1 hmmmmmmmmmmm

2 Please, for God's sake PLEASE, touch my junk.  Hurry.

3 There is a certain governmental arrogance in just assuming people will bend to the new rules. Apparently when drafting these new protocols they didn't actually bother to focus-group people to see if people were actually willing to accept them.

Unelected bureaucrats with unchecked power conducting focus groups?  Snicker.

4
Well, the important thing to know is that some way, some how Congress is going to figure how to tax it.

5 They don't even do naked junk random searches in fucking Russia.

6 Another thought came to me today; Mark Davis had a very unusual RINO Candy-@$$ day this morning (he's usually almost as conservative as I am) that had me shouting at my radio.  And then it hit me: presumption of guilt.

What set me off this morning was those stupid freaking red-light cameras, but I got to thinking about this, too: The whole justification/rationalization behind "security" pat-downs is that "we can't be sure who's a terrorist."  So, we presume that everyone is guilty and force them to prove otherwise.  That's not okay.

The reason that the Israeli style "interview" profiling is okay with me is that it makes no presumption of guilt: they're just talking to me.  Only if I give an actual reason for them to take a closer look do they take a closer look.

7 due to questions of cost

I'm not so sure about that.  With the news of Chertoff's financial involvement with the firm that eventually got the contract combined with the fact that the Dutch have a similar system, but puts the image over a generic 'mannequin' so that the individual is pretty much scrubbed, I'm not sure that the system chosen was picked because it was 'the best'.

8 What's sad is that this was considered the PC solution

9

Shirt seen in security line at airport:

IF YOU TOUCH MY JUNK

THEN PREPARE FOR MY

SPUNK!

10 The bomb sniffing dogs are already at the airport they just work in the back. So I don't think these machines are cheaper than dogs just easier for a single company to lobby for and make a profit on.

11 @5

In Soviet Russia, junk stay in pants.  What is wrong with you people?

12 Good points Ace, i think Reno et al overstepped in this instance, yet another failure by Axelrod to manipulate public opinion.

Obama is getting very very very very very very very bad advice from Axelrod et al.

13 My junk hasn't been touched in over 13 months.... :/

14 Since when is Krauthammer a RINO??? You idiots and this RINO bullshit. This isn't fucking High School!

15 We now know aces tipping point, when he is to the left of Krauthammer.

16 The TSA, pretending you're all sent by Hamas, unless you look like you were sent by Hamas.

17 All you have to do is check out Gateway Pundit today for more stories: TSA Forces 12 Year-Old Girl Traveling Without Parents Through Naked Scanner Rough Skirt Check Leaves Passenger in Tears; TSA Says Search Was “Appropriate & Respectful” Elderly Woman With 2 Artificial Knees Describes Sexual Assault By TSA in St. Louis: “I Was Shaking & Crying… I Likened it to Being Raped” (Video) TSA AGENT ARRESTED ON SEXUAL ASSAULT & RAPE CHARGES (Video)

18 Good to see that the demon possessing you yesterday has left. If they HAD focus-grouped it, would it be any better? And why is it that it takes one guy to open his yap before everybody thinks it's an OK thing not to put up with?

19 I think the other aim of the nekkid scanners & government grope is to try to condition the population to go along with whatever big brother tells us to do.  Cause its for our own good.  We're just stupid little people that need our betters to decide how we should live

20 The other advantage to dogs is you only have to train some of them to sniff for expolosives and any dog walked thru the airport by someone in a uniform becomes a deterrent.

21 The dogs are cheaper, more effective and completely non-invasive. Watched them in action at several airports abroad, most notably New Zealand where no one minded in the least that a Beagle took a few sniffs around our luggage and us. Some rather enjoyed seeing the animals and the atmosphere was much more relaxed.

22 I can't wait to fly to the US!

23 I'm flying to Starbucks for my morning latte.

24
These new measures are just like health care reform and everything else coming out of the brain trust in Washington D.C.

This fixes nothing; helps nothing; but it satisfies the "But we must do something!" requirement.

25 I BANISH THEE FROM ACE, POLICE-STATE DEMON!!

26 OT:  From Politico:

Joe Scarborough suspended from MSNBC for campaign donations

MSNBC said Friday that it is suspending “Morning Joe” co-host Joe Scarborough for two days after he acknowledged giving eight previously unknown $500 contributions to friends and family members running for state and local offices during his tenure at the network, a violation of parent NBC’s ban on political contributions by employees without specific permission from the network president.

http://tinyurl.com/2amgstz

27 It's been suggested that people should make sex noises while being groped. That could be funny. But, me, I don't like being touched by strangers, I guess I'd have to do the naked scan. All because the libs don't want to offend muslims. Sucks to be us.

28 Thinking of Dr. K brings to mind the humiliation that an enhanced pat-down would visit upon disabled people who choose to fly.

This gets worse and worse, and all for the sake of worthless, rubber-spined PC. Something's got to give way.

29 Posted by: James at November 19, 2010 01:52 PM (Nljcu)

Lots of times, really, but most recently when he blasted Delaware Republicans for daring to nominate COD instead of his elitist country club choice of Chris Coons for Senate.

It seems to come and go, really.

And, FTR, I'm pretty sure Ace was being facetious with the "RINO" comment.

30
Posted by: AHFF Geoff

Hey, you old homo, where you been?!?

31 Dogs and retired cops sounds good to me. Slow everybody down in a Disney-style line long enough for the profilers/bomb-sniffing dogs to do their thing and then send everybody on their way. And for God's sake, don't let the TSA unionize.

32 It would be interesting to see what value the market places on "security" .  If each airline had its own entry point and was able to determine how detailed of a screen was required for each passenger...

Yes I know it is not possible unless every airport was redesigned.  But still, think about it and how people would react.

33 Rush has suggested that this is in part to punish us for voting incorrectly.  I don't think that it is that consciously that but it may be unconsciously.  We proved to them on 11/2 that we are too stupid to vote in our own best interest so we need the enlightened to show us the way.  Their contempt for us before the election was a thing of wonder and now that we have rocked their world, their contempt knows no bounds.  We will take it and we will like it!

34

Math:

Could we have afforded the cost of the lawsuits resulting from the profile and search of those that need it for less than this ineffective, venal stupidity is costing us?

YES.

Next.

Legal:

Would the current Supreme Court have struck down the profiling?

NO.

Next.

Policy:

Is this an ineffective, venal policy of the sort that always arises when Congress gets the vapors and creates a huge bloated bureaucracy out of the carcasses of pre-existing huge bloated bureaucracies?

YES.

Full stop.

P.S.:  This is one you CAN blame on Dubya because he let this DHS nonsense happen.

35 "If it costs an extra $60-$100 per ticket to have real security, so be it."  This is nothing but a tax.  And when you bring a tax to the table that is okay with you, count on the asshole govt. to find a way to quadruple it swiftly.

NO!  We pay nothing extra.

36 I'm still thinking we need to stage a civil revolt.  Get about 100 people all at the same checkpoint just to walk through the checkpoint -quietly, calmly- but completely ignore any instruction given to them by the TSA.

37 Isn't also a part of the invasive patdown/gropings to actually force people into doing the naked body scans.  Shame people and make them do it so the TSA layabouts can continue doing as little as possible?  Go through it once and you'll take the body scan after that.

38 It seems to me that this option was chosen because it was cheapest

For the first time in the history of ever, the feds get cost-conscious? No.

This is known/knowable: Pseudo-random crank-stroking, tit-juggling, slot checks, and nudie x-rays don't—and can't—thwart any terrorist anything, and they piss almost everyone off. So that's why they did it.

Starting there, you figure out what doing that accomplishes. Saving money is not it.

39

Biden's in line with Big Sis Genitalia Incompetano.

It's 'necessary'.

40 Makes you want to put a metal pipe around your junk.

41 Glad you came around on this subject, Ace.

It's pretty outragous that the Feds refuse to secure our borders because it's too difficult. Are unable to keep sex offenders out of the TSA or keep up with their own no-fly lists because they're incompetent. And cannot focus on the actual troublemakers because they might look mean...so they do the next best thing - slam their hands into random women's labias.

Side note - does everyone know that these full body scanners can detect neither plastic nor chemicals. So other than the full junk view how is this any better than a metal detector?

42 OT/ But I am so disgusted with this I have to post it.
Warning: This is about Detroit. The Detroit Public Schools wants a bailout.

Oh, good gawd. Yes, people, this is the district that had a school board member “pleasure” himself during a meeting with the school superintendent. This is the district with a school board member sending illiterate e-mails. Before dumping anymore money into this place, how about looking at the dropout rate, the absence rate, the percentage of out of wedlock births, the rate of disappearing baby daddies, the addiction rate,and on and on. And, oh, yeah, this is how the system handles the money it already has.

Everyone in Michigan knows that no good will come of spending more money in this city until the citizenry change their lifestyle. They may as well take 200 million dollars and flush it down the toilet.

43 Due to my husband's job, we travel to the Middle East a lot.  They are not using these scanners, and in some places, the "security" is a joke.  These stupid Homeland security hacks are assuming 100% of all terrorists attacks involving air travel are coming from within US borders.  How stupid and fatally PC!

44 Ace, if Penn Gillette can get his 'crank' grabbed by a TSA agent, anybody can.

This crap goes too far.

45 P.S.:  This is one you CAN blame on Dubya because he let advocated for this DHS nonsense [to] happen.

FTFY

46 Or people can do what I did BEFORE 9-11; quit flying.

When the airlines reduced ticket prices they also reduced service. Flying became a pure hassle from hell. I shudder to think what it is like now.

47

Whats more amazing to me... is that the TSA BOASTED about fining 130 potentialy dangerous items this year, in these searches.

130 out of 10,013,224 flights (2009..)

130 out of 767, 157,111 Passengers (again, 2009)...

We loose about 90 people a year to Lightning strikes (deaths)... out of 320 million in the US...

You are literally more likely to be struck by lightning in a year, than THEY are likely to find somthing...

48 "Lots of times, really, but most recently when he blasted Delaware Republicans for daring to nominate COD instead of his elitist country club choice of Chris Coons for Senate." Yeah, well, he was right about that one wasn't he? It's funny how you guys bitch about the ideological homogeneity of academia, yet at the same time scream and bitch and hound to death anyone who deviates from the party line in the slightest...including Ace yesterday.

49 30
Posted by: AHFF Geoff

Hey, you old homo, where you been?!?

Posted by: crouching soothsayer, hidden soothsayer at November 19, 2010 01:57 PM (uFokq)

I've been off on a walkabout, working on a plan to take over NATO countries and the Russians...figure ya need the Russians to totally lock down the Chinese and Indians for the next 100 years or so....

how about you?

heh

50 Are members of Congress getting searched like the rest of us?

51

If there is any chance at all that our 7 year old daughter would have to get a pat down (like if she failed the imaging portion somehow) then we will not be flying with her period.

As someone pointed out yesterday we spend all of this time teaching our kids how wrong it is for someone to touch them only to subject them to this bullshit.  And as someone else also pointed out that some sick bastard could use this as a way to show little Jimmy that it's not a big deal to be touched down there.

Enough already.  So what's the answer then?  Well I know what the fuck is not the answer.

52 40 Makes you want to put a metal pipe around your junk.

I would but the nuke plants' cooling towers are all busy right now.

53 I really feel a whole like like the proverbial frog, except that IÂ’ve been inching out of the airport for a long time now. Long, long ago, I used to consider flying from San Diego to Los Angeles; it saved a few minutes and a lot of hassle. That doesnÂ’t happen any more. If I leave for LA at the same time I would have left for the airport, IÂ’ll sometimes be in LA before I even would have taken off. Several years ago, I made a vow to never take any airline trip with connecting flights. ItÂ’s nonstop or nothing. This wasnÂ’t even government related (as far as I know), IÂ’d just had one too many silly connection-related problems; the straw was waiting for a connecting flight between Detroit and Muskegon, being outright lied to about probable weather patterns (the fog thatÂ’s keeping us from landing in Muskegon, Michigan at 5 PM will clear up by 7 PMÂ… no, 8 PMÂ… no 9 PMÂ… okay, never, flightÂ’s cancelled. What, did they think the moon was going to burn it off? And this for a destination that was only a 3 hour drive away.) So now I fly into wherever the nearest direct connection is and rent a car; or drive to Los Angeles and get a better direct connection. And a year ago I decided I wasnÂ’t going to fly anywhere that was less than two days drive away. And last month, I decided IÂ’d rather drive even to Michigan. ItÂ’s just too much hassle.

54 15 We now know aces tipping point, when he is to the left of Krauthammer.

Posted by: Mr Pink at November 19, 2010 01:53 PM (J3vTO)

Well Krauthammer is not infallible, but whenever my view on something doesn't line up with his I go back and check myself for any logic errors. Likewise if I ever agree with Jimmy Carter, I go looking for where I went wrong in my reasoning.

55 They don't have to raise ticket prices.  They could hire TSA workers for their looks and have them dressed in latex and PVC, not just gloves, and then some people would pay big $s to pick that pat down line. (leashes and dog collars would be extra)

56

I've got no problem with intrusive security protocols if they are necessary, they work, and a less intrusive regime will not likely be effective.

The naked body scanner/gate rape regime doesn't meet any of these criteria.

I'm just a bit taken aback as to why people are freaking about this when they have gone along with other crap that was at least as stupid for years. Maybe this is a good example of the preference cascade, where everybody was thinking the security theater was silly, but went along because they thought they were the only ones thinking that. When they found that most other people actually shared their attitude, the floodgates opened.

57 You idiots and this RINO bullshit. This isn't fucking High School!

Posted by: James at November 19, 2010 01:52 PM (Nljcu)

Technically you have to be a Republican to be a RINO so the Krautman is not a RINO because he is not a Republican.

58 Ace- glad you're back on the team.  This is the LAST place I would have looked to find someone in favor of abrogating our Constitutional Rights, especially a right as important as this one!

59 39
Biden's in line with Big Sis Genitalia Incompetano.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 19, 2010 02:00 PM (pLTLS)

Paying taxes is patriotic.

Getting groped is patriotic.

Joe Biden is idiotic.

60 A few dogs (have you seen that Mythbusters episode? Holy crap!), a little common sense, and security lines go away. Well, there may be a few delays coming out of Dearborn.

61 I don't know if this has ever been considered or discussed before, but I would cheerfully submit to, and pay a fee for, a background check that would provide me with some sort of ID that would allow me through these checkpoints with a thumbprint scan and card swipe.

Something like that would surely be cheaper than paying the army of retards at TSA to grope me.

On another subject, have we ever, even once, caught a terrorist at a security checkpoint?  We caught the shoebomber on the plane.  We caught the undiebomber on the plane.  All the 911 guys obviously got past security.    Getting on the plane hasn't been and isn't apparently the problem for these guys.  The only thing that's saved us the last few times, including at Times Square, are incompetent bomb makers.

62
how about you?

I've been slapping Curtis_^© and sticking my penor into small pipes.

Good to see you around. You need to come around more often and link the shit out the threads.

63 Lots of times, really, but most recently when he blasted Delaware Republicans for daring to nominate COD instead of his elitist country club choice of Chris Coons for Senate. It seems to come and go, really. And, FTR, I'm pretty sure Ace was being facetious with the "RINO" comment. Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at November 19, 2010 01:57 PM I think he also was pretty dismissive of the TEA Party up until only recently. I think that's where the "'Hammer is a RINO" accusations started. He's not conservative on many different issues, but he was pretty much given a pass for those, because he's so strong on other important issues. But when he came out initially against the TEA Party, that's where people started getting frustrated with him and the RINO tag came out. I don't think he's a RINO so much as he is an elitist. But, yeah, Ace calling him a RINO was sarcasm.

64

If you were in yesterday's comment thread, you may have noticed me coming closer and closer to the "Don't Touch My Junk" position. At some point I said so.

Yes, I'd agree. I noticed you change your position, and you freely admitted doing so. That is appreciated.

 

We saw two strawmen being touted yesterday. Anyone who dares disagree is a prude. Or,

Anyone who dares question this wants no security.

As for the cost angle, that is another straw man. This mob is going to be allowed to unionize by Incompetano. Once that happens, they are SEUI with the power to detain and arrest.

65 Sorry Ace, if Krauthammer is a RINO you are Al Franken. I can only hope you are joking.

66 Posted by: James at November 19, 2010 02:02 PM (Nljcu)

Don't even start that argument again.  It's over.  The point is that he DID deviate from what grass-roots conservatives believe (or, at least, believed).  He's also attacked Palin and DeMint on issues where the base is with them instead of him.  So, yes, he's going to get called a RINO.  The hard-core Conservative base: learn it, live it, love it.

That said, this has nothing to do with "party line."  It has to do with right and wrong, when Krauthammer is on my side- as are (now) Ace, and Monty, and Penn Gillette, and any number of others: and the other side is Barak Obama, Joe Biden, Janet Napolitano, and whats-his-name Pistole, I'm inclined to think I'm on the right side of this one.

Maybe you should look at the people who agree with you to determine if you're on the right side, or not.

67 The only thing that's saved us the last few times, including at Times Square, are incompetent bomb makers.

Posted by: not neo just conservative

 

This is incomplete. The passengers were the one shining part of the last three attacks. And Officially, passengers are supposed to sit meekly by and let the experts handle things.

68 42 OT/ But I am so disgusted with this I have to post it.
Warning: This is about Detroit. The Detroit Public Schools wants a bailout.
Posted by: nerdygirl at November 19, 2010 02:01 PM

So, I was talking to someone about this when it happened- you know the "pleasuring in a meeting bit". It was explained to me that indeed, when men are nervous, the uh, "pleasuring" will take the edge off their nerves. I didn't need/ want to know that. Now I've tainted everyone here. Sorry.

Also, said guy was, I believe, also a functional illiterate.

69 38 It seems to me that this option was chosen because it was cheapest

For the first time in the history of ever, the feds get cost-conscious? No.

This is known/knowable: Pseudo-random crank-stroking, tit-juggling, slot checks, and nudie x-rays don't—and can't—thwart any terrorist anything, and they piss almost everyone off. So that's why they did it.

Starting there, you figure out what doing that accomplishes. Saving money is not it.

Posted by: oblig. at November 19, 2010 02:00 PM (x7Ao

I don't think its cheapest in terms of cost.  I do think it was cheapest in terms of effort.  Just stick a new machine in, tell the TSA guys to get a little fresh with the people they frisk and call it done.

70 What part of "gee, it also provides NO EXTRA SECURITY" did you miss yesterday, Ace?

71 Blue Hen,

Certainly.  I stand corrected.  Incompetent bomb makers and alert passengers and/or bystanders.

72 OT/ But I am so disgusted with this I have to post it.
Warning: This is about Detroit. The Detroit Public Schools wants a bailout.

Bailout for Detroit? Do they supply ANY of the funds for their schools now?  The last I heard the federal government supplied 40% and the State supplied the rest.

73 Joe Scarborough suspended from MSNBC for campaign donations

Leftards are all full of vengeance and spite, aren't they?

