama authoritarian bureaucratic conspiracy.


Scanning like they are scanning was never attempted before. This is outrageous. How can you condone such violations of anyone at random without probable cause?


Wrong. This shit started under Bush's watch.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local&id=6086658
New full-body scanner at LAX
Thursday, April 17, 2008
By Amy Powell

LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (KABC) -- Finding hidden weapons and possible explosives just got a little easier for security screeners at Los Angeles International Airport.

On Thursday, LAX will start using a controversial full-body image scanning machine.


Passengers are certainly used to getting screened for security reasons, but the idea of the kind of intimate exposure that comes with this new scanner is just too much for some.

It's a body scanning machine that virtually allows security officials to look underneath the clothing of passengers. The millimeter wave, full-body imaging system produces a 3-dimensional black-and-white image that reveals detailed outlines of every body part.

TSA screeners will view the images from a remote, enclosed area. Transportation Security officials at LAX say the scanner will give screeners another means of searching for weapons and explosives.

Even though the faces of passengers are blurred and the images are immediately deleted, advocates for passenger rights say the body scan could be too revealing and even degrading to travelers. The scanners are drawing some strong reaction.

"This is the United States, and it doesn't feel like freedom to me, so. It's an invasion of privacy. You know, there's no trust anymore," said Keith Dolnick, airline passenger.

"A little bit uncertain, I mean, it is a little bit uneasy feeling to think that they're going to be seeing everything. There should be a better way to do it, but I don't know if it's anymore invasive than getting patted down or anything else really, so yeah. So whatever you need to do to keep us safe," said

LAX will unveil the new body scanning machine at Terminal 5 Thursday afternoon.

[Obstructed_View]

Scanning like they are scanning was never attempted before. This is outrageous. How can you condone such violations of anyone at random without probable cause?

Do you have any concept of what probable cause is?

Do you have any concept of the fact that flying is a privilege, not a right? Furthermore, do you have any concept of the fact that WE ARE AT FUCKING WAR?

289 people and their families dodged a fucking bullet on Christmas last year. Did you forget already? You should be on your knees thanking your personal God that the government actually moved with some speed to learn from that mistake and make sure it doesn't happen again.

[Parker2112]

You've just equated CHOOSING to fly and go through an airport scanner with SACRIFICING MY FREEDOM.

You must be kidding.

Maybe you should think about that for a little while longer. Let that sink in.

Did you choose to initiate the advanced screening measures on yourself too? :lol

Lots of people were ready to turn over their civil liberties when 9/11 happened too. Now we know what a HUGE fucking mistake that was. wakedafuckup, sleepy head.

Of course you can CHOOSE to relenquish your freedoms. Does that make it wise? Is it worth it for a small peace of mind? Does that preserve the Constitution? Does that preserve the American way? Does that KEEP US FREE? Hell fucking no. Its not worth it.

While you are ready to turn over your right to be free of tyrannical govt pushing you around like a bitch and telling you whats good for you, think about that quote from Franklin. REAALLLY LET IT SINK IN.

Thats where the thinking needs to be done. You have the right to relent, of course your free to do that. But does it serve America? Does it make you a responsible upstanding American? Hell Fucking no it doesnt. It makes you a traitor to the freedoms that our founders bestowed you with. You turn your back on those freedoms for a little bit more security...how does that shit go again? Oh yeah....

[Parker2112]

Originally Posted by Ben Franklin
People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither.

[Parker2112]

in other words, you deserve to be the govts bitch

[Parker2112]

You have the right to relent, of course your free to do that. But does it serve America? Does it make you a responsible upstanding American? Hell Fucking no it doesnt. It makes you a traitor to the freedoms that our founders bestowed you with.

[Obstructed_View]

Which amendment deals with the right to fly on a plane without being searched again? I hope some of you civil libertarians have been railing against those intrusive x-rays on your carry-on baggage and those snoopy metal detectors all these years. :lol

[DMX7]

Did you choose to initiate the advanced screening measures on yourself too?


