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.

 

Would You Allow These Two people to Touch Your Junk?

page: 7
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by kcs7272
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


I agree about the border issue, but once again these new procedures are needed and in fact late.90% of the people bitching about it will be first in line to sue someone for lack of security screening if a family member dies from a terrorist attack or they have bad dreams after it happens.


Needed? Needed for what reason? To prevent a government created boogeyman from scaring people?

The odds of someone dying in a terrorist attack are so miniscule, they arent even worth mentioning really. How much money is being spent and how many liberties are being violated in a pathetic attempt to negate such a feeble risk?

Lets look at 3 things that are exponentially more likely to kill people than "terrorists" are.

Cancer: Why not devote the funds used by the TSA to the eradication of cancer instead? At least cancer kills poses a real threat and kills people every year.

Cops: Yes, thats right, cops. You are more likely to be killed by a cop than you are a terrorist. When do we begin the war on cops? (Hopefully soon, as they actually pose a threat to peoples life and liberty. )

Illegal aliens: Illegal aliens kill far more people than terrorists do, yet our southern border remains wide open. Why not declare war on illegal immigration instead of wasting money on the TSA?

The laughable "War on terror" isnt about safety. It's about control, and there is no better method to control people than keeping them in a state of perpetual fear.




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnteBellum
I'd rather have then touch my junk then be sitting in a plane with my 4 year old daughter when the fuselage blows out .....or having to tell her it is going to be all right as we storm 500 miles an hour toward the Sears Tower.


So if I understand you correctly, you are perfectly OK with allowing a minimum wage pervert to fondle your daughter..while you tell her it's OK.. right?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I'm normally okay with things that are there to protect me, because I know that people need that protection sometimes, but I can see where this is going.

As it stands now, with all the people standing in line at security checkpoints in airports, a concentrated attack on various airport security checkpoints over the country would kill MANY more people than hijacking a plane would now.

We need to move towards better training and less towards technology because it's only a matter of time before some terrorist shoves 20 pounds of C4 up his ass for us to start getting anally probed before we get on a plane.

Here's a great article on what Israel (a country that is constantly being attacked) does for their airport security.

www.thestar.com...

More training, more intelligence, and better procedures...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 




Do you think it’s fair that The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) endorsed the fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners violate Islamic law..


I'm sorry but what do you mean by "Fair". How is it unfair? I think that's a poorly chosen word just to create conflict for Islam. A religion said that something violated it's religion. Happens every day, I fail to see how it's relevant.

Anyways. Some schmuck on CNN said this isn't sexual assault as sexual assault must be sexual in nature. Apparently touching genitalia isn't sexual, only if you're doing it to get your jollies...

Really...? So according to their logic I can touch breasts just because I'm curious. I'm not "getting off" on it. SO it can't be sexual assault according to CNN.

Seriously where do they find their guests anymore? Everyone tries to pretend like they're experts while ignoring blatant common sense.

Still curious why you brought Islam into it, and how you feel it's unfair they took a religious stance.
edit on 17-11-2010 by mryanbrown because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by amc621
reply to post by Violater1
 


I travel multiple times a month. This doesn't bother me one bit. So what, have you ever ridden in a subway in NY during rush hour?

Get over it. There is no other motive here other than to protect us.


I hate to be the one to tell you this, but this isn't JUST ABOUT YOU, or what you are comfortable with. There are a great many people out there who are decidedly NOT comfortable with some complete stranger feeling their genitals....I happen to be one of them. I'm not sure how your analogy about the NY subway has any realavance in this at all...if you have someone touch your genitals on a subway car...that is grounds for arrest and a charge of sexual assault. I certainly would not tolerate that, nor should you. I have ridden the NY subway a number of times during rush hour and nobody has ever groped my genitalia.

I think the point here, is the larger issue of when is this quest for security going too far? What happens if some terrorist decides to shove the explosive up his anus? Neither the scanners or a pat down would detect something like that. Will you be willing to allow someone access to your colon so that they can safeguard your security?

