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: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
What the heck is the point of all this if only a few thousand people have died from terrorists? Not to be disrespectful to the families, but how many of us die per year just driving?

I highly doubt these things make us any safer then the typical metal detector and bomb sniffing dogs can. In fact I think I would trust the sniffer dogs more. Lets not forget all the flight marshals now too, dont think anyones hijacking with a box cutter anymore (cant see how they did in the first place)

These scanners still dont see inside you, which is where they will hide things next, and they have already admitted the cargo on the planes doesnt get scanned very well, so next time it might just be a bomb in a bag set off by a cell phone call, so much for the scanners at that point.

I could care less if someone sees me naked or wants to feel me up, ill make it more uncomfortable for them then it will be for me, but the fact is once the government gets to take steps like this its all to hell trying to reverse it. First its the airport, then the subway, then the mall, then the movie theatre, then your workplace, then there's cameras are everywhere like in the UK, then they are in your house, and on and on and on, THATS the big deal with this, along with the millions they have off this inside deal.


Id rather take the slim chance of a terrorist on a plane then let big brother take over via false flags. Boss up america.
edit on 23-11-2010 by A-Dub because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-11-2010 by A-Dub because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Again.. you are ridiculous. This whole thread is a testament to your swimming with the tide.
2nd



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


they stop more harm than they cause? What have they stopped? Nothing.

Shoe bomber: no
underwear bomber: no
yemen package: no


Could all that have been orchestrated and "set up" to justify the plans to use extreme measures?



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Again your stating that people won't put items on themselves just in themselves... Apparently your sexual fascination because many people try to just put things on themselves and not inside themselves. Again look at everyone here who is for this! It's laughable if this was put through when Bush was in office everyone would be cool with it. Isn't it alarming that you don't see anyone backing this technology right now? Doesn't that make you think that some political party has stake in protests and riots happening, chaos reigning? Or are you still that devoid of logic and really can't see outside that box your in.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Ya thats why everyone is swimming with me genius.

2nd line.



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


That's a good chance of being a possibility but even better do you think they allowed that to happen so then this would happen so then protests and riots would happen?



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 



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


This is the most fallacious statement to make. Everybody defending the TSA makes it. It is not the airports that are enforcing this stuff, it is the TSA. A government agency. There have already been around 17 airports that have kicked the TSA the hell out of their doors, and more are making headway to do the exact same thing. If the airports, as private businesses, themselves said: "We are using these procedures, including groping your genitals and subjecting you to untested technology, and if you don't like it, don't fly with us" I would have absolutely no problem with it. They are private businesses after all. However, this is a government agency saying and doing these things. This is a government agency imposing their rules on a private business. The government, including any agencies that branch off of it, are still subject to the Constitution of the United States, and are still bound by it.

These machines and procedures violate the 4th Amendment, and I'm not going to sit idly by and watch even more liberties stripped away. Many Americans have already let this happen, but this is one that won't.


Peace be with you.

-truthseeker



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


So tell me, since far more people die from car accidents than "terrorists" should we just take Americans right to drive their cars too? Heck lets just stick everyone in in coffin sized rooms so that we dont have to worry about the "boogie men" or anything else getting us and let the government take care of everything else....



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by truthseeker1984
 


Again read my other posts,. I've stated the reason why. If you think the people own this country then state to me how? Because from where I'm sitting the government own's everything and the way of the people has been long gone for a very long time. Clearly no one understands sarcasm.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 



You are weird man. It's obvious I'm recurrently discussing terrorists packing something in their body (could be implanted doesn't have to be anally which is your theme of the hour) it would be impossible to detect with the scanners you are up in the air for. Not only that but I included that some powders and liquids could make it through. So you are the only one focused on that. Also as to what else you said, no I don't think so. I think people would have put up a fight no matter when they were implied.. maybe just after 9/11 when the gov was milking it. That's it though. Also.. are you delusional too? Most people are are not with you on this.


CX

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


they stop more harm than they cause? What have they stopped? Nothing.

Shoe bomber: no
underwear bomber: no
yemen package: no


Could all that have been orchestrated and "set up" to justify the plans to use extreme measures?


Just what i was thinking.

You couldn't have prevented any of them if they were let through security like the underpant bomber.

CX.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by s7ryk3r
 


Cars run the economy... good luck with that, it's a risk our government takes because it makes us money. However the plane burning and people dieing costs the government alot more in the long run. Do you think they've saved money or spent more money since September 11 on airport security? Well the answer is they've spent more but they've also gained more business by this because people were fearful of flying for a very long time.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by A-Dub
What the heck is the point of all this if only a few thousand people have died from terrorists? Not to be disrespectful to the families, but how many of us die per year just driving?

I highly doubt these things make us any safer then the typical metal detector and bomb sniffing dogs can. In fact I think I would trust the sniffer dogs more. Lets not forget all the flight marshals now too, dont think anyones hijacking with a box cutter anymore (cant see how they did in the first place)

These scanners still dont see inside you, which is where they will hide things next, and they have already admitted the cargo on the planes doesnt get scanned very well, so next time it might just be a bomb in a bag set off by a cell phone call, so much for the scanners at that point.

I could care less if someone sees me naked or wants to feel me up, ill make it more uncomfortable for them then it will be for me, but the fact is once the government gets to take steps like this its all to hell trying to reverse it. First its the airport, then the subway, then the mall, then the movie theatre, then your workplace, then there's cameras are everywhere like in the UK, then they are in your house, and on and on and on, THATS the big deal with this.


