so, the terrorists win...

[kramwest1]

So, here's a forward-looking security question:

Airplanes are tight aluminum bundles of wires, hydraulic lines and fuel. If terrorists are serious about bringing down a plane, are there any places on the plane where critical components are so close to the passenger cabin such that a tiny bomb or fast-working guy with a screwdriver can fuck with them?

Probably.

Are we going to tell Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer to reconfigure their passenger planes?

Probably not.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Mark, the last post of yours there was FANTASTICALLY put .

Originally Posted by yolland

Is it hypocritical that some who raised no objections to the Patriot Act are screeching now, sure, but that's predictable since that directly inconvenienced far fewer people, and if anything it illustrates how important organizing the opposed to fight back in a maximally concerted way is.

Too true. Not to mention, hypocrisy is always going to show up in any situation, unfortunately. We just need to start calling it out a hell of a lot more often.

(For the record, I think BOTH the Patriot Act and this new security measure are dumb as can be)

I'm confused, I guess, because I read this...

OTTAWA—Canadian airport screeners have no plans to introduce the kind of “provocative” pat-downs that have sparked protests and riled passengers at airports across the United States, Transport Minister Chuck Strahl says.

“Canadians obviously have a right to expect to be treated properly and respectfully at airports,” Strahl told reporters Wednesday.

“While the Americans have instituted a more intensive ... pat-down technique, that's not happening in Canada. ... They have no intention of doing that,” he said in the House of Commons' foyer.

...and wonder how it is they manage to get by without going overboard and panicking. Sure, their country wasn't the one attacked on 9/11-had they been, who knows, they might be reacting differently, but they are our neighbor and did help us that day in terms of air traffic. And many of our allies that have experienced terrorist attacks don't seem to be going the same route we are. Why are they seemingly able to deal with this better and more rationally than we are? Why can't we follow their mindset?

I haven't flown since 1997, and I've had fears related to flying long before 9/11 and any of this stuff. And I'm not likely to be flying anytime in the near future. So on a personal level, this isn't affecting me much, if at all. But I still oppose the idea because I do not understand where those who came up with the idea think it's a logical solution to our problems. We've tried everything else imaginable thus far and it hasn't seemed to work, why exactly do those who thought this up and those who support it think this will be any different? I've yet to hear an explanation to that question, or at least one that would seem to make any sort of sense.

Angela

[yolland]

Originally Posted by kramwest1

NOTHING our government can do will keep us 100 percent safe from terrorism, and someone should admit to that to the American public soon, and in very serious and honest terms.

I often wish they would, but of course the problem for them isn't that the average American actually believes our government could ever keep them 100% safe. It's that if the government acknowledges that it can't, that statement WILL be seized out of context and used against them sooner or later--like, say, the next time there's a terrorist attack (or nightmarishly close call) and the public is still reeling from shock. As the IRA once told Thatcher, "You have to get lucky every time; we only have to get lucky once." It only makes that worse when the enemy has no clear face.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally Posted by anitram

Apparently you get groped!

GladRags Gab � Blog Archive � TSA Groin Searches Menstruating Woman

And that was only a pantyliner

Super maxi puts you on the terrorist watch and no fly list

Now there's a guy who was allegedly plotting to bomb the Portland, Oregon Christmas tree lighting. Talk about a war on Christmas. They'll have to do pat downs and scans at those too.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

the thing i still can't get over re: the outrage over the pat downs is that if you'd just go through the machine then you won't get a pat down.

soooo why isn't all the moral outrage about the machines? or do we only have the attention to be outraged over one thing at a time these days?

door #1... a non evasive, mild dose of radiation that is less than that of the average cell phone, which will take a picture of your body that your own mother wouldn't be able to recognize

door #2... someone who hates their job, has to deal with all the miserable shits who travel every day, who probably gets yelled at, harassed, sneezed on (or worse) all day long grabbing my junk.


door #1, please.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

the thing i still can't get over re: the outrage over the pat downs is that if you'd just go through the machine then you won't get a pat down.

Not necessarily.

As pointed out in the story above, women wearing pads or pantyliners are pulled aside for a patdown of their genital area because the pads show up on the scanner.

[financeguy]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

the thing i still can't get over re: the outrage over the pat downs is that if you'd just go through the machine then you won't get a pat down.

soooo why isn't all the moral outrage about the machines? or do we only have the attention to be outraged over one thing at a time these days?

door #1... a non evasive, mild dose of radiation that is less than that of the average cell phone, which will take a picture of your body that your own mother wouldn't be able to recognize

door #2... someone who hates their job, has to deal with all the miserable shits who travel every day, who probably gets yelled at, harassed, sneezed on (or worse) all day long grabbing my junk.


door #1, please.

Perhaps lesson number one for the airport security is not to see their paying customers as 'miserable shits'. I don't think it is too much to ask for the security staff to treat the people who pay their wages with courtesy, dignity and respect.

[deep]

Originally Posted by anitram

Not necessarily.

As pointed out in the story above, women wearing pads or pantyliners are pulled aside for a patdown of their genital area because the pads show up on the scanner.

Women? This is happening to every woman wearing a pad? Some women? A few?

They are being felt up?

Has there been any other reports? besides this one anonymous report?

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

Women? This is happening to every woman wearing a pad?

I am assuming, based on what I've heard about the scanner, that it was set off by the type of pantyliner/pad she was wearing (one of those re-usable things that you can wash, etc, sort of like cloth diapers). I imagine the density difference between it and a regular pad would be enough to look different on the detector. Probably same goes for menstrual cups (yes, men, I am sorry that you've had to read this).