74

Maybe you should look at the people who agree with you to determine if you're on the right side, or not.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at November 19, 2010 02:08 PM (8y9MW)

That's a bit of an appeal to authority though.  Not always bad but a fallacy you don't want to fall into.

75

OT: a profile on S. Duffy.

Sorry, ace, they seem pretty happy. Best to find a new man crush.

And she's right -- WI boys are underrated!

76 Perhaps we'll never have real, Israeli-style security -- but now is the best time to push for it, instead of meekly conceding the field, as I was doing. --- ace Indeed. Meekly conceding the field is what RINO's do best. It's a continuous losing strategy, where a million small concessions lead to a Leftwing tyranny, Islamic supremacism, discrimination and oppression of the majorities religion, culture and rights. And so on and so forth. .

77 "What part of "gee, it also provides NO EXTRA SECURITY" did you miss yesterday, Ace?" Probably the part where that claim was actually proven. It's obvious that it does provide SOME extra security, but the issue is that that extra security is not worth the nightmare or expense.

78 Posted by: buzzion at November 19, 2010 02:12 PM (oVQFe)

When the lines are that stark, I'll take my chance with the fallacy.

You also have to know where their "authority" lies.

I'll take my brothers' recommendations on movies any day, I'd never take their political advice if they thought they were trying to save my life.

79

Juxtapose this with the recent CAIR effort to allow Muslim women to "self-frisk."  Napolitano is considering it.

You can't make that up.  Too absurd. 

So the only reason we have heightened airport security will soon be exempt from it.  

Islam: the religion of peace heightened security. 

80

"4. It seems to me that this option was chosen because it was cheapest (and also the most politically correct; but cheapest too) and more expensive regimes, like having lots of chem-sniffing dogs at checkpoints and hiring lots of retired cops to do profiling/interviewing of travelers, were rejected (or actually not even considered) due to questions of cost. This being just a matter of money, then, it sure seems like people are telling them they won't accept nominally-cheap airfare at these very high costs. If it costs an extra $60-$100 per ticket to have real security, so be it."

First, I reject your premise that dogs and face-to-face profiling are more expensive.  It may seem that way, but I am far from confident that the numbers would prove it.  And that's especially true if you factor in the inordinate delays that accompany ever-greater levels of technological scrutiny -- passengers' time has value.

Which leads to the second point: one of the primary purposes of terror attacks is to impose ever-higher costs on the society at large.  The more sand the terrorists can force us to pour into the gears of daily life, the closer they come to the goal of causing us to throw up our hands and say, "We give!  Just leave us alone and you can do whatever you want to everyone else in the world!"

It seems simple to throw a new piece of technology on the pile to deal with each "new threat" as it emerges, but eventually that pile of technology and the procedures to operate it become crushing.  The better solution is to look at the constant, consistent and continuing threat: people dedicated to an ideology that wants us dead or under their control.

Israel is an instructive example in more ways than just their airport security: they have security checkpoints in lots of places, including the entrance to shopping malls.  They also have a higher density of concentrated threats of attack.  And yet the Israeli economy has outstripped all other economies in the region and most other economies in the world, achieving First World per capita GDP levels.  They understand that it's not just about stopping the bombers, but being able to do so without grinding their economy and society to a halt.

81 Well Krauthammer is not infallible, but whenever my view on something doesn't line up with his I go back and check myself for any logic errors. Likewise if I ever agree with Jimmy Carter, I go looking for where I went wrong in my reasoning. Posted by: Mætenloch at November 19, 2010 02:04 PM I find it interesting that many people basically find those such as Krauthammer infallible -- not you, as you have said here he is not infallible -- and check their opinions if they are out of line with the 'hammer's. Yet, they don't extend the same line of reasoning to those such as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, etc. And those people who do take their opinions seriously are considered "cultists" or something. Is there a reason that this opinion is taken more seriously, because it's coming from Krauthammer rather than say Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter? Serious question. I don't understand why many of the same people who brush off an opinion if it came from Rush or Coulter would consider that opinion relevant if it came from Krauthammer.

82 AllenG, you voted for a Truther in the Texas Republican gubernatorial primary.  You don't have the standing to tell anyone to "look at the people who agree with you".

83 So if during a pat down, I start moaning and get a stiffy, then what?

84 Posted by: James at November 19, 2010 02:14 PM (Nljcu)

It's not obvious at all.  Besides the technical documentation already provided about the scanners not being able to detect chemicals or plastics, and the generally known info about people in Muslim guard getting a de facto pass, there's also a boat load of anecdotal evidence that they miss things all the time.

So, no, they don't "obviously" provide any extra security.  They "theoretically" provide a little extra security.

85 It's funny how you guys bitch about the ideological homogeneity of academia, yet at the same time scream and bitch and hound to death anyone who deviates from the party line in the slightest...including Ace yesterday.

You know, for all the discussion yesterday, the vast majority of commentors seemed to me at least to be trying to sway Ace. Not run him down. Yes a few usual suspects jumped right into the put downs. But put down's are part of life here, and it wasn't "I hope he fails" grade mud slinging. Discussion often has the tenor of one side believing the other is wrong, and trying various devices to convince them of that. That's pretty much what I saw yesterday, and a lot of really good subject matter got discussed.


FTR, I don't believe that supporting a RINO (and Castle was a RINO) makes you a RINO, perhaps a little more politically flexible than I would like, but your views, not those of every politician you have ever supported, are what makes that determination. Otherwise I'd have to take responsibility for the sure to come insanity from Kirk and Brown.

86 They could have Mike Steele's lesbian-themed bondage nights at MIA and really raise some money.

87 If I may...

Cinemax Double Feature

88 but being able to do so without grinding their economy and society to a halt. Exactly.

89

OT: a profile on S. Duffy.

Sorry, ace, they seem pretty happy. Best to find a new man crush.

And she's right -- WI boys are underrated!

Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 19, 2010 02:13 PM (pLTLS)

Nonsense: they sound like they are so happy that she realizes he is just too much man for one woman!  I am sure she'd gladly look the other way if some Ewok volunteered to sponge up Sean's excess manfulness.

90 I told you before, it's about controlling cash and stones, not about security. They want us to get back in line.

91 I've also got to wonder if Ace kind of slipped into his original view because he thought it was ginned up talkradio outrage.  He initially approached feeling that way.  And I wonder if he would have started out at a more "Don't touch my junk" attitude if he had seen it as based more in the internet and public perception.

92

Is there a reason that this opinion is taken more seriously, because it's coming from Krauthammer rather than say Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter?

I am sure there are others like me who form their own opinions independent of Dr. K or Rush or Coulter.  I sure hope so, anyway.

That's why I am commenting here way more than I should be.

93

I don't think its cheapest in terms of cost.  I do think it was cheapest in terms of effort.  Just stick a new machine in, tell the TSA guys to get a little fresh with the people they frisk and call it done.

Posted by: buzzion at November 19, 2010 02:10 PM (oVQFe)

This, plus it sidestepped the messy question of looking at just who is trying to kill us.

94 We are all Israel now.

95 61 - Barry Switzer

96 "I don't understand why many of the same people who brush off an opinion if it came from Rush or Coulter would consider that opinion relevant if it came from Krauthammer." Because Krauthammer is a serious commentator who is known for his keen insights and intelligence. Not saying Coulter or Rush are dumb, but they're more pundits/hacks. They often make good arguments and have good instincts, but I'm not going to go to them for serious analysis.

97 It also should matter that these measures, generally unreasonable for many reasons actually increase the risk of being blown up in the sky, Not only do the scans and grabs fail to reliably eliminate the risks they are supposed to eliminate ( I was horrified that you callled them "near foolprood", Ace, as the opposite is true - they are easily fooled by a suicidal radical bent on showy martyrdom) . They dilute and divert resources to examination of non-suspects and create opportunities for distraction and diversion that terrorists can exploit. It is a waste of time, energy, money, at the expense of safety and liberty from *unreasonable* searches. The admitted policy of punishing persons who avoid the scanners with very intrusive exams, to make a public spectacle and example of them, really needs to be punished itself. Whoever developed it should be identified and held accountable; IMO fired. Yesterday I read (a very defensive) TSA touting how the scans were revealing contraband. This is not a selling point. If they catch no terrorists, but catch criminals, and they think this justifies the scans, that's a clearly unconstitutional government operation. A random search of pockets of persons grabbed out of a shopping mall or a parking lot might also reveal its share of improperly removed mattress tags, too - but this side benefit cannot alone justify this, nor naked scans of people wanting to travel.

98 If I may...

Cinemax Double Feature

Posted by: The Mega Indepedent at November 19, 2010 02:17 PM (y3N4m)

Very cute!

99 Juxtapose this with the recent CAIR effort to allow Muslim women to "self-frisk."  Napolitano is considering it.

I will blow a gasket if this comes to pass.

100 What happens if you've got junk in your trunk? Besides getting boycotted at CPAC, that is?

101 Phil, I voted for someone who agreed with me on about 99% of issues and wasn't Rick Perry.

I also voted knowing (hoping otherwise, but knowing nonetheless) that it was simply a protest vote.  If Kay Bailey had actually had a shot, I'd have voted Perry.

I won't recant my support of Debra Medina during the primary (she's gone a little off the rails since then, though).  I thought then that she was a better choice than the other two Republican Candidates.

As we said in the GOProud thread last night: the Primaries are where we do this kind of thing.

@83 - Just don't try to cover it up with a pipe.

102 Well, the scans require so little thinking. Everybody in! No discernment or discretion wanted for that.

103 "Besides the technical documentation already provided about the scanners not being able to detect chemicals or plastics, and the generally known info about people in Muslim guard getting a de facto pass, there's also a boat load of anecdotal evidence that they miss things all the time." Not one of these claims has been demonstrated conclusively, especially that muslim pass. Clearly, they are all things to be seriously worried about, but let's not start treating "concerns" as "facts".

104 This, plus it sidestepped the messy question of looking at just who is trying to kill us. -- United Flight 93 Bingo!

105 I am sure there are others like me who form their own opinions independent of Dr. K or Rush or Coulter. I sure hope so, anyway. That's why I am commenting here way more than I should be. Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 19, 2010 02:19 PM Oh, I'm sure most people do. As do I. I just wonder why the the majority opinion here seems to be a deference to the authority of Krauthammer's opinion on issues over anyone else. As Maetenloch admitted, when he finds his view different from that of Krauthammer's, he goes back and reviews. I don't hear that kind of deference to authority for anyone else, especially not Rush or Coulter, etc. I'm just wondering what special authority Krauthammer has that his opinion is taken more seriously than others in the conservative movement.

106 Clearly, they are all things to be seriously worried about, but let's not start treating "concerns" as "facts".

Before you subject the American people to forced nudie pics. There should be NO concerns about the effectiveness of the process, period.

107 Well, James, half a fence provides SOME security too, but what part of "will not stop any attack, not even the Underwear bomber part deux" is precisely so hard to grasp here? This isn't Chinese calculus here. Pretty simple stuff. This regime will not stop any terrorism. Full stop. Period. Hit the showers, boys. It's over.

108 http://tinyurl.com/GropeMe

109

Yesterday I read (a very defensive) TSA touting how the scans were revealing contraband.

So fucking what.

Ooooooh, WEED.

Tell me the last time a stoner hijacked a plane. 

Want to find contraband?  SECURE THE SOUTHERN BORDER, DUMBASSES.

This is why DHS should have been smothered in the crib.  And now it is impossible to kill.

One more time:  We can't build the goddmaned fence on the border because that might offend someone, but feeling grannie's boobs "is necessary."

I avoided yesterday's thread becasue I knew it would piss me off to this extent.

110 Oh. Never mind.

111 Don't disagree with any point in the original post, except one:

I like Krauthammer.  If you think Krauthammer is a RINO, who (within reason) could you name that stands to his right?  It's like calling Obama a moderate because the Democrats didn't run Jello Biafra in 08.

112 The next big one isn't going to come from anywhere near aircraft or airports. 

113 All I know is I'd rather have fewer competent security officers than hordes of union-thug-clowns the TSA is using now.

114 I am flying tomorrow.  I am going to go to the airport sans pants. 

115

If Ace starts getting it, there is hope.

Now if he would just stop being a Castle-Rove lackey and O'Donnell basher . . .

 

116

This is why DHS should have been smothered in the crib.  And now it is impossible to kill.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at November 19, 2010 02:26 PM (B+qrE)

When I learned that the US Federal Police Force, known as the FBI, would NOT be part of the Dept. of Homeland Security, I knew it was a joke.

117 I'd feel safer if I knew all the passengers who look like soldiers- or cops or whatever. Hell, even pro football players- were NOT disarmed.

118 The next big one isn't going to come from anywhere near aircraft or airports.

Already enough damage done to our free society there. I predict malls, schools, subways, and sporting events next.

119 If they're so worried about security, then why are they focusing so much on children, the elderly, and young women? Either profile or take a logical approach to the patting-down. Otherwise, this entire exercise is completely useless.

120

Somewhat O/T but very, very cool:

Why Israel Definitely IS A Rogue State

An expectation-defying speech delivered at a Cambridge University student debate last month.

This is a war of ideals, and the other speakers here tonight are rightfully, idealists. I’m not. I’m a realist. I’m here to win. I have a single goal this evening – to have at least a plurality of you walk out of the “Aye” door. I face a singular challenge – most, if not all, of you have already made up your minds.

This issue is too polarizing for the vast majority of you not to already have a set opinion. I’d be willing to bet that half of you strongly support the motion, and half of you strongly oppose it. I want to win, and we’re destined for a tie. I’m tempted to do what my fellow speakers are going to do – simply rehash every bad thing the Israeli government has ever done in an attempt to satisfy those of you who agree with them. And perhaps they’ll even guilt one of you rare undecided into voting for the proposition, or more accurately, against Israel.

It would be so easy to twist the meaning and significance of international “laws” to make Israel look like a criminal state. But that’s been done to death. It would be easier still to play to your sympathy, with personalized stories of Palestinian suffering. And they can give very eloquent speeches on those issues. But the truth is that treating people badly, whether they’re your citizens or an occupied nation, does not make a state “rogue.” If it did, Canada, the US, and Australia would all be rogue states based on how they treat their indigenous populations. Britain’s treatment of the Irish would easily qualify them to wear this sobriquet. These arguments, while emotionally satisfying, lack intellectual rigor.

More importantly, I just donÂ’t think we can win with those arguments. It wonÂ’t change the numbers. Half of you will agree with them, half of you wonÂ’t. So IÂ’m going to try something different, something a little unorthodox. IÂ’m going to try and convince the die-hard Zionists and Israel supporters here tonight to vote for the proposition.

By the end of my speech, I will have presented five pro-Israel arguments that show Israel is if not a “rogue state” then at least “rogue-ish.” Let me be clear. I will not be arguing that Israel is “bad.” I will not be arguing that it doesn’t deserve to exist. I won’t be arguing that it behaves worse than every other country. I will only be arguing that Israel is “rogue.”

THE WORD “rogue” has come to have exceptionally damning connotations. But the word itself is value-neutral. The OED defines rogue as “Aberrant, anomalous; misplaced, occurring (esp. in isolation) at an unexpected place or time,” while a dictionary from a far greater institution gives this definition: “behaving in ways that are not expected or not normal, often in a destructive way.”

These definitions and others center on the idea of anomaly – the unexpected or uncommon. Using this definition, a rogue state is one that acts in an unexpected, uncommon or aberrant manner. A state that behaves exactly like Israel.

The first argument is statistical. The fact that Israel is a Jewish state alone makes it anomalous enough to be dubbed a rogue state: There are 195 countries in the world. Some are Christian, some Muslim, some are secular. Israel is the only country in the world that is Jewish. Or, to speak mathmo for a moment, the chance of any randomly chosen state being Jewish is 0.0051%. In comparison the chance of a UK lottery ticket winning at least £10 is 0.017% – more than twice as likely. Israel’s Jewishness is a statistical aberration.

The second argument concerns Israel’s humanitarianism – in particular, Israel’s response to a refugee crisis. Not the Palestinian refugee crisis – for I am sure that the other speakers will cover that – but the issue of Darfurian refugees. Everyone knows that what happened, and is still happening in Darfur, is genocide, whether or not the UN and the Arab League will call it such. There has been a mass exodus from Darfur as the oppressed seek safety. They have not had much luck. Many have gone north to Egypt – where they are treated despicably. The brave make a run through the desert in a bid to make it to Israel. Not only do they face the natural threats of the Sinai, they are also used for target practice by the Egyptian soldiers patrolling the border.

Why would they take the risk? Because in Israel they are treated with compassion – they are treated as the refugees that they are – and perhaps Israel’s cultural memory of genocide is to blame. The Israeli government has even gone so far as to grant several hundred Darfurian refugees citizenship. This alone sets Israel apart from the rest of the world.

But the real point of distinction is this: The IDF sends out soldiers and medics to patrol the Egyptian border. They are sent looking for refugees attempting to cross into Israel. Not to send them back into Egypt, but to save them from dehydration, heat exhaustion, and Egyptian bullets.

Compare that to the US’s reaction to illegal immigration across their border with Mexico. The American government has arrested private individuals for giving water to border crossers who were dying of thirst – and here the Israeli government is sending out its soldiers to save illegal immigrants. To call that sort of behavior anomalous is an understatement.

My third argument is that the Israeli government engages in an activity which the rest of the world shuns – it negotiates with terrorists. Forget the late PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, a man who died with blood all over his hands. They’re in the process of negotiating with terrorists as we speak. Yasser Abed Rabbo is one of the lead PLO negotiators that has been sent to the peace talks with Israel. Abed Rabbo also used to be a leader of the PFLP – an organization of “freedom fighters” that engaged in such freedom-promoting activities as killing 22 Israeli high school students. And the Israeli government is sending delegates to sit at a table with this man and talk about peace. And the world applauds.

You would never see the Spanish government in peace talks with the leaders of the ETA – the British government would never negotiate with Thomas Murphy. And if President Obama were to sit down and talk about peace with Osama Bin Laden, the world would view this as insanity. But Israel can do the exact same thing – and earn international praise in the process. That is the dictionary definition of rogue – behaving in a way that is unexpected, or not normal.

Another part of dictionary definition is behavior or activity “occurring at an unexpected place or time.” When you compare Israel to its regional neighbors, it becomes clear just how roguish Israel is.

And here is the fourth argument: Israel has a better human rights record than any of its neighbors. At no point in history has there ever been a liberal democratic state in the Middle East – except for Israel. Of all the countries in the Middle East, Israel is the only one where the LGBT community enjoys even a small measure of equality. In Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar and Syria, homosexual conduct is punishable by flogging, imprisonment, or both. But homosexuals there get off pretty lightly compared to their counterparts in Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, who are put to death. Israeli homosexuals can adopt, openly serve in the army, enter civil unions and are protected by exceptionally strongly worded anti-discrimination legislation. Beats a death sentence. In fact, it beats America.

Israel’s protection of its citizens’ civil liberties has earned international recognition. Freedom House is an NGO that releases an annual report on democracy and civil liberties in each of the 195 countries in the world. It ranks each country as “free,” “partly free” or “not free.” In the Middle East, Israel is the only country that has earned designation as a “free” country. Not surprising given the level of freedom afforded to citizens in say, Lebanon – a country designated “partly free,” where there are laws against reporters criticizing not only the Lebanese government, but the Syrian regime as well.

