New Polls Show Overwhelming Public Opposition to TSA Rapiscans & Enhanced Pat Downs

[sabrina 1]

We were told by the media, that 'despite' the recent uproar over the TSA's latest abuses of passengers' rights, people were overwhelmingly in support of them. They used one CBS poll taken before the public had much information on exactly what was going on, to make this claim. Over 1,000 people were polled on the issue in the CBS poll.

A Reuters poll this week completely devastates that claim as over 96% of responders disagree with the TSA's use of the machines and the 'enhanced pat-downs':

Are New Security Screenings Affecting your Decision to Fly?

Are you less likely to fly because of stepped-up security procedures such as full-body scans and patdowns?



Yes - I will make alternate travel plans to avoid intrusive security scans and patdowns (96%, 72,249 Votes)

No - It is a necessary procedure to ensure terror plots are thwarted (3%, 2,160 Votes)

Undecided (1%, 1,168 Votes)

Total Voters: 75,578

In every other poll I have seen this week, the results are the same. I think we can forget that CBS poll the media has been using to influence public opinion. I think the public can speak for themselves, and are doing it very effectively. Members of Congress, the TSA and the WH are hearing from the public registering their outrage, many now believing that this time the Government may have gone way too far.

A Boston Harbor Rapiscan Party sounds like a good idea at this point.

It looks like the public is no longer convinced that giving up OUR rights is the way to deal with what really is a statistically very small threat compared to other more immediate threats we face each day.

Maybe at last people are realizing what we on the left tried to tell them for eight, long years ~ their government is using 9/11 to remove rights and to ensure major profits for Big Business, and just maybe we should not be acting like frightened rabbits any longer and start behaving like we live in the 'Home of the Brave' rather than the 'Home of the Terrified'.

You can vote in the poll by clicking the link.

[seabeyond]

1. talking to our quiet young librarian just now. reading cnn. she and i at same time, TSA

i tell her, just say NO.

but but then i will be a terrorist.

already a terrorist, dontcha know.

ya, even the quiet librarian isnt going submitting and is angry

the poll was bullshit to help tsa and stop tomorrow

[Vegetarianist]

2. if online polls truly reflected opinion, Ron Paul should be president of the world by now n/t

[sabrina 1]

10. If a CBS poll reflected public opinion, the TSA would still be

subjecting pilots and children under 12 to their abuses. I'll take the polls that match the facts, over a questionable CBS poll any day.

[Scurrilous]

15. ROFL

:P

[d_b]

lols

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. How many times do we have to 'splain online polls are NOT reliable

In other news they have seen a drop of 16 points in scientific polls.

[woo me with science]

4. +100

Hopefully that is just the beginning.

[sabrina 1]

6. As many times as we have to 'splain how a single self-serving

CBS poll is not reliable either? I think that the public is speaking loud and clear AND getting results. So if it's a choice between one unreliable and another, I'll go with the one that matches the actual reality of what is going on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Alas that poll is not the only one anymore

And the actual reality is that not all people fly either.

Significant...yes, the 16 percent drop in 72 hours in a SCIENTIFIC poll.

[Bill McBlueState]

20. why even look at polls

if you're already certain what the reality is?

[sabrina 1]

25. Why is the media looking at the CBS poll if their facts

are enough to back up those findings?

Call it responding to the claim that 'polls' all show support for the police state tactics, when in fact they do not. A poll for a poll!

I am confident in the result of THIS poll because of the reaction of the TSA so far. And because every single person I know is outraged over what they are doing. Including my friend who is a pilot and was ready to join others in taking a leave of absence without pay also.

[sally cat]

72. Well, a drop of 16% via scientific polls still is 80% opposed.

[johnaries]

5. an ONLINE poll?

:eyes:

[sabrina 1]

8. A single CBS Poll?

Are you disputing the public's anger. Are you ignoring that the overwhelming outrage has actually caused the TSA to back down on two groups they were abusing this past few days? Those FACTS would seem to back the 'online poll'. They certainly don't reflect the questionable CBS poll results, do they?

[MineralMan]

7. Online polls on any subject are worthless.

They do not represent anything more than the opinions of those who take the poll, and those people are self-selected. Online polls are also subject to being manipulated by groups with distinct opinions encouraging their members to go and take the poll. It even happens on DU, where we frequently see pleas to go and vote in polls to shift them in a particular direction.

Essentially, online polls almost never reflect the actual opinion of a broad population.