Liberties are never taken away all at once, rather it is a slow methodical process of indoctrination...first you are conditioned to accept one intrusion into your privacy of person, then comes yet another regulation that allows someone to further encroach on your person or property...it is indeed a slippery slope, and before you know what happened, you have no right to privacy at all in any way. By that point it will be very difficult to regain that lost liberty.

Hope that gives you a different way to look at this issue. I leave you with the immortal words of a great American and Patriot....

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
is it really an invasion of privacy , i thought what you done in your home behind closed doors was your privacy , all thats happening here is someone seeing your naked body !
Do human rights or ammendments factor in clothes ?
we are after all born without them ?
So really all thats at stake for your protection and everyone elses when travelling , is your ego or your dignity.
Id rather be seen naked in a photo than dead.

It was on a tv program recently cant mind which ,

you have two queues at the airport , one for people who havent been scanned or searched
and one where people have been scanned and searched

which queue would you be in
Id still rather be alive than dead regardless if some airport worker sees me naked , once you have seen a naked body you have seen them all .

Get over it
edit on 17-11-2010 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gnarly

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by Gnarly
 


The government is inserting itself between consenting adults trying to engage in commerce.

They are saying I can't buy someone's products until they touch my nuts and molest my children. Or rather, I can pay for the product, but to use it I must first allow sexual molestation of myself and children.
edit on 17-11-2010 by Exuberant1 because: (no reason given)


Do you think everyone wants to molest your children, or touch your nuts? Is that what the people we elect really want to do to us? They got elected just to have that happen to you, right...

Please, explain to me how it's sexual molestation? They do not grab breasts, and anyways, it's same-sex policy. If you can't be comfortable with someone merely grazing your privates, you probably have some issues. If you think that's sexual molestation, then what about physicals, or a doctor's check-up? Are those sexual molestation acts as well? You have to do them to get the benefits of health, or have a guessing doctor.


Gnarly...you need to read up on what exactly is going on. Yes they are touching womens breast. Feeling them. Feeling under them. There have been people coming out that they felt their labia of the vagina. Feeling in between the butt cheeks.
They have grabbed mens penis's. Felt underneath it to see if anything is between the shaft and the testys.
That is sexual assault.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sapien82
 


Just because you live in fear, doesn't mean we must. This isn't a democracy where the fears of the majority can dictate the actions of the minority.

But to that, you and your fears are the minority. Most people disagree with the procedure, and should we properly voice our opinion it would be known that the majority find this practice to be willfully unlawful.

"Air travel is not a right." Well according to most uninformed peoples of the world anymore, nothing is a right, everything is a privilege.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by amc621
reply to post by Violater1
 


I travel multiple times a month. This doesn't bother me one bit. So what, have you ever ridden in a subway in NY during rush hour?

Get over it. There is no other motive here other than to protect us.


I don't need anyone to protect me. I can do that just fine by myself. If you doubt me, break into my home sometime and find out



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
It's sad that we're having a huge nation outcry over someone who chose not to go through the scanners because of health reasons, but everyone wants to discuss the pat downs. I haven't heard a single person in the news talking about this guy choosing not to go through because of health concerns, they've begun not even mentioning it. They're even having hearings about all this and I bet no one will mention it. So there is no "safe" radiation and there's already evidence that these waves can cause the DNA to become damaged, or even "unzip". So there's those health concerns, but then there are our bodily energies that we should be more worried about, this is something that most people don't look into when researching cell phone dangers. You can tell if someone is going to be sick in several days from their auras, you can also see blockages and such that are connected to long term health problems. So our energy determines physical things, several days before, it is the most important part of our health. So do you think shooting radiation at that is such a good idea?

