I am sorry. I can't support any President who requires naked pictures or groping of my genitals to--

[IdaBriggs]

to keep me "safe."

I just can't do it.

Strip searching children, demanding to see breast prosthetics, bursting colostomy bags - it just keeps getting worse every time it comes up.

My family is scheduled to fly from Michigan to Florida in late January. If this isn't resolved by then in a sane, sensible manner, we won't go. I've managed to get through my entire adult life without having "naked pictures" taken, and I intend to do my best to keep that streak (pun intended) alive, and I will not consent to a stranger groping around either my groin or breasts, let alone let them near my 3 year olds.

If Bush was doing this, I'd be in open street revolt. I'm tempted to go the same way with Obama. If he and his people can't keep me "safe" for normal everyday activity - travel - without humiliating me, then I don't want him or his people in office because they are incompetent assholes.

The TSA folks who are being required to do this as part of their job have my sympathy, but at the same time "its just my job" has been used for millenia as an excuse for enabling inappropriate behavior; it doesn't fly (again, pun intended). I suggest they simply *STOP* and see what happens. My guess is nothing, but that comes from some pretty basic common sense.

So, this is my official notice: Obama - the information president who knows how to use GOOGLE - needs to start doing so. I don't know who is telling him this is "necessary" but they need to be fired. This is "the land of the free and the home of the brave" and we'll take a lot of crap to be "supportive" but Naked Pictures and Groin Checks are officially *MY* limit before I start seeing the TSA as terrorists, instead of a reasonable line of defense.

ON EDIT: (Made in a Comment, but really belongs in main post): If TSA has to see me naked or grope my private areas, you know what - I'm not safe. Job Fail, and You're Fired.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[IdaBriggs]

4. Hopefully this little boy, strip searched in an airport:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skkCpnCm7iM

Or this lady, forced to display her prosthetic breast: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40278427/ns/travel-news?ns=travel-news

Or this guy, covered with urine: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40291856/ns/travel-news

A google search turns up dozens of similar stories, including the "don't touch my junk" guy, the 4 year old who was vagina-groped, and the father who flipped his lid when a TSA agent announced to the naked guy observer he was sending a "hottie" (the man's 18 year old daughter) into the scanner.

We haven't even gotten on a plane yet, and I'm already Not Happy. I can definitely empathize with the people being abused, and since I can very easily put myself in their place mentally, it makes it pretty damn easy to see that this is NOT right.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[onenote]

3. are you okay with a president who supports going through your luggage

and looking at your underwear and everything else you packed?

[IdaBriggs]

7. Honestly, inconvenient, but tolerable, especially if the same

level of scrutiny is being applied to the tens of thousands of cargo containers being shipped into this country. I think its annoying, and a waste of time, but I've been sucking *that* up for years. Don't even get me started on having to take off my shoes, because I really thought that was one of the dumbest things I'd ever heard in my life - and now this???

If TSA has to see me naked or grope my private areas, you know what - I'm not safe. Job Fail, and You're Fired.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[Teaser]

11. lol

Your post is funny.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

31. NOT tolerable.

ever read the constitution? There's this part, towards the back, in fact, it is one of the final paragraphs, numbered for easy reference. Let me pull it up for you:

"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."

Tis # 4 as amendments go. Between it and the 21st, those a my two favorites.

[truedelphi]

98. + 1. n/t

[golfguru]

205. If Bush had ordered the groping

I would be mad as hell. With Obama, I am more understanding.

[MrsCorleone]

219. You do realize that this whole RW media blitz was to begin privatization of the TSA, right?

I mean, how much taxpayer money is up for grabs for private secuity firms? Around 7 billion?

Republican John Mica, the future new head of the transportation committee, is encouraging airports across the country to drop TSA in favor of their private security firms.

Thanks DU for falling yet again for tactics to encourage privatization. Great job! Whoooooooo hoooooooo! Let the republican looting begin! :sarcasm:

[PADemD]

5. I'm with you, Ida.

I e-mailed the White House about this yesterday. I don't know if my e-mail will ever be read, but I tried.

