Great article on why the TSA can't back down.

Why the TSA Can't Back Down

First 3 paragraphs...

Dec 2 2010, 12:15 PM ET 41

Organizers of National Opt Out Day, the Wednesday before Thanksgiving when air travelers were urged to opt out of the full-body scanners at security checkpoints and instead submit to full-body patdowns -- were outfoxed by the TSA. The government pre-empted the protest by turning off the machines in most airports during the Thanksgiving weekend. Everyone went through the metal detectors, just as before.

Now that Thanksgiving is over, the machines are back on and the "enhanced" pat-downs have resumed. I suspect that more people would prefer to have naked images of themselves seen by TSA agents in another room, than have themselves intimately touched by a TSA agent right in front of them.

But now, the TSA is in a bind. Regardless of whatever lobbying came before, or whatever former DHS officials had a financial interest in these scanners, the TSA has spent billions on those scanners, claiming they're essential. But because people can opt out, the alternate manual method must be equally effective; otherwise, the terrorists could just opt out. If they make the pat-downs less invasive, it would be the same as admitting the scanners aren't essential. Senior officials would get fired over that.

More at the link...

Xceler8x wrote: Senior officials would get fired over that.

Culling works for herders. No reason it can't work in the TSA, either......

Where is the article on "Why the American people cannot stand up"?

TJ wrote: Where is the article on "Why the American people cannot stand up"?

Isn't that a tautology?

..So all they can do is look to the glorious future where they install these things in front of every bus station, shopping mall, post office, and front door. They've already started in on the bus stops. What then?

Datsun1500 wrote: In reply to TJ: Where's the article, don't like it, don't fly?

Filed under "Reichstag plot"

Don't question the fuhrer. You don't want to end up on 'the list,' do you? It'll be interesting to see if this holds water:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/30286

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

poopshovel wrote: You don't want to end up on 'the list,' do you?

That would fall under a number of headings on this list

Datsun1500 wrote: In reply to TJ: Where's the article, don't like it, don't fly?

They came first for the airline passengers, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an airline passenger.

That type of thinking failed in the past and will lead to nothing but more power to the State and less individual freedoms now.

poopshovel wrote: Don't question the fuhrer. You don't want to end up on 'the list,' do you? It'll be interesting to see if this holds water: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/30286

A CNN reporter, critical of the TSA, "somehow" ended up on the No Fly list. The TSA insists this isn't a punitive measure.

CNN Reporter Drew Griffin Placed on TSA Terrorist Watch List

The No Fly list. A group of people so dangerous, they can't be let into the air under any circumstance, yet so innocent they can't be arrested even under the Patriot Act.

People need to keep making noise about this. Aren't they already talking about putting these scanners at bus stations? It has to stop!

Drewsifer wrote: The No Fly list. A group of people so dangerous, they can't be let into the air under any circumstance, yet so innocent they can't be arrested even under the Patriot Act. People need to keep making noise about this. Aren't they already talking about putting these scanners at bus stations? It has to stop!

It isn't just about flying. It is about restricting movement, spying on citizens, creating agencies to license things the govt does not have the "right" to restrict... to put the burden of proof on the citizen for things like getting off a "list". Once the machinery is all in place - the cameras, the scanners, the plastic money, the federal ID number... NAH, that can't happen here. This is America.

It's funny to me how this goes on for more than 8 years and nobody says a word until the gov't literally, not just figuratively, has a hand on your nuts.

What did you THINK the patriot act was about? NSA internet eavesdropping. Guantanamo. Special Rendition. Threat levels.

Do you think the No-Fly list and the TSA just popped up this summer?

It's nice to see people finally saying, "hey, this ain't how we do things in america", but damn... took ya long enough.

In reply to Tim Baxter:

No one is listening. Dancing with the Stars is on.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to Tim Baxter: No one is listening. Dancing with the Stars is on.

Who did you vote for? Do think that one guy looks geh?

As of December 1, all passengers are checked against the no-fly list. Meaning government permission is now necessary for commercial air travel.

I'm not flying any more. But I'm also not being quiet about this.

I fly on average, twice a month. I try to just zone out and move along with the other lemmings, but occasionally, something happens that just makes me want to vomit. At LAX recently, the man ahead of me didn't want to take off his shoes. He had quite a pronounced limp. He asked for a chair. Airport personnel were rude to the point of abusive. Turns out he had an artificial foot, and it was a time-consuming ordeal for him to take off/put on his shoe.

It's not just the airports. Why in God's name did security have to go through my carry-on going into the LA Auto Show? Just what in hell were they looking for? And why do they have dogs at the Detroit Show? Drugs? Bombs? WTF?

