[Dork.]

No, this is not the contents of my last PM to besson3c, it's the phrase that got a guy thrown out of Airport Security in San Diego, and now he may get fined $10k for leaving the security area (after getting thrown out). (I include the link in case you're internet is not working and you haven't heard of this guy before.)

Yes, the guy was being a bit of a dick, and the fact that he recorded the whole thing on his phone makes one wonder if he wasn't just spoiling for a fight to begin with. I'm sure his blog (where he posted the audio from his phone) got a ton of hits this week.

I don't like these new millimeter-wave scanning machines, although I'd probably consent to go through one the next time I fly. But I don't believe for a second that the pictures aren't saved somewhere (and when a bunch do get released, so many people will be pissed.) I do object to the fact that if you decide you don't want to go through one, or if the scan finds anything suspicious, you need to have a TSA agent perform an "enhanced pat-down", which by all accounts involves being groped by a TSA agent (Also known as "meeting the resistance"). Since they don't do this in airports that don't have the new scanners, it's obvious that the TSA is only doing this to humiliate the people who opt out of the full-body scan.

Are we really that bad off right now security-wise that we all need to be virtually strip-searched and/or groped every time we board a plane? Does this mean the terrorists have won? Or should we just be quiet and let the TSA keep us safe and cradle our sensitive bits for us?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

But I don't believe for a second that the pictures aren't saved somewhere (and when a bunch do get released, so many people will be pissed.)

You're correct about the pictures. While the technology is perfectly safe, I, too, have concerns about what's happening with the images.

[imitchellg5]

I too wonder about the authenticity of this.

However, his points still stand.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Are we really that bad off right now security-wise that we all need to be virtually strip-searched and/or groped every time we board a plane? Does this mean the terrorists have won? Or should we just be quiet and let the TSA keep us safe and cradle our sensitive bits for us?

It's all about defining authority and training individual thinkers to be sheep.

[Doofy]

If you're not going to support religious profiling, then either save up for a LearJet or get used to having a large hairy man feeling you up and/or fapping to your scans he took home.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Neither is necessary. 9/11 was not repeatable regardless. Other terrorism was inconsequential.

[Kerrigan]

Under the Bush administration, hippies flew into a rage over phone-tapping known terrorists.

Under Obama, hippies are absolutely thrilled that the government is frying everyone with X-rays and taking pictures of our junk.

Politics as usual.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

hippies are absolutely thrilled that the government is frying everyone with X-rays and taking pictures of our junk.

Who?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

If you're not going to support religious profiling, then either save up for a LearJet or get used to having a large hairy man feeling you up and/or fapping to your scans he took home.

And, what happens when the people trying to get past security don't have dark skin?


Nope, there must be better solutions. Europe has had a much longer history involving airplanes and highjackers, and they didn't need to resort to the measures that the TSA is taking.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

And, what happens when the people trying to get past security don't have dark skin?

Ummm. I didn't say "racial profiling". I said "religious profiling".
Now, I realise in the tiny minds of North Amerikkkans that those belonging to religions most likely to bomb planes are all brown, but this simply isn't the case.

So. Make everyone eat a bacon sarnie before boarding. Or make 'em say "mohammed had a small penis" or something. If anyone refuses, send 'em for the pat down.

Or, get used to being felt up and fapped over by a fat, hairy man.

In other news, Europe's just given the go-ahead for profiling. You're not going to let Europe be more sensible than you, are you?

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

In other news, Europe's just given the go-ahead for profiling. You're not going to let Europe be more sensible than you, are you?

That's because you live in a social country who doesn't care about personal freedom.

You nazi fascist pinko commie!

[lpkmckenna]

Both these new machines and the pat-down are useless, and won't prevent a single terrorist attack. It will, however, fill the pockets of the manufacturers with money.

Terrorists will eventually decide to store explosives in their rectum or breast implants. What then?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Nope, there must be better solutions. Europe has had a much longer history involving airplanes and highjackers, and they didn't need to resort to the measures that the TSA is taking.

O'Rly ?

Last I checked, airports all over Europe are implementing full body scanners.

-t

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

O'Rly ?

Last I checked, airports all over Europe are implementing full body scanners.

-t

Yes. On requirement from the US, as I understand it.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

Under Obama, hippies are absolutely thrilled that the government is frying everyone with X-rays and taking pictures of our junk.

You're not being fried by x-rays.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

I don't like these new millimeter-wave scanning machines, although I'd probably consent to go through one the next time I fly.

Note the millimeter-wave machines are the ones less objected to. No radiation and the images are pretty low fidelity. Still incredibly slow, much lower throughput than metal detectors.
Backscatter x-ray are the machines everyone is up in arms about. Radiation (all absorbed by the skin) and pretty revealing images (enough for some TSA staff to harass another about his penis size).

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

You're not being fried by x-rays.