Iran is a country given the rating of “not free,” putting it alongside China, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Myanmar. In Iran, there is a special “press court” which prosecutes journalists for such heinous offenses as criticizing the ayatollah, reporting on stories damaging the “foundations of the Islamic republic,” using “suspicious (i.e., Western) sources,” or insulting Islam. Iran is the world leader in terms of jailed journalists, with 39 reporters (that we know of) in prison as of 2009. They also kicked out almost every Western journalist during the 2009 election. I guess we can’t really expect more from a theocracy.

Which is what most countries in the Middle East are – theocracies and autocracies. But Israel is the sole, the only, the rogue, democracy. Out of all the countries in the Middle East, only in Israel do anti-government protests and reporting go unquashed and uncensored.

I HAVE one final argument – the last nail in the opposition’s coffin – and it’s sitting right across the aisle. Mr. Ran Gidor’s presence here is all the evidence any of us should need to confidently call Israel a rogue state. For those of you who have never heard of him, Mr. Gidor is a political counselor attached to Israel’s embassy in London. He’s the guy the Israeli government sent to represent them to the UN. He knows what he’s doing. And he’s here tonight. And it’s incredible.

Consider, for a moment, what his presence here means. The Israeli government has signed off to allow one of their senior diplomatic representatives to participate in a debate on their very legitimacy. That’s remarkable. Do you think for a minute that any other country would do the same? If the Yale University Debating Society were to have a debate where the motion was “This house believes Britain is a racist, totalitarian state that has done irrevocable harm to the peoples of the world,” would Britain allow any of its officials to participate? No. Would China participate in a debate about the status of Taiwan? Never. And there is no chance in hell that an American government official would ever be permitted to argue in a debate concerning its treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. But Israel has sent Mr. Gidor to argue tonight against a 19-year-old law student who is entirely unqualified to speak on the issue at hand.

Every government in the world should be laughing at Israel right now, because it forgot rule number one. You never add credence to crackpots by engaging with them. ItÂ’s the same reason you wonÂ’t see Stephen Hawking or Richard Dawkins debate David Icke. But Israel is doing precisely that. Once again, behaving in a way that is unexpected, or not normal. Behaving like a rogue state.

That’s five arguments that have been directed at the supporters of Israel. But I have a minute or two left. And here’s an argument for all of you – Israel willfully and forcefully disregards international law. In 1981 Israel destroyed Osirak – Saddam Hussein’s nuclear bomb lab. Every government in the world knew that Hussein was building a bomb. And they did nothing. Except for Israel.

Yes, in doing so they broke international law and custom. But they also saved us all from a nuclear Iraq. That rogue action should earn Israel a place of respect in the eyes of all freedom-loving peoples. But it hasnÂ’t.

But tonight, while you listen to us prattle on, I want you to remember something: While youÂ’re here, KhomeiniÂ’s Iran is working towards the Bomb. And if youÂ’re honest with yourself, you know that Israel is the only country that can, and will, do something about it. Israel will, out of necessity, act in a way that is the not the norm, and youÂ’d better hope that they do it in a destructive manner. Any sane person would rather a rogue Israel than a nuclear Iran.

The writer is a Toronto-born second-year law student at Cambridge. He was speaking, along with two other speakers, for the motion: ‘Israel is a rogue state’ at a student debate late last month. The motion, which was opposed by Israeli diplomat Ran Gidor and two other speakers, was overwhelmingly defeated.

121 "Well, James, half a fence provides SOME security too, but what part of "will not stop any attack, not even the Underwear bomber part deux" is precisely so hard to grasp here?" I don't grasp precisely where that EMPIRICAL point was proven...do you? If you would like to share the info with me please do. What I've seen is a long of (very warranted) anger and hysteria over this, but hard facts are in very short order. The point is: Don't say "any" or "all" when the evidence only suggests "some".

122

"I've also got to wonder if Ace kind of slipped into his original view because he thought it was ginned up talkradio outrage." 

That was pretty much my initial take on the situation, but at this point I'm happy that people are rejecting the useless security theater, whatever the trigger.

123 hiring lots of retired cops to do profiling/interviewing of travelers

According to Ann Coulter, the Israeli-style profiling system is actually much cheaper, as well as much more effective.

124 Because Krauthammer is a serious commentator who is known for his keen insights and intelligence. Not saying Coulter or Rush are dumb, but they're more pundits/hacks. They often make good arguments and have good instincts, but I'm not going to go to them for serious analysis. Posted by: James at November 19, 2010 02:20 PM Fair enough. Though I've been listening to Rush on average 3-4 days per week since late 2001 and I've never thought of him as a pundit/hack, but rather a serious commentator who shares keen insights and intelligent discussion/serious analysis on issues in an entertaining manner. Krauthammer I see in a similar way to Rush only he doesn't have his own show, he simply contributes to panels and writes articles. But I put them each in the same "serious commentator with keen insights" category. Neither are infallible, but I do find myself analyzing my stance on an issue if I find myself in disagreement with them.

125 Phil, I voted for someone who agreed with me on about 99% of issues and wasn't Rick Perry.

No, you voted for someone who said she agreed with you.  I don't know what she's done since the primary, but her Truther views were well known prior to it, so that's no excuse.  You go on to say that you hope she would win; in which case Bill White would have destroyed her.  Do you have these sorts of self-destructive urges in other parts of your life, or is it only in politics?

Did you know she was a Truther when you cast your "protest" vote?

126 114 I am flying tomorrow.  I am going to go to the airport sans pants. 

Posted by: Truck Monkey at November 19, 2010 02:28 PM (yQWNf)

And, uh, just out of curiosity, what airport are you flying out from???

127 ace's liberal-for-a-day moment has finally passed. Hoist the flags.

128 130 pieces of contraband eh? And that resulted in how many arrests? And how many convictions? For What? Or is this all under double scret probation?

129 It's like calling Obama a moderate because the Democrats didn't run Jello Biafra in 08.

Kraut is a pundit. So when he gets compared, he gets compared to other pundits, not politicians. On the pundit scale he is moderate.

130 If you think Krauthammer is a RINO, who (within reason) could you name that stands to his right? --- Barry I like Krauthammer and respect him. He and I agree often, and he provides insight that I have not considered before sometimes. However, the man is just plain wrong when it comes to Islam. He slandered Geert Wilders for instance. Perhaps his Jewishness coming out, where White Euro Christian nationalism is concerned. (He doesnt have the same problems with Jewish Israeli Nationalists). Both groups are concerned aboutto protecting and promoting their culture and people's interest.

131 Seriously,
Suppose I get aroused and noisy during a pat down, what happens?!?!?!?!

132

I was musing over why the mainstreaming of the scan at this particular time, right before the biggest flying holiday of the year, when it seems counterproductive (slowing what is an already slow flow, because of inexperienced flyers).

Someone has already sort of touched on this and it was my thought as well.

It is actually a great time to get irregular flyers and flyers who are willing to do almost anything not to miss Thanksgiving with Mom to submit and do whatever it takes.

One your scanner cherry is popped, so to speak, it is less likely you would balk on later encounters with the TSA. It's a known quantity and easier to submit to a second time.

The TSA also appears to be making examples of those who decline the scan. All reports are that a loud shout goes up, "Opt out! Opt out!!!"

Psychological priming and then shaming, intended or not, is the way they are pushing this.

133 TSA. New meaning to the acronym.

Transitory Sexual Assault.

Tits, Snatch and Ass.

134

My wife and I thought about this for a second or so and decided the intrusive electronic scanner was better than the grab-n-grope.  Realistically, the one time per year or so I have to deal with these idiots I'm going to just make sure he's hanging nicely and smile. 

It's PC theater which won't prevent the next attack, but that's what we call security. 

135

And for God's sake, don't let the TSA unionize.

Don't you think that's what is really going on here??  When I heard that I said, uh huh... now it makes sense.  Fuck them.  I will NOT go thru a scanner and I sure as hell will not let some freak touch me in places only my husband is allowed to touch.

136 I am sure there are others like me who form their own opinions independent of Dr. K or Rush or Coulter.  I sure hope so, anyway.

I listen and read them to make sure they are in tune with me.  Not the other way around. 

And when I first started listening to Rush-- I think that many people feel this way-- is that he could state and articulate conservative positions that most people weren't able to do.

What I mean is that I knew I was conservative but could never explain why without stumbling a lot.  But I knew in my bones what I was.  Rush was able to verbalize what people were only able to feel at the time. 

That's why I am commenting here way more than I should be.

Ditto.

137 Posted by: Clyde Shelton at November 19, 2010 02:25 PM (NITzp)

Part of it may be that people view Krauthammer as being "paid to think" while Rush, Coulter, et. al, are viewed as being "paid to talk."

The perceptions are wrong (or, at least, aren't quite accurate), but I think that goes into it.

Like the people who Gripe about Mark Levin- the guy is an opinionated jerk, but he's an opinionated Jerk who has argued cases before the Supreme Court, been an assistant to the US AG, and runs a legal group that helped get Bill Clinton impeached and disbarred.  He's not exactly an intellectual light-weight.

138 I am writing a new book: Confessions of a TSA Virgin

139  I will NOT go thru a scanner and I sure as hell will not let some freak touch me in places only my husband is allowed to touch.

Posted by: jewells at November 19, 2010 02:38 PM (l/N7H)

That means you're better off not going to the airport.  If you go and refuse you risk a fine.   Those are the two option: 1) porn scanner 2) sexual battery. 

140 Touch my junk. Do it over and over and over again. Now switch hads. I'm definitely smuggling plums. Nowmaybe I can sleep on the plane a little easier.

 Sorry TSA, no time for pillow talk, I've got a plane to catch.

141

Shep Smith just announced on Fox he will never submit to a grope. He will miss Thanksgiving he said.

Surprising.I think hell just froze over.

 

142 Hey, when would be the best time to take my Viagra before flying tomorrow? Hypothetically, of course.

143 I love news stories that allow Americans to come together and talk about genitals.

144 Beagle- I have made my choice.  I just won't fly anymore.  I don't travel that much anyway.  If I go somewhere I'll drive.

145 There's some scrunt on Rush Mark Steyn pleading for her poor put-upon TSA-screener husband and playing the "if you don't like it, don't fly" card.

146

Dear Penthouse Forum,

I thought this kind of thing only happened to other people and then, one day I was making a connection thru DFW and....

147 There is a certain amount of distrust of K based on his being a part of the pet right wing columnist brigade that cooed over Obama a la Brooks as a "great intellect" (even though there was neither evidence nor accomplishment to support the charge). 

148 since when is Kraut considered a "RINO"?

149 143 I love news stories that allow Americans to come together and talk about genitals.

It is all so touching to me. 

150

Last time I flew out of San Diego on an international flight a couple of months ago, some TSA supervisor dickhead suddenly strode through the crowded screening area yelling "FREEZE!" at the top of his lungs. Many people were not clear what he meant, which was apparently "don't so much as move a muscle, don't even blink." The slightest movement was met with loud hateful roars of "I SAID FREEZE" and "DON'T MOVE" right in people's faces, including a little old lady. Standing on one foot and taking off your shoe? Continue standing on one foot or get yelled at. Then after a minute or so, they announced it was just a drill.

It was all pointless Simon Says. Big man, huh? Fuck you, you hateful little prick.

Another time a year or so ago, same airport,  I was on my way out of the secure area on my way to the parking lot, had passed the threshold and was actully gone from the secured zone, and I stopped to look at a video monitor for a luggage x-ray scanner that was in plain sight through a window. A cluster of TSA standabouts, male and female, took a short break from remembering the time started calling out to me not to look, to keep moving, in weird singsong joking tones mixed in with laughter.  If nobodyis supposed to see it, why don't you put up a screen? Or was it all a joke? And can they even tell the difference?

Now the same crowd of TSA losers have naked scanners and groping. Shit.

They better lay off my kid.  These people are going to start getting their heads beaten in and it's their own god damned fault.

 

 

151 Sorry Kraut, Islamism is integral to Islam, they arent 2 seperate entities, with Islamism being a small minority of Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims are Islamists who believe in Muslim Supremacy and the implementation of Shariah Law. Liberal Muslims are a tiny minority. Islamism is not just part of Islam but at its core. Krauthammer gets a fail, for trying to tow that line.

152

Shep Smith just announced on Fox he will never submit to a grope. He will miss Thanksgiving he said.

Surprising.I think hell just froze over.

This is not Shep taking a conservative stand it is Shep making sure the truth he has a vagina doesn't go public.

153 I don't think its cheapest in terms of cost.  I do think it was cheapest in terms of effort.  Just stick a new machine in, tell the TSA guys to get a little fresh with the people they frisk and call it done.

Posted by: buzzion at November 19, 2010 02:10 PM (oVQFe)

Don't forget that the TSA is now a bureaucracy and so they will go with the least risky option for themselves. From this point of view the scanners are great because you buy and install them once and they keep working for years without any pesky problems. People and dogs on the other hand need training, annual pay, and they sometimes get sick, make mistakes, and bite/molest people. And this generates lawsuits and bad publicity. So from the TSA's point of view porno scanners operated by minimally trained flunkies are the 'safer' option.

154

I don't grasp precisely where that EMPIRICAL point was proven...do you? If you would like to share the info with me please do. What I've seen is a long of (very warranted) anger and hysteria over this, but hard facts are in very short order.

AWESOME.

Let's break this shit down once and for all, shall we? The X-rays these scanning machines use stop at skin depth, so any bomb hidden within the body is invisible to them. We all agree on this, it's an EMPIRICAL point.

And you have two recent suicide attacks, one with a man lighting his (fucking!) crotch on fire and the other blowing his own ass up, literally. I think it's pretty well proven, these little EMPIRICAL facts, that terrorists have ante'd well past what this regime is capable of detecting.

This is where we're at. There is nothing in the current search regime which will, necessarily, stop another attack. If you're going to war and your opponent upgrades to muskets, grabbing your "arrow-proof" vest isn't going to help you out very much, now, is it?

Anyways, take it or leave it. Don't much care if you persist in tedious resistance to the world.

155 Is it possible to organize a Viagra at the airport day protest?

156 With Buckley, you could at least point to the quote about being ruled by the first people out of the Boston phonebook as opposed to the faculty of Harvard.  With K, you always get the impression of the exact opposite.

157 I thought we had completely surrendered domestically when they allowed Gorelick on the 9/11 panel; maybe there is a spark left in the old battery.

158 155 Is it possible to organize a Viagra at the airport day protest?

Just make sure you don't have a four hour flight.

159

I love news stories that allow Americans to come together and talk about genitals.

LOL- you dirty girl.

160

Wm T Sherman....two days ago I shared almost the same story you did, except it was at LAX.

I literally almost peed my pants when a TSA guy in his fifties went off at a guy near me, and then continued screaming at anyone around him.

We stared at our feet, shuffled uneasily, did sideways glances, and then did....nothing.

 

161 Glad to see you switch sides Ace.

I've seen what the new patdown entails... personalty I don't care. I'm not that shy.

But I'm not game for a trade-off where you grope women and children to maybe make me a little safer.

162 Beagle, you shouldn't do that again. People keep saying that the dose is so safe. It is NOT. And forgetting all the calibration/maintenance/operator errors that could substantially increase the dose you receive over advertised levels, be aware - The dose is not distributed through your tissues, but entirely concentrated on the skin and tissue immediately beneath. It's not even like the cosmic rays you are exposed to when flying at high altitude. The outer tissues are getting a very concentrated dose, and concentrated at dangerously high levels. The machines have hot spots and leaks, and you may inadvertantly recieve much more radiation than you bargained for.

163 New show "Flavor of Love: TSA edition"

164 Like the people who Gripe about Mark Levin- the guy is an opinionated jerk, but he's an opinionated Jerk who has argued cases before the Supreme Court, been an assistant to the US AG, and runs a legal group that helped get Bill Clinton impeached and disbarred.  He's not exactly an intellectual light-weight.

He's also a low-life who libels his rivals over the air (unless someone's actually found that phantom instance of Glenn Beck plagiarizing one of Levin's books) and otherwise tells whatever lies he needs to in order to torpedo his enemies.  Levin's a piece of shit.

165 Vercingetorix, considering the guy making the recent round of bombs in Yemen was responsible for rigging his own brother up with an ass bomb, I really wondering who they are trying to find.

166 I have struggled with where to come down on this issue.  On the one hand, I have never been too put out by the inconveniences of security during air travel.   Wait in line a little while?  So what?  That's what Blackberries are for.   Take off your shoes?  No problem; I wear slip-ons to travel.  Show I.D.?  Shit, brother, I want to show I.D. more often, say, when I'm going to vote!  And, frankly, if it was just me, I wouldn't care if somebody had a gander at my "junk" on a body scan.  I, mean, I'm reaching the age where the next few decades are going to be pretty filled with young nurses using catheters to do unspeakable acts to my person.   Life ain't all pretty, you know.   It's like the old Army saying, "Excuses are like assholes, everyone's got one."   Everyone has a body; every body gets older and nastier; in the end, no one is too pleased with the vessel God gave us, and so we trade it in for wings.

On the other hand, I have a relatively shy wife, and at least one relatively shy daughter.  (The youngest I'm not too sure about.)   And I have six relatively shy nieces ages 13 to 26.   And I have two sisters (not so shy, but still).  And I have two sisters-in-law (ranging from shy to very shy).   And I have a mother-in-law who ought to be canonized.  And I have an eighty year-old Mom.   If someone tried to touch Mom's junk, airport or no, TSA or no, terrorism threat or no, I can tell you that I'd be over the barrier in a New York second and up in somebody's grill.   Touch my junk, fine.  Touch my womenfolk, and it's on!

167 So if during a pat down, I start moaning and get a stiffy, then what?

You'll be arrested for public indecency and registered as a sex offender.

There's some scrunt on Rush Mark Steyn pleading for her poor put-upon TSA-screener husband and playing the "if you don't like it, don't fly" card.

The poor stupid dear's husband gets to feel up hot young girls every day. I can see how that would make someone who feels instead of thinks even more unbalanced.

168 Posted by: Phil Smith at November 19, 2010 02:31 PM (n+cpx)

I knew it had been mentioned, and her campaign sent out an email (yep, I was on the list) explaining it to my satisfaction- that is, it was a fairly trumped up mountain-out-of-a-mole-hill thing brought on by one comment she made- pushed largely by the Hutchison/Rove wing of the Texas GOP.  Since Hutchison thought there might be enough deserters from Perry to get a run-off, but it was also looking like Medina might have been the #2 in that run-off, not Hutchison, it was good enough for me.

Considering the Texas Governor doesn't really have much to say about national investigations centered in New York City, it didn't much matter to me (still doesn't really).  There are a lot of people who I respect on most things where I think they're crazy on others- and an inherent distrust of the Federal Government is a good thing in a Governor, IMO.

As to getting crushed by Bill White: eh, maybe.  She actually ran a decent campaign in the Primary, and it was a bad, bad year to have D by your name in Texas- I think she would have won.