I chose to allow them to initiate the advanced screening measures on me. Big fucking deal. :lol

[boutons_deux]

The ENTIRE JUSTIIFICATION for this is a SINGLE INCOMPETENT underwear bomber ...

from overseas!!

How does xraying and groping AMERICANS in the USA stop underwear bombers from overseas?

Are Europeans and other countries xraying and groping every flyer to the USA?

Americans are fucking craven balless chickenshits, America is insane.

[DMX7]

You only get groped if you're too much of a pussy to go through the damn scanner.

[boutons_deux]

Answer the question, mofo:

How does xraying and groping AMERICANS in the USA stop underwear bombers from overseas?

Pussies are chickenshit men who don't have enough balls or sense to refuse to have their dicks and balls exposed and groped.

[Wild Cobra]

Holy shit, I'm agreeing with WC.

You know something is fucked up when everybody across the entire political spectrum is in an uproar.
We simply agree this is on the wrong side of clear line of lacking probable cause.

[Wild Cobra]

Wrong. This shit started under Bush's watch.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local&id=6086658
New full-body scanner at LAX
Thursday, April 17, 2008
By Amy Powell

LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (KABC) -- Finding hidden weapons and possible explosives just got a little easier for security screeners at Los Angeles International Airport.

On Thursday, LAX will start using a controversial full-body image scanning machine.
If I recall, this wasn't used as a random screening, or requiring the very personal pat downs. It was only used when something else set off the system like a metal detector, as an alternate method. Even then, I think it was shot down and not implemented that Thursday.

More than two years ago... I remember hearing about it, just not the exact details. Still, it was not as they are using them today.

[Wild Cobra]

Do you have any concept of the fact that flying is a privilege, not a right? Furthermore, do you have any concept of the fact that WE ARE AT FUCKING WAR?
I've made that same argument on other topics. Thing is, flying is required for some things these days. I take it you agree driving, health care, etc. are not rights?

289 people and their families dodged a fucking bullet on Christmas last year. Did you forget already? You should be on your knees thanking your personal God that the government actually moved with some speed to learn from that mistake and make sure it doesn't happen again.
That's why I ask DMX where he draws the line. Still no answer. If we are spend so much money for a possible 200+ people dying in an attack, where do you draw the line?

Subway systems...

Major bridges, tunnels...

Trains...

Malls...

If that is your argument, that 200 or 300 people *might* die, then where do you draw the line? Why not just put everyone who goes into any public place of 100 people or more go through the same screenings?

Please stop being a sheeple, and think of the farther implications if we allow it. They will expand it over other aspects of our lives if we don't stop them.

[LnGrrrR]

We simply agree this is on the wrong side of clear line of lacking probable cause.

As DMX mentioned, probable cause is usually more related to being arrested/law enforcement type function.

The only way it MIGHT play in is that the government controls security for all airlines, and so in order to fly, the American taxpayer MUST submit to being searched. (The whole "well you can drive instead" argument is poor, as it doesn't deal with the underlying constitutionality of the pat-down procedures).

[Wild Cobra]

How does xraying and groping AMERICANS in the USA stop underwear bombers from overseas?

It doesn't. Someone will just hide it up their ass instead. This does no fucking good unless we are going to perform body cavity searches on everyone.

[LnGrrrR]

Do you have any concept of the fact that flying is a privilege, not a right? Furthermore, do you have any concept of the fact that WE ARE AT FUCKING WAR?

289 people and their families dodged a fucking bullet on Christmas last year. Did you forget already? You should be on your knees thanking your personal God that the government actually moved with some speed to learn from that mistake and make sure it doesn't happen again.

I'm not a big fan of using the "We're at War!" card to justify any and all programs aimed against terrrorism. Same with the "the terrorists are out there!" angle.

Look, we will never be 100% safe and secure. Bad things will happen, no matter how much we try to prevent them.