[noise]

11. The body scanner companies can pay pollsters

to ask leading questions:

"Are you in favor of preventing terrorist attacks?"

Then the media will report that a new poll shows that 100% of those polled favor body scanners.

[sabrina 1]

13. Yes, and that is what many believe happened. Look what

effort was put into smearing Michael Moore, the millions spent to stop his movie from having an effect, and the MEDIA was used to do it, just like this. Very easy it seems for Big Business to influence our media.

I have a feeling that those who are arguing for the CBS poll, were the same people I argued with over the Michael Moore smears, when even though I did not know how many millions were spent on them, or that we were arguing against powerful corporations, I knew they were lying, that the media was lying. That Sanjay Gubta was wrong and a disgrace for not doing his homework.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

17. My post was only about the worthlessness of such polls.

And yet, you took it on yourself to comment on your perception of my other posts. I doubt you have read them all.

[sabrina 1]

30. Media sponsored polls are not worthless? Especially when

they are taken before the public has access to information and the questions are leading, not to mention the now known influence of Big Business on our media?

I'll take a poll where the public responding is informed, over a secret media poll whose origins we do not know anything about, who scripted it, what the questions were, the level of information the pollees had access to, any day.

I asked you a question before, not sure if you answered, but since you've attempted to minimize the seriousness of this issue, and others btw, in favor of the government as opposed to the people, can you explain why you so often support the government on issues that it is against your own interests to do? As I said, I am very curious about this, not just you personally, but for the past decade as our rights were consistently under attack, I saw these exact kinds of attempts to belittle the people some subtle such as yours, others more overt. It's hard for me to understand this. History should be a lesson that when the people do not fight as soon as the first signs of oppression appear, the battle is already lost.

[sabrina 1]

37. You make a lot of proclamations.

I would love to see some links to back this one up:

Essentially, online polls almost never reflect the actual opinion of a broad population

Let's see, this is not scientific of course, but some of the 'scientific polls' had McCain winning the election in 2008 while many online polls contradicted them and showed Obama gaining support across the country. I remember that very well because we were monitoring polls back then, every kind of poll.

But if you have actual scientific data to demonstrate your claim, I would love to see it.

Thank you in advance!

[MineralMan]

59. The only data needed is common sense.

Polling is a pretty well-defined thing. When a poll is simply open to anyone who wants to vote, it has no scientific results. It only reflects the opinions of those who vote, for whatever reason they vote. Most online polls include a disclaimer, saying that very thing. I'm not going to research what is common knowledge for you. You can do your own Google search.

If you need help framing your search, however, here's a link for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Online+Poll+Validity

[sabrina 1]

67. Thank you. I appreciate the link.

And of course I am not disagreeing with you totally regarding polls. However, when dozens of polls, informal as they may be, are all showing similar results, and in real life, there has already been a reaction to the people's outrage, I think we can deduce that they offer a sense of how the public feels about an issue.

Eg, every person I know personally, is outraged, left, right and especially people who are not especially interested in politics. People care about their rights. This latest escalation of a removal of those rights has painted a far more graphic picture of what can happen when people remain silent, than just reading about it. And it has become very personal to certain demographics, especially parents and child advocates. This has hit people directly and they are reacting.

It was a huge mistake to take things this far. There will be enormous push-back to these practices from many different groups. Law-suits are already being filed, along with those already in the process.

The excuses for these abuses of people's rights are wearing thin, causing people finally to ask, what do they value more, their freedom, or a useless attempt to try to be 100% secure. Too bad they did not ask that question nine years ago, but better late than never.

The President is on the wrong side of this issue. And that is truly a shame as he is a Constitutional lawyer and should know better.

[MineralMan]

14. Here are some of the discussion forum threads asking people

to go vote in that Reuter's poll:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1147252-reuters-poll-fri-nov-12-new-security-screenings-affecting-your-decision-fly.html
http://holycoast.blogspot.com/2010/11/tsa-poll-do-you-avoid-flying-to-avoid.html
http://hillbuzz.org/2010/11/15/please-vote-in-this-poll-will-you-make-alternative-travel-plans-to-avoid-tsa-genital-groping-and-nude-scanning/
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2627152/posts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/de-meme-ing/tsa-pat-downs-passenger-anger_n_786493_68318355.html
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=373295
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/149329 {Ron Paul's Blog}


I only looked at the first three pages of Google results. This is why online polls are worthless.

