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: 8
3
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
Actually i would accept a cavity search, if it is needed. It can't be worse than a rectal exam.

Of course we are not criminals, but how do they know?

In THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, all individuals are INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law.
Until they can prove we are criminals, they can't treat us like criminals.


Because we say so.

YES. Unless they can prove otherwise. That's how the law works.


In todays world your word just is not good enough anymore.

That's not what the law says.


They do it for airline safety.

No they don't.
If they wanted to make airlines safe, this is what they'd do.
Have bomb sniffing dogs.
Have bomb sniffing machines.
Have psycho-analysts do quick interviews as they do in Israel.
Profile.
They do NONE of these things at all airports. But if they want you to be safe, why don't they??????????????


They are doing their job. That is all.

Here are a few other people who were just doing their jobs:
Hermann Göring
Heinrich Himmler
Reinhard Heydrich
Josef Mengele
Adolf Hitler


If i have to be searched, so be it. I will not complain, they are just doing what needs to be done, to ensure a safer enviroment for everyone.

How will this make us safer?
TSA decoy agents are still getting through these checkpoints with weapons and fake bomb materials.
If you really want to be safe, give up all your rights. That's the ONLY WAY to be safe. FREEDOM costs my friend.




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


Exactly, so compromise and stop complaining about something as petty as a physical pat down.

It's not just a pat down and I WILL NOTcompromise my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. I will not lose my FREEDOM to protect my freedom.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Well doesn't this all kind of cut to the quick here and leave us in a bit of a quandary?

On the one hand if a plane gets blown out of the sky Americans will be lined up, screaming that the government should have done something to protect us from those evil, evil, Islamic terrorists. We would stand in outrage that such a thing was allowed to happen and hundreds of threads would rapidly spawn to voice our distaste.

On the other hand when protections are offered what happens? Well, of course, thousands of people come out of the woodwork, quoting Benjamin Franklin and ranting that freedom, as we know it, is dead. Insisting that the ultimate trespass has been perpetrated upon us and that we aren't going to tolerate it.

And, of course, the reality is that it doesn't matter which way things work out. If planes fall from the sky we'd all be here insisting that we'd have gladly put up with more intrusive security measures. And the fact is that, since those steps to protect us are being taken, people are here doing the opposite... Saying that the security is unnecessary and extreme.

The only real truth demonstrable here is this: We, as a people, will complain no matter what happens.

~Heff

I'd rather die FREE than live as a slave.
Why do you think it's ok to give up CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ?
FREEDOM has a price.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
Actually i would accept a cavity search, if it is needed.


I don't believe you.

0/10


How many times must I say this. Yes i would accept a cavity search. There is far worse things that can be done to you to make you uncomfortable than this. So yes, bring on the cavity search.

That's just insane !
And next they will load you onto a train.
Then the train will pull up next to a camp.
Then you will be ushered into a large "shower".
Then your body will disposed of in a large oven.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Okay, here's my two cents. I was okay with pat downs, I was okay with taking off my shoes. I understood people wanted to be safe when they flew. But it reaches a point of inanity when patting genitals and breasts or having a naked image of yourself screened is considered in the best interests of the public.

Its not the groping that bothers me, its the invasion of privacy and lack of rights - all sprung on us without warning or any say as to how we feel about the situation. Its the fact that America is sacrificing its freedom in the name of safety because its "for our own good."

I disagree. You are more likely to be killed by a goat, a pig, a cow, a shark, a car, a person, a fire, than you are to die in a plane crash, or even terrorist threat. These new measures are unnecessary, and do NOT provide any increased safety. Even with full cavity scans, all somebody has to do once they're past security is bring some glass they purchased behind security with them on the plane, or take some silverware. But even then, unless they have a bomb, its not going to matter because the pilots have a GUN, and are protected by a bullet proof wall.

Do people avoid leaving the house when it rains because they're afraid if they look up and breathe in they might actually drown? NO

Do people refuse to drive cars because people die in accidents every year? NO

How many millions of dollars have been spent "for the greater good" to justify our rights being violated, and our freedoms removed. I would rather risk being blown up on a plane in the off chance a metal detector, and a bomb sniffer, and a luggage x-ray didn't detect the threat.

To put it simply, this is INSANE.

