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 Modifies Pat Downs/Protests dated for 11/24/10

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Yeah you have stated a lot of things all of which are B.S. The government may like to act like they own the country, but the fact is they don't it could tip easily enough. A fraction of the people have complained and they are already revising (what your post is about remember) maybe if you would stop fighting for them, and join to fight for the people things would change even more. Instead you just roll over. If more people joined in, we could have it stopped. Americans just have to get together on things and not be anything like you.




posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


I'll accept any proof at all. Many here take hearsay as proof, I don't... If he's an accredited doctor with others on board I'd say your on to something.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Hhahahahaha tip easily enough? Then why haven't we taken back our country yet? Coming from someone who says we could "easily tip the scales" that solution shouldn't be hard to come up with even though we've been in this current situation for 160 years.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Haha why am I talking to you? Yeah they did it for thousands of years and took months out of their lives to make that journey. It's not reasonable. You find a boat company that is purely for transportation and goes several hundred miles per hour and i'll take back everything I've said about how ignorant you are being.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   
How is this method proven to stop bombs?
Show me the proof.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Easy, because of people like you. People who wont stand up for another's rights. People who would tell people that are uncomfortable being looked at naked or being touched to get on a boat because they aren't worthy of taking a plane because of their weakness.
That's everything that is wrong with this country. I'm done talking to you.

edit on 23-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: ...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


How bout you find me that boat, your the one who's going to need it.

2nd line.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Witty fellow.
Maybe I will find that boat, and take a nice long cruise with my dignity intact.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Check out the TSA blog go down to TSA myths and facts.

blog.tsa.gov...

Myth: AIT cannot detect powdered explosives.

Fact: This is false. Advanced imaging technology is deployed specifically because of its ability to detect both metallic threats – which a metal detector would pick up – and non-metallic threats – which a metal detector would not pick up. This includes explosive material that can take the form of powders, liquids and gels and be used in an improvised explosive device made up completely of non-metallic material.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Also on the same TSA blog page. You can find where they've been studying health concerns with the AIT, so far nothing incredibly alarming, unless you've never had an X-Ray.


CX

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by CX
 


I'll accept any proof at all. Many here take hearsay as proof, I don't... If he's an accredited doctor with others on board I'd say your on to something.


Ok here you go, i'll leave it to members here to disect his qualifications and report as i'm not qualified to do so.


Radiation dose actually 20 times higher than Official estimate

The concentration on the skin -- one of the most radiation-sensitive organs of the human body -- means the radiation dose is actually 20 times higher than the official estimate according to David Brenner, head of Columbia University's Center for Radiological Research.

Dr. Brenner, who was consulted to write guidelines for the security scanners in 2002, claims he would not have signed the report had he known the devices would be so widely used. He said a type of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma, which occurs mainly on the head and neck and is usually curable, is the most likely risk from the airport scanners.

Full article: Radiation from airport scanners may increase cancer risk


Maybe too much use of the word, "may" for some people to accept it as proof, but when someone like this says its harmfull, its hard to ignore it over the opinions of someone on the boards who is not qualified to comment.

This is where it always gets difficult, do we always take an experts word as gospel?

CX.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


The TSA blog.. are you kidding me?

This explains why they aren't likely to detect powders and liquids. (keep in mind it only takes a few grams of some compounds not that you would really consider this)
www.dailytech.com...
edit on 23-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


Nice find! Although I would like to know what the radiation level is the equivalent too. also his personal webpage can be found here: www.columbia.edu...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


You stated nothing I don't already know, nothings foolproof but anyone with half a brain knows that
. Tell me that this doesn't give us even the slightest upper hand with finding hazardous materials and maybe just maybe you'd be onto something.


CX

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by CX
 


Nice find! Although I would like to know what the radiation level is the equivalent too. also his personal webpage can be found here: www.columbia.edu...




Yeah i know what you mean. I've seen some comments on the web saying you'd have to go through the scanners thousands of times to even match one CT scan.

Thing is, there are so many devices out there that give off harmfull radiation, yet no-one is fussed about them.

I guess its because mobile phones and wireless laptops don't show you naked or feel you up.

CX.
edit on 23/11/10 by CX because: spells



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by bertapearl
 


My rights? Last time I checked your flying at THEIR airport.


What utter nonsense. Unless it is a privately owned airport, it is OUR airport. These scumbags work for us. They just act like they own it. They want you to think they own it. And, obviously, in some cases , it has worked.
We are taking back Orlando Airport (MCO) back tomorrow. A group of 20 (looking for 1 more) has located a retired DC-3 (Actually passenger converted C-47) to go to Gate 64 for pickup. Passengers using the Terminal transient aircraft gate must go through TSA screening and security. The 21 will opt out, then refuse the pat down. Under TSA publickly announced guidelines and their Management Directive 100.4, the people are then not free to go. They are, therefore, if asked any questions, the subjects of a custodial interrogation, requiring a lawyer be provided before any questioning. How long do you think that is going to take?
Orlando Sanford Airport has already fired the TSA. We think the Orlando Aviation Authority will soon follow wit MCO if anarchy reigns on 11/24.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
People are also forgetting to mention about the countless women who were "randomly" chosen by male guards to go through the body scanners when they were first implemented. consumercal.blogspot.com...
I wonder how many women vs. men were "randomly" chosen to go through the scanners and how many men vs. women were doing the screening when they first came out.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
We have the right to fly as Americans. Read the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978.


We still have the right to fly.




The Act, however, did not remove or diminish the FAA's regulatory powers over all aspects of airline safety.


I don't imagine it removes or diminishes ANY government regulatory powers for safety.


Deregulation Act of 1978

To the subject, I like it that they are modifying their procedures to deal with the resistance of the people. It says that the people DO have power and DO matter. I could get used to using our power this way.

I see both sides of this issue. I do, however, highly suspect the government's motivation here. But I don't fly. I haven't flown since they started doing what amounts to invading our privacy in exchange for boarding an aircraft. So, I agree with Joker. If you don't like it, don't fly. But I agree with the others that this invasion goes FAR beyond what is necessary and I believe there's more to it than what we're seeing.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


Ya like say a microwave? Used daily in the home and no one has called for a ban on them yet.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


It doesn't.
I'm on to something.
"Anything you can hide in your a** you can get on a plane"



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join