[sabrina 1]

23. Is there something wrong with letting the public know that their

opinion is being asked for? Did any of these sites tell people HOW to vote?

People who oppose the tactics can read those sites can't they?

Were people opposed to them, blocked from getting the information that they too could vote?

If not, how come the anti-TSA tactics people didn't overwhelm those opposed?

You're not making much of a point here, unless there's something I don't know, like those sites somehow are not available to supporters of the TSA!

If anything, I wish we had all been informed about the CBS poll. I would like to have offered my opinion. But apparently it was not made public, so those of us who oppose these police state tactics were excluded from that poll.

Making it far less reliable, now I see from your post, that everyone was invited to offer their opinions on this poll.

[sabrina 1]

44. Correction to the above post. 'How come the PRO-TSA

people did not overwhelm those opposed?' They all had the same information. I see this as a positive, open debate, with a poll where all can participate. Not sure why you would think it somehow makes your case that somehow the reuters poll was unfair though.

[OHdem10]

16. Never underestimate the Power of Fox and Libertarians.

Fox set up the firestorm and others followed suit.

See how fast the Media can influence public opinion.

I thought we learned that from the elections.

24hr drumbeat and the sheeple fall in line.

[spin]

27. Sure, lets blame Fox because of the fact that you have a choice between ...

an x-rated body scan or a intimate grope by some threatening individual in a uniform.

Neither will detect an explosive hidden in a body cavity or explosives hidden in the baggage compartment of a cargo aircraft.

Passengers are being subjected to humiliation for no real good reason as any real terrorists will simply change their tactics to avoid the scan or the pat down.

Think of it this way. If you knew that the police are stopping all drivers at 4th street and Main and checking to see if they are over the limit and you are, would you go through that intersection?

Actually the Drudge Report started this campaign against the TSA long before Fox made a big deal of it. Drudge has been calling Janet Napolitano "Big Sis" for months.

The solution is fairly simple. The images that the TSA operator sees should be cartoons with the suspicious areas highlighted. Most people would have no objections to this and it would merely require a change of software. The pat down should be done with consideration and courtesy by well trained people. Commonsense should be used.

I also believe that dogs should be used in the entrance to the passenger areas to detect explosives. It's quite possible that a bomber could merely walk into a passenger terminal with suitcases filled with explosives and kill a large number of people when he detonated his baggage.

[OHdem10]

29. I am not blaming Fox, I am giving them credit.

[spin]

41. Well they do a great job of pushing their agenda ...

and they definitely did a good job with this story.

I disagree with them on many issues and they are definitely NOT fair and balanced.

I am on their side in this issue. Personally I have no problems with somebody seeing me nude or having someone feel my "junk". If someone gets a kick out of seeing an x-rated view of a 64 year old overweight man or feeling his privates, I feel sorry for him.

However many people are humiliated or angered by this procedure. Some people find the scan offensive and don't want anyone to view their body in all its glory. Some people have been sexually abused and the enhanced pat down will cause them emotional distress. Some have colostomy or ileostomy bags attached to their bodies. There are many reasons why people desire reasonable privacy and are insulted when they lose it.

If the procedure actually prevented terrorists from blowing up an aircraft, it might be worth it. However, the procedures do not detect explosives in body cavities.

Why subject millions of travelers to a procedure which can still miss a bomb? Why not train TSA agents to look for suspicious people acting abnormally.

First do away with the x-rated body scan and replace it with a cartoon figure that would highlight areas to check out.

Second, train individuals to pick out people acting in a suspicious manner. If I had a couple of pounds of explosive shoved up my ass, I would act and walk in a strange manner.

Finally, use dogs to sniff people walking into the passenger terminal of any airport. Trained dogs can sense explosives from a distance.

If I had a large amount of explosives shoved up my ass, I might walk funny. If you questioned me or had a dog sniff me

[sabrina 1]

48. Excellent post, thank you! n/t

[veganlush]

18. If polls are really coming down against the TSA

than it's due to the misinformation and mass hysteria whipped up here and elsewhere. Just like many people think Obama raised taxes when he actually pushed through the biggest tax cut in history. The lies about what the TSA is doing are fueling the discontent and negative polls.

[bushisanidiot]

21. b-b-b-but a boy was STRIP SEARCHED in Utah! It's true!

The MSM told me so!

lemmings.

[MineralMan]

22. What! Oh...wait...the boy's father took the kid's shirt off?

Oh, never mind. Strip searched, indeed.

