TSA is sure classy

madmax

brettw22 wrote: »

When your default response to everything is "OMG, MAYBE/WHAT IF THEY'LL BE IN YOUR HOMES SOON" blah blah blah you lose the arguement. Every. Single. Time.

Well yeah but when they were talking about making you take your shoes off he was probably saying "OMG, MAYBE/WHAT IF THEY'LL BE IN YOUR PANTS SOON"

kevhed72

Remember that movie, with Mel Gibson, where he had rooms full of old newspapers stacked up to the ceiling...what was the name of that movie?

EndersShadow

kevhed72 wrote: »

Remember that movie, with Mel Gibson, where he had rooms full of old newspapers stacked up to the ceiling...what was the name of that movie?

Conspiracy Theory.....he also had locks on his fridge and the items in them..specifically tapioka pudding

Great Movie!

bobman1235

kevhed72 wrote: »

Remember that movie, with Mel Gibson, where he had rooms full of old newspapers stacked up to the ceiling...what was the name of that movie?

Conspiracy Theory.


Tough to piont to that movie as "look at that weirdo" considering he ended up being right in that movie.

wayne3burk

I read about the first two pages of this thread.... here's what i ascertained.

1) 9/11 was perpetrated by Arab / Muslim terrorists acting alone (no not Dick Cheney)

2) Muslim / Arab terrorists are hell bent on blowing up more planes with personal explosive devices sometime in the near future - but - Timothy McVeigh's brother (or grandmother or toddler neice) might also have the same idea / intention - so everyone is a suspect.

3) Christians all believe the planet earth and the universe are about 4000 yrs old give a take a decade or two.

4) The rules of this forum not to discuss politics or religion no longer apply.

-- wayne --

nooshinjohn

Deleted...

wayne3burk

kevhed72 wrote: »

Remember that movie, with Mel Gibson, where he had rooms full of old newspapers stacked up to the ceiling...what was the name of that movie?

The move that is relevant is:

The Long Kiss GoodNight (1996) with Geena Davis and Samual L. Jackson

Rent it - Think about it

-- wayne --

nooshinjohn

wayne3burk wrote: »

The move that is relevant is:

The Long Kiss GoodNight (1996) with Geena Davis and Samual L. Jackson

Rent it - Think about it

-- wayne --

Samantha Caine is a mother and schoolteacher with a seemingly normal life in the small town of Honesdale, Pennsylvania. However, she was found badly injured and suffering from amnesia eight years previously, and has no memory of her past. When she is attacked by an escaped convict, Samantha dispatches her attacker with lethal self-defense skills she was not aware she possessed. She hires wisecracking, ethically challenged private investigator Mitch Henessey to help her find the truth about her past. She contacts the mysterious Dr. Nathan Waldman who reveals that Samantha is really Charlene "Charly" Elizabeth Baltimore, an assassin for the CIA who went missing eight years ago. When Samantha is captured and tortured by some of her old enemies, her real identity resurfaces. Although she initially disdains her life as 'Samantha', Mitch forces Charly to recognize that she actually liked her time as Samantha as it was the first time she was truly content with herself.

While attempting to resolve her conflicted feelings about her past, Charly discovers that her former boss at the CIA, Leland Perkins, has allied with a psychological-operations specialist named Timothy in a false flag plot to detonate a chemical bomb in downtown Niagara Falls, New York, frame "Islamic" terrorists for the crime, and thus secure more funding. She and Mitch set out to thwart the plot and rescue her young daughter, Caitlin from the clutches of the terrorists. Charly reveals to Timothy during a tense confrontation that he is actually Caitlin's father due to a brief fling during Charly's last assignment before being struck with amnesia. After averting the plot by stealing the tanker carrying the chemical bomb, Charly returns to her old life as Samantha and loving parent to Caitlin. For his part, Mitch enjoys the publicity attracted by his role in the crisis.

What is your point exactly? And you think I am a conspiracy theorist:rolleyes:...

wayne3burk

nooshinjohn wrote: »

What is your point exactly? And you think I am a conspiracy theorist:rolleyes:...

hold on just one minute....



I have to run out to the store to stock up on more Reynolds wrap before I get snowed in....

oh yeah don't let me forget toilet paper and milk ))

-- wayne --

Norm Apter

wayne3burk wrote: »

4) The rules of this forum not to discuss politics or religion no longer apply.

