We have a government agency devoted to groping old women and babies.

[Barnabas]

Frankly, only the tiniest sliver of a percent of a percent of a percent of 'them' are doing that either. Let's not demean an entire quarter of the world's population over the actions of the desperately radicalized few. Unless, of course, we toss christians in the trash over the actions of McVeigh.

Were not fighting a third of the population of the planet, were fighting the militant ones that crashed a plane into a civilian structure. Also Oprah annoys me.

and DX

Wars should be fought between soldiers whom have agreed to fight them, civilians aren't soldiers and shouldn't be attacked by others. But sure if were going by effective means of defeating our enemies, destroy Iran and Iraq.I mean remove them from the map kind of destruction, make their mountains into mole hills. It's infinitely more efficient then fighting a land war and would likely deter any future attack against the U.S..


of course this is if were throwing our morals out the window.

 

[MindYourHead]

I'm sure the TSA agents are just thrilled to have to do these pat downs.

 

[DimensionX]

I'm sure the TSA agents are just thrilled to have to do these pat downs.

A few might be but I'd imagine the majority hate it, can you imagine how much hassle they get for this?

 

[~jet]

But sure if were going by effective means of defeating our enemies, destroy Iran and Iraq.I mean remove them from the map kind of destruction, make their mountains into mole hills.

Ah, and just a moment ago you were talking about the ends rarely justifying the means. As long as it kills millions of of innocent and predominantly kind people who just happen to disagree with you, I guess the means are fine. Neither of these countries were guilty of the crime done against us, and both were amongst the most socially 'uplifted' you can even find in that part of the world, given dramatic GINI index figures. And why leave Saudi Arabia out of the equation? They're happily funding and prodding both sides of the conflict. Oh, right... because they're an arms partner for our corporate military... the thing this country essentially now exists to serve.

I repeat: Eisenhower was right. So was Von Braun, come to think of it.

 

[Chessie]

I have friends in Iraq and Afghanistan right now and I can tell you quite honestly that we're not fighting any 'well organized militant group'. Al Quaida is a joke-squad propped up by local farmers making mortars in their basements.

We haven't been fighting 'terrorists' for years, if ever. What we did was fight a lot of civilians and kill a lot of civilians. Then we made them into terrorists whose only option was to start using the most effective means at their disposal. Americans accomplished more for terrorism than Osama could have ever hoped.

 

[Chessie]

You know, I may fly this year but I intend to make the TSA as uncomfortable as possible. I'm going to wear a strap-on and no underwear under my skirt and paint in metalic paint on my ass 'Fuck You!'. Then I'll go through the scanner and demand a good grope. I intend to moan loudly while it's going on, from start to finish.

 

[Chessie]

You're so much fun Indigo. We love you.

 

[Chessie]

Oh, wow, I thought you left! I see you're still here.

Anyway, I am a bit curious as to whether or not it's likely that such patdowns will be included in our interactions with other parts of government. I don't say that it's likely but what about Post Offices as potential terror targets? Lots of people, essential infrastructure, communication disruptions, property damage?

If you had to go through such a pat-down for any interaction with the state, up to and including going to vote would you do it? Just for the sake of being secure?

 

[DimensionX]

*post deleted*

Would this be due to the thread derailments? the methods people are considering using to make TSA agents uncomfortable? or the differences in opinion whether or not the increased security measures are needed or whether they violate our rights are citizens? (or something to that extent).

 

[Barnabas]

Ah, and just a moment ago you were talking about the ends rarely justifying the means. As long as it kills millions of of innocent and predominantly kind people who just happen to disagree with you, I guess the means are fine. Neither of these countries were guilty of the crime done against us, and both were amongst the most socially 'uplifted' you can even find in that part of the world, given dramatic GINI index figures. And why leave Saudi Arabia out of the equation? They're happily funding and prodding both sides of the conflict. Oh, right... because they're an arms partner for our corporate military... the thing this country essentially now exists to serve.

I repeat: Eisenhower was right. So was Von Braun, come to think of it.

You completely dropped the end of my quote, which showed I was being facetious. I'm also pretty sure you didn't read the post that was mine was in response to or you wouldn't be playing the "your morally bankrupt" card.