[bushisanidiot]

24. Oh, and the internetz said there was an anal probe involved.

gotta be true if I read it in black & white!

[sabrina 1]

47. Did the internetz say that? Could you provide a link please?

I do know that the internetz and the media reported some serious abuses, and they must be true, since the TSA has had to apologize to at least one passenger for the abuse he was exposed to and has backed down on forcing those abuses on Pilots and children under 12.

But I have not seen any reports on the internetz or elsewhere about anyone being anally probed. So I would appreciate a link, thanks in advance.

Btw, should the TSA have apologized do you think, and should they have backed down at all, or do you suppport those abuses? It's hard to tell from what appears to be a very dismissive attitude. But I could be misunderstanading as in this medium it is often hard to tell if someone is joking or not.

[bushisanidiot]

50. Try freeptard land or any right wing nutso site. They're all over

"groper-gate". Their hair is on fire over it.


whiners.

[sabrina 1]

55. So, you were for these machines back in 2004 when the left

was all over them with 'their hair on fire'? I'm clear at all on why you support them. Did you oppose the efforts of Civil Liberties groups, scientists, public health officials and the public who was aware of them back then and successfully kept them out of airports? Or did were with the right, who supported them because Bush wanted them?

Your posts indicate that you must have been on the side of the right back then, or maybe I am misunderstanding and it's just that you've changed your mind since then?

Btw, I am very glad the right has finally seen the light on this issue. NOW they get why we opposed them years ago. And I am having lots of fun pointing out that it was because they did not oppose them back then, that we have them now. There is nothing more fun than pointing out hypocrisy.

[bushisanidiot]

56. AWOL Bush was completely incompetant when it came to national security

so I would have been less likely to trust his judgement in use of the x-ray type machines if they were used back in 2004. but, not surprisingly, i was unaware that they were even being used because the media wasn't telling us to be "concerned" about it back then. we all must be concerned over what the media tells us is important, afterall.

lemmings.

[sabrina 1]

74. He was criminallly negligent.

There was no need to abuse Constitutional rights to stop 9/11, the system that was in place worked and had worked for decades. During other administrations, many terror attacks were stopped. Bush ignored the warnings from the Intelligence community. That is why 9/11 happened.

There is still no need to abuse the Constitutional rights of the American people, so why is this president doing so?

The machines WERE NOT being used until this past year, because the Left was able to stop their use under Bush. They fought for our rights and succeeded. That is why the media wasn't telling us to be 'concerned'. There were no full body scanners in airports so long as the Left kept fighting, in court to keep them out.

You are very misinformed about all of this. Last year this administration set back the fight to keep our rights protected by ten years, when they over-rode the 'left' and did what Bush was never able to do, install those grotesque and possibly dangerous scanners in 68 Airports.

One of Obama's good friends is the CEO of Rapiscan. A man he invited to go on his India business trip with him. Once we learned that, the reason for Obama's betrayal of the fight for Civil Rights was suddenly clear.

What you are saying is that we should trust a politician with our civil liberties, who has shown even less interest in them than the previous politician by succeeding where the other one failed, who has now shown he has a conflict of interest regarding these machines. But we should trust him, even though he has betrayed us on this issue, because he has a 'D' after his name?

The rightwing felt the same way about Bush. THEY trusted their team more even though he too had conflicts of interest for all that he did.

We were able to fight off Bush's attempts to steal more rights, but sadly we could not stop this President from doing so. I do not care about politicians anymore. Those machines do not belong in a democratic nation. No matter who is responsible for them.

Keep trusting 'our team' if you like, I prefer to trust no politician anymore. The issue is what counts. Obama and Bush are on the same page regarding those scanners. We the people are on our own.

[sabrina 1]

58. But what has that got to do with this issue, which the left

has been fighting for for years? If they have finally decided we were right about these machines, hypocrites that they are because when Bush tried to install them, they were for them, how does that affect the issue itself, other than add more voices, whatever their reasons, to many who have been opposing them since around 2004?

Just tell them you're glad to see they are now seeing the light and are in agreement with the left, and it's too bad they let things get this far before finally realizing we were right all along. I've had a lot of fun with my rightwing friends who were either silent when Bush was trying to get them installed or openly in favor them. It can be fun to point out their blatant hypocrisy, we don't often get a chance like this.

But the left should not be equally hypocritical. The left has always opposed these machines and fought to successfully keep them out of airports for years. Should we let Freepers distract us from important issues should as the further erosion of our rights? I don't think so. Let's use them now to help us finally stop these abuses. Maybe we can even get them on board now to get rid of the Patriot Act and start restoring the rule of law in this country.

