It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do you honestly not think this is a nude image?

page: 26
56
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


What if we turned it around and said...

"If you dont feel safe without the body scanner then dont travel..."




posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by BingeBob
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


What if we turned it around and said...

"If you dont feel safe without the body scanner then dont travel..."

Totally.

People like dereks are the problem in society today, not terrorists. If it weren't for lemmings like him, tyrannical government wouldn't take over in any country and terrorists wouldn't exist in the first place.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by BingeBob
 


I actually did on page 22.

It is interesting that the people who feel unsafe and want all these "security measures" put in place to protect them from any possibility of dying due to terrorism dont use that logic on themselves.

I also note that their lives are in statistically MUCH more danger from, oh, teenagers driving, or drivers in general, and I dont see the level of fear and the desire for increased "security measures" in that area of travel.

Why? It is because they DO get their cues as to what places them in danger or makes them safe solely from the television. Not by looking at statistics, or considering on their own if the danger level of various situations sold to them via the TV actually serves a different purpose, such as the erosion of rights and freedoms.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I don't know. It looks pretty sexy to me. Plus, I love showing off my body whenever I get the chance. I was blessed!!!

In all seriousness though...

Any way that you cut this up, IT IS A GROSS INVASION OF PRIVACY, and one needs to consider how this technology can easily be abused.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Oh sorry...Sometimes I miss a couple points in long threads like this.

We keep catering to the lowest denominator. Thats why we keep coming up with crap. Thats why our economy is in the toilet and out unemployment rate is double digits.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Aside from the gross invasion of your privacy every time you want to fly somewhere?


you have the choice - if you think it is a gross invasion of privacy then dont fly

You know what? FREEDOM OF TRAVEL IS A FREAKING RIGHT.

You don't agree with this ? MOVE TO FREAKING NORTH KOREA.

I'm sick of your kind, bunch of freaking lemmings who will bow down to anything. You have no self-respect, you're useless as a human.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by Vitchilo]



Way to have respect for others Vitchilo. He is less of a human just because he has a different opinion? If thats what you think, you should consider leaving ATS.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Calling someone a lemming is not implying they are less human than others.

It is referring to a lemming mindlessly following the lemming in front of it for no other reason than "Hes doing it so it must be a good idea"



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I fly often and would be much happier if they used these full body scanners.
I have nothing to hide/be ashamed of regarding my body.

...and don't say, "then you wouldn't mind the government putting cameras in your home bathroom", because that is very, very different. In the bathroom in my own home I expect a bit of privacy. When I fly, that expectation is not there. If I'm putting my body on a plane, the people responsible for that plane have a right to know what's on my body.

When I'm on a plane, I want the people responsible for that plane to know what's on the other passengers' bodies.



[edit on 1/9/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BingeBob
 


I personally think the PTB know very well that the way to push through policies that erode our rights or undermine our Constitution is to use the politics of fear. Create and maintain an irrational level of terror (which is terrorism itself, if you think about it) among your populace, and get them to BEG you to do the things that in their right minds they would fight you to prevent.

What boggles the mind is how well the strategy works, and how we the people, (the masses) fall for it over, and over, and over, and over....................

We never learn. We can see it being used on others, and sometimes even recognize it when it is happening to them, but when it is happening to us, and the technique is being used on us, our fear response makes us virtually unable to see the manipulation. Its sad, really, but brilliant in a really sick and twisted way.

Edit various spelling issues

[edit on 9-1-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 





If I'm putting my body on a plane, the people responsible for that plane have a right to know what's on my body.


Wouldn't that be true for all public areas then. And what happens if this "measure" isn't sufficient and additional "measures" even more invasive need to be taken. Maybe at some point we need to stop worrying about the boogie man before we need to stand in line and clear a security checkpoint in order to leave our homes.


[edit on 9-1-2010 by harvib]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by harvib
 

I already must walk through a metal detector and have my briefcase x-rayed as I enter a Federal Building in the United States. The same goes for some high-profile sporting events. This has never bothered me at all -- in fact I'm glad they do it. I wouldn't doubt that someday those magnetometers will be replaced with body scanners.