 

[Barnabas]

Would this be due to the thread derailments? the methods people are considering using to make TSA agents uncomfortable? or the differences in opinion whether or not the increased security measures are needed or whether they violate our rights are citizens? (or something to that extent).

all of the above

 

[kita]

I'm a control freak, and it does bother me to have an image of my naked body out there somewhere...without a meaningful guarantee that my privacy will be respected.

I do like the technology though, I just wish it didn't outline people's genitals.

 

[Barnabas]

wear a metal cup

 

[Chessie]

I've got to ask, and maybe it's because I'm a nudist, but isn't your body at all sacred to you? I have no issue with people seeing me nude. I have all the body modesty of an alley cat.

What I do object to very strenuously is that it is not my choice and there is an intense suggestion that this practice is likely to be expanded beyond just the airport. I also have very STRICT boundaries where being touched is concerned.

Even if EVERY terrorist attack that has been attempted since 911 succeeded in the United States, we would still have lost fewer of our citizens than we committed to going and killing poor people in another country.

 

[Barnabas]

I've got to ask, and maybe it's because I'm a nudist, but isn't your body at all sacred to you? I have no issue with people seeing me nude. I have all the body modesty of an alley cat.

What I do object to very strenuously is that it is not my choice and there is an intense suggestion that this practice is likely to be expanded beyond just the airport. I also have very STRICT boundaries where being touched is concerned.

Even if EVERY terrorist attack that has been attempted since 911 succeeded in the United States, we would still have lost fewer of our citizens than we committed to going and killing poor people in another country.

It's your choice to fly, and highly doubt you'll start seeing this technology on your local bus. Maybe in large government building but not public transport or wal-mart


Also, you look at situation to narrowly, Wars are fought with an objective and a known risk of almost certain death for individual participating. Terrorist attacks are seemingly random and the deaths belong to those whom had no choice in the matter.

 

[bamf]

You know, I may fly this year but I intend to make the TSA as uncomfortable as possible. I'm going to wear a strap-on and no underwear under my skirt and paint in metalic paint on my ass 'Fuck You!'. Then I'll go through the scanner and demand a good grope. I intend to moan loudly while it's going on, from start to finish.

I am sure there are more effective ways to go about making a change than becoming the person that makes a hassle for the very people you want to change.

If you want your point of view to be taken seriously, this might not be the best route, but that's just my 2 cents.

 

[Chessie]

I am sure there are more effective ways to go about making a change than becoming the person that makes a hassle for the very people you want to change.

If you want your point of view to be taken seriously, this might not be the best route, but that's just my 2 cents.

Seriously, you have a Martin Luther King Jr. quote in your signature and you're saying that 'making a nuissance is not the way to get change'. This was a man who encouraged sit-ins, marches, blocked public thoroughfares, boycotted theaters and buses, and bugged people until everyone finally said 'Enough!' and change happened. You do not MAKE change without shutting down the system.

 

[bamf]

Seriously, you have a Martin Luther King Jr. quote in your signature and you're saying that 'making a nuissance is not the way to get change'. This was a man who encouraged sit-ins, marches, blocked public thoroughfares, boycotted theaters and buses, and bugged people until everyone finally said 'Enough!' and change happened. You do not MAKE change without shutting down the system.

He didn't berate people in a fashion such as you suggested. There are reasonable ways to go about "shutting down the system" that don't include offensive means of drawing attention to ones self by demanding to be groped and then moaning in "pleasure" from it in public view...at least King never did.

Like I said, it's just my two cents.

EDIT: You are right though, I misspoke when I said hassle. Making a hassle is required, just I think yours will ostracize you from the results you wish to see.

 

[the]

I'm pretty sure Washington did order his troops to strap dynamite to their chests and run into populated civilian areas.

Pretty sure at least.


edit:

also fear tactics are not the same as terrorist attacks

Whoosh! Right over your head.

Wars should be fought between soldiers whom have agreed to fight them, civilians aren't soldiers and shouldn't be attacked by others.

I disagree here as well. A war that the civilians arent behind and supporting is not a war worth fighting. When you go to war with a nation the civilians are just as responsible and just as worth killing. That is as opposed to declaring war with a terrorist organization which is more police business in my opinion.

 

[88chaz88]

I have to ask, and it's been suggested...if the TSA were to introduce these scanners to every form of daily transportation, would that solution to that be 'don't travel using public transportation'?

Or just get the fuck over yourself and use the damn scanners.

Nobody is interested in your body. Least not the guy that has to see them every damn day.