-- wayne --

I'm not sure when they ever applied (at least not in the 2+ years I've been here). Those rules seems to be breached on a weekly, if not daily, basis.

I don't participate in those discussions, but often times I open up a thread with a innocuous-sounding title only to find that people have used the topic as a platform to espouse their political beliefs or views on religion. Its usually the same handful of people who engage in this. As George Grand once said, people have a hard time controlling themselves. I've never reported a thread and I don't plan to in the future...its just not my style. I think usually those folks will respond with the defense, "this is a civil discussion and we're all adults here" and therefore its OK to violate the rules. No skin off my teeth, but you can't have it both ways. Rules are either enforced or not enforced.

ben62670

Norm God is going to punish you.

wayne3burk

ben62670 wrote: »

Norm God is going to punish you.

Taken out of context (of the previous post)....

This reads

Norm God is going to punish you

so in and of itself it's pretty insightful and amusing

-- wayne --

TNRabbit

TSA is in a no-win situation; they get b!tched at every day on capital hill. It's either too much or not enough. You take any group of 40,000 people and there will be some ****$holes.

I worked for TSA from their inception until 2009; I got sick of the crap & bailed out to take a job with a defense contractor. I challenge anyone to hire on with TSA & try to make a difference or throw some common sense into the mix. Most of the bullsh!t is forced by Congress or higher-ups in the government in the name of CYA. Any every reaction is a knee-jerk.

I'm happy to be out of it EVERY DAY~

mdaudioguy

It's just plain scary though, to consider that there's stuff that could take down an airplane, that someone could easily hide on their body, that wouldn't be picked up by metal detectors. And, that a container greater than travel-size could could actually contain an explosive liquid. And, that there are people who would endeavor to do carry out such insidious things. Maybe TSA goes wrong sometimes, but maybe one day it still won't be enough.

But, as mentioned earlier, the next 9/11 won't be like the last one. Eventually they'll strike again when and where we least expect it, but we'll realize later that maybe we should have expected it.

tonyb

It's hard to be scared of everything, but isn't that the idea ? If a bomb in a backpack blows up a school, do we then outlaw backpacks ? How about an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, mentality instead. How about we stop funneling money to organizations inside our own borders that agitate people to blow things up. Would that not be an ounce of prevention ? How about we scrutinize those who want to come in to our country better. Nobody see's a problem when you don't have to prove who you are to vote,drive a car, attend school, open bank accounts, get a job, apply for entitlements, and so on ? Or cross our borders pretty much at will ?
Lots of things we can do to help lower the risk on the safety issues we face. No political will to do it though. Hopefully that will change soon.

tonyb

wayne3burk wrote: »

hold on just one minute....



I have to run out to the store to stock up on more Reynolds wrap before I get snowed in....

oh yeah don't let me forget toilet paper and milk ))

-- wayne --

LOL !! Wasn't that the same dude watching Moses build the ARK ? How did that work out for him ?

Face

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WXDLQPfqc04&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WXDLQPfqc04&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Bobsama

@The sausage: http://xkcd.com/779/

Anyways, some of this is ridiculous, some of this isn't. I hope this young lady's court case goes through and that she's successful. As it stands, government agencies are somehow never liable unless their employees break dozens of laws (minimum)...

madmax

After watching the above video I checked out "TSA Pat Downs" and there were a few which were disturbing. This one is of a reporter who started asking them questions and got handcuffed to a chair for an hour and then thrown out of the airport. This is not the USA I signed up for. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJGvsAgpfig&feature=related

I'm all for the opt out thing over the holidays, too bad I'm not going anywhere... Actually its a good thing because I'd start on my 4th amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure and get thrown out or arrested. One of the videos showed a woman standing there quietly while an agent creeps up from behind, grabs her and throws her backwards at a metal chair (slamming someone sitting behind the chair). Not into the chair, against the chair. When she falls to the floor they handcuff her and lead her out. Possible good reason for it? No, because when he first grabbed her it could have been over with. Excessive use of force for sure. This topic really bothers me about whether we are a free people or not. Once you enter the airport you are not free and will be treated as such. Sorry, I couldn't find that video again.

nooshinjohn

madmax wrote: »

After watching the above video I checked out "TSA Pat Downs" and there were a few which were disturbing. This one is of a reporter who started asking them questions and got handcuffed to a chair for an hour and then thrown out of the airport. This is not the USA I signed up for. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJGvsAgpfig&feature=related

I'm all for the opt out thing over the holidays, too bad I'm not going anywhere... Actually its a good thing because I'd start on my 4th amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure and get thrown out or arrested. One of the videos showed a woman standing there quietly while an agent creeps up from behind, grabs her and throws her backwards at a metal chair (slamming someone sitting behind the chair). Not into the chair, against the chair. When she falls to the floor they handcuff her and lead her out. Possible good reason for it? No, because when he first grabbed her it could have been over with. Excessive use of force for sure. This topic really bothers me about whether we are a free people or not. Once you enter the airport you are not free and will be treated as such. Sorry, I couldn't find that video again.

