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.

 

They want you to use the security body scanner.. that's the idea behind the rape. They insist !

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by littlebunny
 


Well I happen to agree these types of searches are not what I want to experience when I fly, after taking a trip with my elderly parents a few years ago I decided that the random search system was pretty stupid, many people that fit the so called profiles of bomb and drug smugglers walked past me and my two (72 and 81) parents as we were pulled off to one side, this happened on the trip there and the return trip, my only point is in knowing people smuggle parts of bombs onto planes and the reassemble them in the air, these parts don't test positive for explosives for dogs to detect, people smuggle drugs and money and we know that dogs cannot be used for general population sniffing when most of the US currency tests positive for drugs, too many false hits, its a little ironic that once they isolate a subject and have the dogs go over them, they detect drugs but instead find large amounts of cash sometimes. The question I ask is how many people would agree on the level of screening deemed necessary to be safe in today's world and how as a concerned population do we get to that point ? . People want to make huge bloody statements against our government and we are the unlucky people caught in the middle, the very first time we find that a person let through screening because of sensitivity issues actually brought down the plane then we will have all these questions to answer and solutions will have to be put forth, my guess is for the time being these are our only options.




posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SankeySugar
 


You site the Underwear bomber to prove your point? He neither put it up his ass, nor did he hide it in his child's diaper (an you meth story doesn't count because someone with meth on a plane isn't a danger to me or you, this s about keeping us safe on planes, right?)

Ok, so let us get back to that crazy guy, the Underwear Bomber. That guy fit the PROFILE. A muslim, buying cash, not an American citizen, between the ages of 18-34, need I go on? You actually HELPED my point, thanks for that. HE should ABSOLUTELY have been pulled out of line and pat down, because he fit the stinking profile!



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SankeySugar
People put bombs and drugs down their pants and up their ass, they also stuff them down their childs diapers. Unless someone can come up with another way of finding these items besides a pat down or scan you only have one choice, don't fly. Has this site really lost all common sense ?


Have you?

You're probably more likely to be struck by lightening than killed by a terrorist.
You don't have to fly it's your choice and your right. So It's a risk your take upon yourself, if people don't want this then they shouldn't be subjected to it. They have already said that the underwear bombers bomb wouldn't have even shown up on this scan. It's about keeping comfort.

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

Don't you understand, the line has to be drawn, somewhere and it should have been at the step before this. What happens when someone sneaks a bomb onto a plane in their ass? Cavity searches? Will you accept that to be able to fly?

Flying is a right. You are aware of that right?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Layla
 


I would beg to differ on your point that someone on meth is not a danger to me, so would other victims of violence at the hands of a methhead, as a country with laws against bringing drugs here, men and women put their lives on the line everyday upholding those laws, allowing people to smuggle drugs because of sensitivity issues isn't an option to them, if you knew for sure that meth was headed to a high school near you would you feel different? Back to the point of the underwear bomber though, yes he fit the profile but as we read in English newspapers how white women are marrying Muslim men and converting to their lifestyles and faith everyday, that profile you speak of is going to change and then what? after the first white women convert blows up a plane how do you start screening then ? All people that might know a Muslim ? or just thoroughly screen every single person getting on the damn plane, I am just pointing out with limited options we only have so many choices to make sure 2 or 3 hundred men ,women and children don't die needlessly.
I also would like to say my common sense question was more of an exasperated exclamation on my part and not meant to criticize the original poster, everyone has their own opinion and I respect other peoples views and occasionally I am persuaded in my own opinion by others counter arguments, a compromise is needed in this situation and I am just curious where that line will be drawn.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Well I am sure what kind of answer one can expect from your question but absolutely yes ! If people are putting bombs up their bums and blowing planes out of the sky I would expect an examination to make sure I got to where I was going with my family safe, or I would more then likely opt not to fly until they come up with a way to thoroughly investigate and clear people to be safe to fly months in advance, in the case of butt-bombers I ask you the same question if there are 2 bombers a month doing this are you going to get on a plane that hasn't had thorough screening, ? I mean in my situation with two small boys to raise it would be very irresponsible to subject my self to any known risk,( like that scenario), for their sakes, ( which unfortunately rules out parachuting and fast motorbikes currently ) everybody that flies likes to think an incident of any kind wont happen to them, you have to almost think in that frame of mind just to get on the thing right?
I absolutely don't mean any disrespect to any of you with different views on this, as the son of a retired police officer I just think that vilifying people who put themselves right next to someone possibly with a bomb strapped to them to protect our safety isn't the right approach.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
I'll be flying on the 24th, the opt out day.
That means I may need to sign up for the frequent groper program.
Hope I at least get a free dinner out of it.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SankeySugar
 


So they got you then. You are scared of what essentially amounts to the monster in the closet. Muslims don't want to just kill us. The attacks are solely to take our rights away. You would honestly accept cavity searches?! That is a foolish attitude. I don't even know what to say to people anymore. You can bend over (literally) out of fear, I will not.

There are other ways to handle this. There are common sense ways. Some people just aren't terrorists, no chance.
As a father, if TSA says to you they need to touch your child, what if say in the future they wanted to search the cavities of all of your family. ( i know disturbing though but think) for the safety of the other passengers who are concerned about as you said sitting next to someone with a bomb, would you allow your family to be subjected to that? they aren't any different. By current logic you could be a terrorist and planted bombs on them.
edit on 19-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


I think that in this situation we propose, I wouldn't have a choice, if I absolutely needed to get my family out of the country, then yes everyone would have to join the Ben Dover club, if the last four bombers had hidden the explosives on five year old , then I can understand why authorities would want to check my son. He doesn't like being examined at the doctors office either, but I have to stand there and watch him get upset because we have to do it, if there was a magical way to get everyone's personal doctor to accompany them on trips to perform all the examinations, would people still be so uneasy about the exam ? I don't know.
As flying off to sunny places is too remote a possibility for me to entertain right now, I have no worries. But if people just want to be patted down and be done with it, Iam afraid those times are gone forever.
The whole Idea of a scanner was to give people some sense of dignity at the airport, just as we trust x-ray techs at the doctors office, we have to be able to trust the people doing it at the airports, perhaps ex health care workers could man the machines or there could be an automatic 25 year prison sentence for removing or storing an image, but it sounds like some people don't want either the scan or the excessive searches, so perhaps the consumer marketplace will take over and we will all win, separate flights for people who choose the excessive search and ones that get just the pat down, heck, smokers could have their own plane too, Otherwise what other option do you have besides not flying ?? Just exactly what do you propose until sniffer technology catches up with the threat?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join