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: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


..I know. That's what I was saying. If you had included what my quote was in response to, it was OP questioning that right.




posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
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.


Ever closed the door with your head inside? They don't start with the door open for a reason.
The two things don't relate. It is impossible to deny that this machine exposes you to radiation, and if you don't want to be exposed to any again.. that's your right.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Exactly my point enjoy your day or two or three in a cell. Hope it's worth halting someone's traveling plans, remember if it's your airport it's also theirs the people who don't care about the scanners. Although as I stated before you can act all you want like the "airports" are ours... that's laughable, they haven't been "ours" since September 11.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 





My opinion: I think this is complete and utter bull, to me these devices stop more harm then they cause and the only reason people are getting patted down is because they refuse the scanner or set off the metal detector.


Personally, I like a good fondling, but your premise is wrong. They do absolutely nothing to make us safer! They would not have stopped the shoe or the panty bomber. There are high quality ceramic weapons that would be easy to conceal and not set off either scanner. There are plenty of explosives that could be hidden inside body cavities, or swallowed before boarding the flight. The 2oz liquid limit is plenty of material to mix a bomb on the plane. There is no need for a bomb, the planes can easily be taken down on takeoff or landing from outside the fence. There is no need to take a bomb on the plane when a bomb in the security line would be just as effective. Plus, why go through all that security to take down a plane full of distant strangers, when you could much more easily attend a big political rally or a football game or a basketball game and take out a big section of people from one community!

The Airline security is ridiculous!



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


It's a proven fact that microwaves still give off radiation, that's why they tell you not to stand in front of it and watch your food cook. So in comparison to the AIT the microwave is much more deadly because it is used daily.Do I really have to find you a study on that as well?



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


They do absolutely nothing to make us safer? Are you kidding me seriously? Just because something isn't foolproof doesn't mean it does nothing to stop hazardous materials from getting onto a plane, showing someones figure down to the bare skin sounds like a great start!



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Whatever dude.. you can play that card all you want, but anyone here knows it wasn't til the last page that you learned that the airports were the publics. Our airport, or right to fly. Both facts which you have denied. You have no case. None whatsoever.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


I'm still waiting on the evidence that these scanners in fact make use safer.
2nd



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


They do absolutely nothing to make us safer? Are you kidding me seriously? Just because something isn't foolproof doesn't mean it does nothing to stop hazardous materials from getting onto a plane, showing someones figure down
to the bare skin sounds like a great start!


You did your best NoJoker, you made a bait thread, you got a bunch of people to rebut your illogical posts but yet you still failed to score any flags. Better luck next time.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


No because they have already proven that that doesn't stop anything, it does however make people uncomfortable and not want to fly so a new approach has to be sought.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


As usual Heretic you words are soothing and calm and I thank you for the input. Also thank you for agreeing that if you don't like it don't fly and I will admit that everything takes a while to get right. I promote anything that will lead to safer skies.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


Haha I noticed that, I was thinking the same thing. I figured he was just trying to drag it out so it stays up top. No other sense for arguing that long, but then I realized it still wasn't getting him anywhere so I played along. I'm sure a few of the other hardheaded people that seriously believe this crap and aren't just trolling will maybe give him a few if they stumble on it.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by bertapearl
 


My rights? Last time I checked your flying at THEIR airport. Just like if you don't like the no shirt, no shoes policy tough luck you still won't get in MY store. When something is yours you can choose how it should be run, otherwise your going into a government run place where your say means just about nothing. The government hasn't worked for the people for a long time, those of you with dillusions that it still does need to either do something about it or conform to the system. America still has the best way of life in the world, don't like it move.


No no no... just because it's your store, coffee shop, newstand, or whatever... doesn't give you the right to violate someone's right to privacy or deny fair and equal treatment. It wasn't all that long ago that certain people were denied equal treatment in public establishments because of the color of their skin. While I understand that we're talking about public safety here, I think this is a matter of principle and is a conscious effort by many to halt what they percieve is a violation of our basic constitutinal rights (privacy). Did you read the story about the man who was humiliated because of his medical condition that required him to wear a urostomy bag?

TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine

This type of thing is why people are so upset. We aren't cattle and we will refuse to be treated as such, at least I will.