It may be a hassle sometimes, but it's not an invasion of privacy. What would I be carrying on me that I want to keep private?

The machine is only looking at my physical body -- it's not making me reveal my innermost feelings and secret desires. Those are the things that are private, not a scan of my body. I'll start complaining when the time comes that the machines are reading secret desires.

[edit on 1/9/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





Create and maintain an irrational level of terror (which is terrorism itself, if you think about it) among your populace,


You couldn't be more right.

A fully loaded 747 could explode everyday of the year and cancer and heart disease would still be the number 1 killers by about 800%. With the huge rate of cancer in this country most people seem to have no reservations walking through a machine that may or may not contribute to the cancer epidemic. All over an irrational fear that currently holds a death rate less then that of being killed by lightening.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


A couple of points in regards to your post.




I already must walk through a metal detector and have my briefcase x-rayed as I enter a Federal Building in the United States.


If you see the value in having security checkpoints in Federal buildings then in a time where (reportedly) there are terrorist looking to cause high civilian casualties then must certainly we need to increase the number of security check points.

I would suggest any location that is to have more then 100 people. Every mall, restaurant, park, beach, shopping center need to all have a manned security check point. Right?

Or are only airline passengers and federal employees lives important enough to be protected?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
ITs a joke... These scanners really upset me... I wish other people would open their eyes to the reality that these things aren't going to make them any safer.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by anoymous7]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by harvib
All over an irrational fear that currently holds a death rate less then that of being killed by lightening.


It is not an accident that our educational system on all levels stresses memorization over critical thinking and reasoning. All anyone would need to do is to look at the numbers themselves and reason their way through it. Unfortunately, they dont realize they should.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by harvibOr are only airline passengers and federal employees lives important enough to be protected?


No -- but obviously (here in the U.S. at least) they are the known targets. If suddenly there is a rash of bombings inside shopping malls, you can bet that some security devices would be set up in those, also.

Because of people (not terrorists) bringing guns into some "Chuck-E-Cheese" restaurants, some inner-city Chuck-E-Cheeses have installed metal detectors. That is an example of not only airline passengers and people inside federal buildings being important enough.

Chuck-E Cheese made a business decision to make certain "high risk" restaurants safer. Would the world be a better place if these metal detectors were not needed at a "Chuck-e-Cheese"? Sure it would. But that's not the reality sometimes.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
We just keep giving more rights and more rights away... When will it end? Are we going to lose?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by apacheman
So when they screen children with this, how is this not child porn?


Two words... Sexual intent.


I believe they have changed the law in some states. Simply having naked pictures of children is proof. At the very least, you can be charged with child pornography.
Not having to prove intent in court, for a conviction. Just the same as if you are busted on the street with a joint. They can charge you with possessoin. "Not with intent"



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 





No -- but obviously (here in the U.S. at least) they are the known targets.


If terrorist are targeting high populated areas then an airliner is the least of our worries. People that share the paranoid viewpoint should be screaming for these devices to be installed everywhere people congregate. Do we need to wait for a major civilian casualty? In my opinion people who support these devices at an airport are being hypocritical when they aren't calling for these to be installed everywhere. Hell maybe the solution is to force people, upon leaving their homes, to report directly to a security checkpoint. From there they can carry on with their day. What do you think?



[edit on 9-1-2010 by harvib]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo

You know what? FREEDOM OF TRAVEL IS A FREAKING RIGHT.

You don't agree with this ? MOVE TO FREAKING NORTH KOREA.

I'm sick of your kind, bunch of freaking lemmings who will bow down to anything. You have no self-respect, you're useless as a human.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by Vitchilo]


You do have the right to travel. You can even get a license, a plane, and fly yourself without being scanned at all. It is really quite simple. Unless you are some kind of lemming that depends on private companies to fly them around and then whines on some forum about how that private company conducts its own business. You are not like that right?



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join