The question should be, are these scanners useful? Do they work at preventing terrorist threats? And do they work WELL ENOUGH that it is acceptable for Americans to allow government to x-ray them/see them nude?

I don't think that's a crazy argument to be having. Some people are ok with the scanners, some people aren't.

[LnGrrrR]

Please stop being a sheeple, and think of the farther implications if we allow it. They will expand it over other aspects of our lives if we don't stop them.

And this is the same argument I made to you about wiretapping... which you accepted as necessary to prevent terrorists from attacking us. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

As DMX mentioned, probable cause is usually more related to being arrested/law enforcement type function.

The only way it MIGHT play in is that the government controls security for all airlines, and so in order to fly, the American taxpayer MUST submit to being searched. (The whole "well you can drive instead" argument is poor, as it doesn't deal with the underlying constitutionality of the pat-down procedures).
The TSA is an extension of the federal government:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Now with civil liberties we acknowledge about disenfranchising people, curtailing activites, etc...

What about the arguments used about not requiring proof of citizenship to vote, because you might disenfranchise someone?

Can we stay consistent with themes, or at least change a reasoniing over reasonable purposes?

I'll ask you the same thing I asked DMX. Where do you draw the line. If you say this screening is OK for the slim chance a plot will kill 200+ people on an airplane, what about subways, malls, buildings, etc. where more than 200 people are at risk of the same thing?

We are letting the terrorists win. We are falling into that trap of being terrorized... We have to let this unfounded fear let go, else we acknowledge victory to them.

[Wild Cobra]

The question should be, are these scanners useful? Do they work at preventing terrorist threats? And do they work WELL ENOUGH that it is acceptable for Americans to allow government to x-ray them/see them nude?

Then you are OK with everyone going into a mall go through these scanners to. You would be all for that in the name of security, wouldn't you?

[Wild Cobra]

And this is the same argument I made to you about wiretapping... which you accepted as necessary to prevent terrorists from attacking us. :lol
The wiretapping issue is different. they use probable cause. they don't with this. If they used probable cause, I would be OK with it.

[baseline bum]

I wonder if Obstructed View would like to be scanned naked and/or patted down every time he went to the grocery store if some jackass blew himself up at a Wal-Mart? What about at McDonalds? The Spurs games? What about a college class held in a large lecture hall? Every trip to the mall? How about everyday going to work if it's in a big corporate campus or large office building? How about when you go to the DMV? Every one of those places a terrorist could kill a lot of people pretty easily.

[Duff McCartney]

Man, just wait until some serious shit goes down...a run on the banks, a mass outbreak, a major terror attack, and you will see just how capable our govt is of trampling the shit out of the constitution to make us safe.

That already happened after 9/11 and the previous administration did more to erode civil liberties in this country than any administration before or after.

But I laugh when I hear you talk about tyranny. I literally LOL. As if to think Americans would know the first or the last thing about tyranny. There will never be any tyranny and we're not even close to it in this country.

You can still go down the street and buy your cheeseburgers, play the lottery, and sit on the couch and watch television.

[Duff McCartney]

I wonder if Obstructed View would like to be scanned naked and/or patted down every time he went to the grocery store if some jackass blew himself up at a Wal-Mart? What about at McDonalds? The Spurs games? What about a college class held in a large lecture hall? Every trip to the mall? How about everyday going to work if it's in a big corporate campus or large office building? How about when you go to the DMV? Every one of those places a terrorist could kill a lot of people pretty easily.

That would probably happen if there was a terrorist attack at one of those places. But there hasn't been. And you know what? If an attack did happen at one of these places, all these conservatives would be in an uproar about why we didn't have better security at said place.

I can see the argument that some people might think it's an intrusion upon their liberties, I guess. But please, the "we're at war" argument is as tired as the slippery slope logic you are trying to make a point about.