And your love it or leave it comment is old and tired. it's people like you who are willing to trade their rights for some percieved safety who should GTFO. All this added security crap is just smoke and mirrors and it looks like you've fallen for the rabbit in a hat trick. Remember, magic is just an illusion. You do know that the "underwear bomber" never went through TSA security right?

Anyway... I'm sure none of what I said will get through to you so have a lovely day.

~peace



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


You really are devoid of all common sense aren't you? You can't seem to get a grasp on my sarcastic nature. You think that I really believe that airports aren't the peoples? Their run by the government so they should be but that's not the case because the government, last time I checked, hasn't been working for the people for quite a long time. So take your moronic insult and shove it you clearly do have less then half a brain if you've missed my sarcasm to this point. Also if you can't see the pros in being able to take a full body image of someones bare skin then you really must be devoid of all logic, again I never said it was foolproof, apparently you must also like shoving things up your backside because it's the only defense you've gone to quite a few times.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Blarneystoner
 


Um actually it does, if you don't conform to the rules on the door I can decide not to serve you. Same as at the airport.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


As usual Heretic you words are soothing and calm and I thank you for the input. Also thank you for agreeing that if you don't like it don't fly and I will admit that everything takes a while to get right. I promote anything that will lead to safer skies.


I don't get you. He obviously disagreed with you as just a few threads back you were saying we weren't "tipping" anything that us causing them to change their approach didn't show us taking any control.
You flip flop like a politician.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Really? Which terrorists have they arrested so far? I am not a terrorist, I have never been to some fancy camp, and I don't have a big bankroll, and I could beat the system with 1 or 2 days prep time and minimal internet research.

This is a false sense of security. It absolutely does not do anything substantial to make you safer, but the fact that you believe it does is good enough for them!

I gave plenty of examples above, but let me go further. The new procedure allows them to put their finger between the cups of a bra if the shirt is not tight fitting, but what about inside the cups of the bra? They don't do a mammogram, so why couldn't 800cc of high-powered explosive be carried in a wonder bra? They can now reach up in a crotch area, but they don't reach inside. Do you think a flashlight sized tube of C4 could be hidden in a cavity and attached to a cockpit door in flight? Do you think airplanes are the most vulnerable area of security risk? Do you think bringing down another airplane would do anything to change the lifestyle of Americans? I contend that the DC Sniper was more effective at causing mass terror than 9/11 was. (That is, until the governmental response overwhelmingly took our rights and conveniences as a response to 9/11.)

So, in my opinion terrorist actions rank #1 Governmental Response, #2 DC Sniper, #3 My own fears of what "could" happen. and lastly #4 Actual terrorism on a flight! So our security measures should be aimed in that order! #1 Protect the population from an overbearing Government. #2 Protect the population from random psychos. #3 Actually give a little bit of Forethought and prevent the worst-case scenarios. #4 Protect the airplanes.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


You really are devoid of all common sense aren't you? You can't seem to get a grasp on my sarcastic nature. You think that I really believe that airports aren't the peoples? Their run by the government so they should be but that's not the case because the government, last time I checked, hasn't been working for the people for quite a long time. So take your moronic insult and shove it you clearly do have less then half a brain if you've missed my sarcasm to this point. Also if you can't see the pros in being able to take a full body image of someones bare skin then you really must be devoid of all logic, again I never said it was foolproof, apparently you must also like shoving things up your backside because it's the only defense you've gone to quite a few times.


Well the fact that I'm on my side of the argument and you are on yours shows who is lacking in the common sense department. And I already explained why it showing bare skin does nothing to stop an attack, as many others here also have. They can simple pack the explosives in their body, and that's if the explosives that can make it through the scanner don't work. And you clearly did not know that as you said it wasn't the peoples right to fly. You can't just try to apply sarcasm to cover your knowledge and logic gaffs.

Mature insult. It's the defense I go to because its the one that proves you absolutely incorrect and flawed in your logic.
edit on 23-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


You think I want flags? That's for people who swim with the tide, apparently like yourself. Protest has become popular no wonder all the sheeple here are NOW on the ban wagon. Take your stars or flags and shove it, I just want to get some stuff off my chest and clearly most here are for a burning plane and not a safer one at the risk of some human touch! O Boo Who!



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
You know Joker, GogoVic has a point, you have YET to show these scanners/searches stopped a bomb OR explosive device from getting on a plane, and you avoided answering his question, twice in fact.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join