[sabrina 1]

49. Wow! Did you feel the same way about the 3 year-old little

girl being probed by a stranger in a uniform begging him to 'stop touching me'? Or the infant who was removed from his mother and taken to another room out of her sight?

I am guessing you are not responsible for children, for instructing them never to allow a stranger to touch them, only to get to the airport and be required to reverse that teaching? Nor do you appear to see how doing so trains children to believe that it is okay to be touched by strangers?

Happily though, even the TSA has responded to those who, unlike yourself, were outraged by these practices and have concluded that it IS inappropriate to allow these practices, at least in the case of children under 12. Again, you seem to be in the minority in your snarky dismissal of the concerns of parents everywhere.

[bushisanidiot]

51. Didja hear? Didja hear?

hide your kids hide your wife..

[MineralMan]

60. The 3-year old girl was not "probed." You see, the very words

you are using are loaded. She was searched, and like a lot of 3-year-olds, she didn't like that very much. 3-year-olds scream sometimes if you try to feed them ice cream.

[sabrina 1]

28. Did you call the reaction of the public to the Patriot Act eg

'mass hysteria' back then? Of course the right did call us hysterical and rabid, and traitors and pro-terror etc. etc. But what about you? Were you one of those who thought those of us opposed to emerging police state put in place by the Bush administrtion, were engaged in 'mass hysteria'? Actually we could not get the kind of mass support necessary to stop it.

But this ISSUE seems to have affected far more viscerally, perhaps because it is easier for people to see this very graphic example of what the left was warning about years ago. So, 'mass' if fine with me. I wish we could have generated some 'mass hysteria' when our rights were first assaulted using 9/11 as the fear factor.

I hope this mass hysteria grows until we get our sanity restored. Some things require hysteria, and all the better if it's massive.

[LisaL]

31. Do you think you need a groin check in order to get on the plane?

[veganlush]

34. Oh no, i think we should call sensitive areas off limits

I'm sure the terrorists won't exploit that. I think most of them are kind and considerate.

[LisaL]

35. And one sticks is up his butt no doubt you will be fine with a cavity

search? Enjoy.

[sabrina 1]

52. Do you realize what the statistics are of anyone dying by

terror as opposed to say, people who die every day in car accidents, or the lack of adequate health insurance?

Should we give up more rights so that the government can protect us from all these threats we face every day?

And have you asked yourself why there is so much focus on planes? More people have died in plane crashes over the years, than a terrorist could ever dream of.

Do you think terrorists have only one option to attack this country? Planes? And are you aware that during the Clinton administration more terrorist attacks were stopped using normal anti-terror practices than have been since we lost all those rights trying to be safe? Or that it was the public, not the TSA who apparently failed in those incidences, who stopped both the Shoe bomber and the underwear bomber?

What are you so afraid of? There really is not need to be considering the odds that you will ever encounter a terrorist on a plane or anywhere else.

Maybe if we stopped creating terrorists, there would not threat at all. But abusing the flying public under the pretense that this will make us safe, is just simply ludicrous.

[sabrina 1]

33. Btw, what misinformation are you referring to?

Are you aware that the TSA has already been forced to back down on the abusive treatment of children and on the attempt to force airline pilots into subjecting themselves into these 4th Amendment rights abuses just to get to work, after saying they would not?

Are you supporting these police state tactics? Where will you draw a line? Personally I drew mine at the Patriot Act. What is yours?

[veganlush]

39. there is a big difference

between this and the patriot act. When they're reaching into your privacy without your knowledge, reading your email, bank account, listening in on phone calls, braking down your door without a warrant yeah the patriot act went too far. Flying is a choice and you are made aware of what security measures will be used. Allowing a plane full of people to be bombed is not a good option. Some people choose not to fly at all because they don't want to be killed in a plane crash. You can opt-out of flying for any reason, including boycotting a security system you don't like.

[LisaL]

43. Email is a choice too. If you don't want anyone reading your

email, just stop emailing. Do you have to put money in the bank? No. So banking is a choice. Do you have to make phone calls? If you don't want anyone listening to your phone calls, just stop calling.
So I really fail to see why you would have problems with someone checking your emails, bank records, and listening onto your phone conversations. Just don't do any of these things and you will be fine.
:sarcasm:

[sabrina 1]

54. Several things, but first, flying is not a choice, it is a necessity

for many people. Such as Airline Pilots. And as of a few days ago, the Airline Pilots who had objected to these practices have won. TSA was forced to stop these inane and useless tactics regarding them.