169 Deciding whether you'd rather be groped or have a nekkid picture of yourself stored on a TSA hard drive somewhere is one thing - but, if you set off the alarms on the nekkid-picture-taking machine, you don't have any other option but to get finger-forked by a TSA agent.  Well, other than telling him/her to go screw themselves and not fly at all.  So, "would you rather" is a concept that only goes so far.
I heard this Pistole guy say that, since they've started using the New and Improved^tm screening methods, they've found and confiscated liquor, marijuana, and even a knife.  The knife would have triggered the metal detector, and as for hooch and weed...show me one instance in which an airplane was brought down by a pint of Beam and/or a baggie full of pot. 
All of this while, to our south, drug dealers are shooting it out across OUR BORDER, and our Dear Leader is doing - what?

170 I love news stories that allow Americans to come together and talk about genitals.

Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves)

 

It is a great break from the same old grind(er).

171 Another angle:  we have 100,000 or so troops in Afghanistan, right?  They are not there by accident, are they?  No, they are there because certain kinds of people -- radical Muslims from the Middle East -- flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, killing 3,000 Americans.   I assume they are not randomly flying Predator drones, or randomly firing artillery, or randomly shooting at Afghanis.  I assume they are very carefully targeting those individuals who are identiably our enemies.   Is it too much to ask that our government's TSA agents use the same kind of care in identifying individuals who might actually pose a threat to airlines?  

We have a government that thinks it's OK to shoot Predators at Talibanis in Pakistan -- to commit murder, to call a spade a spade -- without a trial, without presenting evidence, without reading them their rights, etc. I agree with those actions.   But the same government is somehow too principled to observe Abdul Ahmed Rahman, traveling on a Yemeni passport on a one-way ticket to Los Angeles, and make a rational decision that maybe, just maybe, they should pull him out of line and have a pointed conservation with him about where he's going and where he's been?   Instead they want us to blithely allow them to inflict indignities on our daughters and nieces and wives and sisters and mothers?   That's not just idiocy (as Krauthammer suggests), it's hypocrisy.

172 Part of it may be that people view Krauthammer as being "paid to think" while Rush, Coulter, et. al, are viewed as being "paid to talk." The perceptions are wrong (or, at least, aren't quite accurate), but I think that goes into it. Like the people who Gripe about Mark Levin- the guy is an opinionated jerk, but he's an opinionated Jerk who has argued cases before the Supreme Court, been an assistant to the US AG, and runs a legal group that helped get Bill Clinton impeached and disbarred. He's not exactly an intellectual light-weight. Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at November 19, 2010 02:41 PM Agreed. And that's really what I was getting at. There were plenty of conservative pundits out there making the same case about this issue that Krauthammer makes here. But they were kind of blown off by some. But NOW, now that *Krauthammer* states the same case that others have been making for days, it's time to take this opinion seriously. I agree with Dave C above who stated that they check with people like Kraut and Rush to see if THEY agree with him, not the other way around. I do the same. And I agree that they both also do a good job of articulating conservative beliefs that we all share, but don't find a good way of articulating ourselves. They are our public voice, in a way. I just found it odd that a position on an issue was not taken seriously by some here up until Krauthammer took that position. If others took it, it wasn't taken seriously. But when Kraut weighs in, then he holds the authority so now people take the position seriously. I wasn't sure if he has some special background I wasn't aware of that gave him that authority. Seems like he doesn't, it's just a matter of which commentator people like more. Some like Rush, some like Coulter, some like Beck, some like Krauthammer.

173 You'll be arrested for public indecency and registered as a sex offender.

So they can do it but I can't enjoy it?!?! Sounds like most of liberalism.

174 If it costs an extra $60-$100 per ticket to have real security, so be it.

Ace falls for the trap.

175

An extra $60 a ticket sounds like too much.

Assuming a well-trained, reasonably well paid Israeli-style screener could on average evaluate 1 person a minute (little old ladies taking 0 minutes, swarthy types taking longer), that's 60 people per hour.

That would mean 50 cents a ticket buys one $30/hr (including benefits)employee.  $10 a ticket would hire 20 such people.

176 Well, Ace picked the four dumbest ass reasons to change his mind. But changing his mind is something I guess.

177 The groping will continue until morale improves.

178 There is a certain amount of distrust of K based on his being a part of the pet right wing columnist brigade that cooed over Obama a la Brooks as a "great intellect" (even though there was neither evidence nor accomplishment to support the charge). Posted by: ejo at November 19, 2010 02:44 PM Really? Was Krauthammer on board with Obama during the 2008 election? I don't remember that. If so, that puts his judgement in serious question. But I don't remember him being on that bandwagon. I just remember him not being on board with the TEA Party and I attributed that to his elitism.

179 You were right the first time, Ace. And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck. Time to cowboy up, ladies. It's not the era of corsets and fainting spells anymore. War is hell. We're in a war against Al Qaeda. If persevering in this war means occasionally getting a patdown at a security checkpoint, I say grin and bear it. But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

180 Not only did Kraut weigh-in, he did it on enemy ground. When he pisses the same direction as the rest of the right, he does it from inside the WaPo - not somewhere on the back end of the AM dial at 3pm. He is pissing on a completely different set of loafers.

181 Is there a reason that this opinion is taken more seriously, because it's coming from Krauthammer rather than say Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter?

Serious question. I don't understand why many of the same people who brush off an opinion if it came from Rush or Coulter would consider that opinion relevant if it came from Krauthammer.

Posted by: Clyde Shelton at November 19, 2010 02:15 PM (NITzp)

Well I view Rush and Ann as entertainers first, pundits seconds (not to say that they aren't fairly good political pundits) while Krauthammer is primarily a 'thinker' columnist. Plus he's got a pretty good lifetime track record on his political judgments. Sure he's less prone to get rah-rah about political causes and more pessimistic in general, but IMO he's also more accurate in his assessments.

182 And, frankly, if it was just me, I wouldn't care if somebody had a gander at my "junk" on a body scan.  I, mean, I'm reaching the age where the next few decades are going to be pretty filled with young nurses using catheters to do unspeakable acts to my person.

I would love to see thousands of fliers of your vintage--all genders!--"spontaneously" stripping down to their birthday suits in lieu of being groped or irradiated, just to see what happens. 

Unfortunately, I suspect you'll all be registered as sex offenders, esp. if there are children present, and the TSA won't change a thing.

183 The machines have hot spots and leaks, and you may inadvertantly recieve much more radiation than you bargained for.

Posted by: SarahW at November 19, 2010 02:49 PM (Z4T49)

Nice.  Even better, the 100 scans leaked to the media came from our local federal courthouse.

I'm still far more likely to risk the radiation than having some dude frisk me.  Seems like I should be able to pick the gender which is going to grope my junk. 

184 That's not just idiocy (as Krauthammer suggests), it's hypocrisy.

Posted by: The Right Curmudgeon at November 19, 2010 02:52 PM (69ED2)

Not to mention the hypocrisy of an Administration that says that the best way to avoid violating the civil rights of terrorist suspects at horrid places like Gitmo is to blow them up outright -- or that it's unacceptable to use evidence "tainted by torture" but acceptable to kill terror suspects before obtaining any evidence at all that they might have about future operations.

185 Should gay passengers ask for the opposite sex when being patted down?

186 Posted by: Clyde Shelton at November 19, 2010 02:55 PM (NITzp)

I don't recall him being on Obama's side (ever) but I think he was one of the "Right Wing Pundits" who were invited to that breakfast meeting or whatever he had in early January.

187 It's good to see that just about everyone is deciding to stand up now.

The new scanners "function" (as advertised), but they don't work as needed; they can't detect explosives smuggled internally, a technique potentially used (but denied in paragraph 2) to try to whack a Saudi prince.

And now, we start to learn (publicly, this time, that Michael Chertoff is heavily involved with companies that sell the new scanners ... how did this happen? 

We need a major investigation of the justification(s) for the need for these scanners, and a good look at the field trails, and bidding process.

Follow the money.  My guess is that if the scanners are not used, (possibly because the backup threat of a goof grope is quashed) someone will lose BIG dollars.


Two of the TSA's arguments to Tyner were (essentially) "when you bought an airline ticket you gave up some rights" and "there are other means of travel".

True and true; or not. Or, how about "Bullshit"? Not all rights are surrendered. In fact, only a few, and not quite completely, and no federal officials are able to derive additional authority and trample on other rights.

And as for other methods of transportation, no, not really. Aside from the fact that the rail system, where the government-owned version of it still exists, is a pale shadow of what it once was, and buses are far too slow (and then there's cost), driving is a personal choice, and not for the government to require of forbid, ...

 ... air travel is a form of PUBLIC conveyance. The government may not prohibit usage of this public system without due cause.

Refusing to send all of one's carry-on items through the x-ray machine, or to go through the metal detector in the manner specified by airport authorities, are generally-accepted causes for being denied access to air travel.

Refusing to be subjected to additional search, simply to fulfill a statistical requirement, and no other reason, is not sufficient cause.

That there are people who wish to commit violence and mass murder, specifically involving airplanes filled with passengers, is undeniable.  But we know who these people DO NOT look like. Why do we look where we expect to find nothing?


Note to all air travelers: start documenting and potentially video-ing all "questionable" diversions to, and skips past, the new scanners.

The scanners can detect nothing on people who do not go through them.  

Let's do our own profiling.  Suppose a member of an asian, or black, or white, or hispanic, middle-aged couple gets diverted to one of the new scanners ... who were the 3 of 4 people preceding? What about following?

Let's do this again for reasonably hot (or hotter) girls ... or women ... or mothers of 2 ... or ... older executives ......

Young families and 20-40y.o. men, singly or in groups, might be worth watching.

I suspect we are going to see a profile ... a pattern of looking everywhere we are highly unlikely to find what we are looking for.

188 Kraut is Bill Oreilly with a better mind. His conservatism is fueled mostly by foreign policy with emphasis on Israel and anti communism. He is pro choice, anti death penalty. He is for increased energy taxes. He is for fed funding of embryo stemcell research. He worked for Mondale and other dems in the past and was given top awards by liberal groups such as People for the AmericanWay. He is worth reading and listening to but he is no stalwart conservative.

189 Fuck you sauropod

190 But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 02:55 PM (GPm6P)

Just curious: what will you say when three or four planes get blown out of the sky despite all their passengers and crew having gone through full-body imagers and enahnaced pat-downs?

191 "And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck. Time to cowboy up, ladies." ------------------ Free groping lessons. Prepare for your trip. First 12 one hour lessons are free.

192 178 There is a certain amount of distrust of K based on his being a part of the pet right wing columnist brigade that cooed over Obama a la Brooks as a "great intellect" (even though there was neither evidence nor accomplishment to support the charge).

Posted by: ejo at November 19, 2010 02:44 PM

Link, please. Because I don't recall Krathammer supporting Obama or raving over his intellect.

193 But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

Nice straw men there.

Because, of course, planes were being blown out of the sky every week for the last ten years before the TSA started taking nudie pics of children and fist-fucking old ladies.

And yeah, this "war" that will last the rest of our lives and probably the rest of our childrens' lives justifies the permanent and open-ended revocation of our rights as Americans and human beings.  That's convenient.

194 But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

The question will actually be:  "Why didn't the government pat down those disheveled Arab males who bought one-way tickets?"

195 PROFILE! and leave the rest of us alone

196 Should gay passengers ask for the opposite sex when being patted down?

I'm looking forward to the lawsuits from M-to-F pre-op transexuals.

197 Good post cant believe its not bitter

198 The question will actually be:  "Why didn't the government pat down those disheveled Arab males who bought one-way tickets?"

The answer will be "RAAAAACIST!"

199

But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

You don't get it.  We should be profiling people.  This shit going on now isn't going to prevent squat.  We have already had someone literally blow his ass up in an assassination attempt.  If something like that happens here, are you ready to have someone shove their fingers up your ass before you board a plane?  I'm sure as hell not.  No, it stops now.  This PC shit is gonna kill us all.

200 airports can opt out....and should....then the tsa can unionize all they want....they'll still be out of work...

201 I knew it had been mentioned, and her campaign sent out an email (yep, I was on the list) explaining it to my satisfaction- that is, it was a fairly trumped up mountain-out-of-a-mole-hill thing brought on by one comment she made- pushed largely by the Hutchison/Rove wing of the Texas GOP.

Allen, for fuck's sake.  Go listen to the interview she did with Glenn Beck before she sent out that email.  Nobody trumped up anything.  She's a Truther, plain and simple. 

Oh well.  Enough thread jacking, I guess. 

202 Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 02:55 PM (GPm6P)

That's really dumb.  Nothing new that they're doing would prevent jack-crap: it's all kabuki theater.  IF they were actually focused on security, I MIGHT .be inclined to let them continue.  However, it is much more likely that this will not do anything constructive.

Rule 1: Don't trust the Government.
Rule 2: If the Government says something that makes sense, see Rule 1.

Further, from a principle standpoint, we go back to my above point: I should be presumed innocent: that is, I shouldn't have to prove that I'm not carrying a bomb.  They should have to have real reasonable suspicion (just catching a flight shouldn't count) before they put me through a scanner.

People mentioned lots of behavioral flags yesterday: last minute tickets, traveling alone, cash tickets, little/no luggage, etc.  If I fit any (let alone multiple) of those things, I would agree there was at least a reason to suspect I might be up to no good.  Traveling with my wife and kids to her brother's wedding in Michigan?  Not so much.

203 CNN says screeners will no longer be crotch grabbing kids 12 and under. I guess they want to feel them up only after they go through puberty.

204 Solution:

Hotter TSA agents.

Must be hooters waitress or hotter.

205 And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck. Time to cowboy up, ladies. It's not the era of corsets and fainting spells anymore.

War is hell. We're in a war against Al Qaeda. If persevering in this war means occasionally getting a patdown at a security checkpoint, I say grin and bear it.

But probably the TSA will back down. And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky, the same people who screamed, "Don't touch my junk" will be howling, "Why didn't the government DO something?!"

Posted by: sauropod

Wow. So much shit in such a small space.

And we are civilians.

You say grin and bear it. For all we care, go in, get groped and stay there.

 

Tough luck huh? So does that mean we are now allowed to single out who were fighting in this war? Radical Islamists? No, it means that TSA jerks with no backgraound checks get to feel up three year old girls. Becauase according to Sauropod, we're at war with three year old girls.

If an airplane gets blown out of the sky, it will not be despite your efforts, it will be despite the efforts of passengers who are told by jerks like you to shut up, grin and bear it, and remain in your seats while the hijacker gains attention by slitting the throat of a flight attenedant.if the passengers listended to dicks like you, they would have stayed in their seats whil the last 9/11 plane headed for the Capitol or White House. The shoe bomber would have had a free hand. And your precious panty raider would have been able to kick start his fruit of the booms.

 

Because according to you and the TSA, passengers should shut up, surrender all of their rights, remain in their seats and "grin and bear it". Try this line of shit on the families of one of those people lost over Pennsylvannia. See how long you keep your teeth.

206 Looks like the blog is starting to return to sanity.  Is it time to dismiss the circular firing squads and start focusing on 2012 yet?

207

"I'm looking forward to the lawsuits from M-to-F pre-op transexuals."

Can't they train chimps wearing pants to search the "alternative people"? 

208 And when the next three or planes get blown out of the sky

The most recent jihadi attacks seem to be in public non-airport places.  Times Square, Ft. Hood...not sure how a bureaucrat sticking his hand down my pants at MKE will stop the next Nidal Hassan.

209 And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck.

Don't leave out us guys there fella because I have a biologically ingrained aversion to witnessing my wife, mother, sister or daughters being touched. And I get the idea that many other male comenters here have the same feeling.It may be manly to take the indignity foisted on us but it is not manly to stand by when someone degrades the ones we love.

210 Well I view Rush and Ann as entertainers first, pundits seconds (not to say that they aren't fairly good political pundits) while Krauthammer is primarily a 'thinker' columnist. Plus he's got a pretty good lifetime track record on his political judgments. Sure he's less prone to get rah-rah about political causes and more pessimistic in general, but IMO he's also more accurate in his assessments. Posted by: Mætenloch at November 19, 2010 02:56 PM Thanks. That's understandable. Though I do think Rush and Coulter are underestimated as simply being more "entertainment" and less "thinker". Listening to Rush for years, reading Coulter's books, etc and I've come to realize they definitely are "thinkers". It's a shame they are brushed off as not being so many times, because they present their info in an entertaining manner. I would probably make this analogy: Krauthammer/HotAir : AoSHQ/Rush/Coulter Krauthammer and HotAir seem to be more straightlaced in their political analysis, while AoSHQ, Rush and Coulter are more entertaining in their analysis. Part of the reason I stopped reading HotAir, yet continue reading AoSHQ is because it is entertaining analysis, even when I disagree with the analysis. But I don't discount the analysis here as less "thinking", simply because it is done in an entertaining manner. Anyway, it's not all that important. I was just curious. Thanks for the reply and explanation.

211 And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck. Time to cowboy up, ladies. It's not the era of corsets and fainting spells anymore.
Uh huh.  So, since we're at war, it's ok to suspend "innocent until proven guilty" in favor of "since we don't know who's the terrorist, you must all be treated like terrorists"?  It might actually be time to "cowboy up", Hoss, but the "cowboy-ing up" needs to be done by the Federal government and the Imams who cry like babies when anyone mentions the efficiency of profiling.  Profiling works. 

212

sauropod,

Wow, so you're in favor of the toddler grope which is all over the Internet?  I'm sure you'd suddenly care about civil rights if, say, Muslims were subject to heightened scrutiny -- instead of all the groups which have no history of blowing up airplanes. 

Every single search of a non-Muslim since 9/11/01 has been a waste of time from the standpoint of terrorism.  Kabuki theater doesn't make anyone safe.

Meanwhile a Muslim guy on a terror watch list flys out of Africa one-way and pays cash but luckily only burns his junk instead of the airplane. 

So the solution is to invade everyone's privacy?

Hey, I know, pay extra attention to Muslims instead of the exact opposite PC BS which we do today. 

  

213 Ah, Jean! There's just so much wrong with that tidbit of info...you're own brother helping insert the colon claymore! Jesus, what an asshole!

214      127 ace's liberal-for-a-day moment has finally passed. Hoist the flags.   Ace is on a new integrity kick.  That's just the fucking way it is.   Where's Joe?

215 Here's one example from 2008. (Although, he does seem to go back and forth on his like/dislike of the guy for the past two years.)

Krauthammer Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously said of Franklin Roosevelt that he had a "second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self-definition -- do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president.

http://tinyurl.com/49o8cw

216

Posted by: Blue Hen at November 19, 2010 03:06 PM (R2fpr)

THIS.

217 CNN says screeners will no longer be crotch grabbing kids 12 and under.

The UK would-be liquid bombers were going to hide explosives in an infant's diaper.  I'm totally cool with groping children who are traveling with parents who belong to radical mosques and have leave "to be viewed after my martrydom" videos...

218

 

Time to cowboy up, ladies.