There's no safe dose of radiation, and it isn't even well established how much you're receiving.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Yes. On requirement from the US, as I understand it.

Nope. The Europeans are as scared about terrorists as the US.

I know that Germany's willingness to implement full body scanners has nothing to do with the US.

-t

[Big Mac]

Now, based on Muslim pressure, the administration is allegedly contemplating creating looser standards for Muslims because they object to the security measures on modesty grounds. So, these intrusive (and potentially life threatening) security procedures are established supposedly to combat Muslim terrorism against air travel, but then a narrow exception may be carved out for Muslims only so that they don't have to face the security measures their radical co-religionists imposed on the system to begin with. "Oh, you can only pat down a Muslim women around her neck area and nowhere else because anything else is a violation of our religion." And you wouldn't want to offend Muslim sensitives.

I can't wait for the investigative videos showing Muslims in hijabs going effortlessly through security while the TSA screeners accost four year olds.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Now, based on Muslim pressure, the administration is allegedly contemplating creating looser standards for Muslims because they object to the security measures on modesty grounds.

Gotta source for that?

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I can't wait for the investigative videos showing Muslims in hijabs going effortlessly through security while the TSA screeners accost four year olds.

The scary thing is, you actually believe this might happen.

[Big Mac]

I've seen too many ridiculous government actions to put anything past government.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Note the millimeter-wave machines are the ones less objected to. No radiation and the images are pretty low fidelity. Still incredibly slow, much lower throughput than metal detectors.
Backscatter x-ray are the machines everyone is up in arms about. Radiation (all absorbed by the skin) and pretty revealing images (enough for some TSA staff to harass another about his penis size).

You're right, of course, I got them confused. You can tell them apart according to who's lobbying for them: the millimeter-wave company has "Pothole" Al D'Amato, and the Backskatter company has Michael Chertoff....

[SpaceMonkey]

In DC we've been dealing with this for years. You can't even buy a coffee without getting your junk handled.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

So. Make everyone eat a bacon sarnie before boarding. Or make 'em say "mohammed had a small penis" or something.

They were all conservatives too, so they should also have to say "I love Barack Obama," and if they say it with zero in the name, grope away!

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Now, based on Muslim pressure, the administration is allegedly contemplating creating looser standards for Muslims because they object to the security measures on modesty grounds. So, these intrusive (and potentially life threatening) security procedures are established supposedly to combat Muslim terrorism against air travel, but then a narrow exception may be carved out for Muslims only so that they don't have to face the security measures their radical co-religionists imposed on the system to begin with. "Oh, you can only pat down a Muslim women around her neck area and nowhere else because anything else is a violation of our religion." And you wouldn't want to offend Muslim sensitives.

I can't wait for the investigative videos showing Muslims in hijabs going effortlessly through security while the TSA screeners accost four year olds.

Why would you post something that can be debunked in a mere 30 seconds?

The Transportation Security Administration says airline passengers won't get out of body imaging screening or pat-downs based on their religious beliefs.

TSA chief John Pistole told the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday that passengers who refuse to go through a full-body scanner machine and reject a pat-down won't be allowed to board, even if they turned down the in-depth screening for religious reasons.

"That person is not going to get on an airplane," Pistole said in response to a question from Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., on whether the TSA would provide exemptions for passengers whose religious beliefs do not allow them to go through a physically revealing body scan or be touched by screeners.

Religion Offers No Break on Airport Screening, TSA Says - FoxNews.com

OAW

[screener]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Why would you post something that can be debunked in a mere 30 seconds?

You're surprised?
Really?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by mduell 

There's no safe dose of radiation, and it isn't even well established how much you're receiving.

You receive more radiation simply flying in an airplane or living in higher altitudes than you do in one pass through the full body scan.

When a large solar flare hits our planet, it's the equivalent of receiving two chest x-rays.

Now it is possible that direct exposure versus ambient exposure may make a difference, I don't know, but the general consensus is that the full body scans do not produce enough radiation for it to be harmful.

[OldManMac]

An excellent article on the idiocy and silliness of this procedure, which is propagated by those who stand to make a fortune off selling them to gullible Americans, out of their sense of irrational fear.

'Porno Scanner' Scandal Shows the Idiocy of America's Zero Risk Culture | Civil Liberties | AlterNet

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Now, based on Muslim pressure, the administration is allegedly contemplating creating looser standards for Muslims because they object to the security measures on modesty grounds. So, these intrusive (and potentially life threatening) security procedures are established supposedly to combat Muslim terrorism against air travel, but then a narrow exception may be carved out for Muslims only so that they don't have to face the security measures their radical co-religionists imposed on the system to begin with. "Oh, you can only pat down a Muslim women around her neck area and nowhere else because anything else is a violation of our religion." And you wouldn't want to offend Muslim sensitives.

I can't wait for the investigative videos showing Muslims in hijabs going effortlessly through security while the TSA screeners accost four year olds.