Flying and driving are not priviliges, this is a meme that has been challenged many times in court. Not to mention the fact U.S. code states that the public has right to fly.

I don't how this meme gained so much traction on the internet, but it does those in power to have people accept that they have no rights.

As for being bombed, you have a far better chance of being involved in airline crash, far, far, better chance, that of a terrorist bringing down a plane.

Finally, before 9/11 do you know how many terror attacks the Clinton administration stopped?

The Bush administration ignored threats which is why 9/11 was not prevented. It could and should have been without these latest assaults on our rights. And based on the incompetence of the Bush administration the entire country is being asked to give up their rights. I am very glad to see the people fighting back at last. They have been fighting these machines for years on the left, successfully.

[veganlush]

70. What's your alternative, really?

I'm not saying it is a privilege, but it is a choice. You can choose to fly or you can choose a different mode. What's different about flying is the risk to other people if a suicide type gets on board. In that event, everyone gets killed. What about the rights of the people who don't want to be blown to bits?

I realize that being blown up on a plane is very unlikely, odds-wise, relative to an accidental plane crash, etc..in fact, more people die each year in slip-and-fall accidents in their homes than died on 911 but you don't see us waging a war on bathtubs, i get that too.

The current political climate however, dictates that no matter what happens this holiday season, Obama will have gotten it wrong, way wrong, at least according to the right-influenced MSM. If a terror bomb succeeds, he will be excoriated as weak on terror, if not an outright accomplice. If no terror bombing occurs, they will continue to whip up the 'paling around with and condoning child molesters angle.

Yes, Bush's incompetence brought us here, but now we're here and have to deal with the facts.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

79. Exactly right (re: Obama)

If, as the right wing is demanding, the body scanners and/or the pat downs end and then somebody attempts an attack on an airplane (remember, unsuccessful attacks are treated as "security failures" too by the right-wing) that could've potentially been prevented by the use of one or another of these highly controversial methods, then, I certainly hope that their rhetoric gets thrown back in their faces 24-7-365 and that they aren't allowed to get away with mercilessly bashing President Obama or "big sis" for TSA falling down on the job. Unfortunately, the hypocritical conservatives (who for years supported all kinds of security measures in the name of fighting the "war on terror") will, of course, get away with it- by the same media that is hyping this particular story.

[sabrina 1]

82. I think it 's time to stop the fear mongering for one thing. Most

people I know don't care about terrorists. They understand the miniscule risk of dying by terror and in fact in most polls that is borne out. So why is Obama worried? I don't think he is. I'm sorry to say it but there is no denying it anymore, all this is about money, NOT security.

The president eg, is good friends with the CEO of Rapiscan, the manufacturer of the full body scanners. He took him to India with him last week. That puts a whole different light on Obama's support for those machines. Those Corps have made a fortune since this administration succeeded in installing those machines in airports last year, something that the Bush administration was not able to do.

I don't worry about politicians anymore. I'm beginning to view them, both parties, as two competing Consulting companies for Big Business. They compete to see who can do the best job of selling the latest Corporate product to the American people. That could be War, Police State Equipment etc. To sell these things they need conditions to be right, such as keeping the public in a state of fear in order to sell these scanners. For that, Obama did a better job than Bush.

Miraculously we had a guy get on a plane with a bomb in his underwear, and VOILA! After six years of Bush failing to sell them, the Obama admins was successful. Talk about a great sales campaign.

Bush sold the wars. Again, almost miraculously, we had 9/11. That was good for trillions of dollars worth of military spending. A lot of people got rich. And the police state Bureaucracies he set up, more billions of dollars, Homeland Security, the TSA etc. etc.

What is my solution, well first of all to stay focused on issues, NOT politicians. They really are not working for us and Obama and Bush will be fine. They will be richly rewarded by the corporations they are working for once they leave office.

But we the people have no such expectations of rewards. All we are getting is fewer and fewer freedoms while they get richer and richer.

I am hoping that both the right and the left will unite eventually and wake up and forget party loyalty and think of the country. Because someone has to. We are being conned. I feel like a fool for the loyalty I gave to this party and now they are doing the same things I was so against when Bush did them.

So what if people blame a politician if there is an attack. We blamed Bush, they will blame Obama. Did it harm Bush? No and it won't harm Obama either. We need to start worrying about us, and the rights we are losing.

