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.

 

TSA, does it have the right?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
I haven't followed this "disaster" closely, so please forgive my ignorance.

Am I understanding that you only get patted down if you refuse to go through one
of the x-ray machines?



No, you get the choice of letting a bunch of powertripping voyeurs with shiny little government insignia on their lapels take high tech naked photos of you, your wife, and your kids... or you can just let them grope you all.

At what cost safety and at what price freedom?





posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


That's a very sad perspective in my opinion although I respect it as yours, but that doesn't mean I agree with it and in fact I'd say that you were incorrect.

I'm not so sure why so many people seem to have a problem with their own bodies, hell if you go to the doctor you show him some of the more personal regions of your body but you don't have a problem with that? Why is it any different in showing your naked body to prove, for reasons of national security, that you aren't carrying concealed weapons?

The idea or even suggestion that the government employs "creeps" to feel up your wife or children for their own satisfaction is laughable to say the least, and absolutely ridiculous to say a little more.

Taking your logic, maybe we should stop police officers investigating suspiscious individuals acting odd in public for fear we may upset them??????



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Anyone who has a problem with having a physical pat down has issues that are possibly even more disturbing than an act of terrorism.

I wish people would get off their high horses about "being touched by a stranger"

Simply put, do we risk offending a few prudes in airports with physical pat downs??? or do we stop pat downs all together and risk the danger that they would originally prevent?

)


To put the shoe on the other foot. What about rape and molestation victims? There are many out there. Do you consider that being 'prude'? Do you consider that someone who has been victimized through no fault of their own in the past, not wanting to be touched by a stranger to have a 'problem'? If so is this 'problem' they have their own fault, or caused by outside circumstances?

No offense, but what it comes down to is, unless you've suffered through such victimization, non victims may be able to sympathize, but I doubt they will ever truly be able to 'understand' how much it can impact someone through their entire lives. Add to that the fact that yes, you DO get some TSA agents (not all, not even a majority) who are on an obvious power trip. Rape and molestation is quite often far more about power than sexual gratification. Also, bear in mind, when I speak of rape and molestation victims, I am not using the example in a gender specific context (IE: women), there are males that have been victimized as well.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


I would opt out of the scanner because of the privacy issues that they've had retaining the images when they are not supposed to. Also, the back-scatter machine focuses x-ray radiation on the body which is absorbed by the skin and sub-dermal layers. This damage caused by it is irreversible and quantitative (can be measured). An improperly configured or applied machine can deliver 20x the safe dose.

I have been searched by a police officer once as I was pulled over in my vehicle and he thought I seemed suspicious. (I was coming home from work in a dress shirt and TIE). what really happened is I was young driving a nice car and he was hoping to score a bust on weed. I'm not stupid.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by janon

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Nothing to hide then nothing to fear, it's not difficult is it really?


I can't even begin to explain how much statements like that sicken me to the core.


I also can't even begin to explain how many people can confuse an idea and twist it into something that it never was and never will be just because of their paranoid tendancies.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stryker Ops
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


I would opt out of the scanner because of the privacy issues that they've had retaining the images when they are not supposed to. Also, the back-scatter machine focuses x-ray radiation on the body which is absorbed by the skin and sub-dermal layers. This damage caused by it is irreversible and quantitative (can be measured). An improperly configured or applied machine can deliver 20x the safe dose.

I have been searched by a police officer once as I was pulled over in my vehicle and he thought I seemed suspicious. (I was coming home from work in a dress shirt and TIE). what really happened is I was young driving a nice car and he was hoping to score a bust on weed. I'm not stupid.


Ah! Maybe now we are getting somewhere! I can understand an obligation to going through the scanner as a result of being against images of yourself being stored for future access; I would probably feel the same way.

With regards to the radiation issue, well to be honest that wouldn't really bother me, but each to their own.

Genuine cause for concern is fine, but I'm not going to tolerate people sitting here telling me that they are opposed to being pat down as "a guy is reaching for his wifes labia" that's an ignorant and basically stupid statement taken so far out of context I'm honestly wondering on how to answer it without resorting to insults about that persons intelligence.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I'll try this once again.

What are the body scanner and invasive pat down doing in terms of security that metal detectors and wands aren't doing? If they are broken, then why are those security measures still in use and people are only "randomly" selected for the additional measures?

Further, what is to stop one of those thousands of other passengers that aren't selected for the scanner to bring in a "ceramic knife?" How many ceramic knives have the scanners found that wouldn't have been found in a metal detector or carry-on xray?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by works4dhs


leave security up to the individual?
there are some things ONLY government can do, and security is one of them.
leaving security up to airlines or individual airports would be a joke as we'd have literally hundreds of varied levels of security; the bad guys would identify the weak ones and use them to access the big flights.
the idea is to have uniform HIGH security. as has been pointed out, we've had no major incidences since 9/11.


ONLY government can provide security?

Evidently you are right, I mean our southern border is so secure, I'm sure glad government was there to handle that.

Airlines would have a vested interest in providing excellent security, it would be a bad business decision not to.

In regards to no major incidences since 9/11, lets look at the 2 well known ones: The underwear and shoe bombers.

Government didnt stop them, private citizens did.

So much for that government provided security eh?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


yes but what you're not really seeing regarding the explanations of dude's reaching for your wifes labia is that there has already ALREADY been an account where a TSA agent pulled the blouse of a lady down and exposed her boobs to everyone THEN told others about it and proceeded to make jokes about it. Not to mention they made her do it again.

I would suggest you view the video of a TSA agent trying to perform a pat down on a three year old or a little child whose mother is standing there smiling and apologizing while the agent isn't even comforting or attempting to comfort the child. The fact is we tell our kids that NOBODY is aloud to touch them except mom, dad and the doctor and now they are cupping genitals. yes they are cupping genitals. I've seen the videos of a TSA agent explaining the process. How am I suppose to explain to my child that it's ok for a stranger that is the government to do it but not a stranger on the road. A doctor, mom and dad are not strangers and never should be.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
I haven't followed this "disaster" closely, so please forgive my ignorance.