 

Hey Sauropod you asshole. How about we clerk up instead? Howz about you or some TSA jerk try reading the no fly lists and denying the panty raider a seat? It's not as glamorous as feeling up toddlers though, is it? Cowboy up sounds more macho, and impressive?

 

Or perhaps you can "visa up"? And deny seats to 9/11 bombers that list as an address, "a hotel". or would you rather be taking the three year old to the hotel?

219 Solution: Make all screeners female!!!!

220

I'm really hoping that the strap-on producers have seen a surge in sales.  And if they haven't every woman who has a flight soon should go out and buy one and wear it there.

221 What do you mean I HAVE to walk through the scanner?

222 It doesn't take extra personnel or special people, just training and awareness on the part of the people we are already paying.

Looking for terrorists is easy if you allow your eye to focus on them instead of forcing yourself to look at everyone equally.

That's what we should do. Look for terrorists and stop abusing everyone.

223 The UK would-be liquid bombers were going to hide explosives in an infant's diaper.  I'm totally cool with groping children who are traveling with parents who belong to radical mosques and have leave "to be viewed after my martrydom" videos...

Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 19, 2010 03:10 PM (A/iZj)

Precisely, Heather.  If for no other reason than to rescue those children from nutjob parents who think it's allah's will to use their babies as IED's.

224

The be all end all solution is to have hot ass babes pat down the men and hunks for the women and NO TOUCHING the kids! Now that I could go for. The babes could pat me down as long as they wanted too and I may even tell them they missed a spot.

225 Link, please. Because I don't recall Krathammer supporting Obama or raving over his intellect.

Posted by: Mætenloch at November 19, 2010 03:00 PM (pAlYe)

Another - Crooks & Liars got mad at Dr. K for a bit of self-deprecating humor, where he wanted to dispel the idea that Obama's dinner at George Will's house had converted all the attendees:

Charles: What's interesting is the fact that he would want to do this. And you see that since his election he's kind of reached out to people who may not be his ideological allies. To Rick Warren, the pastor who will be at his inaugural. To John McCain, who he's treated with a lot of dignity and respect and to a bunch of right wing columnists last night. In part because I think he is a guy who's intellectually curious and he wants to exchange ideas. Also in part because he wants to co-opt the vast right wing conspiracy and I'm here to tell that speaking for myself---he succeeded. I'm brainwashed entirely. I'm in the tank and I'm a believer now in hope and change and above all audacity.

226 To the people who keep saying these procedures don't prevent attacks based on the fact that no one has been caught with anything are relying on flawed reasoning. Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox? I don't necessarily agree with the pat downs only because they are performed by less than professional personnel.

227 1 in 5 Americans Mentally ill But, why do all of them have to be in Congress?

228 The point of the program is not to secure the airlines.  It is to secure compliance.  Plain and simple.

I tried to keep my opinions of this crew in the 'ideological retards' category, but I've finally gone over to 'fully malicious usurpers'.

229 Personally, i have zero problems with the new search protocols.

230 And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck. Not when it's for nothing; achieves nothing, prevents nothing - and not when it's the government. NO. How about you MAN up.

231 Really? Was Krauthammer on board with Obama during the 2008 election? I don't remember that. If so, that puts his judgement in serious question.

Krauthammer is NOT a RINO because he is NOT a Republican. He is what I consider the original Neocon. He is a Democrat turned conservative on some issues, mostly dealing with the WOT and Israel. He is also liberal on some issues.

He was a member of the failed Carter Administration and he was a Walter Mondale speechwriter. IOW he is, or was, a Democrat.

As for "supporting Obama in 2008" he didn't. He actually announced in one of his columns in 2008 that he supported McCain and was going to vote for him mostly due to security issues.

LOL, looking over his columns in 2007 via Townhall it looks like he was part of the "we need McCain to beat Hillary" crowd.

232 Here's another pat-down story that includes pictures of TSA workers performing said pat-downs.

233 CNN says screeners will no longer be crotch grabbing kids 12 and under.

The UK would-be liquid bombers were going to hide explosives in an infant's diaper.  I'm totally cool with groping children who are traveling with parents who belong to radical mosques and have leave "to be viewed after my martrydom" videos...

Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 19, 2010 03:10 PM (A/iZj)

It's pretty simple: the jihadis will put their weapons wherever they think they can get away with it.  It's not as if the lives of children 12 and under (even their own) are somehow sacrosanct or precious to them.

234 "Europe and America, Aligned for the Future" New IHT (NYT) article by Obama

235 Order my Passengers Gone Wild DVD and receive a FREE Girls of the TSA Screening Line calendar!

236 To the people who keep saying these procedures don't prevent attacks based on the fact that no one has been caught with anything are relying on flawed reasoning. Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox?

I don't necessarily agree with the pat downs only because they are performed by less than professional personnel.

Posted by: Can't believe its not bitter

 

It's not flawed. Several here have noted that there may be some deterrent effect. But that is all thus far, based upon the evidence presented. And that is speculation; It's difficult to quantify such an effect unless we obtain intelligence that corraborates that this has stymied them.

Also note that now the TSA is touting 130 objects seized. Which resulted in how many arrests? On what charges? how many convictions? For What?

 

So we're supposed to swallow wholesale the groping of toddlers ( which yesterday we were told either A. Never happened, or B. it does and it's absolutely vital AND "parents were expected to help", but today is now verboten).

 

Mazeltov.

237 226 To the people who keep saying these procedures don't prevent attacks based on the fact that no one has been caught with anything are relying on flawed reasoning. Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox?

I don't necessarily agree with the pat downs only because they are performed by less than professional personnel.

Posted by: Can't believe its not bitter at November 19, 2010 03:14 PM (8BC13)

Most of the people saying it have been pointing that these procedures wouldn't have caught the terrorist attempts that were stopped, even if they had been in place at the time.

Look, a lot of these things they are doing are something like step 10 or lower on security check point.  And they are refusing to do Step 1!

238 Create the TSA Lounge, staffed by hookers, where a person could get a nice relaxing full body grope. Serve drinks. Passengers would be sooo relaxed instead of stressed out. For the women, every night could be amateur wet t-shirt night. If flying is going to suck, let's make flying really suck.

239

War is hell. We're in a war against Al Qaeda. If persevering in this war means occasionally getting a patdown at a security checkpoint, I say grin and bear it.

Precisely.

NOT WITH GRANDMA AND LITTLE CINDY LOU WHO, YOU GODDAMNED IDIOT.

Go ahead, give the false choice of submit or "we're all going to die" instead of noting that TSA is a collection of idiots doing idiotic things to perfectly innocent people to no effect.

Up next:  Disabled vets or puppies?  To balance the budget we can only choose one.

Fucking intellectually stymied douchebag.

240 If for no other reason than to rescue those children from nutjob parents who think it's allah's will to use their babies as IED's.

Yeah, I'm cool with that, too.

I'm just saying, a blanket "we won't touch anyone under 12" policy is just as stupid as a blanket "we will touch everyone" policy. It's pointless to stick your hand down little Suzi Whitebread's pants...unless we know her daddy is Azzam the American.

241 Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox?

Because of many, many layers of security and the sure knowledge that they'll be shot in the attempt?

Look, you're (probably, but I haven't looked at actual numbers) more likely to be in a Bank during a take-over style robbery (the rare kind, as opposed to the more common "note" style) than you are to be on a plane which gets hijacked and/or blown up.  Do we have FBI agents (Bank robberies are Fed authority, after all) manning stations at all major banks and forcing everyone either to walk through a full body scanner or get an incredibly invasive pat-down?

No.  Because we believe that the vast, vast majority of people going in to banks are doing so to deposit or withdraw money, or to conduct other legitimate business. 

However, just because I'm getting on a plane there is now probable cause to force me to submit to a full-body scanner or an invasive pat-down?

242 Charles: What's interesting is the fact that he would want to do this. And you see that since his election he's kind of reached out to people who may not be his ideological allies. To Rick Warren, the pastor who will be at his inaugural. To John McCain, who he's treated with a lot of dignity and respect and to a bunch of right wing columnists last night. In part because I think he is a guy who's intellectually curious and he wants to exchange ideas. Also in part because he wants to co-opt the vast right wing conspiracy and I'm here to tell that speaking for myself---he succeeded. I'm brainwashed entirely. I'm in the tank and I'm a believer now in hope and change and above all audacity. Posted by: stuiec at November 19, 2010 03:14 PM Okay, the last part was obviously sarcasm, but for Kraut to say that Obama is "intellectually curious" and "wants to exchange ideas" is ridiculous. Obama has never wanted to do anything of the sort. And he reached out to people? His first week in office he told people to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh and he's suggested that Fox New is bad. I don't think Kraut is a 'bad conservative' so much as he is just an elitist and gives the benefit of the doubt to other elitists (which Obama is). He comes at issues from an elitist point of view. Which is why he gave the benefit of the doubt to Obama and turned up his nose at the TEA Party movement. He's correct more times than not, but I don't consider his opinion any higher than anyone else. In fact, because he's an elitist, I tend to view his opinions with much more skepticism than others.

243 Profile and stop the PC bullshit.  And by profiling, I also mean the one-way ticket, cash paying flyer, or the no luggage, international flyer, the heavily clothed at Miami International with ants in his pants and a swarthy tan and a big bushy beard.  Train the screeners better and use some discretion.

244

As for "supporting Obama in 2008" he didn't. He actually announced in one of his columns in 2008 that he supported McCain and was going to vote for him mostly due to security issues.

If I recall, Krauthammer did come out and support McCain like the last week of the election.  Before that most of his talk for the election was about either talking up Obama or attacking Sarah Palin.

245 O/T:  Great.  Run on Irish banks.

My friends who just got married about two weeks ago are wrapping up a honeymoon there.

I do not believe these are connected...

246 Part of it may be that people view Krauthammer as being "paid to think" while Rush, Coulter, et. al, are viewed as being "paid to talk."

Rush, Sean, Glenn, Mark, have to put together 3 hours of discussion material every day. Kraut writes a column, and when he is on TV can barely fill 10 minutes with good commentary. If the question is who is researching and analyzing more, I go with the talkie pundits.

247 The make all screeners hot females, give me a hot guy - comments are cutting close to one of the real reasons for the scanners: manpower and scheduling, getting enough trained and competent female TSA officers is a problem. So you need a scanner to address the conformal, low density, non-metallic bomb problem if you are going to try and maintain a somewhat random distribution of searches. The problem starts with the search theory (as usual).

248 @246.  Agreed.  I also noted that the perception is wrong.

249 This groin-fest started up the day of the Yemeni packages. If TSA was looking to be reactive, they were reactive against something else.

250 Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox? Gold is too heavy and you get a better return on stocks.

251 Krauthammer is NOT a RINO because he is NOT a Republican. He is what I consider the original Neocon. He is a Democrat turned conservative on some issues, mostly dealing with the WOT and Israel. He is also liberal on some issues. Posted by: Vic at November 19, 2010 03:16 PM This might explain why many people here see him as an authority, since I believe there are many here at AoSHQ who share his political persuasion (former/current Democrats turned conservative on some issues, but not all, mainly not on social issues). I've never seen him as a RINO or conservative or anything. I've always seen him as an elitist part of the 'establishment' and just viewed his statements and writing through that prism.

252 If robbing a bank could result in thousands of deaths and war and the disruption of our entire country I would guess you might see an upgrade of security next time you went to make a deposit.

253 If I dress up "little Fritz" in a GI Joe outfit will he be pat down as well?

254 18And why is it that it takes one guy to open his yap before everybody thinks it's an OK thing not to put up with?

Classic preference cascade.

255

Saurpod - There is enough info in this article that you could easily contact this woman and tell her to "Cowboy Up"

You're pathetic.

256 Cowboy up

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 02:55 PM (GPm6P)

What the fuck is wrong with you.

I'd get into a fight and put myself at greater risk if it might prevent a woman or kid from getting sexually assaulted.

You are willing to have kids sexually assaulted for your personal safety.

And I'm the coward now?  I need to "cowboy up" and decide that groping kids is ok?  That I should support the sexual assault of women and children for my safety?

I guess you wouldn't get into a fight to stop a woman or kid from being groped.  You're ok with them being groped if you're safer; I'm sure you'd simply run away as that would be safer for you.

Good to see the cowboy would run away from a sexual assault rather than trying to stop it... BrokeBatch Bitch much?

257 Completely O/T

Who are ewe?  Who are ewe? 

No fucking body!

http://tinyurl.com/2937hym

258 Classic preference cascade. I admit, I would have laughed if he had received a beat down on the spot.

259 Before that most of his talk for the election was about either talking up Obama or attacking Sarah Palin.

Go over to Townhall and read his columns from 2007 and 2008. He talked down on Obama from day 1.

But yes he did attack Palin, as well as some other conservatives.

260 Guess why no one tries to rob Fort Knox? Gold is too heavy and you get a better return on stocks.

Posted by: Jean

 

And they make you pay for drinks. The inflight movie sucks too ( they keep replaying Goldfinger for some reason).

261

Above and beyond the efficacy or safety or the other many critical parts of this discussion, there is this.

There is a revulsion at the sight and experience of  fellow citizens being herded in a shuffling mass, past government workers who bellow at them as they head to be partially strip, virtually strip or get man handled.

I would gladly do it, if it made any fricking difference.

262

Good to see the cowboy would run away from a sexual assault rather than trying to stop it... BrokeBatch Bitch much?

Posted by: gekkobear

 

And I thought that I was harsh on the little lizard. Well said sir!

263 From the videos I have seen, especially of the kids- if the child came into the ER after that with ANYONE ELSE, we would be calling the cops, CPS, and completing our own forensic assessment documentations for court.

264

 gekkobear at November 19, 2010 03:29 PM (X0NX1)

Well done Sir.

265 Because of many, many layers of security and the sure knowledge that they'll be shot in the attempt?

Also, gold is a hard target. Being so heavy and all. What you can carry is not worth the risk. Guess they could try and sneak it out with beefed up mini-coopers. Since 100 dollar bills go about 30 bills to the ounce, they are a much lighter less risky way to steal.

266

 "Likewise if I ever agree with Jimmy Carter, I go looking for where I went wrong in my reasoning."

 

hahahaha....good policy.

267

The inflight movie sucks too ( they keep replaying Goldfinger for some reason).

Anyone else bothered by the whole "smuggle an army of Chicomms with a nuke into the States in the mid-60s" suspension of disbelief required?

 

268

Ace, you seem to be spending an awful lot of time these days trying to make us forget about your wobbliness on issues which should be quite clear to bona fide conservatives -  who operate with conservative cognition.

You seem to get caught up with the linguistics and nice sounding words of your pen, and that's OK . . it's fun, I know. . . however, if one purports to be something, they typically comport with it as well. 

The TSA stuff is clearly across the line for a society set within a constitutional structure of governance as ours.  The degree of which it crosses the line is as blarring as a Judas Priest concernt and as obvious as Corporal Klinger's Schnoz.

And the irony here is that you keep coming back to conservatism orthodoxy only when other more moderate, shall we say, RINO's weigh in on a subject. 

This is a wishy washy practice and is akin to taking a poll everytime things of substance cross your desk.

Ace, what do you believe in?  This is rhetorical-  and should be established before the pen hits the paper or educated fingers start pounding a key board.

Analysis is good but clarity of thought and position is even better.  Stand up for what you believe but first understand it.

And remember, we still love you.

269 might see an upgrade of security next time you went to make a deposit.

Posted by: Can't believe its not bitter

 

This presumes that the stupidity that we are seeing is indeed, and upgrade. VIPs don't go through this, pilots may soon not go through this, the searches have not resulted in one arrest or conviction to our knowledge and supposedly muslims, at least muslim women may get a pass.

This is not an upgrade.

270 Scarbrough suspended by MSNBC for political donations. Per the Boston Herald "news alert" thing.
I did not know that.

271 @252 - You really think that someone taking potentially millions of dollars (assuming a moderate sized bank, btw) in our economy right now wouldn't send some ripples out?  How over leveraged is the FDIC right now?

But that's not even the point.  One can do things that "result in thousands of death and war and the disruption of our entire country" without flying.  Indeed, the likelihood of any plane being hijacked and used as a guided missile is virtually nil, now- which is why current airplane plots have aimed at blowing them up- to stop us from flying, not to do a great deal of damage.

If the current crop of terrorists were all as relatively effected as Nidal Hassan, Times Square would be a ruin- and all these sexual assaults wouldn't be able to stop them.

We're never going to be able to have enough man-power to make these effective, so lets do what we DO have the manpower to do: profile based on combination of background/behavior and let everyone else go about their business.

272 War is hell. We're in a war against Al Qaeda.

We are in a war; a war to maintain our free society. You have already surrendered it to the terrorists by saying we can't be free because of them. Way to lose the war for the rest of us.

Oh where's old Patrick Henry when you need him, to explain to some punks, that some things are worth more than a little pretend personal security.

273

Anyone else bothered by the whole "smuggle an army of Chicomms with a nuke into the States in the mid-60s" suspension of disbelief required?

 Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here)

 

Not I. Simply conduct an analysis of the number of Chinese take out establishments and laundries within a 10 mile radius of the Ft. Know region, and I surmise that a reinforced company at least could be mobilized.

P.S. How off topic are we now?

274 I personally don't care. I'm not going to get offended or embarassed. However, a lot of people are and it's time to push this PC crap off the cliff using the easily traumatized. I'll join those howling if we can stop this stupid pretending that granny is a potential terrorist. We are all doing this so CAIR doesn't whine. The question is why?

275 The bomb sniffing dogs are the way to go. Train up hundreds of them, and have them positioned at all the security checkpoints. If the dog gives you a pass, proceed to the metal detector and the gates. If the dog smells bomb residue, you go through the naked scanner or get the touchy-feely patdown. No profiling, so the libs will like it. No crazy random searching, so the rest of us will be ok with it. (Yeah, if a bomb sniffing dog detects bomb residue on you, you SHOULD get one hell of a pat down).

276 If the TSA gropers were highly intelligent and intellectually curious (like K, Obama, Brooks and Christopher Buckley), it wouldn't be quite so offensive to folks like K.  Why, oh why, in all the wailing about the issue, is there no attention being paid to the real bad guys, our ROP terrorist friends. 

277

I think I've found a new career.

Belgian Malinois and beagle breeder.

278 P.S. How off topic are we now?

There was a topic?

279 This whole thing is probably a secret conspiracy to revive rail travel. 

The "oracle of Omaha" bought a major stake in a railroad recently and everyone thought he was nuts at the time.  Maybe he knew what was in the works...

I'm just saying...

If Soros bought any major stakes in railroads recently, that would seal the deal in my mind.

280

And I'm the coward now?  I need to "cowboy up" and decide that groping kids is ok?  That I should support the sexual assault of women and children for my safety?

Posted by: gekkobear at November 19, 2010 03:29 PM (X0NX1)

To be fair, he probably meant "Cowboy up" in the same sense as a short-order cook means "Order up" -- that is, "Cowboy up" as shorthand lingo for "Some TSA cowboy is up your orifices."

281 Why, oh why, in all the wailing about the issue, is there no attention being paid to the real bad guys, our ROP terrorist friends. 

Posted by: ejo

That was the entire point to the "wailing". Innocent people are being treated like shit by ill-trained jerks that a shopping mall would not hire, while muslims are being treated like a protected minority. That's why this TSA crap is being derided as theater.

282
Well I view Rush and Ann as entertainers first, pundits seconds (not to say that they aren't fairly good political pundits)...

I view you as a clown and a fourth-rate blogger. Nothing personal.

283

And I'm the coward now?  I need to "cowboy up" and decide that groping kids is ok?  That I should support the sexual assault of women and children for my safety?

Posted by: gekkobear at November 19, 2010 03:29 PM (X0NX1)

To be fair, he probably meant "Cowboy up" in the same sense as a short-order cook means "Order up" -- that is, "Cowboy up" as shorthand lingo for "Some TSA cowboy is up your orifices."

Posted by: stuiec

 

Heh. The little lizard either went back under his rock or back in line for another groping.

284 Time to cowboy up, ladies. It's not the era of corsets and fainting spells anymore.

When you have period then you can tell me to cowboy up asshole. You want some minimum wage jackwagon's hand in your pants fine but not me.

How many of your freedoms are willing to give up when we know who the enemy is?

285 Why do people take Krauthammer seriously?

I don't take him seriously on every single issue, but I know he's an accomplished guy with a high IQ.  The entire establishment was universally trashing John Kyl (whom I'm sure many here would call Rino) because he is single-handedly holding up the arms control agreement negotiated with Russia instead of rushing it through the lame duck session.  Even some former Bush administration people are in favor of this thing.  So I wondered if Kyl was just being a dinosaur about this.  Krauthammer, however, gave some very cogent reasons on why this thing should be slowed down and carefully looked at.  I am not an expert on arms control (and never will be) but my assumption is that Dr. K knows a lot more about these issues than I do and has the brain power to figure them out.  

286 Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 02:55 PM (GPm6P)

You miss the point. Little old grand mother gets groped because of completely misguided PC bullshit. Fucking hell. Its stupid. Little old grannies don't hijack planes and fly them into buildings or blow them up in mid air. Neither do 3 year old little girls. Only goat fuckers who face east and offer their ass up to their God while praying do that.

It is completely mindblowing stupid of epic fucking proportions.

The terrorists have won, we are sexually assaulting our own people who have nothing to do with terrorism in some misguided fucking sense of justice. We Sexually assault three year old girls and old grandmas so we don't offend Muslims.

287 277 The bomb sniffing dogs are the way to go.

Plus dogs might keep the Muslims away.

288 281 This whole thing is probably a secret conspiracy to revive rail travel. 


Funny. What about the reduction in greenhouse gasses from people avoiding flying?

289 We don't want to offend Muslims in this country but it's perfectly fine to be in your face anti-semitic.

Explain that.

290 If the Israelis aren't pornscreening and groping, then why are we?  They're closer to this war and more at risk than we are.  Frankly, I would feel safe outsourcing this operation to them.

291 I want there to be a big huge stink. Enough already. Profile the fucking muslims who blow up airplanes. Everyone is not the same, everyone doesn't have the same potential for terrorism, everyone isn't packing bombs--mulim jihadists are. Idiots. The time, the money, the organization to submit everyone to this stupid scrutiny is ridiculous. Let's march everyone through so we don't offend muslims who want to blow us up? Yeah, then so much attention is paid to grandma, maybe they can slip through. Profiling them because of their violent tactics isn't bigotry, it's reality. When did we get so stupid?

292 Nitrate sniffing dogs probably aren't trained to catch binary incendiaries like the common home brew potassium permanganate(ordainry pool supply) & Nair(gel women's product).

The only thing they'll catch, even with the scanners and gropy reach arounds, are the rankest of amateurs.

293 Since when is Charles Krauthammer not a Republican or a conservative?  Seriously now?

294 Posted by: dagny at November 19, 2010 03:52 PM (2GOHX)

While I agree with you, in general, the point is that just being Muslim isn't (or shouldn't be) probable cause, either.

That said, it should be a flag- on that sets the bar much, much lower for what DOES actually constitute probable cause.

But we've hashed this over a dozen times already: There are lots of things you can do without bothering to (overly) consider outward appearance and still spot the bad guys.

Though, it does help that even the non-Middle Eastern crazies take Muslim Names and grow the scary beards...

295 #295 I have never heard him admit to being a Republican.  Yes, he is a former democrat.  I think he's conservative on most issues.

296 The TSA inspections are more for show than go. They're similar to the security checkpoints that they set-up at Disneyland and Disney World where they look into your backpacks and purses before you can go into the park. They're worthless because anyone with the slightest imagination can figure out how to get a gun or bomb past those searches (no, I'm not going to mention any). They spend a lot of money and irritate their gurests on a worthless security point just for show.

297

There is a revulsion at the sight and experience of  fellow citizens being herded in a shuffling mass, past government workers who bellow at them as they head to be partially strip, virtually strip or get man handled.

I would gladly do it, if it made any fricking difference.

Posted by: Who Knows at November 19, 2010 03:32 PM (QLiYt)

 

Word.

298 All the sauropod hate seems to be missing the issue I think. Personally, I'm against the scanners + patdown appeoach, and am on the Israeli style profiling bandwagon. What I took from sauropods post, and what I agree with is that a blanket no patdowns for the females policy is also stupid, and that a woman patting down another woman is not inherently more offensive than a man patting down another man.

299 #190 "Just curious: what will you say when three or four planes get blown out of the sky despite all their passengers and crew having gone through full-body imagers and enhanced pat-downs?" If it happens - and it may not, because the methods you mentioned have a strong deterrent effect - but IF it happens, the next step is either cavity searches or X-rays. Yes, this is war, people. And profiling won't cut it. There are blond, blue-eyed Muslims. (Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the Netherlands.) And yes, terrorists are not above using a toddler or a grandma as a vehicle for a bomb. Children have been used as suicide bombers in Israel.

300 Posted by: Suicide King at November 19, 2010 04:02 PM (zmboG)

Sorry, based on the level of the patdown, I'm still going to disagree.

I'd fight a guy to stop him from groping a woman at that level against her will; even if I figured he'd go no further.

So I'd put myself at increased risk to prevent that level of groping of a woman.

Why would I now turn around and endorse that groping for my safety? 

If I'll take increased risk in one case; why would I avoid it in a comparable one?

Although it's not entirely comparable.  My odds of getting seriously injured in a fight is much higher than my odds of getting seriously injured on a plane.

301

Also good:

"Don't tase my junk."

"Don't touch my bro."

302 Posted by: Suicide King at November 19, 2010 04:02 PM (zmboG)

Because three year old girls, 98 year old grandmas and 20 year old Western women are the terrorist demographic. Screen them, they may have Semtex maxi-pads.

303 #301 Israel has to deal with blond haired blue eyed muslims, too.  Why don't they do the scanning and groping?

304 If it happens - and it may not, because the methods you mentioned have a strong deterrent effect - but IF it happens, the next step is either cavity searches or X-rays.

...terrorists are not above using a toddler or a grandma as a vehicle for a bomb.

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 04:06 PM (GPm6P)

Ok, so now I need to "cowboy up" and encourage the full-on insertion molestation of women and children for my safety?  That's your position?

I'm guessing if you see a woman being raped you run away like a little bitch; stopping sexual molestation isn't worth any possible risk to your safety now...

Good to know this about you.  You're a cowardly little bitch who would let kids be raped so he could feel a tiny bit safer.

Anyone willing to defend the full-on sexual molestation of toddlers for their safety aside from sauropod?

305

If the Israelis aren't pornscreening and groping, then why are we?

Because the Israeli Knesset did not see the opporuntity to create a gigantic pork exercise disguised as security.

We are exactly zero percent better off with TSA than without.  There is no value-added in this stupidity. 

306 "Yes, this is war, people." Ooooo, so courageous with other people's bodies! Someone, quick! give Sauropod a medal!

307 "Anyone willing to defend the full-on sexual molestation of toddlers for their safety aside from sauropod?" No.

308 Yes, this is war, people. And profiling won't cut it.

Israelis seem to do wonderfully with it. So I would like some more reference on how it "won't cut it"

Given the privacy of your own body is up for grabs, is there any freedom or right you will not give up to spare your miserable life? Is there no line you won't cross for collective safety? If not, than I warn you, you are an enabler of tyranny, which always comes first in a free society wrapped in a bow labeled "greater good"

309 249:  Clearly, they misunderstood the memo about 'checking all packages'.

301:  Fortunately, I have a flight of dragons on speed-dial to deal with your unicorn-riding Nordic muslims.  Fight one fairy story with another, I figure.

In the meantime, I suggest you focus on the threats that actually exist.

310 Sauropod, you seem to have a very uninformed idea of what profiling is.

311 312 Sauropod, you seem to have a very uninformed idea of what profiling is.

Posted by: SarahW at November 19, 2010 04:20 PM (Z4T49)

He also seems to think we should be living in a police state.

312

It seems to me that this is a classic exercise in Mediocre Management.  The Mediocre Manager always avoids dealing with the noisy, abusive person and prefers to take action against the most accomodating.  This is why dysfunctional people in the office who complain to get their way usually get it, compliments of pushover managers who want problems off their desk pronto.

In this case, there is a loud liberal and Muslim lobby against profiling the real threats:  Muslim men between 15 and 35.  If gummint doesn't have the balls to face down the loudest idiots, and it doesn't, then it will take the easiest path and make a show of inspecting to death the least resistant people, law abiding citizen-types, nuns, the elderly, and toddlers.

Here's another interesting point:  Government always expands dramatically in a war.  When the war is over, government scales back down, but always to a level higher than the pre-war level.  The war on terror is an opportunity for gummint to expand and it will expand as far as it can until it is stopped.

313 Yes, this is war, people. And profiling won't cut it. There are blond, blue-eyed Muslims. (Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the Netherlands.) And yes, terrorists are not above using a toddler or a grandma as a vehicle for a bomb. Children have been used as suicide bombers in Israel.

Posted by: sauropod

 

World War II: We've just been bombed by the Japanese. What do we do?

Little lizard: treat the Japanese as a protected minority and grope toddlers. This is war. After all, this is what (will) happen in Israel.

Israel (here coutesy of a time machine): Actually no you idiot, we don't (won't) do that.

Little lizard: Uh.... Let's grope the toddlers anyway.

314 And no, the scans and grabs have no deterrent effect on persons content to die for their religion, or happy enough to have a child as mule for their weapons, or bright enough to bring their explosives in a medicine bottle. You are Less secure, not more secure, as a result of these measures.

315 Here's where I come down: You fucks won't even take the common sense step of securing our border, so why in the world would I submit my family to this?

Not only is it unreasonably invasive, it accomplishes little to nothing. It's a dodge and everyone knows it.

Bring dogs in. Profile. Do the Israel thing. Fuck the cost. Look at how much money is wasted every year buying votes and transferring wealth to preferred constituencies. Fuck your cost savings. Find a way. Divert resources.

I have a 4 yr old. No, your goons may not look at him naked.  No you may not touch his groin. No. Never. Fuck you. I'll fucking kill you first.

316 "Yes, this is war, people."

Ooooo, so courageous with other people's bodies! Someone, quick! give Sauropod a medal!

Posted by: Vercingetorix

 

Little lizard, we award you this courageous restraint medal, bestowed for restraining toddlers while they are being molested. Thank you, we couldn't have done it without you.

VP Biteme

317 Just wait till a Muslim boards a plane with a Semtex suppository and blows the plain up at 30,000 feet. Cavity searches for everyone, 3 year old kids, 98 year old  grandma, your 18 year old daughter, your wife.

And Muslim women are going to get a pass on this. Can you say matching set of Semtex Bra and Panties?

318

I'm all for getting rid of this ridiculous, vile security system.  It only serves to humiliate and put the boot on the law abiding (while providing a completely false sense of security); CAIR and friends will be sure to get exclusions for Muslims based on religious practice (thereby making it easier for someone to get around security and causing even more ill will amongst the general populace).

Frak PC, frak ridiculous security measures, and frak the pansy-assed approach to the problem that most are taking -- I don't subscribe to "better dead than culturally sensitive".  There are answers to this problem, but they don't involve pat downs and tippy toeing around a certain groups hair trigger outrage and precious sensitivities.

319 I see a lot of name-calling, but not much critical thinking. Okay, I get it, I get it. I'm stupid, crazy, and evil. I wouldn't stop a rapist from molesting a toddler. Why, I might even be a child rapist myself! Rather than making yourselves look foolish with this level of discourse, why not consider the possibility that some trade-offs are necessary when dealing with people like fanatical suicide bombers? Standing before a scanner for a few seconds doesn't strike me as high price to pay for some increased security when boarding a plane. Neither does a professional patdown, in public, by someone wearing gloves and touching me only with the back of his hands. I don't know why anyone's mind would jump immediately from that scenario to "molestation and rape." It seems to me that people are getting all worked up over very little.

320

It will take one incident of the correct type and then the subject of cavity searches will be broached.

Remember when the joke was that flyers would have to be seen naked before boarding and we thought it really was a joke?

321 I just thought of some thing that would be cheap and a better test of "security"

Remember the movie Shogun where the newly hired Samaria were required to step on a "catholic cross" to prove loyalty to the Anjisan?
 
Post a "picture" of Mohamed on the floor at the entrance to each aircraft. Require every boarding passenger to step on said picture.

322

The douche-bags at TSA are treating people in a way that the Montgomery County (Ohio) Jail decided was a problematical strip-search at best.  They got one of those full-body scanners a couple of years before I retired.  They did one round of tests and basically said "Oh, sh!t. We're doing strip-searches."  The body scanner was not used after that.  --- This was out of concern for the dignity of people already in custody and being processed by Intake at the Jail.

A police officer has to have reasonable suspicion before he can do even a frisk for weapons.  Forget about reaching into somebody's pants without being able to articulate a damn good reason other than "They bought a ticket and want to fly as a passenger in an airplane but don't want to walk through a full-body scanner."

I personally refuse to fly under those conditions.  People buying tickets are only purchasing a service.  Frankly, I can't see how the TSA can legally do searches this intrusive -- they are acting under the color of law and must obey provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

 Now, if an airline wants to have their employees do those searches and explicitly notify customers that they would have to consent to such searches as pre-condition of flying on that airline's aircraft, I think that might stand legal scrutiny.  However, I rather doubt that is a business model for success.

 

323

And I'd love to see an Israeli style system coupled with the dogs -- but of course a certain group will pitch a freaking fit about that, and we just couldn't have that sort of thing on our conscience.//

Slightly OT: you don't really need a specific breed of dog for drug/bomb detection work (provided it isn't one of the smushed in face breeds -- breathing issues and possibly sight hounds -- genetic coding to hunt by eyesight).  Any kinda hyper, got getter, reward crazy dog who likes to use its nose, is sound enough to work for long periods, and is amenable to training can do the work -- hell, there are probably some good canidates at our animal shelters right now.  Besides, experience has shown that it's good to have a good mix of different types of dogs doing the work -- they blend in better then; people aren't on the lookout for "the sniffer dog" when they don't really know what the sniffer dog will look like.

324 @#304 Did you read my post? Because you seem to have missed my entire point. Patting down grannie is as stupid as patting down the 25 year old dude in a priest collar. My point is "Oh noes, the women are getting patdowns" fails as a logically valid objection if you're still content with blanket patdowns of men, based solely on gender. A female saudi muslim should be considered a greater threat than a white american male, for example. And to gekkobear, last I checked, only female employees groped women, which no reasonable person can maintain is objectively worse than a man groping another man. Of course I object to my female relatives getting groped out of protectiveness on my part, but not really more than I do my male relatives. Now, if all gropers were male I'd object more on behalf of female gropees, and vice-versa, but that's not what's happening.

325 And if women have some deep-seated, biologically ingrained aversion to being touched ... well, tough luck.

10 bucks says he's single.

Make sure you wear your GI Joe underoos while they're groping you, Saurpod. Remember ... WE'RE AT WOR!!!!!

326 OK how about this. Everybody flies in bathing suits? wWe might have to heat the airports to 78F but so what?

327 Neither does a professional patdown, in public, by someone wearing gloves and touching me only with the back of his hands. I don't know why anyone's mind would jump immediately from that scenario to "molestation and rape."

It seems to me that people are getting all worked up over very little.

Posted by: sauropod

 

Ah, still more shit.

There are numerous accounts that this isn't being conducted professionally.

You again ignore the fact that the head groper admitted that the back of the hand isn't being used any more.

And again, there is no evidence that this works. The Israelis do not do this. The British never did this in Ulster. But you are keen on promoting this. Why? Because its proven to be effective? Because you know that the people doing this have all passed background checks? And you keep dodging the fact that this is being done to toddlers.

Perhaps the worst part of this drivel is that you claim that people who dare disagree with you aren't thinking this through.

What utter bullshit.

328 Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 04:49 PM (GPm6P)

The system you're encouraging isn't just groping you... or in your proposed next system; cavity searching you.

I'm so sorry you can't think beyond YOU to see how this might affect anyone else... I guess critical thinking means it's all about YOU.

Hey, you're all for random groping of passengers, including women and minors for your safety... we get that.  Of course if you look at who is getting groped beyond you, you might realize what you're proposing.

These aren't the "professional patdown" you are pretending they are.  the patdown changed from what it was before... you know that right?  It's now groping, handling your junk, squeezing a woman's breasts, etc.

329

you're a good man Ace, and not because you agree with me now, but because you are man enough to admit you were wrong.

Gunga Din and all that stuff.... salute!

330

322 My proverbial panties are in a bunch over this because it doesn't work, will not work, and people are buying the notion of its extreme "workability".

And for some reason comments I made a long time ago, on other threads are showing up (see @112 here -- I didn't post that, I just got online a half hour ago, haven't been at the computer all day).  Wth?

331 Posted by: Suicide King at November 19, 2010 04:57 PM (zmboG)

I do still think these are different; call me old fashioned.  I would be less likely to step in if you got "handled" in public; I'd expect you to deal with it yourself.

But yes, my full opinion is simply "end the patdowns" not "only pat down men"... I was unclear because I'm personally ambivalent to someone doing this style patdown to me.

My objection here isn't about me; and is less about guys than about women and children... so that's where I put my focus.

Yeah, I'm definitely old fashioned.

332 #328 "Remember ... WE'RE AT WOR!!!!!" Good Lord, he can't even spell "war." Okay, confession time. My original post (#179) was a scientific experiment of sorts. I suspected that most of the people objecting strenuously to the TSA policy would be characterized as either having serious problems with authority or (in the case of males) having issues with their own masculinity. Accordingly, I phrased the comment in such a way as to press these people's buttons. ("Cowboy up ... grin and bear it," etc.) I wanted to see if, in fact, the anti-TSA people would respond with Pavlovian predictability to this stimulus. And they did. Success! For anyone who bothers to read this thread, now or in the future, it should be obvious that the most intense criticism of the TSA is motivated by neurotic emotionalism. It's also a safe bet that the people causing scenes at security checkpoints are likely to be similarly afflicted. You can't argue with people who are reacting out of pure emotion. All you can do is point out their problems and hope that their anxieties will not result in less effective security procedures for the rest of us.

333

If it happens - and it may not, because the methods you mentioned have a strong deterrent effect - but IF it happens, the next step is either cavity searches or X-rays.

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 04:06 PM (GPm6P)

We call that "playing into the enemy's battle plan."  The jihadis want to use their terror attacks to make us adopt more and more layers of more and more unwieldy technology and rote procedures so that our economy and our social fabric wear out under the ever-increasing friction.

IF this is war, then let us by all means go to a wartime footing and stop pretending that all we need is a finer sieve to put all of our citizens through.  Let's admit that in this war, we have an enemy that we can name, and let's target our countermeasures against that enemy.

334 Standing before a scanner for a few seconds letting complete strangers see you, your wife, your daughter, your mother naked, doesn't strike me as high price to pay for some increased security when boarding a plane. FIFY

For some people it is. For those people, asking to keep the physical form inviolate minus probable cause is both reasonable and a right in these United States. And no, simply declaring those with some sense of personal modesty as being barred from air travel their whole lives is not an acceptable answer.

You have never answered my question. If you are willing to tolerate this, what won't you tolerate in the name of public safety? Where is the line? 

335

Interesting. I was profiled once and I'm probably the prototype of the middle aged WASP type. Was a guest at an expensive hotel in a resort area walking through the pool complex in street clothes. A hotel security guy caught my eye and gave me one of those thousand yard stares, then made his way unobtrusively through a crowd of people to me, showed me a badge, identified himself as head of security at the hotel, and asked pleasantly for my ID. When he checked out the ID (very efficiently, took about 30 seconds) and saw I was a hotel guest, he apologized for the nuisance and told me to have a good day. A polite, soft spoken  guy, but absolutely no question at all this was a very tough, streetwise, no-nonsense guy. I figured some sort of ex-special ops person.

No clue what he saw in me that caught his attention, and I can't say I was thrilled at the implication. But I remember later feeling pretty confident no one would be breaking in my room or snatching my wife's pocketbook by the pool. Bottom line, it's not overly pleasant being profiled, but I think anyone without a chip on their shoulder can manage to get over it and deal.

336

I fail to see how this is "pure emotionalism" you intellectually smug little person, so much as extreme disgust at how we are defiling people (most of whom are completely innocent), trampling their rights...and it isn't for anything effective.

How well are they scanning luggage and cargo?  And those scanners and pat downs are not going to stop somebody from carrying explosives on board, definitely not going to stop a hijacker. 

So great way to cow the people, make a big show at being serious about the threat...and completely fail in the mission to stop an actual threat (and even though I didn't post it: no, there are other targets besides planes...so what about them?  will we put CATV on every corner? that's worked well for Britain).

You on the otherhand seem to have an emotional connection to defending this carnival...why?

337 You can't argue with people who are reacting out of pure emotion. All you can do is point out their problems and hope that their anxieties will not result in less effective security procedures for the rest of us.

Your attempt at cerebral usage has failed. When you say things deliberately to infuriate, you cannot claim that the opposing argument is flawed because it comes tied to the emotions you attempted illicit. That is neither logical, nor convincing on an emotional level. So as an argumentative tactic it is a fail.

I have attempted to engage you several times on the slippery slope argument that you have simply ignored. Your inability to respond to a simple question, if this isn't too much what is? And a simple historically proven statement, "If the answer is nothing, than you thinking supports absolute tyranny" is testimonial to your inability to argue the subject on the objective grounds presented by the group. One in which we are a society of rights, and this is a clear violation of one of them.

In order to proceed with your argument you must profess that either we are not a society of rights, or the privacy of the human form is not a right. Both I think are very weak, and not demonstrated in anything that you have written.

So your attempt at erudite discourse with your supposed "mental experiment" is simply a smoke screen to protect the most basic weakness in the foundation of your thinking. Either rights don't exist, or they are not meaningful when placed against the so called greater good. Either way your line of thinking is incompatible with a free society. And as such dead wrong, at least in this country.

338 You can't argue with people who are reacting out of pure emotion. All you can do is point out their problems and hope that their anxieties will not result in less effective security procedures for the rest of us.

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 05:20 PM (GPm6P)

Thank you for exposing why your opinions are so deeply entrenched.  It seems that you're not controlling your experiment for the fact that the experimenter has a neurotic faith in technology and the goodwill and competence of a cohort of public employees with questionable capabilities and training to protect him from any and all threats to his safety and well-being.

See, you assert that the full-body imagers and enhanced pat-downs are "effective."  By what evidence?  How do they prevent terrorists from finding alternative methods of attack?  How are they more effective than alternative procedures that target travelers who behave suspiciously and/or have other characteristics suggestive of terrorist behavior?

Your entire counter-argument is an emotional appeal: "The TSA will save us because I believe in them!"

339

No clue what he saw in me that caught his attention, and I can't say I was thrilled at the implication.

Posted by: RM at November 19, 2010 05:26 PM (GkYyh)

Most likely nothing more than wearing street clothes in the pool area -- possibly looking like a non-guest trying to sneak in to use the pool, or a non-guest attempting to enter the hotel surreptitiously via the pool area.

340 Again I agree that procedures could be better but it still aggravates the hell out of me that people express that we are suddenly losing our 4th amendment rights when in actuallity we have expanded the 4th tremendously over the years.

341 We need a version of the Gadsden Flag that says, "TSA, Don't Tread on My Trouser Snake."  Too bad I can't get a t-shirt to that effect made up before I fly for Thanksgiving.  (Not that my wife would let me wear it anyway, of course.)

Posted by: ScurvyOaks at November 19, 2010 05:21 PM (M2aeh)

The image should be the Gadsen snake coming out of a trouser fly, with the legend, "Don't Touch My Snake."

342 I went through  airport security in MidOctober. There was a pat down and a body scanner and the metal detector and I really did not care all that much. And I am woman.

And Charles Krauthammer may have a point about the idiocy of all this, but that does not mean that we should get rid of the body scanners...or that profiling would work by itself or that Americans would tolerate being interviewed and interrogated by TSA instead of touched or whatever.

I think of John Lindh and that woman who was arrested in March, the one they called Jihad Jane and I think of how easy either of them would have evaded a profile. And besides, it is too easy to steal identities.

In fact a friend of mine is a quad, like Charles Krauthammer and he said that he was amazed that no one checked his chair closer when he was at the airport not long ago...he said as far as that is concerned how can they really know I am a quad.

That is the thing, we are assuming that all these TSA people know we are fine upstanding Americans they are just deliberately victimizing us. Well, they don't..and it is not just here either. If you go overseas there are more and more security methods like this showing up in airports all over the world.

I think some people are just getting kind of hysterical about the whole thing myself.

343 losing our 4th amendment rights when in actuallity we have expanded the 4th tremendously over the years.

Dude how is strip search without probable cause not a violation of the 4th? How can we say that we are secure against unreasonable search and seizure when the executive branch gets to look at us naked any time they deem it to be within the public good?

344 Again I agree that procedures could be better but it still aggravates the hell out of me that people express that we are suddenly losing our 4th amendment rights when in actuallity we have expanded the 4th tremendously over the years.

Posted by: Can't believe its not bitter at November 19, 2010 05:34 PM (Get6T)

Well, that's so.  Criminal suspects have more 4th Amendment protections now than they had 50 years ago.

But people trying to get on a plane aren't criminal suspects just for wanting to fly -- so they don't get those protections.

345 That is the thing, we are assuming that all these TSA people know we are fine upstanding Americans they are just deliberately victimizing us. Well, they don't..and it is not just here either. If you go overseas there are more and more security methods like this showing up in airports all over the world.

First off. We don't define our rights in the US based on what countries over seas do. If we did the concept of search warrant would be foreign. If the government can force you to stand essentially naked in front of a stranger without probable cause what right to privacy do you think you have?

346 Sauropod, when is the last time you had a date?

Crashing your sister's slumber party doesn't count.

347 but it still aggravates the hell out of me that people express that we are suddenly losing our 4th amendment rights

One more thing. The 4th amendment wasn't written to protect criminals from search. It was written to protect honest citizens from an over bearing government's unreasonable invasion into their privacy. Simply to keep the government from harassing honest citizens with unreasonable searches. If this doesn't breech not only the word, but the very essence of the 4th amendment, I would be hard pressed to figure out what does.

348 Duuude they are not strip searches and they are not naked pictures but you keep going with those knee jerk liberal like methods of exaggerations to try to make your point. My point by the way is that we have better protection under the 4th today than 50 years ago in all aspects based on the how the courts have expanded what can and can't be done.

349 Selections of post # 335

Okay, confession time. My original post (#179) was a scientific experiment of sorts. I suspected that most of the people objecting strenuously to the TSA policy would be characterized as either having serious problems with authority or (in the case of males) having issues with their own masculinity. Accordingly, I phrased the comment in such a way as to press these people's buttons. ("Cowboy up ... grin and bear it," etc.) I wanted to see if, in fact, the anti-TSA people would respond with Pavlovian predictability to this stimulus.

Weak try at a save. The problems with the TSA's actions are several, and mentioned previously. 

But to restate an implicit one, the "slippery slope" argument perhaps, is that these gropes, which are seen as beyond the pale, are being presented as necessary, and because they are done "professionally, not really what they are: (quasi-)sexual gropes. 

I'm waiting for the first link to a prn movie that has exactly this sort of scene ...

And they did. Success! For anyone who bothers to read this thread, now or in the future, it should be obvious that the most intense criticism of the TSA is motivated by neurotic emotionalism. It's also a safe bet that the people causing scenes at security checkpoints are likely to be similarly afflicted.  .

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 05:20 PM (GPm6P)

And .... no.  There are many  posts that are not even remotely emotional. Check #187 as one example.

350 Neither does a professional patdown, in public, by someone wearing gloves and touching me only with the back of his hands. I don't know why anyone's mind would jump immediately from that scenario to "molestation and rape."

It seems to me that people are getting all worked up over very little.

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 04:49 PM (GPm6P)

Are you that fucking dense or do you just choose to be stupid.  It is not a 'back of the hand' patdown.    Pay attention and do some damn research of what the hell has been happening since the 1st of this month.

You are a clueless motherfucker.

351 Duuude they are not strip searches and they are not naked pictures but you keep going with those knee jerk liberal like methods of exaggerations to try to make your point.

I've seen the pictures this thing can take. I've seen spreads in playboy that showed less.

My point by the way is that we have better protection under the 4th today

Criminals have better protection under the 4th. If this is how we manhandle the 4th, I would say in aggregate (considering the number of times my stuff *might* have gotten searched under less stringent 4th, and the reality of being seen naked by government officials against my will and without probable cause ) I would say the scale tips soundly in the less protection category.

352 I think some people are just getting kind of hysterical about the whole thing myself.

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 05:37 PM (SkhDW)

The patdowns you had mid-October are not the ones you would have, now.   The rules changed on the 1st.   That is the reason for all the crap you're hearing about in the last week or so.

Plus, what doesn't bother you may not be the same for everyone.

353

352  Wouldn't work.  Your idea is "profiling" in the worst sense of the word, and would be easy as heck to get through. 

Thing is, with the Israeli system Muslims are not "profiled" anymore than anyone else -- this is an example of effective, successful profiling: they don't go after a "look" persay (it would be easy enough to change it if that were the case), and they don't go after a specific group other than ones that fit a terrorist profile.  If some people who are innocent do fit the profile, well, they get scrutinized more -- but a small price to pay to be safe right?  And it is still, at this point less intrusive than the grope and the scanner.

Not everybody who blows up a plane is going to look Middle Eastern, nor Muslim; they may have U.S. citizenship as well...but they will be very likely to react in a certain manner when going through that sort of security system checkpoint.  That's why it works: it deemphasizes a physical "look" over actions and it focuses on prospective terrorists rather than focusing on innocent fliers. 

Of course, you need highly trained and professional people to do this, who take their jobs very seriously, and it has been proven very effective...so of course our government wouldn't do such a thing. (yeah, I'm rolling my eyes...sigh).

354 I'm waiting for the first link to a prn movie that has exactly this sort of scene ...

Posted by: Arbalest at November 19, 2010 05:53 PM (8tCPO)

This scene from Crash qualifies.

355
Hey, thanks for getting on board, Ace.

356 Would you be willing to tell us what your occupation is, Sauropod?

357 I suspected that most of the people objecting strenuously to the TSA policy would be characterized as either having serious problems with authority or (in the case of males) having issues with their own masculinity.
Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 05:20 PM (GPm6P)

Which do you categorize me?  I disapprove of anyone groping women and children?  Is that due to my issues with authority, or issues with my masculinity?

And how do I fix the problems I have with women and children get groped for my "safety"?

I'm sure this is going to be a really impressive therapy session.  Is it going to be reminiscent of "A Clockwork Orange"?

358 I visualize a tee shirt with the Culpeper coiled rattlesnake, and over the top it says "If you touch my junk," and around the bottom it says "I'll have you arrested."  

359 Krautman on Fox now talking about this.

360

I Got Punched in the Junk...

... and all I Got was this Lousy T-Shirt




Available soon at your Duty Free Shop

361
Bottom of the 9th, and #360, stuiec at November 19, 2010 06:07 PM (7AOgy), drives in the winning runs ... the crowd goes wild ...

362 see the latest TSA screening technique here:
http://tinyurl.com/2btnsam

363

Don't forget,

"Wear A Burka to TSA Screening" Day

1)  Carry a koran

2)  Don't wear any underclothing

3)  Scream like a banshee when touched ("Your hands are COLD!")

4)  Men as well as women may participate (pets with burkas are optional)

After the first few (and very public) incidents, all others wearing burkas will be waived through.  If you were one of these first few, all who come after will thank you for your sacrifice.

364 Hey Terrye, let us know the next time you fly.  See if you feel the same way.  These are New Procedures that likely weren't in place when you flew in October. 

365 People should flooding airports with T-shirts with "Unreasonable search and seizure" written on it.

366 The solution to having your Maginot Line flanked is not to build another Maginot Line. The strategic foolishness of static defense, proven beyond a doubt 70 years ago in Belgium and France, is lost on the TSA The 9/11 hijackers carried box cutters, so no knitting scissors or Swiss Army knives. Line no. 1. Shoe bomber, so no shoes through the metal detector. Line no. 2. Plan discovered to use liquid explosives, so no fluids over 3 ounces. Line no. 3. Nigerian diaper-bomber, so whole-body scans and aggressive, disturbing pat-downs. Line no. 4. Printer cartridge bombs, so no toner for you. Line no. 5. Does anyone really believe there will NOT be another attempt, and shortly thereafter TSA's Operation Maginot 6.0 slid into place? Static defense always fails because you cannot put a line, either on a map or in human imagination, beyond which no one will go. Generals are accused of fighting the last war first, the TSA has institutionalized this edict. Were it not for the incompetence of our adversaries we would already be down at least two airliners. The difference between TSA and Islamic fundamentalists is that incompetence for the fundies is the result of inexperience and will eventually be rectified, while at the TSA it is the result of policy and will not be voluntarily rectified. They will simply inconvenience and/or molest us all so the forms are maintained, and not if but when the next penetration of security comes they cannot be blamed as the protocol was followed. There will be a rectal bomb or at least an attempted bombing at some point, what do the security protocols become at that point? "Okay sir, you're free to go. And by the way, you might want to ask your doctor about your prostate, felt kinda' hard on the right." Free occult blood screens with every flight are part of Obamacare, right? I don't mind talking with someone about where I am going and why. El Al-type security screenings don't bother me in the least. They might dissuade the constipated-looking religious student behind me who says he is headed to Yemen for "advanced training" though, which is the point. Besides being less invasive, they are more effective as they rely on training and intuition rather than Big Iron like backscatter x-ray machines. The government has an onus to Do Something, and adding backscatter machines is something that people can walk by and say to themselves, "The government is Doing Something". On one level this is Mission Accomplished for the government, but in my book inflatable and inert machines would work as well for the PR purpose backscatter machines serve. As long as we take intuition out of the loop, as long as people can make it onto a plane having paid cash for a one-way flight with no baggage if they can pass a backscatter exam and a pat-down without being questioned, we are not safer. We're just slightly more irradiated, and slightly less free.

367 When the next adherent of the religion that cannot be named tries to board an airplane with two condoms full of C4 up his rectum, what will TSA do next?

368 There is nowhere I want to go badly enough to have to take a commercial flight to get there.  My rule used to be 500 miles or less, drive.  Now it is:  If I can't get there in my car, I'm not going.  There is no way I will allow some high school dropout to stick her hands down my shirt or up my skirt.  And the only only people who see my naked body are my husband and my doctor.  I'm really fortunate that I have a job that doesn't require commercial air travel.  Otherwise, I'd be looking for a new job.

369

Not everybody who blows up a plane is going to look Middle Eastern, nor Muslim; they may have U.S. citizenship as well...but they will be very likely to react in a certain manner when going through that sort of security system checkpoint.  That's why it works: it deemphasizes a physical "look" over actions and it focuses on prospective terrorists rather than focusing on innocent fliers. 

Of course, you need highly trained and professional people to do this, who take their jobs very seriously, and it has been proven very effective...so of course our government wouldn't do such a thing. (yeah, I'm rolling my eyes...sigh).

Posted by: unknown jane at November 19, 2010 06:06 PM (5/yRG)

I could be wrong, (would not be the first time) but I don't think Americans are going to  be any happier with a government official or an officer doing a background check on them to get on a plane...or asking them questions about their travel and their life and their jobs and all kinds of stuff...than they will be with a pat down or a scan. I went through the process myself in a few minutes and I was on my way. I do not want to have to get a back ground check just to get on a plane and I don't want to have answer a bunch of questions about my travel plans and personal business just to be allowed to board. I would rather buy the ticket, go through the scan and be on my way. What happens if they don't like the way I answer the questions? What then?

370 Terrye, how do you know that what you went through is what they are doing now?  get back to us after you fly again.

371 When the next adherent of the religion that cannot be named tries to board an airplane with two condoms full of C4 up his rectum, what will TSA do next?

Posted by: Pelayo at November 19, 2010 07:10 PM (V9Q+f)

John Lindh, Jihad Johnny...and Jihad Jane would not have set off any alarms if they had been profiled. They were both Americans, and white and grew up in regular families...they were not from the Muslim community. Someone like that could easily evade a profile...so even if you named the religion it would not keep them off that plane. It is not that simple.

372 We're just slightly more irradiated, and slightly less free.

Posted by: Darren at November 19, 2010 07:03 PM (iXV5s)

Your Maginot metaphor is spot on.

373

John Lindh, Jihad Johnny...and Jihad Jane would not have set off any alarms if they had been profiled. They were both Americans, and white and grew up in regular families...they were not from the Muslim community. Someone like that could easily evade a profile...so even if you named the religion it would not keep them off that plane. It is not that simple.

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 07:35 PM (SkhDW)

They wouldn't have triggered a profiler's suspicions based on ethnicity.  They damn sure would have based on their answers to a well-directed set of questions about their intentions and destinations.  And not just their answers, but the behaviors they exhibited when giving those answers.