[veganlush]

73. btw, as for driving

of course it's a privilege. If it were a right, than it would apply to everyone.Rights aren't subject to licensing. The whole point of licensing is to exclude some people. If driving were a right, everyone would be able to drive, period.

[fascisthunter]

75. once again,, we see the "priviledge" meme

yes sir, no sir, yes sir, absolutely sir, thank you sir may I have another, sir!

[GoneOffShore]

83. Flying for business or a family emergency is NOT a choice!

If one is traveling one should not be treated as a potential criminal.

Let's extend your logic -" Taking the train is a choice and you are made aware of what security measures will be used. Allowing a train full of people to be bombed is not a good option. Some people choose not to take the train at all because they don't want to be killed in a train crash. You can opt-out of rail journeys for any reason, including boycotting a security system you don't like."

How does that work for you?

Or - "Taking the subway is a choice and you are made aware of what security measures will be used. Allowing a subway train full of people to be bombed is not a good option. Some people choose not to take the subway at all because they don't want to be killed in a train crash. You can opt-out of taking the subway for any reason, including boycotting a security system you don't like."

[bushisanidiot]

19. Passengers, overall, were fine with it. Until the concern trolls in the MSM told them

they should be angry. VERY VERY ANGRY!

GRRRR!!


Lemmings.

[Scurrilous]

26. Yep. n/t

[sabrina 1]

32. You must be kidding. Clearly you are unaware of the history of these

machines and the controversy, especially from the left, when the Bush administration first tried to install them.

Civil liberties groups and politicians, scientists, public health officials, the public that was aware of them, all managed to keep them from being installed, until now.

The media did little to help those fighting to fend off Bush's police state. I guess your own ignorant statement is proof of that.

Let me guess, Obama is for them, and IOKIYAD?? Did I get that right?

Because it used to be US who were screaming and Bush loyalists who were saying exactly as you are saying now. That the 'liberals' were the reason why we couldn't have those machines. Either you supported the Bush police state tactics back then, which would at least make you consistent, or you didn't and have changed your mind since our team won.

I see the same thing thing happening on the right, as in 2004 I fought furiously with rightwingers over these very same machines online, and was accused of being hysterical etc etc, 'our freedoms' 'terrorist supporter' etc etc. And now, since their team lost, all of a sudden they see the light.

This whole thing is fasinating. However I am thrilled that after fighting for so long against these vile, obscene assaultes on our rights, the public has finally had enough. I would anyone on the left who has been engaged in this fight, would feel the same way.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. These procedures are less than a month old

So where does your information come from exactly? I'm thinking a scan might be needed to find your source.

[sabrina 1]

53. That source would be hard to find, especially since this is not a

new battle. These machines have created controversy and outrage since they were first revealed and were successfully stopped from being used under the Bush administration. Rightwingers back then supported them of course, but they supported everything Bush did. The left was completely and almost unanimously opposed to them from the very beginning. To those of us who have been part of that fight, this is not new, what IS new is that they are finally in use and under a Democratic administration.

[SnakeEyes]

57. This just reeks of ignorance of the facts of flying in the US.

Most people don't fly regularly. Many of our 300M Americans public have never flown before. These procedures of "enhanced pat downs" are new. The nude body scanners are not the sole thing at most security check points yet. The only way to get an enhanced pat down is to opt out of the scanners. The number of passengers to opt out is a smaller percentage. So how can you say that passengers were fine with it? Most people aren't going to learn of how invasive they are until the scanners are the only option, they eventually fly and choose to opt out, or hear about it from the smaller percentage that have flown recently AND also opt out.

The enhanced pat downs are put in place, passengers who opt out of the scanners get their first enhanced pat down… they realize how invasive they are… they object. The media picks up on it and other people learn about the procedure and object too. It's that simple. Which leads to my next point…

The pointing by some around here to the lone poll done shortly after passengers started objecting to the new pat down procedure began to make news fails to take into consideration the fact that the new procedure was very new, the percentage of passengers who encounter nude scanners is a smaller percentage, the passengers who opt out of the scanners and therefore would get an enhanced pat down is an even smaller percentage, that people don't fly often, and that there has been a less invasive pat down in the past. The old less invasive pat downs only occurred at random or if you tripped the metal detector. Without the details of a new procedure, the fact the new procedure is mandatory if you skip the nude scanners (which people also object to), and what that procedure is, the mostly non-regularly flying public wouldn't have a reason to object. The old procedure was acceptable to the public, which is most likely what people thought of given the new procedure was not everywhere in the news yet. They wouldn't likely have known.