To this I can only add... I am out as I cannot understand why some refuse to see just how percarious a thread our liberties are hung by. All I can say is that until we as individuals understand what our personal beliefs are and frame those beliefs with principles that define YOU, then there is no foundation upon which to build. Freedom is not FREE, and to give it away is an insult to all that have worn the uniform and a desecration of the very graves of every person that has given their life and their sacred honor to defend it.:frown:

ben62670

Is TSA hiring?

madmax

nooshinjohn wrote: »

To this I can only add... I am out as I cannot understand why some refuse to see just how percarious a thread our liberties are hung by. All I can say is that until we as individuals understand what our personal beliefs are and frame those beliefs with principles that define YOU, then there is no foundation upon which to build. Freedom is not FREE, and to give it away is an insult to all that have worn the uniform and a desecration of the very graves of every person that has given their life and their sacred honor to defend it.:frown:

Why are you such a hatemonger? Just kidding. :biggrin:

Polkersince85

Bin Laden is probably laughing his ask off.

I want to see a PSA of The entire first family and the staff of HSA on video going through these assaults. Come out the other side with a smile saying "See, It ain't so bad."

cfrizz

What some of you refuse to see is that we live in a TOTALLY different world now, then 200+ years ago. What I see is that there are CRAZY people out there whether they were born here or not and THEY DON'T GIVE A DAMN about any of us, or ANYONES freedom so long as they can kill, and they are perfectly willing to kill ANYONE no matter what country they come from. They will do it overseas & they will do it right HERE as well.

Whether you like it or not, these are dangerous times that we live in. It is not going to hurt me the 2-3 times I fly a year to go through a scanner. Once done, I will be free to fly on to my destination.

If you want to stand up & be a jerk to people who are simply doing their jobs & trying to keep ALL of us safe, go right ahead. I hope whoever you give a hard time to jacks you up for being a jerk, it's no less than what you deserve for being unreasonable.

ben62670

Cathy I am going to break your caps keys:rolleyes: If you had half a brain you would see that the complaints are focused on women/children being sexually degraded by some of these turds that work airport security. Write Oprah a letter and take a chill pill.

Polk addict

This is the kind of stuff I read about as a kid going, how is that even possible...

It seems I've been scanned without even realizing what was being done... I'm definitely going to make sure they don't do this to me when I head back home...

Edit: kid as in like 5 years ago... But still...

Polkersince85

cfrizz wrote: »

What some of you refuse to see is that we live in a TOTALLY different world now, then 200+ years ago.

Yea right. Just call me old fashioned.


.........is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.



He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

messiah

Once upon a time there was a guy named Richard Reid. He had a bomb in his shoe, but failed to blow up the plane. Now we have to all take our shoes off because of one a@@#$%e. Then there was this guy named Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (say that 10 times fast) who wore a bomb in his underwear. He also failed to blow up the plane, and while they aren't forcing us to take off our underwear yet, they are investigating our crotchital regions, which has many people upset. I can't blame them. If the next terrorist has an anal or vaginal bomb, should we be cavity searched before a flight? Where does it end?

Our constitution guarantees us the right to unreasonable search (4th amendment). What is unreasonable? I guess that depends on what you believe in.

In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that a search occurs only when 1) a person expects privacy in the thing searched and 2) society believes that expectation is reasonable.

Here are our choices in the current scenario:

1) It is reasonable to perform invasive scans and pat downs on every man woman and child that want to fly.

2) It is unreasonable to invade our privacy this way

Personally I choose number 2.

ben62670

Well the terrorists have won. They have some Americans scared into thinking that our rights are less important than our freedom. Congrats to the POS terrorists.
Ben

Polkersince85

There's a whole army of these renegade grannies ready to take us out. :rolleyes: