Terrorism and the TSA page 2

172 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

lol. just for the irony of that, someone aught to do it some time.

Please no. The civilian casulty rate would be devastating.

that means the same amount of radiation one would naturally receive every 30 minutes. gotta be more to that story…hmm.

Probably isn’t. It’s the usual “It’s Radiation! RADIATION!” scaremongering. They’re playing on most people’s lack of scientific understanding, and hoping they’ll associate all radiation with nuclear radiation.

doesn’t sound that easy at all. even with such things in place, it’s still freaky.

Extremely easy. Provide no method of internal data storage on the scanning machine. The workstations security use are thin clients. Without USB ports or hard drives. The scanner outputs to video memory only, and there is no way to store the contents of video memory elsewhere. As soon as you walk out of the scanner, your data is gone for good.

 
Flag Post

hmm, kay. but the cameras mobile phones come with these days…

but anyway, if you set off an alarm, and false alarms are probably very common aren’t they?, you can’t opt for the nudie picture sent to who knows where, but have to get assaulted by who knows whom.

and then there are a number of women that got arrested for groping when all they did was demonstrating the act that was done to them by TSA security.

 
Flag Post

Simply don’t allow the staff to have cameraphones whilst on duty, and you solve that potential problem. They already have radios, so they don’t need other communication devices.

If you set off an alarm, you are subject to search, it is that simple. That’s how it should be.

If you know you are going to set off alarms due to implants, don’t travel via public air. It’s not always fair, but we have to give up some freedoms for the illusion of security.

 
Flag Post

TSA doesn’t “send nudie pictures to who knows whom”. They also don’t assault anyone.

 
Flag Post

lol. just for the irony of that, someone aught to do it some time.

Please no. The civilian casulty rate would be devastating.

It has been tried. I’m surprised that terrorists haven’t done it more often. London Heathrow handles 70 million passengers a year, many in transit to other destinations. A large explosion in one of the international terminals would disrupt air traffic around the world, potentially for weeks. That’s exactly the kind of attention that many terrorists are seeking.

 
Flag Post

so now we can add that the whole security hold-up only helps the terrorists? awesome!

TSA doesn’t “send nudie pictures to who knows whom”. They also don’t assault anyone.

yes they do!

It’s not always fair, but we have to give up some freedoms for the illusion of security.

you realise how incredibly, uhm, funny that comment is right? and i would think the ability to use public air transport is a right for anyone not on some probational sentence or something, and that there is a conflict here with the right to not be assaulted.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
It’s not always fair, but we have to give up some freedoms for the illusion of security.

you realise how incredibly, uhm, funny that comment is right?

Yes. It’s why I wrote it the way I did. It’s also depressingly accurate to what we are doing.

and i would think the ability to use public air transport is a right for anyone not on some probational sentence or something, and that there is a conflict here with the right to not be assaulted.

What they do isn’t assault if they are properly trained, which is more the issue here. It would also address the issue of the difficulty faced by those with metal parts inside their bodies and see that all supposed to be on offer procedures are followed. This still does not always happen.

 
Flag Post

lol. sorry that was very deadpan. but aar, even if procedures are properly followed, the procedures themselves are inherently improper. and if they grope too much you can’t prove anything; and what is too much, anyway?

i saw a youtube comment (youtube is full of examples…), someone asking if it’s legal for the TSA employees to make moaning noises while they’re groping you…

although, come to think of it, i’ve always wanted to grope little boys balls, so this is my chance eh? ok, forget what i said, i’m all for TSA!

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

lol. sorry that was very deadpan. but aar, even if procedures are properly followed, the procedures themselves are inherently improper. and if they grope too much you can’t prove anything; and what is too much, anyway?

They’re trying to determine if you have any dangerous substances on your body. I agree it is humiliating, but tis the price we pay for that illusion of security. It’s actually progress that a breast implant isn’t groped any more.

That’s why the display systems are better. Same result, but a lot less searching. you are only searched if the machines pick up something that cannot be explained away. I would rather they be used at more airports, and stripsearches used a lot less.

 
Flag Post

or you get searched if you display any suspicious behavior, such as being a 4 year old and giving your grandmother a hug; or if the image was for some reason blurry which tends to happen if the person is an attractive young woman…

 
Flag Post

Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither.