But yeah pat downs, I don't remember who, but some female senator referred to them as love pats...despicable. But how about all the Republicans coming out against this, quite amazing, I figured they'd be fear mongering, instead they're supporting our liberty, a few years too late. I never would have thought there could be national outrage about overboard airline security, but whala, here it is, if only they would talk about how the elite are trying to poison us as fast as they can, with the full body scanners helping quite a bit with this (thanks to the underwear bomber of course). Putting our children through these machines is as bad as getting them vaccinated, but everyone is just talking about not letting them get touched, if only they cared about their kids' DNA getting touched. If only we just profiled like everywhere else, instead we counter-profile. If Muslims have a problem with being profiled, maybe they should suggest that their extreme brethren chill out. I understand that our government is behind much of it, but it is still Muslim extremists that are at the top of the list of people who want to destroy this country, with only liberals ahead of them. If they want to screen white people extra in the Middle East, that is fine with me. If we install all this security for Muslim Extremists, it doesn't make sense to have an 80 year old white woman wheeled to the side for extra screenings and it certainly doesn't make sense to give her cancer on top of that. I know it sounds like intolerance to profile, but using political correctness as an excuse not to discuss reality is pretty dangerous, look at Europe, they're literally being invaded by Muslims because they had to be tolerant, now the intolerant Muslims are trying to force sharia law and if they are politically correct, then they'll give it to them. Profiling is bad, but it's effective. And destroying people's DNA is far worse than profiling. I have nothing against Muslims, but I am against ignoring reality. If I was in charge, we wouldn't even have airlines in the first place.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Seriously, I would have stopped a terrorist who had a box cutter, or fireworks in his underwear. FIREWORKS ARE NOT A BOMB. (Thoughts are with you Christmas day "bomber").



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 

And trust me if it got to where a police state was issued in our country, I would be the one fighting and dying for its demise


Uh...... I have to ask, have you taken a look around you while standing in line for that TSA pat down?

Should you do so, you would see that the entire screening process is a textbook example of a police state - complete with jack-booted thugs having their way sexually with whomever catches their eye.

Why aren't you fighting?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sapien82
is it really an invasion of privacy , i thought what you done in your home behind closed doors was your privacy , all thats happening here is someone seeing your naked body !
Do human rights or ammendments factor in clothes ?
we are after all born without them ?
So really all thats at stake for your protection and everyone elses when travelling , is your ego or your dignity.
Id rather be seen naked in a photo than dead.

It was on a tv program recently cant mind which ,

you have two queues at the airport , one for people who havent been scanned or searched
and one where people have been scanned and searched

which queue would you be in
Id still rather be alive than dead regardless if some airport worker sees me naked , once you have seen a naked body you have seen them all .

Get over it
edit on 17-11-2010 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)


With all due respect, what is it like to live in constant fear of something that has virtually no chance of ever killing you?

Do you wake up and immediately have fearful thoughts?

Are you scared of police? If not, may I ask why? They are more likely to kill you than a terrorist is.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   
What does it mean to give up your freedom to board a plane without being searched?

Why should I give up my freedom to board a plane without being searched if it means I keep my liberty to be the victim of a terrorist attack?

I really don't see how my freedom, or anyone else's freedom of carrying whatever they want on on a plane unchecked violates my wanton disregard for security.

By giving up your freedom to get on a plane where the passengers have been thoroughly checked by security, you are losing the security that you are safe from a terrorist attack.

If you want the liberty to get on a plane where nobody is checked, then rent or buy a plane and give away seats to random people who you don't know, announcing to everyone aboard that nobody will be checked for anything... because everyone with a lick of common sense gets to keep their freedom of not having to have airports run by idiots who disregard security.

edit on 17-11-2010 by RestingInPieces because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by sapien82
is it really an invasion of privacy , i thought what you done in your home behind closed doors was your privacy , all thats happening here is someone seeing your naked body !
Do human rights or ammendments factor in clothes ?
we are after all born without them ?
So really all thats at stake for your protection and everyone elses when travelling , is your ego or your dignity.
Id rather be seen naked in a photo than dead.

It was on a tv program recently cant mind which ,

you have two queues at the airport , one for people who havent been scanned or searched
and one where people have been scanned and searched

which queue would you be in
I'd still rather be alive than dead regardless if some airport worker sees me naked , once you have seen a naked body you have seen them all .

Get over it
edit on 17-11-2010 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)


Good for you....I'm glad that you don't mind be naked in front of strangers...however, as I pointed out to another poster...this isn't just about YOU and what you are comfortable with.(see my comment above).

Besides...I'd rather die like a human being with my dignity intact, than live like a slave to some bloated authoritarian government agency.

So you just go line up like a good citizen and let Big Brother do whatever he wants, because if history teaches us any lesson...it's that it isn't going to stop with this. A few days, weeks, months, years, from now, they are going to want to intrude further...I guarantee it.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by RestingInPieces
If you want the liberty to get on a plane where nobody is checked, then rent or buy a plane and give away seats to random people who you don't know, announcing to everyone aboard that nobody will be checked for anything.


LOL! Because it's not like their are economic sanctions in place that make it nearly impossible to provide private flight for yourself or others. If you fly, you follow FAA 'guidelines'. It's that simple.

Because everyone believes the "right to travel" only means walking. But the "right to speech" has been infinitely elaborated on beyond it's scope.

What if I want to exercise my right to visit China? How can I get there? Walking? No. Oh I know! An automobile, those travel across the oceans right? Oh no, wait. You need a boat or airplane to get to china.

But I don't want to travel on a boat for 3+ weeks! I would like to get there using ordinary means of the time (flight). So the only reasonable way to travel to China is with an aircraft, yet it's not my right? So how can I have the absolute right to travel?

Oh that's right, my rights have been circumvented with administrative procedure which can't be legally enforced upon me, but should I wish to exercise my right, I must forgo another right.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I would let them do it, but then I would act like I liked it .....no, I mean REALLY liked it! I would start moaning and licking my lips at whoever was doing it and give them that glazed over eye look. If they are going to make ME feel uncomforatble.....two can play that game.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Phenomium
 


They would then charge you with sexual harassment as they were merely performing their legally supported duties. And you made THEM feel sexually uncomfortable.

This is the system we live in, where someone can sexually assault YOU and claim YOU sexually harassed THEM.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


Ok...I'm getting frustrated with all the people bleating like sheep that the security checks are for your own good to save you from terrorists, and being naked in front of strangers is no big deal, so GET OVER IT.

Let's try and put some sadly lacking perspective on the actual probability that you will be killed in an airline high-jacking by terrorists....

A companion piece in the Wall Street Journal lays out the statistics. Since 2000, the odds of you dying as a result of a terrorist act aboard a commercial American airliner is 1 in 25 million. The odds of getting struck by lightning: 1 in 500,000. Yes, you have a 50 times greater chance of being struck by lightning than dying from a terrorist attack on an airplane. Scary numbers indeed.

Source: Chad Garrison, Writer, Daily RFT.com, Original Info: The Wall Street Journal


1 in 25 million are pretty good odds...I'll take that chance to not have to subject myself to the draconian measures currently enforced in airlines across the US.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 



If some lady were to start fingering another woman during a pat down, that would be sexual assault. If a guy were to start stroking another guy during the pat down, that would be sexual assault. Just because you touch someone's genitals doesn't make it sexual assault, otherwise physicals would be considered sexual assault, and now Johnny can't play football! When the doctor has to look at you, that would be considered sexual assault, so we'll keep our "liberties, privacy and freedom" over what we wanted in the first place.

There are multiple people watching the pat down, which has already been established. Multiple customers and employees. If a single employee were to try to really get a good feel, they would first have to be gay. As we know, being gay isn't "natural" (I'm my actual views, everything that occurs is natural) so it's very unlikely that the person touching you is gay. Even if the person was gay, they most likely wouldn't want to "sexually assault" you because of the chance that you are ugly, fat, smell really bad, are old or for a bunch of various reasons. Even if they were gay, and they just loved feeling up on strangers like you claim, the very first second they were to do so is the very second they would be screwed. Everyone is watching, and there are cameras.

It boggles my mind to think that people actually think that the U.S. government wants to have it's own citizens sexually assaulted, or to take away our liberties. We're a freaking DEMOCRACY. We elect people into office. Those people in office are there for US, not to be against us. They do not make laws to have us sexually assaulted in line for a plane just for kicks. To think that a bunch, and I mean a bunch of people would actually get together just to do that? Do people really think that?

edit on 17-11-2010 by Gnarly because: Wrong word.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join