374 377 Terrye, how do you know that what you went through is what they are doing now?  get back to us after you fly again.

Posted by: buzzion at November 19, 2010 07:35 PM (oVQFe)

I flew home in mid October. I left out of Indianapolis. They have been using scanners up there since May. It was the same process. Now, if I had refused to go through the scanner they would have done a more intrusive pat down on me..but I just went through it and went on. I put my shoes and my jacket and my purse in the tubs..along with my carry on...I stepped through the scanner and the metal detector and then they used the wand on me and did a cursory pat down. The whole thing was over in a few minutes. I know that people think that women are being physically assaulted all day every day in airports around the country, but I just did not see that.

375

I could be wrong, (would not be the first time) but I don't think Americans are going to  be any happier with a government official or an officer doing a background check on them to get on a plane...or asking them questions about their travel and their life and their jobs and all kinds of stuff...than they will be with a pat down or a scan. I went through the process myself in a few minutes and I was on my way. I do not want to have to get a back ground check just to get on a plane and I don't want to have answer a bunch of questions about my travel plans and personal business just to be allowed to board. I would rather buy the ticket, go through the scan and be on my way. What happens if they don't like the way I answer the questions? What then?

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 07:31 PM (SkhDW)

Look at the scene from Crash at #360 above.  That's what the TSA is now doing to people who don't pass the full-body imager.

376

John Lindh, Jihad Johnny...and Jihad Jane would not have set off any alarms if they had been profiled. They were both Americans, and white and grew up in regular families...they were not from the Muslim community. Someone like that could easily evade a profile...so even if you named the religion it would not keep them off that plane. It is not that simple.

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 07:35 PM (SkhDW)

Profiling does not equal look over only people that look like they tan more than one hour a month Terrye.  That's a bullshit strawman the PC nutjobs use to scare people away from it. 

377

They wouldn't have triggered a profiler's suspicions based on ethnicity.  They damn sure would have based on their answers to a well-directed set of questions about their intentions and destinations.  And not just their answers, but the behaviors they exhibited when giving those answers.

Posted by: stuiec at November 19, 2010 07:37 PM (7AOgy)

Maybe, maybe not. It is not as if they could not lie, it is not as if they would not be expecting the questions. The thing is they won't just be asking them those questions, they will be asking the millions of other people who are flying. Israel is a small country with a small population and not a lot of fliers. I was in the Atlanta airport recently and I bet more people go through that airport in a day than live in the entire state of Israel. How long would it take to do background checks on every flier? Could you buy your ticket ahead of time and be assured of boarding? I just don't think Americans would like getting the third degree just to get on a plane. That is what I am saying, it would not only be costly, it would be time consuming and intrusive in its own way...and there would be people who would not like it any better than they like the scanner.

378

I flew home in mid October. I left out of Indianapolis. They have been using scanners up there since May. It was the same process. Now, if I had refused to go through the scanner they would have done a more intrusive pat down on me..but I just went through it and went on. I put my shoes and my jacket and my purse in the tubs..along with my carry on...I stepped through the scanner and the metal detector and then they used the wand on me and did a cursory pat down. The whole thing was over in a few minutes. I know that people think that women are being physically assaulted all day every day in airports around the country, but I just did not see that.

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 07:39 PM (SkhDW)

I keep asking because it seems like these procedures have been implemented in the past two weeks, and you would not have been subjected to them in mid-october.  Like I said, get back to us the next time you fly.

379 Terrye,

Do not be a useful idiot - or a fellow traveler.

Odds are you never got the random extra screening - odds are a real bad guy won't either.

380

Look at the scene from Crash at #360 above.  That's what the TSA is now doing to people who don't pass the full-body imager.

Posted by: stuiec at November 19, 2010 07:39 PM (7AOgy)

I went through the scanner and so did everyone else who was there when I was there. I realize people do not want to do either one. They do not want people touching them and they don't want to go through the scanner. Well, then I guess I can just refuse to go through the metal detector too and see what happens to me. The point is that they have a choice..and of course the other choice is to not be there and not fly. It is not as if they don't know what is coming.

381

Passengers per day Atlanta: 241,184

Population of Israel. Approx. 7.5 million

Seriously?  You want to say anything else stupid?

382 Do not be a useful idiot - or a fellow traveler.

Odds are you never got the random extra screening - odds are a real bad guy won't either.

Posted by: Druid at November 19, 2010 07:47 PM (adCDx)

I am not a useful idiot just because I did not go off the deep end and start whining about how victimized I am because I had to go through a scanner. I have flown a lot over the years. One time I wore the wrong boots when I flew and set off that metal detector. At first they could not figure out what it was and so they took me aside and put me up against a wall and physically searched me. One time my grandmother put a jar of jelly in luggage and wrapped it in foil for my return trip. It was a surprise...I did not know it was in there and when that showed up in my bag I thought I was going to be arrested.  I have put up with a lot of crap in airports.

And I am not saying that some common sense and common courtesy could not go along way to helping this situation, they could relax some of this stuff. But I also think that some people are going off the deep end on some of this stuff. I really do. That is just my opinion and I have a right to it and that does not make me a useful idiot.

383

Passengers per day Atlanta: 241,184

Population of Israel. Approx. 7.5 million

Seriously?  You want to say anything else stupid?

Posted by: buzzion at November 19, 2010 07:51 PM (oVQFe)

Stupid?That is not nice. My point is that Israel is a small country and Atlanta is a huge airport with a huge number of people passing through every day, not just passengers.. To try use the same methods in large airports like Atlanta all over the United States on a daily basis would be overwhelming. If I worded it poorly it does not change the point I was trying to make.

384 In fact as of 2008, the number of people flying every day in the US averaged 2 million per day..or about 735 million that year.

385 Terrye, you shouldn't go through the scanner. The naked picture is a kind of assault, that many very much object to, but that's the least of your worries You cannot rely on getting the advertised dose of radiation. Even the advertised dose varies from what the test have shown - there are hotspots at various locations of the scanners, for one thing, where radiation levels are higher. The radiation concentrates on the skin and tissue immediately beneath. Though the overall dose is low, it's concentrated level there makes measuring the risk different from measuring the risk of an xray. There will be areas of higher concentration which may be at dangerous levels. It's a risk as well because you are relying on the machine also to be set up and operated according to manufacturer's instructions - calibration errors, machine errors, and operator errors are possible - they happen at hospitals with highly trained operators - no doubt a bunch of near simians are worthy of no more trust. Finally, the machines can be deliberately set with higher levels of radiation to get more detail. Be a fool. If you have any propensity to develop skin cancer or thyroid cancer, you could be at risk. If convenience is your aim, suit yourself but don't expect others to put up with an unreasonable and ineffective search that also poses some health risk, which is at LEAST as high as entering a plane full of unscanned passengers.

386 You attempted to make a dumb comparison and have been called out on it.  You don't like it, don't say something dumb.  Another dumb thing you've said is assuming that profiling involves looking for people with darker skin.  Yeah Israel is a small country, and we're a big country, so that means we'd need to hire more people to do similar work.  You know what kind of bet I would take though?  That we are already employing more people to do a shittier job than Israel is already doing.  That's a lot safer of a bet than thinking an airport handles more passengers in a day than there are people in a nation.

387 Also, you are kind of being a useful idiot.

388

Uh, Terrye, unless I'm really mistaken (or it has changed dramatically since the last time I had experience with it) the Israeli system does not involve much more of a background check than what a good going over of the no-fly or suspected should not-fly lists would give you.  It isn't really any more invasive than what sort of check you could expect if you were applying for some jobs or if you get pulled over.  In short, if you're an innocent person, it really isn't all that invasive. They question people along the way to boarding the plane, yes, but I don't see how you could be so blase about the scanners and the pat downs but get all bothered about people asking you questions.

Since there is a logistics issue that we have and Israel does not (bigger country), I would go with the Israeli system plus the dogs.  I really can't see anyone but a terrorist having an issue with that (certainly compared to being x-rayed and patted down by amatuers, mostly lazy, unprofessional amatuers at that).

 

389

That is just my opinion and I have a right to it and that does not make me a useful idiot.

Thanks for the opinion...

how about some of your analysis on the effectiveness on how this kind of random searchg might actually intercept a bad guy?

390 Terrye:

From #392 SarahW at November 19, 2010 08:12 PM (Z4T49) :

"The radiation concentrates on the skin and tissue immediately beneath. Though the overall dose is low, it's concentrated level there makes measuring the risk different from measuring the risk of an xray. There will be areas of higher concentration which may be at dangerous levels."

In this context, "skin" includes the cranium, specifically, the front ... your eyes.

391 Terrye, you obviously have your own WRONG idea of what profiling is. Also, the scanner does reveal the naked form and the genitals. That's a strip search, using radiation. It's not ok to do this routinely on persons suspected of absolutely nothing, especially when it does not prevent at all what it purports to reliably prevent.

392 sauropod, I don't know what kind of whiny psycho-babble bullshit experiment you think your running.

My problem with you is that you suggest women suck it up and get sexually assaulted in the name of security.

My original reply to you stands, fuck you.

393 Sarah:

When I was a young woman, I was actually raped and so I know what an assault is...and that scanner was not a rape. For about a million different reasons.

394 That is just my opinion and I have a right to it and that does not make me a useful idiot.

Thanks for the opinion...

how about some of your analysis on the effectiveness on how this kind of random searchg might actually intercept a bad guy?

Posted by: Druid at November 19, 2010 08:18 PM (adCDx)

I was talking about using scans in general. As for random searches, I am sure the idea is to impress upon potential terrorists that might be searched at any time.

To be honest, I do think there are some methods that could be relaxed, such as elderly people taking of their shoes, kids being searched etc...but the truth is the vast majority of people who go into any airport are completely innocent people no matter what method is used to screen them. That is just a fact.

395 TSA Logic -

- They seized nail clippers from soldiers flying with their weapons...

http://tinyurl.com/25sjuds

396 Terrye, you obviously have your own WRONG idea of what profiling is.

Also, the scanner does reveal the naked form and the genitals.
That's a strip search, using radiation.

It's not ok to do this routinely on persons suspected of absolutely nothing, especially when it does not prevent at all what it purports to reliably prevent.

I have seen what shows up on those screens, you don't need to tell me..as for profiling, I have pretty good idea what it is. When Governor Brewer was trying to get her immigration bill passed, she went to great lengths to impress upon people that it was not profiling. She did not do that because she worried about being politically correct, she was thinking about questions concerning the legality of the bill, whether or not it was constitutional. That is one problem with some potential profiling, it is not a question of political correctness, I don't care about that...but I do think that there are certain possibilities of law suits and other legal issues with profiling.

397 Don't try to one up life experience with ME. I didn't call the machine a "rapist'. I said it shows the naked form and the genitals. It is a strip search, accomplished with ionizing radiation. This is a highly invasive test; the govenrment is restrained from unreasonable searches of our papers and persons. The scans are administered and viewed by the government - on unsuspected persons. So is it reasonable? SInce it does not prevent what it puports to prevent - no. I said this is not an acceptable routine procedure for persons suspected of nothing.

398

Since there is a logistics issue that we have and Israel does not (bigger country), I would go with the Israeli system plus the dogs.  I really can't see anyone but a terrorist having an issue with that (certainly compared to being x-rayed and patted down by amatuers, mostly lazy, unprofessional amatuers at that).

 

Posted by: unknown jane at November 19, 2010 08:17 PM (5/yRG)

I think the dogs are a good idea....but I think people are underestimating the amount of time and the level of intrusiveness..for instance, I don't think most people want to have to get a background check just to buy a plane ticket. I am not saying it is a bad idea..I am just saying that I think there would be people who would not like it any better. They don't want to be interviewed or any of that..they just want to buy their ticket, go through security as quickly as possible and get on the damn plane and be on their way.

399 Terrye's comments are by far the most intelligent and sensible on this thread. I think she speaks for the vast majority of Americans. A CBS poll found that 81% of Americans support the use of full-body scanners. Someone keeps asking where I would draw the line. I don't know what that means. Where do the Israelis, who are so admired by many on this thread, draw the line? They can interrogate you for hours and subject you to a full-body inspection. Obviously the rules and procedures will evolve as we learn more about the enemy's methods. I've flown a lot since 9-11, and while I've encountered some TSA people who were a bit surly, I've never seen any who were abusive or thuggish. I'm not saying there aren't a few rotten apples, but most of them are just bored civil servants doing their job. Someone asked what my occupation is. I don't know why this is relevant, but I trade stocks and options. Actually maybe it is relevant, since I have to assess risk-reward ratios. In this case the risk of encountering a crazed TSA molester seems heavily outweighed by the reward of deterring suicide bombers. I notice that other people are still responding emotionally, thus providing me with additional confirmation of my thesis. Thanks!

400

think the dogs are a good idea....but I think people are underestimating the amount of time and the level of intrusiveness..for instance, I don't think most people want to have to get a background check just to buy a plane ticket. I am not saying it is a bad idea..I am just saying that I think there would be people who would not like it any better. They don't want to be interviewed or any of that..they just want to buy their ticket, go through security as quickly as possible and get on the damn plane and be on their way.

Posted by: Terrye at November 19, 2010 09:00 PM (9iEV2)

And I think you're full of it and don't know what you're talking about.  Are you really going to sit there and claim that dogs walking around sniffing are more intrusive than a dose of radiation and an image of your naked body?  Who's talking about a background check just to buy a ticket?  Do you think they are doing that in Israel?  You really think they want a full body rub down in public rather than potentially being asked a few questions? 

I mean really?  How can you actually believe that people should be A-Ok with everything up to a cavity search but the idea of a few Rin-Tin-Tin's and being asked some simple questions is the line for which they will not stand?

401

I notice that other people are still responding emotionally, thus providing me with additional confirmation of my thesis. Thanks!

Posted by: sauropod at November 19, 2010 09:00 PM (GPm6P)

Your statements are nothing more than drivel that has already been rehashed repeatedly in other threads about this.  We're tired of going over and over and over that these full body scanners are not making us safer for simpering dipshits like you that can't read other comments.  You're a dumbass and your posts no matter how intelligent you think they are, are dumber than the dogshit the dogs we should have at airports should be leaving, and aren't deserving of a response beyond go fuck yourself.  Stick to your stock trading and leave the experiments to people that have actually taken the time to learn the scientific method.

402
This is more a rhetorical question -

Anybody got a link to the full incremental benefit-cost analysis? The underlying assumptions would be, interesting.

 

Surely one was done before spending the $$$ on this shiite.

 

No TSA sources please. They are not credible given their claim that images are not saved because

1)      it is inherit in digital technology

2)      they are doing this gather criminal evidence

403

409 I don't know anything about the cost/benefit, but I do know this:

You can fool those scanners; you can even fool a pat down (especially the shoddy ones being performed by the TSA).  The dogs can be fooled too, but it's a lot harder to fool them.  Professional, well trained people -- really hard to fool.  So, why not go with the two methods that are the hardest to fool plus metal detectors which are an inconvenience but let's grant them just to be safe for rhetorical reasons, since some are hung up on gadgetry (anybody who doesn't pass through those is somebody who probably deserves a thorough, professional, emphasis on professional, pat down).

And for goodness sakes, let's start scanning the cargo better.

Still can't believe someone could equate a thorough check by knowledgeable, professional people of a no-fly list/should be on a no-fly list as some sort of extremely intrusive background check...and state it's worse than being x-rayed and felt up by amatuers, and worse yet that the latter keeps you just as safe or safer than the former.

404

The best argument against it that I have seen has come from Micheal Totten of PJ. He basically said that all the TSA is doing is reacting. In other words, they don't do body scans until we have the panty bomber, and everybody from the first run is dead. Meanwhile back at AQ's lair more plots are churned out and the TSA doesn't look for them. Mike eventually says we must use the Isreali model; I agree.

I think what has most conservatives mad is that no matter what happen 18 to 40 yr old middle eastern males are not being profiled; WHEN THEY SHOULD BE. Plus, when is the first female muslim going to complain just to get special treatment. FLYING IMANS anyone

 

405 Of course RINOs don't want their junk touched. You can't blame them for not wanting people to know they don't have any balls.

406 As Tennessee Williams once trenchantly commented, If you like seafood, you go where the seafood is. Every sexual molester is now applying for a job with TSA. "We actually get PAID to commit sexual assault, even on children? Cool."

407
409 I don't know anything about the cost/benefit, but I do know this:..
Posted by: unknown jane at November 19, 2010 10:28 PM (5/yRG)

Let me just say this - they methods currently being used cannot stop anyone from bringing one down.Anything one would need is already on the plane or allowable - Kabuki Theatre at its worst.

413 Of course RINOs don't want their junk touched. You can't blame them for not wanting people to know they don't have any balls.
Posted by: ThePaganTemple at November 19, 2010 11:16 PM (FcPw+)

That is precisely why the RINOs need to show a pair and opt for the rubdown.
Personally - I am freeballing it the next trip and will demand a female screener IF selected for additional screening  -- do the same poser.

408
414 As Tennessee Williams once trenchantly commented, If you like seafood, you go where the seafood is. Every sexual molester is now applying for a job with TSA. "We actually get PAID to commit sexual assault, even on children? Cool."

Posted by: Dick Primate at November 19, 2010 11:47 PM (9qNw7)

Valid point as noticed elsewhere/before.

Not unlike astronomers, TSA is using an EM frequency not visible to the human eye, applying false color imagery to make it visible to the human eye. Inherit in the digital technology, the images are saved via cache (TSA claims otherwise notwithstanding are fucking lies), and are made specifically to to record potential criminal acts.

This is not unlike my use of IR security cameras around my casa, except that in this case, TSA's  EM frequency can see through clothes.

409

Not unlike astronomers, TSA is using an EM frequency not visible to the human eye, applying false color imagery to make it visible to the human eye. Inherit in the digital technology, the images are saved via cache (TSA claims otherwise notwithstanding are fucking lies), and are made specifically to to record potential criminal acts.

This is not unlike my use of IR security cameras around my casa, except that in this case, TSA's  EM frequency can see through clothes.

Posted by: Druid at November 20, 2010 12:01 AM (adCDx)

I believe that the machines are not currently saving the images, but its not some immutable law they must follow.  Its a setting that can be turned up and down.  So its probably pretty likely that the plan was to get everyone accepting the naked body scans and then once they have them set in stone and acceptable turn on the save features.

410

The Israeli system is far superior to ours, for one thing they have people who know what they are doing and for another they are not wooried about focusing on the threat. In other words, they look for a profile and exert their effort there. Last time I passed theough Ben Gurion, even though I was under contract to the IDF, I was asked some specific questions. When I told the interviewer he would have to get the answer elsewhere that is precisely what he did. In the meantime I was set aside.

But dealing with our own system stateside, first one has to understand its not a 'security program', its a minority jobs program with jobs going to whoever applies so long as they are of the proper ethnic group. Education level is around fourth or fifth on the list. Surliness is one of the over-riding requirements.

 

411 Hmmm. Some of those points are a bit like Collins'.

412 Thanks for this great post it was very informative and helped me with my own project I am attempting to complete.If you have any other tips for Excel I would greatly appreciate it...you have a great way of laying out the solution!!