That will NEVER happen. They will never install such measures in common places like that. It's about as useful as saying that allowing gay marriage will open the flood gates for people to marry animals. People won't stand to wait an extra 15 minutes so they can get their hamburgers or their cheap plastic crap at Wal-mart.

[Spurminator]

Which amendment deals with the right to fly on a plane without being searched again?

According to this former TSA administrator, the 4th amendment.

Ni4GVWvT2Zs
“Nobody likes having their 4th Amendment violated going through a security line. But the truth of the matter is, we’re going to have to do it”.

[Wild Cobra]

That already happened after 9/11 and the previous administration did more to erode civil liberties in this country than any administration before or after.

But I laugh when I hear you talk about tyranny. I literally LOL. As if to think Americans would know the first or the last thing about tyranny. There will never be any tyranny and we're not even close to it in this country.

You can still go down the street and buy your cheeseburgers, play the lottery, and sit on the couch and watch television.
You mean by the Patriot Act, essentially written by Joe Biden in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing?

[Cry Havoc]

There is no violation. We CHOOSE to fly; therefore we knowing submit to these scans for the safety of everyone onboard. Probably cause here is irrelevant.

You CHOOSE to go into grocery stores to buy food.

You CHOOSE to own a personal computer.

You CHOOSE to attend sporting events.

Your line of reasoning basically gives free reign to the government to do a full body scan of people anytime they are doing something that they are not compelled to do by law. Including going to work.

[Duff McCartney]

You mean by the Patriot Act, essentially written by Joe Biden in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing?


The bill was drafted by the Justice Department with great input from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the White House.

Biden may have introduced it...but he didn't write the thing. And it's a very big stretch for you to say that the Omnibus bill Biden introduced is directly responsible for the Patriot Act considering that the Patriot Act changed laws to many acts done before Biden.


The Patriot Act made a number of changes to U.S. law. Key acts changed were the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 and Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), as well as the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Personally I could care less who wrote it, because the whole thing is an attack on civil liberties. But no politician made a stink about the Patriot Act that is making an issue about the body scans.

[LnGrrrR]

The wiretapping issue is different. they use probable cause. they don't with this. If they used probable cause, I would be OK with it.

But, as we've gone over before, they don't use probable cause; they just use specific words and pick up random email with those words in it. That's why it's so broad-based. (After all, if it was targeted to a few individuals, then they could easily get the warrants to wiretap/intercept communications, right?)

So your argument doesn't make sense.

[LnGrrrR]

Then you are OK with everyone going into a mall go through these scanners to. You would be all for that in the name of security, wouldn't you?

I never said I agree with them. I think, for the money and liberties they infringe upon, they're not worth it.

[Marcus Bryant]

Americans tend to notice the nationalist tint of the federal government when their party is in the minority.

[Obstructed_View]

I've made that same argument on other topics. Thing is, flying is required for some things these days. I take it you agree driving, health care, etc. are not rights?
Flying is not a right. There's no two ways about it. If you want to fly, you have to go through security. You wouldn't fly on an airline with no security. You of all people should understand having to make the smallest of sacrifices when there are soldiers overseas dying to protect you from terrorists.



That's why I ask DMX where he draws the line. Still no answer. If we are spend so much money for a possible 200+ people dying in an attack, where do you draw the line?

Subway systems...

Major bridges, tunnels...

Trains...

Malls...

If that is your argument, that 200 or 300 people *might* die, then where do you draw the line? Why not just put everyone who goes into any public place of 100 people or more go through the same screenings?

Please stop being a sheeple, and think of the farther implications if we allow it. They will expand it over other aspects of our lives if we don't stop them.
Don't give me an NRA "slippery slope" strawman argument, please. We are at war because people hijacked commercial airliners full of civilians. This isn't about bridges and tunnels, this is about flying on commercial airliners. It couldn't possibly be more relevant, and there is no civil liberty argument to be made. TSA is not some creation by Obama to stomp on your precious civil rights, it was established under the Bush administration in response to September 11. Wake me when they start trying to expand to anything beyond airports and we'll have the discussion then.