IF it did, that'd be one thing, but it doesn't.

meanwhile: http://current.com/shows/upstream/92829316_man-arrested-after-ejaculating-during-tsa-pat-down.htm

LAWL (assuming it's real)

(and I'm fine with the body scanners--will take that over the pat-down any time--just don't blow my plane up--thx)

Datsun1500 wrote:

TJ wrote:

Datsun1500 wrote: In reply to TJ: Where's the article, don't like it, don't fly?

They came first for the airline passengers, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an airline passenger. That type of thinking failed in the past and will lead to nothing but more power to the State and less individual freedoms now.

Less freedoms? You guys act like you have the right to fly.You could drive to your destination, but it is easier to fly, and flying has rules. I lost relatives and friends on 9/11, if touching my junk makes it so that will not happen again, have a ball. When something happens again, people will be screaming about how it should not have happened and how the TSA did not do its job...

To paraphrase Ben Franklin: Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.

If you really think having some rubber glove wearing goon fondle you children, your wife, and yourself makes you safer in any way then I don't know what else to say. The TSA should not exist, much less deal in child porn and sexual assault. This has nothing at all to do with 9/11.

TJ, You only have to read the newspapers or pay attention to world events to know there is a real threat. Making rude comments when you obviously don't have accurate information does not make your point. Do you have any idea of how security works? It is based on a multi-layered system that makes it effective because no matter what technology or lack thereof that is used, the multiple layers increase the effectiveness. TSA screening is just one layer. But the real question is; Do you really think eliminating security will make it safer to fly, attend large public events or travel on a public transit system? The fact that there has not been another 911 type incident is an indicator that these measures are working.

Datsun1500 wrote: Less freedoms? You guys act like you have the right to fly.You could drive to your destination, but it is easier to fly, and flying has rules. I lost relatives and friends on 9/11, if touching my junk makes it so that will not happen again, have a ball. When something happens again, people will be screaming about how it should not have happened and how the TSA did not do its job...

My problem is that it's ineffective. Were I motivated, I am 100% sure I could get bad stuff past security. So I am also 100% sure that the bad guys can as well. This makes the security nothing but a big show that is lining more pockets in the burbs of DC.

Don49 wrote: The fact that there has not been another 911 type incident is an indicator that these measures are working.

No. It isn't.

If a single terrorist had be nabbed by the TSA screening process at the airport over the last 10yrs they would have touted it as a victory for the system and it would have been on every news channel for a week. There WERE incidents. Foiled by ineptness and the FBI. Not the TSA. Instead we hear "we aren't allowed to discuss our wins because it will endanger national security". BullE36 M3.

The Department of Homeland Security and the TSA are McCarthy era style organizations enabled by the fear mentality fostered by our leaders. They are allowed to run roughshod over individual rights of US citizens in this country with a little help from the Patriot Act and a population well heeled to whatever is best for them as long as what is best for them comes from the government.

Call me a nut if you like but pay attention anyway. Bad things happen when a people who are supposed to be governing themselves do not.

I dislike the intrusion into personal areas which has become a part of flying. It irks me to see gray haired old ladies in wheelchairs checked over.

But is it the TSA's fault? No, not really, although they could do a better job with PR. They are merely the messengers sent by those out there who would do harm to others to make a political or social point, or even for something so crass as to collect insurance. For more on that, check into the history of travel insurance sold by vending machines. Short version: many years back a guy insured his mother with one of those machines, then put her on a domestic flight with a bomb in her luggage. All on board the plane were killed.

The point is the gray haired old lady in the wheelchair may not be a terrorist but who knows for sure that she doesn't have a jihadi crazed grandson who decided she'd be an excellent way to sneak some explosives on a flight?

You want this problem fixed, go to the source: convince the jihadi freaks to knock it off. Until then, we have a situation which no one likes but must be dealt with.

Until y'all reach this Utopia, I'd really rather go through a full body screen or have someone rub my nuts than fall 20,000 feet to my death because some asswipe had a bomb in his crotch. I might be a free man while I'm falling, but that landing is sure to put an end to that freedom permanently.

TJ wrote:

Datsun1500 wrote: In reply to TJ: Where's the article, don't like it, don't fly?

They came first for the airline passengers, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an airline passenger. That type of thinking failed in the past and will lead to nothing but more power to the State and less individual freedoms now.

yawn...

First they came for my freedoms.. I did nothing cause of 9/11. Then they came for more freedoms.... Then I did nothing cause Bush scared me about WMD's. Then they took even more freedoms.. But I was all up on bush's jock so.. I still did nothing.. Then my 401k evaporated and some black guy who wasn't born in this country got elected... Then I got pissed off.

yawn.