Am I understanding that you only get patted down if you refuse to go through one
of the x-ray machines?



This is not true anymore. This blogger was subjected to the pat down (without disclosure of what would be done) because she had baby formula for her infant with her at an airport that doesn't have the Rapiscans. All they needed to do was test the formula... not do an invasive search of her person:

How is this right?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by janon
I'll try this once again.

What are the body scanner and invasive pat down doing in terms of security that metal detectors and wands aren't doing? If they are broken, then why are those security measures still in use and people are only "randomly" selected for the additional measures?

Further, what is to stop one of those thousands of other passengers that aren't selected for the scanner to bring in a "ceramic knife?" How many ceramic knives have the scanners found that wouldn't have been found in a metal detector or carry-on xray?


I do see your point, to a degree...

As you will probably know, no system in the world is perfect and that principle applies in terms of national security/airport security/proximity security/law enforcement etc etc

Just because said system isn't perfect doesn't mean it should be adandoned and thus risk potential vulnerabilities, even though the current methods won't catch everyone, it's a bonus if lives are saved when they work.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


The police do not have the right to strip search an individual without due process of law. The body scans are, essentially a virtual strip search. Furthermore, comparing a police frisking to the TSA process, which includes genital fondling/manipulation supposedly to ensure someone isn't wearing exploding underpants (exploding underpants! Jesus Christ what kind of bizarre cartoonish world have we devolved into?!?!?) , is a huge stretch. Until you are booked (ie: DUE PROCESS), the police are essentially doing a quick check to ensure you don't have a weapon or stash of drugs which can be quickly gotten to.

Dude, I was with you on this 8 years ago. When it was simply longer, slower lines at the airport, "you can't take container of liquid on board", and the TSA has to be able to unlock your bags it was all simple inconvenience and I thought people should suck it up and take one for the team. Now we've pole vaulted across that line and are into physically intrusive, violations of the right to privacy surrounding your own body. An agency has been created which believes it is above the Bill of Rights and exempt from expecations of due process. That is what is sick here.

I can choose my doctor. That argument is ridiculous. Why not go all the way and say "Most people have no problem being naked and felt up by their lover, so what's the difference?" The difference is, you have no choice here. If you intend to fly (remember when wanting to fly didn't automatically make you a criminal suspect in the government's eyes? Those were the days, huh!), then you are subjected to either the Mad-Eye Moody x-ray "I can see your dingle" treatment or you're groped. In the real world we call that sexual assault... in National Safety Land it's called being a good little citizen and never questioning the Overlords. In my world I call it unacceptable and outrageous.




posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Stryker Ops
 


Do police officers not abuse their power? What about doctors, lawyers, politician's, soldiers, medics, writers, CEO's etc ....

Nothing is perfect and any system will always be abused, you can't use blanket logic and describe one case to represent the whole system.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


Well the my answer would be simple; you either accept that due to the current climate and terrorist threat you'll put up and shut up or simply you won't fly in terms of your rejection to the notion.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


Well the my answer would be simple; you either accept that due to the current climate and terrorist threat you'll put up and shut up or simply you won't fly in terms of your rejection to the notion.


What terrorist threat would that be?

The one government claims exists?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


Please see 7/7 London Bombings.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


That's the problem though it ISN"T just one case. There have been multiple and we're just in the infancy of the measures. The bigger picture is that they've been abusing their power since the get go. You can't dismiss their behavior in the least otherwise you allow yourself to be stepped on all the time. The smug attitude and behavior travels all the way up the line to Janet Napolitano who is the secretary of DHS. She literally takes the stance that they have the right to dismiss the bill of rights if it means protecting the American people. Every measure they've put in place has been proven ineffective. They scoff at the measures El Al Airlines put in place when in actuality it is THE SAFEST airline to travel on. The TSA make a mockery of real security firms. I am not going to argue with someone who obviously cannot see the big picture. There is A LOT more going on that this is just a part of in which you do not see because you are probably to focused on your next episode of GLEE and your super-sized Big Mac meal. Keep poisoning yourself with MSM and ignore the stuff that blatantly slaps you in the face everyday and you'll finally get it when none of your liberties exist any longer.

If you sacrifice liberty for safety then you deserve neither.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Which is what I said above. My family and I will not be flying until this outrage has been resolved to my satisfaction. I have little doubt that, once enough people are on board with this concept to start crushing the airlines' bottom lines, the government will buckle under commercial pressure and come up with a more acceptable form of security.

What I do worry about, however, is expansion of these machines and tactics outside of the airport. What happens when they suddenly decide to place these at every federal building entrance? If you, for instance, get called for jury duty, then suddenly all choice has been thrown out the window. Unless the recompense over this is swift and relentless from those who believe our rights are in jeopardy, this will happen. Metal detectors, for example, started in airports and were soon after found at entrances to most government buildings, shortly faterward schools, now even at some malls. Rights are funny little things, especially privacy rights... they're kinda like healthy cells in the body. All it takes is for one or two of them to become afflicted with disease and before you know it, the entire body is full of dead and dying cells.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Stryker Ops
 


Simply put, there's more than one case of police brutality reported here on a monthly, even weekly basis in the UK. It does't make them all bad and certainly doesn't mean they are all part of the same bunch...



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


Please see 7/7 London Bombings.


Thats all you have? An attack 5 years ago that didnt take place on a plane?

Thats your justification for the current liberty violating searches now?

A 5 year old attack in another country that didnt even take place on the same platform we are discussing?

Seriously?



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join