PDA

View Full Version : Tsa



road kill
11-17-2010, 09:48 AM
Going union?
Problems galore!!


RK

Goose
11-17-2010, 11:27 AM
TSA - Thousands Sexually Assaulted

Has anybody seen the video of the little 3-year old girl being groped by one of TSA's finest at the airport? I wonder if Janet Napolitano ordered her TSA goons to take a nude picture of her, too?

We live in Cuba now.

road kill
11-17-2010, 11:53 AM
TSA - Thousands Sexually Assaulted

Has anybody seen the video of the little 3-year old girl being groped by one of TSA's finest at the airport? I wonder of Janet Napolitano ordered her TSA goons to take a nude picture of her, too?

We live in Cuba now.
And....once they in the union, can't nobody fire they behinds!!
Just sayin........


RK

dnf777
11-17-2010, 02:08 PM
Just recently my wife and 6yo daughter flew from Pittsburgh to California for a meeting. When my wife asked that our daughter be spared the Xrays, they politely offered both of them to come around the machine, and checked them with the wand. Very courteous, very helpful. Those stories never make the news or bulletin boards.

Cody Covey
11-17-2010, 02:20 PM
Just recently my wife and 6yo daughter flew from Pittsburgh to California for a meeting. When my wife asked that our daughter be spared the Xrays, they politely offered both of them to come around the machine, and checked them with the wand. Very courteous, very helpful. Those stories never make the news or bulletin boards.

I fail to see why this is a big deal. If you don't like it drive. You don't have a right to fly just because you want to?

dnf777
11-17-2010, 02:26 PM
I suspect its a big deal because its occurring under Obama's watch. If a republican were in office, much like the Patriot Act, it would be no big deal to the same people who are now enraged. In fact, if this happened under Bush, anyone questioning it would likely have their patriotism called into question.

road kill
11-17-2010, 03:29 PM
Yeah, as long as it's happening to someone else it's OK!!!

If this happened to your wife or daughter....well I'd like to be there.
http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/11/15/what-happens-if-you-decline-a-full-body-scan/?icid=maing%7Cmain5%7C10%7Clink4%7C26129

BTW--they won this battle, the attacks of 9-11 changed America and they are not done yet!!


RK

Buzz
11-17-2010, 03:59 PM
BTW--they won this battle, the attacks of 9-11 changed America and they are not done yet!!


RK


That's what I've been saying for years, but as long as it was a Republican in office, lots of folks thought it was OK.

dnf777
11-17-2010, 04:11 PM
Yeah, as long as it's happening to someone else it's OK!!!

If this happened to your wife or daughter....well I'd like to be there.
http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/11/15/what-happens-if-you-decline-a-full-body-scan/?icid=maing%7Cmain5%7C10%7Clink4%7C26129

BTW--they won this battle, the attacks of 9-11 changed America and they are not done yet!!

RK


I don't disagree.

If that happened to my wife or daughter, I would adamantly refuse to let her be dosed with unecessary radiation, and would likely forfeit my flight.

Captain Sullenberger has a good point, and I would take it a step further. ANYONE who is occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation doesn't need one additional rad of exposure. Just today in JAMA, there was an article regarding patient's exposure and risk from CT scans. This is becoming a hot topic, and I suspect you'll soon be seeing tv commercials that start with:

Do you have cancer? Have you ever been exposed to a CT scan? If so, you may be entitled to monetary damages.......

When this hits the public perception, you will see a whole new firestorm about airport scanning and radiation exposure. I predict airports (at least in the US) will be limited to non-emitting methods of scanning in the near future.

At the same time, the government does have a responsibility to protect the flying public, and the commerce that goes along with air travel. Where we draw the line between public safety, public health concerns, and right to privacy will be an interesting and fluid argument, depending on what unfolds before us.

On a side note, I find it superfluous to scan pilots. Think about it. If a pilot has a screw loose, and wants to down an airliner.....does he really need a box-cutter or explosives to accomplish that? And even if you say he needs a method to subdue his fellow pilot, they now have the ability to carry a pistol on them in flight. End of story.

road kill
11-17-2010, 04:14 PM
I don't disagree.