[Obstructed_View]

I'm not a big fan of using the "We're at War!" card to justify any and all programs aimed against terrrorism. Same with the "the terrorists are out there!" angle.

Look, we will never be 100% safe and secure. Bad things will happen, no matter how much we try to prevent them.

The question should be, are these scanners useful? Do they work at preventing terrorist threats? And do they work WELL ENOUGH that it is acceptable for Americans to allow government to x-ray them/see them nude?

I don't think that's a crazy argument to be having. Some people are ok with the scanners, some people aren't.

If I were using the "We're at War!" card to justify any and all programs, I'd say you had a point. I'm using it to justify added security aimed at catching someone like Abdulmutallab who got onto a plane full of people with a bomb in his pants. If we've decided as a society that we're not going to racially profile, and if we've decided that it costs too much money to interview every single person before they board a plane like El Al does, then what's the alternative? When you come up with it, let the rest of us know.

[Obstructed_View]

I wonder if Obstructed View would like to be scanned naked and/or patted down every time he went to the grocery store if some jackass blew himself up at a Wal-Mart? What about at McDonalds? The Spurs games? What about a college class held in a large lecture hall? Every trip to the mall? How about everyday going to work if it's in a big corporate campus or large office building? How about when you go to the DMV? Every one of those places a terrorist could kill a lot of people pretty easily.

Strawman argument. Has nothing to do with the conversation. When the TSA camps themselves out at Walmart we'll have that talk. Until then, it's about keeping people safe who choose to fly on airplanes.

[Obstructed_View]

According to this former TSA administrator, the 4th amendment.

Ni4GVWvT2Zs
“Nobody likes having their 4th Amendment violated going through a security line. But the truth of the matter is, we’re going to have to do it”.

That's not correct because there's no legal precedent. Once the courts determine that someone voluntarily walking through airport security has a reasonable expectation of privacy, the scans WILL become a fourth amendment violation under the law. The TSA won't be allowed to search people, and nobody will ever fly again after the first couple of planes are bombed out of the sky.

[boutons_deux]

"We are at war because people hijacked commercial airliners full of civilians"

You Lie

[Spurminator]

Your fear is unreasonable. There is insufficient danger of terrorists blowing planes out of the sky to justify the kind of security we have for every airline. If we were under such threat of terrorism, they would have found other places to attack by now.

And a violation of the Constitution either exists or it doesn't. The courts interpret the Constitution in the end, but just because they haven't decided on a case related to the Amendment yet doesn't mean that these actions aren't a violation. They don't suddenly become violations after a court case rules they are. They are or they aren't.

[baseline bum]

Strawman argument. Has nothing to do with the conversation. When the TSA camps themselves out at Walmart we'll have that talk. Until then, it's about keeping people safe who choose to fly on airplanes.

Sounds more like a dodge on your part when your only justification for this garbage is the pre-existence of a bureaucracy.

[Obstructed_View]

Sounds more like a dodge on your part when your only justification for this garbage is the pre-existence of a bureaucracy.

http://conservativeamerican.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/9-11.jpg

[Obstructed_View]

Your fear is unreasonable. There is insufficient danger of terrorists blowing planes out of the sky to justify the kind of security we have for every airline. If we were under such threat of terrorism, they would have found other places to attack by now.

Christmas day, 2009. Did you forget already?

[baseline bum]

Don't give me an NRA "slippery slope" strawman argument, please. We are at war because people hijacked commercial airliners full of civilians.

Technically, we are at "war" because terrorists broke into cockpits and commandeered planes. Having armed pilots and locking cockpits eliminates that.

[Spurminator]

Christmas day, 2009. Did you forget already?

1 failed attempt out of how many people on how many flights? Hell, go ahead and throw in the shoe bomber too.

It's an insufficient threat.

[Obstructed_View]

Technically, we are at "war" because terrorists broke into cockpits and commandeered planes. Having armed pilots and locking cockpits eliminates that.