Id rather take the slim chance of a terrorist on a plane then let big brother take over via false flags. Boss up america.
edit on 23-11-2010 by A-Dub because: (no reason given)


I couldn't agree with you more. I think that what is happening is that people are waking up to the fact that the US Gov. is attempting to resind our constitutional rights at almost every level. I'm very encouraged that this issue is garnering attention from the MSM and people are basically saying "no" we will not tollerate it. Maybe this will be the catalyst that we need to put a halt to the growing insurections on our rights that were initiated by the Homeland Security act.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
People are always saying things like 'if you don't like a rule or a law do something about it'.
The masses are not satisfied with these new rules and are doing something about it.
The companies are not listening to their customers. Posts telling people that it is too bad and suck it up kind of goes against standing up for yourself. Many people in the US would rather freedom over security and not need to be subjected to humiliating acts just to board a plane.

It really is too bad that fear has to be the vehicle used to push these stupid agendas. People buy into the fear and assume that everyone wants them dead at every turn.

Why cant the planes just use the steel reinforced cockpit with the pilots armed with ammo designed for airline use along with undercover air marshals? Isn't this more than enough? It's not like we've seen hundreds of hijackings in the US and the people are up in arms over it. From what I have read, many hijackings are for diverting the plane to another destination not so much to be used as a missile. If someone wants a plane out of the sky, it has always been much easier to either fire a ground based rocket or plant some explosive on the plane down below.
edit on 23/11/10 by shadow watcher because: sp



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by A-Dub
What the heck is the point of all this if only a few thousand people have died from terrorists? Not to be disrespectful to the families, but how many of us die per year just driving?

I highly doubt these things make us any safer then the typical metal detector and bomb sniffing dogs can. In fact I think I would trust the sniffer dogs more. Lets not forget all the flight marshals now too, dont think anyones hijacking with a box cutter anymore (cant see how they did in the first place)

These scanners still dont see inside you, which is where they will hide things next, and they have already admitted the cargo on the planes doesnt get scanned very well, so next time it might just be a bomb in a bag set off by a cell phone call, so much for the scanners at that point.

I could care less if someone sees me naked or wants to feel me up, ill make it more uncomfortable for them then it will be for me, but the fact is once the government gets to take steps like this its all to hell trying to reverse it. First its the airport, then the subway, then the mall, then the movie theatre, then your workplace, then there's cameras are everywhere like in the UK, then they are in your house, and on and on and on, THATS the big deal with this, along with the millions they have off this inside deal.


Id rather take the slim chance of a terrorist on a plane then let big brother take over via false flags. Boss up america.
edit on 23-11-2010 by A-Dub because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-11-2010 by A-Dub because: (no reason given)


Yes this is absolutely right.
The things that led them this far aren't going to stop. This isn't some great infallible system. Something will happen. Someone will get something past it (if they are really even trying) and they will try to impose something even worse. Let's stop them before it gets out of hand.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
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.


When the people who you say don't care find out that the scanners are screwing with their time, they will start to care. Sort of like the people at the lunch counters in 1965 Birmingham whose sandwiches were delayed.
And the local sheriffs here in Fllorida are already telling the TSA that they don't care what the TSA definition of suspicion is, they require probable cause and won't arrest just because someone refuses the scan and pat down. And the TSA goons have no law enforcement powers. None. Their only recourse is to recommend a 14 CFR Part 49 civil enforcement proceeding, and even if they win that, they have to convince an appointed U S Attorney to go to USDC to collect. There hasn't been such an action ever according to a NEXUS/LEXUS search.
Oh, and the standard bond schedule for Orange County for disorderly is $250.00/10% so $1000.00 covers the bond for all 20. And I wonder why the term "Vichy collaborationist" sprung to mind. Well, ATS is open to TSA employees, too, I guess.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Then that should tell me I have a sound mind and I haven't been the product of biased propaganda, like yourself. Also you keep bringing up items inside the body and I've stated (I'll put it in caps so you can see it) THAT THE FULL BODY SCANNER OBVIOUSLY CAN'T SEE ITEMS INSIDE THE BODY. But powders or anything else on the outside of the body do show up on the scanner and therefor stop people from smuggling things on their person. A scanner that sees your insides is step two and probably not far out.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


I'm not talking going in with the sheriff they have their own holding cells in the airports, where you could be held as long as the officials see fit. Don't believe me go to the airport and protest tomorrow.



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


OK THEN I WILL PUT IT ALL IN CAPS FOR YOU SINCE YOU OBVIOUSLY AREN'T GETTING IT. IF PEOPLE CAN PUT STUFF INSIDE THE BODY THEN THE SCANNERS OR NULL. IF A SUICIDE BOMBER IS GOING TO BLOW UP THE PLANE AND KNOWS HE CAN GET IT PAST THE SCANNERS BY PUTTING IT IN HIS BODY HE WOULD JUST DO THAT. SCANNERS OBSOLETE.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Wow.. you really are what's wrong with America. Trying to scare people out of protesting for what they believe in.
Dick Cheney?

EDIT: BTW they can't do anything. They can't hold him. The cops yes, but not for long. The airport/TSA no.
edit on 23-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join