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by anitram

If you believe that then what possible argument is there for continuing to support this invasive, ineffective and expensive procedure?

I am not and have not promoted such an argument on this thread. I think it's as boneheaded as taking off the shoes. I don't know that it's as horrible is being hyped up in the media (and here).

I only advocated one argument, which I believe was swiftly shot down by. . .you.

[deep]

xraying shoes will find the PETN bomb materials that the shoe bomber used, shoe bombers would rather you do not xray shoes, too.

I have heard it said more than once, that these new xray machines would not have caught the underpants bomber from last year. Well, if they pick up pads, then they would pick up those types of bombs.

Also, with just metal detectors, a person could walk through with gallons of liquid explosives under baggy clothes. We need xrays or pat downs to detect those.

And we all remember the 'Don't Touch my Junk" you tube guy that kicked this off.
He is from the San Diego area, if he had his way and people could opt out of xrays and pat downs of certain areas,
then the underwear bombers could proceed and have a successful? flight.

Speaking of the San Diego area, we have this:

Explosives found in house include PETN
Published: Nov. 26, 2010 at 11:08 AM

ESCONDIDO, San Diego Calif., Nov. 26 (UPI) -- Searches of a California house where a blast injured a landscaper last week yielded blasting caps and a potent plastic explosive, sheriff's officers said.

Among the items found at the house in Escondido were chemicals, including pentaerythritol tetranitrate, known as PETN, grenades and other weapons, the San Diego County Sheriff's Office told KGTV.

PETN was used by would-be airline shoe and underwear bombers, officials said. The new body scans at airports are meant to detect it.

Resident George Jakubec has been in jail since the landscaper was injured. He is being held on explosives charges in lieu of $5 million bail.

Most of the explosives, which were found Wednesday, were left in the house because it is too risky to move them but deputies were working on a disposal plan, authorities said.

"This is a very cluttered environment. There were items that were just stacked on every open spot," Assistant Sheriff Ed Prendergast said.

"Proactive operations on site have been suspended," he told the Los Angeles Times. "Explosive material and hazardous chemicals remain within the house."

Chemicals from a shed on the property including 4 liters of hydrochloric acid, 1 liter of nitric acid, 25 gallons of sulfuric acid and 50 pounds of hexamine, CNN reported.

http://articles.latimes.com/print/20...house-20101127

Largest cache of homemade PETN explosive compounds in U.S. found in southern California |

[deep]

Bush got a briefing that Bin Laden wanted to crash planes into buildings.
He went on vacation, to Crawford Texas and we know what happened.

Could there have been a briefing that PETN bombs were going to be used over the Holiday flying season, because they can easily be worn on the body and metal detectors do not pick them up?


Headache is right, it just takes a few seconds to walk through the machines, who cares? I sure don't.
I am more worried about the long term effects of my iPhone radiation frying my brain.

[dazzlingamy]

I had one rather surprising pat down when I was leaving the U.K Am so used to people either waving a wand over you or sort of not touching you in your boobage area but this woman had a lovely field day rubbing me all over, and I just thought 'what a bloody shit job you've got!' i mean sure like that tape with the baby formula there are vindictive shitty people in this job like secuirty guards and bouncers, just people trying to cling to any ounce of authority but for the most, i bet they bloody hate doing it and until these bullshit stories stop being blown out of proportion then what else is going to make people fly? I believe they actually do it so people feel safer because if someone wants to bring down a plane they're already batshit crazy they'll fight to the death to do it. whats to stop them punching the shit out of one of those old flight attendants and pulling the door open? i mean to be honest a million people are being fucked around for like 1 person who can't even do the job right, i mean what a bloody joke! hahahaha

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by financeguy

Perhaps lesson number one for the airport security is not to see their paying customers as 'miserable shits'. I don't think it is too much to ask for the security staff to treat the people who pay their wages with courtesy, dignity and respect.

i'm not saying the TSA sees the paying customers as miserable shits. maybe they do, maybe they don't. i'm saying I do.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by deep

Headache is right, it just takes a few seconds to walk through the machines, who cares? I sure don't.
I am more worried about the long term effects of my iPhone radiation frying my brain.

the amazing irony is that these people who are deathly afraid of passing through the backscatter machine because of radiation are getting on an airplane, where they will be exposed to a hell of a lot more radiation than they will from passing through the machine.

[kramwest1]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

the amazing irony is that these people who are deathly afraid of passing through the backscatter machine because of radiation are getting on an airplane, where they will be exposed to a hell of a lot more radiation than they will from passing through the machine.

And it's the cumulative effect of all of the radiation that I don't think anyone really considers.

Hell, doesn't the European Union forbids pregnant flight attendants from flying once they reach 6 months or something like that?--Socialists that they are.

Death or injury by terrorism is a minute threat to Americans. Cancer is almost a certainty on a long enough timeline.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

appears these pat downs have now spread to major league baseball

YouTube - Naked Gun - Baseball ( good quality,longer )

[deep]

Originally Posted by kramwest1

And it's the cumulative effect of all of the radiation that I don't think anyone really considers.

Hell, doesn't the European Union forbids pregnant flight attendants from flying once they reach 6 months or something like that?--Socialists that they are.

Death or injury by terrorism is a minute threat to Americans. Cancer is almost a certainty on a long enough timeline.

I try not to be an alarmist

but I do wonder about the cumulative effect of cell phone use, over 30-40 years. I imagine around 2025-30 there will be enough data in (our heads) to settle this one way or the other.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

when we all have giant tumors shaped like the apple logo on the side of our heads, then we'll know.

[corianderstem]