Even you aren't dumb enough to believe that. :lol

[baseline bum]

Even you aren't dumb enough to believe that. :lol

You're a pissy little cunt today, huh? Eh, no different than normal.

[Obstructed_View]

1 failed attempt out of how many people on how many flights? Hell, go ahead and throw in the shoe bomber too.

It's an insufficient threat.

Tell that to the people on that plane.

Look, If you think there's an acceptable number of planes that can be bombed out of the sky every year, then write to your congressman and tell them what that number is. You might share it here, too. I'd personally be interested in how many airplanes and lives you want to sacrifice so a bunch of strangers don't look at your wang through a scanner. If we've collectively decided that number is zero, then this is the process until someone comes up with a better idea.

[Spurminator]

You shouldn't even need to arm the pilot if you secure the cockpit. Keep the metal detectors too. But there's no reason for security checkpoints in an airport to take any longer to go through than the checkpoints outside of baseball stadiums.

I'm completely okay with some airlines keeping these policies as long as there are options for the other 50% of Americans who don't want to be groped or peeped before flying somewhere. Right now there's not an option.

[Obstructed_View]

You're a pissy little cunt today, huh? Eh, no different than normal.

No, you're just being a slave to your politics without any thought; no different than normal. I don't think you actually believe that a locked cockpit door is going to keep someone from getting on a plane and blowing himself up.

[baseline bum]

http://conservativeamerican.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/9-11.jpg

Seriously, this is absolutely ridiculous. Your fear perfectly exemplifies Winehole's earlier argument about how our security is always preparing for the previous attack. Islamic terrorists bomb supermarkets, buses, subways, and the like, but hey, it didn't happen here yet and we have an official bureaucracy for the airports.

[Winehole23]

If we've collectively decided that number is zero, then this is the process until someone comes up with a better idea.Total prevention is a totally unrealistic standard. It might even be a counterproductive one.

[CuckingFunt]

No, you're just being a slave to your politics without any thought; no different than normal. I don't think you actually believe that a locked cockpit door is going to keep someone from getting on a plane and blowing himself up.

No. But metal detectors have done a pretty decent job of that, since no one managed to blow themselves up on a plane. Before, during, or after the attacks on 9/11.

[baseline bum]

No, you're just being a slave to your politics without any thought; no different than normal. I don't think you actually believe that a locked cockpit door is going to keep someone from getting on a plane and blowing himself up.

I thought we were at war because the terrorists used the planes as missiles against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

[Spurminator]

Tell that to the people on that plane.

Look, If you think there's an acceptable number of planes that can be bombed out of the sky every year, then write to your congressman and tell them what that number is. You might share it here, too. I'd personally be interested in how many airplanes and lives you want to sacrifice so a bunch of strangers don't look at your wang through a scanner. If we've collectively decided that number is zero, then this is the process until someone comes up with a better idea.

I have decided the number is zero and that securing the cockpit and using metal detectors is sufficient security to keep it close to that, and that the current measures offer no better protection against it being greater than zero.

Somehow the underwear bomber got through the security at the time and still failed miserably. Laughably.

It's akin to banning or searching parked cars near buildings because of OKC. Wait, no it's not, because McVeigh was actually successful.

[Winehole23]

But preventing shoe and underpants bombers so strictly and stringently after the fact partakes of the absurd.

[Spurminator]

I'd personally be interested in how many airplanes and lives you want to sacrifice so a bunch of strangers don't look at your wang through a scanner.

Also, I don't give a shit who sees my wang. But when half of the country finds something personally invasive, there's a problem.

[Spurminator]

Oh, and has everyone forgotten that the underwear bomber didn't board a plane in this country?

[greyforest]

So we're willing to send our troops out to the deserts of the middle east to die for our "freedoms" and "safety", but we're not willing to go through a full body scan at the airport to protect our "safety".

Objecting to anything the Government does is akin to being a Traitor. This is the USA. It's time we pull together and be on the same team here, come on guys.

[LnGrrrR]

Flying is not a right. There's no two ways about it. If you want to fly, you have to go through security. You wouldn't fly on an airline with no security. You of all people should understand having to make the smallest of sacrifices when there are soldiers overseas dying to protect you from terrorists.

Flying is as much a right as is going to work, eating a brownie at Starbucks, or any number of things.

The "rights" of an American citizen are not limited to those explicitly outlined in the Constitution. The 9th Amendment explains that.

Tell me Obstructed, where would YOU personally draw the line? What if they made all passengers fly nude? Would that be acceptable as well?

As I said earlier, we should not be justifying ANY measure in the name of security. We should look at the effectiveness of the procedures, and then determine the cost/benefit ratio.

[LnGrrrR]

If I were using the "We're at War!" card to justify any and all programs, I'd say you had a point. I'm using it to justify added security aimed at catching someone like Abdulmutallab who got onto a plane full of people with a bomb in his pants. If we've decided as a society that we're not going to racially profile, and if we've decided that it costs too much money to interview every single person before they board a plane like El Al does, then what's the alternative? When you come up with it, let the rest of us know.

The alternative is accepting that there is no way to be 100% safe. If you're afraid of it, then don't fly, don't leave your house, and live in your basement.

People who are dedicated will find ways around the system. We need to be spending money wisely, and using metrics to determine if those methods are effective.

[LnGrrrR]

Guys, what about that guy who tried to blow up a car in NYC? I think all citizens should be forced to subdue to policemen everywhere when asked, and strip searched in the middle of the street.

It's the only true way to stay safe.

[LnGrrrR]

Tell that to the people on that plane.

Look, If you think there's an acceptable number of planes that can be bombed out of the sky every year, then write to your congressman and tell them what that number is. You might share it here, too. I'd personally be interested in how many airplanes and lives you want to sacrifice so a bunch of strangers don't look at your wang through a scanner. If we've collectively decided that number is zero, then this is the process until someone comes up with a better idea.

Do you write your congressman about the "acceptable" numbers of people dying in car accidents, demanding that all car manufacturers install bumpers around their cars?

How about the amount of people who die eating fast food? Do you write your congressman about that?

Bad guys are out there. They kill people. Life happens. Just because you're afraid of it doesn't mean that you get to put a straightjacket on all of us.

[Parker2112]

Wake Up before the water reaches boiling and the noose closes too tight to move.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/130549-next-step-for-body-scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-



“[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through,” Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose."

“I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?”

[Wild Cobra]

But, as we've gone over before, they don't use probable cause; they just use specific words and pick up random email with those words in it. That's why it's so broad-based. (After all, if it was targeted to a few individuals, then they could easily get the warrants to wiretap/intercept communications, right?)

So your argument doesn't make sense.

The data mining you are talking about is a different topic yet, going over leased lines with third party consent.

[Wild Cobra]

Flying is not a right. There's no two ways about it. If you want to fly, you have to go through security. You wouldn't fly on an airline with no security. You of all people should understand having to make the smallest of sacrifices when there are soldiers overseas dying to protect you from terrorists.

Movement across our nation is a right.

Now if I want to go to Hawaii, now I am restricted to traveling by boat if I refuse to give into these authoritarians. Now what do you say when they do the same screening an the cruise ships to Hawaii. What options do I have now?

[Wild Cobra]

Don't give me an NRA "slippery slope" strawman argument, please. We are at war because people hijacked commercial airliners full of civilians.
There have been numerous airliners hijacked over the years, and sometimes many deaths. All I am concerned about adding security to is making it next to impossible to use the airplane as a guided bomb. That's all you should be concerned about, because like it or not, it is a slippery slope you are agreeing to.

The reinforced cockpit doors are enough. You cannot have 100% security, and they are simply going too far. Agree with them, and you are a slimball authoritarian.

Or maybe you like your package handled by men?