If that happened to my wife or daughter, I would adamantly refuse to let her be dosed with unecessary radiation, and would likely forfeit my flight.

Captain Sullenberger has a good point, and I would take it a step further. ANYONE who is occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation doesn't need one additional rad of exposure. Just today in JAMA, there was an article regarding patient's exposure and risk from CT scans. This is becoming a hot topic, and I suspect you'll soon be seeing tv commercials that start with:

Do you have cancer? Have you ever been exposed to a CT scan? If so, you may be entitled to monetary damages.......

When this hits the public perception, you will see a whole new firestorm about airport scanning and radiation exposure. I predict airports (at least in the US) will be limited to non-emitting methods of scanning in the near future.

It appears the Israeli's have a very solid approach to this dilemma, but why would we want to do something that has been proven to WORK????


RK

road kill
11-17-2010, 04:21 PM
Who'd of ever thunk it???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH-dpkJZiOM

RK

Buzz
11-17-2010, 04:26 PM
How about dogs?;-)

A great outlet for washouts!

road kill
11-17-2010, 04:28 PM
How about dogs?;-)

A great outlet for washouts!
I guess that was on the table, but it offends some people, so we do these "gropings" instead.:rolleyes:


RK

Buzz
11-17-2010, 04:38 PM
I guess that was on the table, but it offends some people, so we do these "gropings" instead.:rolleyes:


RK

I guess it beats a dog nose to the crotch huh? :confused:

road kill
11-17-2010, 04:40 PM
I guess it beats a dog nose to the crotch huh? :confused:
Not to me.....but then......what do I know???;-)


RK

dnf777
11-17-2010, 05:00 PM
I guess it beats a dog nose to the crotch huh? :confused:

Depends of who's doing the groping. ;)

http://i982.photobucket.com/albums/ae306/dnf777/sexycopcostume.jpg

Juli H
11-18-2010, 12:07 AM
I suspect its a big deal because its occurring under Obama's watch. If a republican were in office, much like the Patriot Act, it would be no big deal to the same people who are now enraged. In fact, if this happened under Bush, anyone questioning it would likely have their patriotism called into question.


Actually, I disagree with you on this.... People were equally upset by being searched 'then' as they are 'now'....

People do not like their privacy invaded - How many travelers do you see putting up a show of hands to volunteer being searched? LOL

BTW - nice picture/comment to show off your lack of class.
Juli

dnf777
11-18-2010, 06:08 AM
Actually, I disagree with you on this.... People were equally upset by being searched 'then' as they are 'now'....

People do not like their privacy invaded - How many travelers do you see putting up a show of hands to volunteer being searched? LOL

BTW - nice picture/comment to show off your lack of class.
Juli

Thank you. I love it when the pious take offense to mild humor like that. God, I hope you NEVER turn on your television set, other than Nickelodeon. Its a harsh, harsh world out there!

I have no class. That's why I married a gal who has more class than you and me combined.....enough for both of us! She ain't even got no tattoos, and got a full set of teeth!

Oh, and I assume you've scolded the several RTFers here who have bikini-clad avatars as well? Please DON'T....I think they're cool! But then again, I have no class. :D

M&K's Retrievers
11-18-2010, 08:36 AM
But then again, I have no class. :D

Yes you do too, Dave. It's just all low.;)

dnf777
11-18-2010, 08:44 AM
Yes you do too, Dave. It's just all low.;)

Guilty as charged! I love looking at beautiful women...that's why I married one. (with class--Bonus!)

But I tell her, just because I've ordered, doesn't mean I can't still look at the menu!
:cool:

Juli H
11-18-2010, 01:27 PM
Thank you.
you're welcome - my apologies for getting carried away. I'm actually trying to imagine what it would be like watching men walk away from being searched by someone such as was in the picture you posted......Maybe the airlines would have to encourage male passengers to lay off the viagra, before traveling. LOL

So, if not 'pat downs' - then what? Watched an interesting piece (on FOX) about how El Al screens their passengers....very interesting...