Wow. Then what is the point in the first place?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

...get used to having a large hairy man feeling you up...

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Or, get used to being felt up and fapped over by a fat, hairy man.

What do you have against hairy men?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Arabs are hairy, and doofy hates arabs, so by the transitive property, doofy hates hairies

[SpaceMonkey]

Smaller, hairless, more nimble fingers are better for that kind of work anyway.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

What do you have against hairy men?

Nothing, as long as they're not feeling me up.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Nothing, as long as they're not feeling me up.

Good. Then we're safe.

[lpkmckenna]

TSA success story, linked from John Gruber.

[SpaceMonkey]

Other TSA success stories about "almost unbelievable" experiences can be found in the Penthouse Forum.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Why would you post something that can be debunked in a mere 30 seconds?

Sure, 30 seconds. . .

Adjustments, More to Come on Muslim Screening (If you object to the source, just click to watch the Napolitano video on the page.)

You lefties are so predictable with your perfunctory automatic defenses of everything your politicians do.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Sure, 30 seconds. . .

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...e-come-body-pa

Page Not Found.

In any event, this still doesn't change what the director of TSA said. No religious exemptions. EITHER the full body scan OR the pat down.

OAW

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by OAW 

In any event, this still doesn't change what the director of TSA said. No religious exemptions. EITHER the full body scan OR the pat down.

It is clearly stated that there will be forthcoming adjustments to screening requirements specifically for Muslims.

[Uncle Skeleton]

I heard there's also going to be SECRET loopholes for SECRET Muslims to board the planes. No surprise there

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It is clearly stated that there will be forthcoming adjustments to screening requirements specifically for Muslims.

Are you illiterate? It doesn't say that at all.

[Dork.]

If Muslims can get on planes without getting screened, then maybe that NPR guy was on to something....

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

TSA success story, linked from John Gruber.

Sounds more like a success story for freedom.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It is clearly stated that there will be forthcoming adjustments to screening requirements specifically for Muslims.

Uh … no it does not. It clearly states that a Muslim group encouraged women wearing the hijab to avoid the PAT DOWN screening. It said nothing whatsoever about them objecting to the BODY SCANNER. Furthermore, Ms. Napolitano indicated that adjustments might be forthcoming to the PAT DOWN procedure. Since they are grabbing nut sacks and tits after all. That does not mean that this would be specific to Muslims … nor does it indicate a change to the overall SCREENING procedure.

You are seeing what you want to see in the article in order to confirm your pre-existing biases.

OAW

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Ummm. I didn't say "racial profiling". I said "religious profiling".

How exactly does religious profiling work?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Are you illiterate? It doesn't say that at all.

The "it" I was referring to is Napolitano, because I don't what gender to assign to that person. And it did clearly say that, that adjustments specific to Muslim sensitives would be coming. Did you watch the video? The reporter asks about whether TSA would require Muslims in religious garb to go through the fully-body scanners despite their protests against it, to which Napolitano said,

"Adjustments will be made where they need to be made. With respect to that particular issue [Muslim objections], I think there will be more to come."

You guys can believe whatever you want to believe, but please don't say I didn't tell you so if Muslims specifically get excluded from the standard invasive security measures.

[Dork.]

Holy cow. I never thought I'd ever be writing these words, but I totally agree with Ron Paul.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The "it" I was referring to is Napolitano...

That's a lie. You said this:

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It is clearly stated that there will be forthcoming adjustments to screening requirements specifically for Muslims.

Your attempt to rewrite history is a failure.

...because I don't what gender to assign to that person.

You are an unrepentant troll.

And it did clearly say that, that adjustments specific to Muslim sensitives would be coming. Did you watch the video? The reporter asks about whether TSA would require Muslims in religious garb to go through the fully-body scanners, to which Napolitano said,

"Adjustments will be made where they need to be made. With respect to that particular issue [Muslim objections], I think there will be more to come."

You guys can believe whatever you want to believe, but please don't say I didn't tell you so if Muslims specifically get excluded from the standard invasive security measures.

She doesn't say anything about special exception or rules for any group.

It amazes me that on an issue that conservatives and liberals can agree and unite on, you decide to twist this into an Americans vs Muslims fantasy. No, it doesn't amaze me, it disgusts me.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Holy cow. I never thought I'd ever be writing these words, but I totally agree with Ron Paul.

Let's hope the uberconservatives on this forum will listen to one of their own.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Let's hope the uberconservatives on this forum will listen to one of their own.

Who are the "uberconservatives" on this forum, and what beliefs on this subject are you ascribing to them?

[Shaddim]

On our last trip we went through the scanners and they still decided that they needed to pat down one of the girls, maybe her shorts were too much for them. Some guy was acting like he was going to do it but we told him he was out of his f***ing mind. A woman did the pat, it took about a minute and we went on our way.