Our nation was founded on the idea that freedom is worth the risks and dangers that come along with it. I am no longer flying, despite normally needing to multiple times a year. I am now taking the train, and am looking to organize local protesting against all these changes.
edit on 19-11-2010 by zelaar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by zelaar
Our nation was founded on the idea that freedom is worth the risks and dangers that come along with it. I am no longer flying, despite normally needing to multiple times a year. I am now taking the train, and am looking to organize local protesting against all these changes.

Let me know when and where. I'll do my best to attend

I'll need some advance notice though as I won't be flying !



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
 


This isn't for safety? What was the case that made these scanners and pat downs necessary? There were no bombs being sneaked onto planes regularly or ever really, excluding one very convenient failed attempt that most would consider highly suspicious [underwear bomber] case in which they say his bomb today still wouldn't be see on the backscatter scanner. Why did they all of a sudden make this sweeping nationwide, every airport reform? Spend million of dollars because of this once incident? Because if it wasn't because of this underwear incident there is no excuse because nothing was happening? There was no problem with the old precautions.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Yes.. right this way. We have posted guards and barbed wire fences around your neighborhood and work. You can't ever leave, just live and work here, but you will be really f**king safe!!

I would rather take all these risks and live completely free.
You would be as safe as can be in a padded room, but you would no longer enjoy life.
That is what is happening on a small scale. They suck a little joy out of your life for safety they tell you you need.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jfj123
 


demandprogress.org...

Thank you very much !
I just signed it, forwarded it to a bunch of friends and put it on my facebook page !
STARRED !


Thanks. I found it on boingboing.net they are covering the TSA thing extensively.
Not advertising, just showing some love for a really,really good site. I signed it the other day.
I'm not sure what the petition is, I think it just sends that small sentence. Whatever works.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ProvehitoInAltum
 


I've wondered why not use the dogs myself. Makes so much sense.

3 year olds you say?
Well, they are subject to "pat downs" now so i don't know why they wouldn't be subject to anything that is imposed in the future.
www.examiner.com...



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I'd rather die FREE than live as a slave.
Why do you think it's ok to give up CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ?
FREEDOM has a price.


It's so easy to spout rhetoric and speak in definitives and ideals in the abstract. But would you look in the eye of a child who lost their father to a preventable terrorist act and say "It's OK. Your Dads death was necessary for our freedom"?

It is absolute hyperbole to equate increased security at airports as "slavery". You do realize that these types of restrictions and searches already existed for travel to many other nations long before this week of TSA paranoia, right?

I have had two different jobs which involved being pat searched and having my possessions (Coats, briefcase, bags, etc) searched on a daily basis this was not only normal, it was mandatory. There was an easy out to avoid this. I simply could quit the job if I didn't agree.

You can simply NOT utilize airlines - private business entities - if you disagree with their security policies. Contrary to the rhetoric here, you do not have a Constitutional right to fly. There is no rape of freedom here. There is no violation of your rights. Nothing is being forced upon you. If you fly you agree to the policy via informed consent. Refuse the pat search, and you don't fly. It's simple.

Let's cover that one more time because it's important... Airlines are private entities which have the right to secure their businesses. And you have the ability to refuse to utilize their services if you do not agree with their methods of securing their premises. To me you might as well be screaming that we need a revolution in this country because you are subject to metal detectors and pat downs when entering a courthouse. It's the same damn principle. The only difference is that Fox news isn't milking any courthouse stories for ratings this week.

~Heff
edit on 11/20/10 by Hefficide because: typo



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Is your reply with sarcastic humour an indication that I have a point and you don't have an answer for it?



No.. it wasn't actually.
I made my case. They don't have to touch you like that to determine whether or not you have a bomb.
There are other avenues to explore. Also, what is there reason for this nonsense? Where is the real threat?


I have no problem with being searched at an airport. I would even welcome a full cavity search if it was necessary.
People can hide things in very weird places and crevices. Without a full search, who knows what the guy next to you smuggled into the plane between his butt cheeks?
I believe these guys are just doing their job, and it is getting blown out of proportion on this thread.

VvV


No offense, but are you truly serious? And exactly WHERE do children fit into that? In WHAT WORLD would it EVER be acceptable for NON-MEDICAL personnel to insert their fingers into the orafices of a three year old girl or boy? Do you realize an event like that would literally SCAR A CHILD FOR LIFE? Are you then willing to part with even MORE of your money to afford the tax that will be needed to offer COUNSELING to each and every child that has been mentally traumatized by such an event?