More know now though.

[SnakeEyes]

61. Correction...

the poll some around here have referenced only deals with the naked scanners. So there is no way to say that the public had no problem with the enhanced pat down procedure. It didn't ask about that. It only asked about full body x-ray scanners.

As for the question they did ask... whether people knew to the extent the naked scanners show when people were asked matters. Again, previous post's points applies here too.

[sabrina 1]

65. Thank you!

Good post, that CBS poll was used so often if you were someone who didn't trust the corporate owned media who participated in the millions of dollars smear campaign against Michael Moore, you might wonder who influenced that poll.

[fascisthunter]

76. you calling us lemmings? I'd say people defending this are the real lemmings here

nice try... did Donald Rumsfeld teach you Orwellian?

[Bluenorthwest]

38. I just read a poll of people who actually fly

and there is a high rate of anger at the new procedures. Anger was the operative word.

[sabrina 1]

40. Yes, I have a friend who is a pilot and he told us last week that

he was ready to quit over this. As it turned out he was not alone, and the TSA has had to back down on forcing pilots to subject themselves to these draconian measures. It took one man to start that ball rolling, I'm hoping the outrage will end this attempt to destroy our rights, completely.

[felix_numinous]

42. It sure feels great to have the whole country unified

behind one issue. Finally, some common ground.

[sabrina 1]

45. Yes, it does. Almost the whole country.

I think this showed the people graphically what they had been so apathetic about in the past. Sometimes people have see something in action. Unlke the Patriot Act which should have received the same kind of outrage, but it was just a lot of text and legalese to many people. This is the Patriot Act in action. Not to mention the fact that people are doing everything they can to record these abuses since the media has not. Good for everyone who is standing up. And unity is a good thing, I agree.

[Liberal_in_LA]

62. kick

[avaistheone1]

63. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Goodbye Rapeandscan machines, and goodbye sleazy genital gropings.

Hopefully someday soon.

[sabrina 1]

64. Well, there have been a few successes this week.

The Pilots, thanks to one pilot's protest, are now exempt from the abuses along with children under 12. We have a long way to go, but that was a good start in response to the outrage imho.

[Turborama]

66. K&R Are any of the media reporting that truly devastating poll yet? n/t

[sabrina 1]

68. Lol, no, I don't think so, Turborama ~ they are still referring to the

CBS poll which was taken before the public had any idea of what these scanners were all about, and the new 'enhanced pat-downs'.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. No they are not

they have been referring to the one after that had it DROP by sixteen points... he even made the connection that this DROP was more than just SIGNIFICANT.

Or did you miss countdown yesterday? Oh I forgot he is NOT media...

[sabrina 1]

81. The post you're responding to was made yesterday.

I do not understand your comment regarding Keith since I consider him to be one of the best journalists on TV at the moment. And yes, I did miss Countdown last night for personal reasons. I don't always get to watch TV.

[RZM]

69. Self delete (dupe)

[WilliamPitt]

77. Um.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144920/Air-Travelers-Sacrificing-Privacy-Security.aspx

[Onlooker]

78. That's a meaningless poll

Only those on the losing side of an issue resort to using online polls as evidence.

[sabrina 1]

84. 75,000 people are a lot of people. As for being on the losing side

the TSA has now backed down twice this week from their Orwellian, totalitarian attempts to take away even more rights than Bush had taken already. This is not what I supported. This is everything we were against under Bush. Did you forget?

Did you support these machines when the left was fighting Bush over them, since 2004? Or were you with the freepers claiming that we who opposed them were aiding and abetting terrorists?

It's hilarious to see the hypocrisy on the left and the amnesia that has set in as to what we USED to oppose when Bush was doing it. I guess you were with Bush then on these tactics. You do know that the left successfully stopped these 'enhanced pat-downs' back in 2004 don't you? Did you support Bush back then on the pat-downs also?

Exactly were does the left stand now? Have they totally abandoned all the things they stood when Bush was president? I am getting whip-lash from trying to keep up with the sudden change in position since Dems won in 2008, but one thing is for sure, I don't recognize this party anymore.

[CreekDog]

80. It's not scientific, but on the other hand --the public doesn't even support the 1st Amendment

as Mr. Gallup found a while back.

:eyes:

[woo me with science]

85. Kick. nt