[jonnyblitz]

6. K & R. nt

[Vinca]

9. There needs to be mass protests by brave people.

Get to the point of the search and strip. Down to skin. Buck nekked.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeyondGeography]

12. The President needs to do something to calm you down

Doesn't matter if you're overreacting or not, the reality is this issue is a political disaster that he needs to get control of.

If Obama hasn't done anything more than politely question the TSA by Tuesday or Wednesday, the entire White House team should don political dunce caps for Thanksgiving.

[IdaBriggs]

13. Agreed. I'm a supporter. I can't support THIS. If I'm this upset,

how are non-supporters feeling? We send a lot of people through the airports, which means *A LOT* of motivated ANTI-Voters.

Someone smart is going to think to put a collection jar at the end of these lines, with the sole purpose of getting the boss of the people doing the groping fired. What do you want to bet the jars would fill up fast?

[jefferson_dem]

16. He struck the right rhetorical balance in his statement, and suggests serious policy evaluation.

"You have to constantly refine and measure whether what we're doing is the only way to assure the American people's safety. And you also have to think through, are there ways of doing it that are less intrusive...I'm constantly asking them whether is what we're doing absolutely necessary, have we thought it through, are there other ways of accomplishing it that meet the same objectives."

[BeyondGeography]

20. This is a quasi-sex scandal that is taking on a life of its own

Check out the cartoons:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/11/21/921946/-XXX-Body-Heat-XXXThe-TSA-in-Editorial-Cartoons-(Poll)

Not to mention the flood of posts and threads here and on every liberal forum in the blogosphere.

We should be talking about boxing the Republicans in on START and the tax cuts, but this is overtaking everything.

Course correction needed. Soon.

[Smarmie Doofus]

17. The correct answer is here.

I had to come all the way back home to find it.

[dennis4868]

25. Huh?

I saw a poll that said that 80% of the people are fine with the TSA procedures. What exactly does Obama have to get control of?

[boston bean]

26. Once the see the little 5 or 6 year old boy having to take off his shirt and the TSA

agent patting him on the head for being such a good boy and his father standing there with no recourse, you will see that number drop to 1%.

[dennis4868]

40. I just flew the other day from DC to Miami....

And my 5 and 6 year old were treated fine....They did not have to take off their shirts....I think everyone is looking for a new reason to slam Obama and they have created a narrative about TSA procedures.....everyone needs to cal
down a bit.

[boston bean]

45. You chalk this up to obama hating. How the hell long have you been on DU?

you certainly ascribe motives that do not exist.

for what?

Do you own stock in the back scatting companies?

[dennis4868]

51. I began on DU right after the 2000 election fraud....

Which is probably when DU first started.

[boston bean]

53. Then you above anyone should realize how wrong it would be to chalk this up to Obama hating. nt

[CreekDog]

58. Is this fine?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/the-problem-with-prosthetics-and-airport-security

[treestar]

85. this is true

and calling it sexual assault is an obvious attempt by these people to make the worst of it.

It's deliberate.

[Whisp]

239. smells like 475 rats -all this stupidity

of sexual assault and child molestation on a massive scale.

if it's on the media, you bet it's full of shit propaganda (when a Repug isn't in charge, that is).

how weak minded some are here, just unfuckingbelievable.

[SoCalDemGrrl]

217. You are being too kind to Obama. At this point we've jumped the shark

it's out of control.... so what's next?? An attempted bomber puts explosives in his anus and it is discovered in time to prevent an explosion in an airliner then we all have to have anal cavity searches before boarding????

Or next the terrorists insert an explosive device through their big toes that cannot be detected through any known
scan or pat down and some of us require toe amputations??

There is no end to this....

My family had planned a vacation from Los Angeles to Florida then New York over the Xmas holidays... we just cancelled....

I refuse submit..........

Obama are you listening ???....... Oh yeah I thought not - you have not listened to us much since that day of Hope and "Change" in November 2008..... no one does anymore.......

[COLGATE4]

229. According to MSNBC, the child's father is the one who took off the

boy's shirt, apparently in an effort to speed up the process.

[laughingliberal]

99. I'm thinking that number will tank as more people fly and more people hear what is being done.

I have to think the number is going down as more is learned about how intrusive this is.

[Lorien]

170. Post a link to that poll. Every poll I've seen shows that 90% are AGAINST the new TSA

scans and gropes.