Juli

Buzz
11-18-2010, 02:20 PM
Guilty as charged! I love looking at beautiful women...that's why I married one. (with class--Bonus!)

But I tell her, just because I've ordered, doesn't mean I can't still look at the menu!
:cool:



Admit it. You're going to leave this thread up next time you walk away from the computer so your wife stumbles across it! ;-)

hotel4dogs
11-19-2010, 10:44 AM
I heard this on the radio yesterday, but I have no idea if it's true or not. I pass it along only for pondering, and perhaps a chuckle.
Apparently they are having problems with the body scanners showing tampons in use in female passengers.
They can't tell whether it's a tampon, or an explosive device with a fuse attached when they look at the scan.
No one is quite sure how to deal with it....(I'm thinking this would be a great job for sniffer dogs).

road kill
11-19-2010, 12:07 PM
Hey, all you middle of the road independents, tell me this administration is not a bunch of Muslim sympathizers!!

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/nov/napolitano-may-exempt-muslims-airport-pat-downs

Napolitano May Exempt Muslims From Airport Pat-Downs

As the U.S. government retaliates against an American for refusing to allow airport security to grope his genitals, the nation’s Homeland Security secretary considers waving the intrusive “pat-downs” for Muslim women who consider them offensive.

The demand came last week from the politically-connected Muslim rights organization that serves as the U.S. front for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Calling the searches “invasive” and “humiliating,” the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) advises Muslim women wearing religious head covers known as hijabs to reject full-body checks before boarding planes."

So the only people getting searched for terrorist activities will be anyone except the people who have committed the terrorist acts!!


Put that in your Kool-Aid and drink it!!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!



RK

luvmylabs23139
11-20-2010, 09:07 AM
I guess it beats a dog nose to the crotch huh? :confused:

Well I'd rather deal with a dog as a woman but maybe that is because I have 4 labs 3 of which are males. Trying to say this while staying politically correct but it doesn't phase me when male dogs sniff an area a bit more at certain times. I'd rather that than some strange man groping me. I just have a dogs will be dogs attitude.

luvmylabs23139
11-20-2010, 09:20 AM
This is the part of all of it that gets to me. You can decide to go thru the body scanner but if you set it off you are still subjected to the pat down. My understanding is that they will no longer accept the doctor's letter of metal in your body. This can cause panic in elderly people. I can remember way back when long long before 911 my grandfather set off the old metal detector. The poor man went into total panic mode back in the 70's and almost collapsed at the metal detectors. Why won't we in the US use more profile screening?
Let's be real, it would be much more effective.

BonMallari
11-20-2010, 10:42 AM
IMHO this whole TSA fiasco has gotten blown way out of proportion, after 9/11 the majority of the country were willing to go through almost any screening process in order to fly safe and somewhat worry free...fast forward to present day and we are nitpicking the process, I am all for civil liberties but until you can guarantee that passenger # whatever is clean, scan away, do what you must to insure safety...there are lots of ways for a terrorist to strike, we get so obsessed and think that the airlines are the only weapon

Gerry Clinchy
11-20-2010, 10:01 PM
Napolitano May Exempt Muslims From Airport Pat-Downs


Would this be reverse profiling?

1tulip
11-25-2010, 04:59 PM
This is the part of all of it that gets to me. You can decide to go thru the body scanner but if you set it off you are still subjected to the pat down. My understanding is that they will no longer accept the doctor's letter of metal in your body. This can cause panic in elderly people. I can remember way back when long long before 911 my grandfather set off the old metal detector. The poor man went into total panic mode back in the 70's and almost collapsed at the metal detectors. Why won't we in the US use more profile screening?
Let's be real, it would be much more effective.

Yes! Yes! YES! Is it not the height of stupidity to have NO plan in place for dealing with the disabled? Shows how thoughtlessly brain dead this bureaucracy is. If they were doing this for our "safety" they wouldn't expose old and/or disabled people to injury.