I think this is the first time I've ever truly become incensed reading something on a thread here.

ETA: What I don't understand? Why don't they use dogs? Why do they not follow the model of El Al, which is THE safest airline in the world? The patdowns are NOT necessary as there are already far more effective methods which have been suggested to the DHS.
edit on 19-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)


If you have bothered to read all the posts here, you would see that, that question was ask to me. Who do I think should get searched and what not. I replied that the frail elderly, anyone under 18 should be excluded. So please read a bit more carefully, before jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

You would not get incensed, if you bother to read all the replies and posts. You clearly are just jumping on the bandwagon of complaints.

VvV




As for who should be excluded. The only people that should be excluded, should be the really frail elderly, kids under 18.



edit on 20-11-2010 by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep because: just to include my statement, that this person obviously missed



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Originally posted by jfj123
I'd rather die FREE than live as a slave.
Why do you think it's ok to give up CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ?
FREEDOM has a price.


It's so easy to spout rhetoric and speak in definitives and ideals in the abstract. But would you look in the eye of a child who lost their father to a preventable terrorist act and say "It's OK. Your Dads death was necessary for our freedom"?



You know you've lost when you are using hypothetical fantasy scenarios.

Seriously.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Is your reply with sarcastic humour an indication that I have a point and you don't have an answer for it?



No.. it wasn't actually.
I made my case. They don't have to touch you like that to determine whether or not you have a bomb.
There are other avenues to explore. Also, what is there reason for this nonsense? Where is the real threat?


I have no problem with being searched at an airport. I would even welcome a full cavity search if it was necessary.
People can hide things in very weird places and crevices. Without a full search, who knows what the guy next to you smuggled into the plane between his butt cheeks?
I believe these guys are just doing their job, and it is getting blown out of proportion on this thread.

VvV

So you believe that anything is reasonable to be safe.
Lets continue that logic.
You may no longer travel without papers.
You may be stopped while driving, questioned and detained without cause at any time.
Your house may be searched at any time without warrant or cause.
Of course the government will need to keep track of you while you travel so you will be tattooed with a set of numbers.
All of your banking may be investigated without cause at any time.
Your friends and family may be interviewed and detained at any time.
Your children will be cavity searched.
etc...
Welcome to the fourth reich !


Again, don't twist my words to fit into your hysteria about state security. I am commenting on the searches conducted at airports. I am not saying anything about houses being searched and being detained unlawfully.
You see this is what happens everytime there is some new thing the media gives attention too.

Hysteria errupts over something that is not such a big issue in the first place. You get searched at the airport, you get on the plane, knowing everyone was thoroughly checked, and it is safe. You feel safer knowing it was done.

Why is there this need to complain about everything? This is done for YOUR own safety. If something unsavoury happens on the plane, YOU will complain about airport security, or the lack thereof. Then there will be a thread created about the lack of security again, and gotten blown out of proportion.

It is absurd. Just accept it, it is for your own good.

vVV



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
 


Ah so you think violating peoples bodies, let alone their civil liberties, is ok if the government claims "its for your safety"?

Seriously?



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Ah, I see. Hand pick a small segment of the post and then attack it, while ignoring the context and the rest of the post - and all with an arbitrary and totally irrelevant statement.

This seems much more lost than anything I've posted.

Seriously.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep

Why is there this need to complain about everything?



He isn't complaining about everything.

He is standing up for my freedom and he is doing a good job exposing you for what you are.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Originally posted by jfj123
I'd rather die FREE than live as a slave.
Why do you think it's ok to give up CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ?
FREEDOM has a price.


It's so easy to spout rhetoric and speak in definitives and ideals in the abstract. But would you look in the eye of a child who lost their father to a preventable terrorist act and say "It's OK. Your Dads death was necessary for our freedom"?


Before or after considering that the US government has said that thousands of times in the past, only in the form of telling a child who's father just died "It's OK. Your dad's death was necessary for our freedom" following the dad's death in some ass end of nowhere war on the other side of the planet against people who pose absolutely ZERO threat to Americans and our freedom but, rather, represent some threat to backroom US government deals, some deep pocketed US corporation's profit margin, or some other issue the average US citizen would consider meaningless but Uncle Sam claims is worth dying over?

I'm freaking serious here. We have an actual set of rights and freedoms that are under assault here IN THE NAME OF KEEPING A SMALL HANDFULL OF AMERICANS SAFE!?!?! From the same government that can opt on a whim to send Americans into situations where they are hundreds of times more likely to die at enemy hands than they are likely to die of a terror attack inside the US with no additional "security" meansure in place? This is like the old bumpersticker saying: "God please protect me from your followers." US government, we need you to act now to protect us from the US government!



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
Airlines are private entities which have the right to secure their businesses. And you have the ability to refuse to utilize their services if you do not agree with their methods of securing their premises. To me you might as well be screaming that we need a revolution in this country because you are subject to metal detectors and pat downs when entering a courthouse.


This deserves it's own reply because it is important.

1. Airlines are private entities which have the right to secure their businesses... They should also have the right not to do so, but the TSA disagrees. This isn't the airlines. Several airline company executives have come out this week and criticized this. The government has given them the brush off and stated that the airlines have no say as they have deemed this "national security." Goodbye to that argument, unless you wish to discuss the removal of freedoms of the airlines themselves under the crushing fists of the federal government, in which case I'm game.

2. Those metal detectors at courthouses (and schools, some malls, and most any federal building) all started in airports. I have never been patted down at a courthouse. Unless you are entering one in shackles, I doubt that you have, either. If this is permitted to continue at airports, however, I have little doubt we'll see the scanners and gropes at courthouses, schools, malls, everywhere that now has metal detectors within 10 years. THIS also will destroy your freedom of choice argument. The law says I must send my children to school... think that law will suddenly change if they install naked body scanners at the door? Think I have any intention of allowing my children to walk through one at school if I refuse to fly until they remove them from the airports? Courthouses are also scratched from the elective entry list because we have mandatory jury duty among other "involuntary" reasons people must enter courthouses. We have a much better chance of fighting these privacy rights violations here and now than we ever will if we sit on our asses with our thumbs in our mouths believing our big buddy in DC has our best interests at heart and just wants to keep us safe (while at the same time stealing our freedom of privacy over our own body.)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Before or after considering that the US government has said that thousands of times in the past, only in the form of telling a child who's father just died "It's OK. Your dad's death was necessary for our freedom" following the dad's death in some ass end of nowhere war on the other side of the planet against people who pose absolutely ZERO threat to Americans and our freedom but, rather, represent some threat to backroom US government deals, some deep pocketed US corporation's profit margin, or some other issue the average US citizen would consider meaningless but Uncle Sam claims is worth dying over?


I have no disagreement with this whatsoever. I am not pro government, programmed, nor delusional in my interpretations of how corrupt our system is. I see things as they are.

However, wars having nothing to do with steps to ensure public safety in non war zones. Cops kill people, frame people, and do all manner of dirty things, probably daily. But this does not mean that we should abandon the rule of law because of it. Even with the risk of police officers abusing their office we accept a necessity for them because they are part of our deterrent to danger.

People die in wars and it is unavoidable. People dying from bombs on airplanes, however, can be avoided.


Originally posted by burdman30ott6

I'm freaking serious here. We have an actual set of rights and freedoms that are under assault here IN THE NAME OF KEEPING A SMALL HANDFULL OF AMERICANS SAFE!?!?! From the same government that can opt on a whim to send Americans into situations where they are hundreds of times more likely to die at enemy hands than they are likely to die of a terror attack inside the US with no additional "security" meansure in place? This is like the old bumpersticker saying: "God please protect me from your followers." US government, we need you to act now to protect us from the US government!


Again, my distrust of the government does not relate, at all, to my desire to take reasonable steps to guarantee my best possible chances of being safe. And, again, the risks that soldiers face in war are not equatable to the dangers and risks that a civilian population should have to face. The two things are apples and oranges.

As another poster pointed out earlier in this thread... You cannot even enter a sporting event or music concert without being pat searched these days. Where is your ire about that? Where is the hyperbole? In fact at least the TSA does background checks on their screeners. I doubt the guys at your local mega venue were subjected to such scrutiny - and yet I don't see Fox News, or the right in ATS raising Hell about that. Why not?

I am not a fool who thinks that Barack Obama and Uncle Sam are my saviors. But I am a rational person who feels that a bit more scrutiny before flying is acceptable based upon risk analysis.

~Heff



edit on 11/20/10 by Hefficide because: bb tag



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join