 
Flag Post

A tactic espoused for dealing with overzealous pat-downs, by mythbusters I believe, was to ‘enjoy it’ a little too much… very vocally… if you know what I mean? :P

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by ColtArmy:

Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither.

Yup, and right now, sacrificing liberty for fake security is the path we are headed down.

or if the image was for some reason blurry which tends to happen if the person is an attractive young woman…

Other side of the coin to not saving the images. you get the good with the bad, but you can limit that, by making damn sure it is not possible for the image to be blury, and oh yes, there are ways. Then, if the official tries to use that excuse, you can raise an official complaint, and have them disciplined.

 
Flag Post

putting an awful lot of trust in the system.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

putting an awful lot of trust in the system.

Have to. The system is here to stay, so work to improve it as much as possible, and put in as many safeguards as possible. Groping is unnecessary if the scanning systems are working properly. So, make damn sure the scanning systems are working properly, so the staff cannot claim ‘it was too blurry miss’.

On top of that, push for proper complaint procedures, and use them when a breach occurs. Official complaints are very good at that. Yes, you may have to miss a connecting flight to do it, but better that you do it than such sordid individuals continue to be put in a position of trust. We’re in a depression so there are plenty of good folks out there that can do the job.

 
Flag Post

i guess that’s the major difference between my culture and your culture. this supposed awe and reverence and subservience to the system. in the Netherlands, we have none. even the police has held protests about low wages about 10 to 15 years ago.

if you ask me, it’s the opposite. you have to have NO trust in the system. always. what good are rights if you just take ’em for granted? always question everything, especially authority.

 
Flag Post

Oh there’s no ‘awe and reverence’ of the system. Just an acknowledgement that the systems are in place and aren’t going away anytime soon. So we have to work with the system in order to effect change.

My own view is any system with human involvement is always going to go pear-shaped, nature of the beast. But that doesn’t mean rules cannot be put in place to minimise the effect of the slackers and the perverts who worm their way in.

Besides, whilst we’re always going to lose some rights to increased security, by improving the nature of that security, we can minimise the loss of rights whilst keeping the effectiveness of the security systems. It is all about checks and balances again.

 
Flag Post
so we have to work with the system in order to effect change.

so you have to hand over your sword to the king before you can duel him? you have to hand over your money before you can ask to keep it?

funny thing: the USA was founded by disobeying laws.

 
Flag Post

Very different situation, Omega. You cannot compare the war of independence, to a security checkpoint at the airport. The two, just don’t mesh.

The security system is already in place. The politicians like it, the commercial airlines like it. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon. However, we can make it far less intrusive than it already is, right down to the point that it is completely transparent if at all possible. That is working within the system. It does its job, and our rights are not compromised.

It is a win-win situation.

Our independence came about because there was no win-win situation avaiable. One side had to lose whatever happened.

 
Flag Post

but i wasn’t just qeustioning the exact situation, i was questioning the general attitude of “[working] with the system in order to effect change”, where change seems to be a naive hope that something bad without good cause (you admit to that at least), can be made acceptable, via the normal course of the system that is already shown to fail in this purpose.

if nobody wants it but authorities, then the only reason “It’s not going anywhere anytime soon”, is this submissive, compliant attitude.

That is working within the system. It does its job, and our rights are not compromised.

it’s over ten years later, and the problem is still not resolved. you call that doing its job? and your rights ARE compromised.

this subservience is not a win-win situation. the more you accept the things you oppose, the farther they can push things you oppose onto you. it enables corruption, which is almost as bad as causing it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

but i wasn’t just qeustioning the exact situation, i was questioning the general attitude of “[working] with the system in order to effect change”, where change seems to be a naive hope that something bad without good cause (you admit to that at least), can be made acceptable, via the normal course of the system that is already shown to fail in this purpose.

Not at all naive. We’ve done it before, countless times. Remember our previous discussion regarding feminism? Same basic principle. You have to fight within the system, to force the system to change.

if nobody wants it but authorities, then the only reason “It’s not going anywhere anytime soon”, is this submissive, compliant attitude.

I also said the airline companies like it. You ignored that bit. Having such security decreases the cost of their insurance, for obvious reasons. Airports are after all, commercial ports.

That is working within the system. It does its job, and our rights are not compromised.

it’s over ten years later, and the problem is still not resolved. you call that doing its job? and your rights ARE compromised.