SOrry to be repeating myself, but this issue (more than MY screening issues) just burns me up.

greenheadsandcans
11-25-2010, 05:13 PM
reverse profiling indeed

dnf777
11-25-2010, 05:14 PM
This is the part of all of it that gets to me. You can decide to go thru the body scanner but if you set it off you are still subjected to the pat down. My understanding is that they will no longer accept the doctor's letter of metal in your body. This can cause panic in elderly people. I can remember way back when long long before 911 my grandfather set off the old metal detector. The poor man went into total panic mode back in the 70's and almost collapsed at the metal detectors. Why won't we in the US use more profile screening?
Let's be real, it would be much more effective.

How in the world would they verify a doctor's letter as legit? I don't blame them for not buying that.

How does a metal detector incite panic? My grandfather just had radiation therapy at 91, and he didn't panic one bit. I've seen many people, myself included, trip the alarm at airport security, without one tiny pang of panic. I don't understand that point.

finkomania
11-25-2010, 11:29 PM
We were using these scanners in Iraq two years ago. I have no problem with them being used here as long as the people operating them are professional. Are they intrusive, you bet they are. I didnt have one complaint from any of the people entering our base that had to be scanned for access. Everyone was scanned or they didnt get in. This included all of the foreign truck drivers who came on the FOB.

dnf777
11-26-2010, 07:35 AM
We were using these scanners in Iraq two years ago. I have no problem with them being used here as long as the people operating them are professional. Are they intrusive, you bet they are. I didnt have one complaint from any of the people entering our base that had to be scanned for access. Everyone was scanned or they didnt get in. This included all of the foreign truck drivers who came on the FOB.

I agree. I have only a little problem with the privacy issue, so long as they are all professional, which I believe the vast majority are.

I have heard very little about the actual radiation exposure of the various scanners. Magnetometers do not expose one to ionizing radiation, such as the x-ray scanners. These are what I'm concerned about, mainly for flight crews, frequent fliers, and children or people with small statures.

JAMA just had an article about conselling patients about the radiation-induced cancer risks that CT scanners pose. A young woman will have a 1 in 300 chance of developing a radiation induced malignancy in her life time from ONE abdominal CT scan! That is NOT an insignificant risk, especially when we consider how many scans are preformed. Older people and men will have lower risks due to volume distribution and time-exposure factors. These risks are cumulative over one's lifetime, too. Its like stacking blocks each time you go through a scan for your entire life, you add a block to the tower. We will likely have to begin to have signed consent forms detailing the risks of radiation exposure (just as for surgery) for those getting CT scans.

I do not know what the actual exposure is from some of these airport machines, other than they're "very low", as we've been told. That's what we used to tell people getting CT scans too. :confused:

sinner
11-26-2010, 10:37 AM
Dogs? Many of the "working dogs" here at the USAF Academy were purchased from Europe (Average cost $50,000). How many will it take across our country? Most of these are not washouts!
Ask Bobby George how much time and effort it takes to train one and the cost of the animal for 6-8 years.
Some where common sense must come into play for safety.
I treat patients with artificial joints on a regular basis. I have yet to hear one "whine" about being screened or patted down.
Check this out for at least some current thoughts:
www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/cancer/2010-11-18-scanner-radiation_N.htm

Steve Hester
11-26-2010, 11:57 PM
I suspect its a big deal because its occurring under Obama's watch. If a republican were in office, much like the Patriot Act, it would be no big deal to the same people who are now enraged. In fact, if this happened under Bush, anyone questioning it would likely have their patriotism called into question.

That's got to be the dumbest post ever made on RTF.

dnf777
11-27-2010, 07:29 AM
That's got to be the dumbest post ever made on RTF.

Why? This current group of republicans has been opposed to EVERYTHING Obama has supported, even when it is the same thing THEY supported in the recent past. This "party of no" attitude has permeated down from Sara, Mitch, and Boehner to many of the rank and file republicans. Thankfully, the number of people calling themselves independent has grown steadily over the past 10 years.

More voters are looking at people and policies.....rather than just parties.
The latter group is what I was accurately referring to.