If you had been following the discussion post by post, instead of responding to the last one only, you would see that I had stated we need to make changes to the system, to minimise the invasion of rights whilst keeping the security standards just as high. Change is a slow process, especially in recession. Still, it is happening. With regards to the issues with prosthetics users for example, change is slowly occuring. The CastScope project is an example of this. They are still in limited supply, not installed at every port as of yet, but are already a way of decreasing the invasion of privacy for a highly put upon type of traveller.

Continued innovations like this one are necessary, in order to slowly render security a more and more invisible part of the travelling experience. It is no-longer invading your rights when you don’t even notice it is there, and receive no negative feedback (unless you are trying to blow up a plane, smuggle contraband, or take a flight hostage).

this subservience is not a win-win situation. the more you accept the things you oppose, the farther they can push things you oppose onto you. it enables corruption, which is almost as bad as causing it.

Not if you continually fight for less and less invasive means of doing so. You work with the system, kneading it in your hands, until you reshape it into something that everybody is happy with. Each time they bring in a new system, you do the exact same thing. Making sure everyone wins is the goal.

In an ideal world, security should not affect liberty. This is not an ideal world, but the ideal is no less worth striving for, so that security impinges on liberty as little as possible.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Very different situation, Omega. You cannot compare the war of independence, to a security checkpoint at the airport. The two, just don’t mesh.

The security system is already in place. The politicians like it, the commercial airlines like it. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon. However, we can make it far less intrusive than it already is, right down to the point that it is completely transparent if at all possible. That is working within the system. It does its job, and our rights are not compromised.

It is a win-win situation.

Our independence came about because there was no win-win situation avaiable. One side had to lose whatever happened.

No, it is not a win-win situation. As Colt said so eloquently, you are giving up your freedom in hopes of a little safety. Since it’s inception, the TSA has never caught a single terrorist with their so called security at airports. But look at the freedom the American people have sacrificed for a false security.

You are also forgetting that document liberals love to hate…the Constitution (Bill of Rights).

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

You are also forgetting that document liberals love to hate…the Constitution (Bill of Rights).

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Searching for any combustible or explosive material, or chemical agent that would pose a clear and present danger to the passengers in the sealed environment of an aircraft, is not an unreasonable search.

Further, because the ‘terrorists’ know such a search will be carried out, it puts them off going through, knowing they will be arrested impotently if they do so.

The challenge then, is to make this reasonable search as unobtrusive as possible. Ideally completely hands off, by monitoring device only.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by jhco50:

You are also forgetting that document liberals love to hate…the Constitution (Bill of Rights).

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Searching for any combustible or explosive material, or chemical agent that would pose a clear and present danger to the passengers in the sealed environment of an aircraft, is not an unreasonable search.

Further, because the ‘terrorists’ know such a search will be carried out, it puts them off goingthrough, knowing they will be arrested if they do so.

The challenge then, is to make this reasonable search as unobtrusive as possible. Ideally completely hands off, by monitoring device only.

Did you miss the part where the TSA has not caught the first terrorist in ten years? Yes, unless you are under suspicion of a crime, they are unreasonably searching you…and without a warrant.

No it doesn’t scare off the terrorists, they just come up with another tactic. They aren’t a stupid people you know. Did you know that recently (within the month I believe) a guy took over a commercial jet in Colorado? He taxied it until he hit a fence. The TSA is going through the motions, but they are of no value. Where there is a will.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Since it’s inception, the TSA has never caught a single terrorist with their so called security at airports.

Well I’m pretty sure they’ve found some other stuff, maybe not something that would qualify as terrorism.

Oh, and answer me this, would you be more willing (if you wanted to blow shit up) to take a bomb to an airport knowing that you will be searched, and there’s a pretty damn good chance that they’d find it, or one where you don’t have to be searched, or not enough so that they would find it?

Originally posted by jhco50:

Did you miss the part where the TSA has not caught the first terrorist in ten years? Yes, unless you are under suspicion of a crime, they are unreasonably searching you…and without a warrant.

Did you miss the part where she said they don’t want any harmful material getting onto a crowded plane?

No it doesn’t scare off the terrorists, they just come up with another tactic.

And you know that…?

They aren’t a stupid people you know.

Some aren’t, some are.

Did you know that recently (within the month I believe) a guy took over a commercial jet in Colorado? He taxied it until he hit a fence.

Because we will totally believe everything you say, even though you still didn’t give a source.

The TSA is going through the motions, but they are of no value. Where there is a will.