[Caretha]

189. Link please or

or it didn't happen

[Larry Ogg]

46. The President is going to find himself in a Pandora's Box. Maybe...

When someone gets badly hurt or killed as a consequence of a good husband or father instinctively tripping off line and going psychotic in order to protect his wife, children and bank account from government psychopaths... People will be... I guess you'll have to use your imagination on that one...

But I can imagine that those in-charge of the psychological warfare department - against the American public - predict that we will except the new levels of oppression with not to much violent resistance. The sheep will cower against their own best interest, most will except it with nary a whimper, and a few liberals will throw themselves into the mouth of lions. And then what, 2012 is a long ways away...

[jefferson_dem]

49. What if...

We change the policy and some asshole terrorist exploits the "vulnerability" and pulls some devastating attack? What then?

[atreides1]

57. Then we suck it up

Like we always have. Because that's what we Americans are famous for, always coming back in the face of adversity.

After all isn't this "....the land of the free and the home of the brave."


And just a reminder, all of their reasons for this little grope fest that you and others don't seem to have a problem with, were external. The Shoe Bomber, the Mixing explosives in the plane bathroom bombers, the Underwear bomber, and those FEDEX packages all came from outside of the US.

So, searching children at Ronald Reagan isn't going to have a whole lot of effect on what comes in from Yemen.

Because while the TSA is groping people at airports, that shipping container from the UK containing a possible dirty bomb will still get through.

[CreekDog]

59. if we reverse the policy of xraying the disabled?

almost no nation does.

Canada doesn't.

you are useful to them but you aren't convincing anybody.

[14thColony]

78. We dust ourselves off and move on, that's what

We don't cower and wet ourselves like a bunch of spineless fear-junkies. There will always be vulnerabilities, threats and dangers. We live with far more threat of harm and mayhem on the highways from drunks and morons, who kill more Americans in a month than terrorist-bogeymen do in a year, but nobody seems to give much of a shit about that.

So the answer is we accept that life isn't ever going to be threat-free and we live with it, just like we live with hurricanes and tornadoes and earthquakes and drunk drivers and a hundred other things that are far more realistic threats to us, but that we don't panic and cower over like a fear-conditioned version of Pavlov's dog.

You feel free to hide under your bed. I prefer to live life.

[jefferson_dem]

91. Not really my point but that's ok.

For the record, one of my favorite songs of all time is this one - http://www.mojvideo.com/video-bob-dylan-let-me-die-in-my-footsteps/20919031c8f4ea0c1dbd

[14thColony]

92. Curses!

How dare you reply in a non-combative and disarming manner such as that? And to include a link to one of my favorite artists' songs! Diabolical. :-)

[Larry Ogg]

83. Who or what created the terrorist that we now have to so diligently guard against?

Take a look at our pernicious foreign policy and the malevolent corporate elitist, predators and politicians that personally benefit from spreading mayhem and American grown terrorism.

Take a look at the consequences of overthrowing democratically elected governments, propping up and supporting tyrannical puppet dictators and predators in countries that don't have nuclear weapons and are unable to protect themselves from American tyranny. Take a look at how many innocent men woman and children have been brutally murdered as a direct and indirect consequence of our ‘looting and plundering’ foreign policy, aka free trade…

If you want to stop the terrorist then stop being a terrorist or terrorist supporter yourself. And stop thinking that the world is going to be a better place by a government sanctioned Paraphilia, and that's what taking nude pitchers and molesting we the citizens is all about, how far can you sick fuckers go...

[14thColony]

87. Well this strikes straight at the heart of the matter, doesn't it?

I just want to register my appreciation for your no-nonsense post before the flamethrowers reduce you to a charred husk for daring to point out the elephant in the room of terrorism.

[Larry Ogg]

95. It seems short memories create a lot of fuel for the sake of misguided argument...

and pointing out a bigger pitcher than that offered by the last fallen domino can take the fuel away and engender honest people to become more informed.

Except for the right wing conservative extremist republicans who defy logic, they somehow manage to find all the fuel they need in a place where the sun don't shine. But (no pun intended) the TSA seems bent on changing all of that.

[liquid diamond]

97. It's a no win situation for Obama. If he has the

TSA back off and it results in a terrorist attack, the right will pounce and say he failed to keep America safe. That will have catastrophic political consequences. We know how well fear works to control the American public. On the other hand, if Obama raises security measures, the left starts bitching about their civil liberties being violated. The guy is fucked either way. I don't get why anyone would want to be president.

[awoke_in_2003]

175. It is a lucky thing...

that people like Jefferson were not as scared as you.

[tblue37]

15. Someone needs to keep us "safe" from sexual assault and violations of privacy. nt

[lillypaddle]

18. I think you are grossly overreacting.

Just mho.

[Mnemosyne]

22. Ever been sexually molested? Ever been raped? Ever heard of flashbacks? Fuck them and anyone

that believes it is "over-reacting". :puke:

[jefferson_dem]

23. Here we go...

with the "you're insensitive to rape victims if you're not outraged" charge. Please...

[boston bean]

27. As a parent, if anyone, anyone strip searched my kid, you would have to arrest me and send me off to

Gitmo.

[jefferson_dem]

34. Fine.

Go for it.

But the truth is this: Everyone is not equally concerned about this policy. That some are are not outraged does not mean that they are not sympathetic to survivors of rape. For goodness sake...do we really need to point that out.

[Go2Peace]

214. I don't agree with the policy and I am with folks on rethinking our approaches.. but the sex paranoi

-a that we are in the midst of is far more damaging.

Really, I am not in any way for this approach, but as long as there was no actual lecherous activity going on the only permanent damage to a child will be the freaking parent who plants such terrible fear and anguish about it in their mind that they have to go to a psychologist to learn that nothing really happened that they should fear in later life.

[CreekDog]

60. this is what you get for saying people's concerns were a perverted fascination...

you deserve all the flaming you are getting

because that was LOW.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mnemosyne]

138. I am referring to the residual effects of rape and these intrusions on the psyche. n/t

[sudopod]

246. What the fuck is wrong with you, jefferson_dem?

I'm sure Thomas by-god Jefferson would love this travesty to death. No doubt he would be first in line behind his daughter to...thank the man that looked at his daughter naked by way of the power of the state.

Or are such quaint notions out-of-date?

[catgirl]

35. You're comparing this to RAPE?

That's disgusting.

[KoKo]

54. When they pull your tampon out, because it might be concealing bomb makings

you might think differently.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mnemosyne]

140. I am referring to the residual effects of rape and the effect of these intrusions on the psyche. n/t

[Odin2005]

114. +1,000,000,000,000,000,000

:applause:

[Mnemosyne]

145. Apparently, I am disgusting for suggesting that the residual psychological effects of rape and

molestation will affect some in very traumatic ways. To be fair, I didn't word it that way, but I never dreamed fascism would be so defended here by those with the inability to understand context.

I will finally have the money to fly next year and won't now due to these fascist practices. :nuke:


:hi:

[Odin2005]

151. I have a friend who is a rape survivor, so this shit REALLY pisses me off.

:grr:

[Mnemosyne]

182. I survived, as did many women I know, and none of us will be flying.

This place is so much colder and crueler than it used to be. :cry:

[Pirate Smile]

154. It is insulting to actual rape victims to call this "rape". It is belittling the word and what it

represents to use it this way.

[Lorien]

171. They DID NOT call it rape; they said that it would cause flashbacks and trauma

and it WOULD. It's insulting to the rest of us that you pro-Obama folks will defend EVERY LAST ANTI PROGRESSIVE STANCE of his, no matter how vile you would call it if Bush had done the same thing. The hypocrisy here is disgusting.

[TriMera]

173. +1,000,000 n/t

[Mnemosyne]

183. Thank you, Lorien.

:cry::hug:

[sudopod]

247. I'm sorry you're having to defend the obvious, M.

Can anyone and their right mind explain to the rest of us just what the fuck is going on here? Are so many of our people so damn attached to a party affiliation that they will blandly accept anything as long as it can be counted as a "win"? Is their empathy to victims of abuse so dulled, and their memory of history so dim, that they can sweep your misgivings away so easily? Because OH GOD TERRORISM!!!11

"Here you go with the "you're insensitive to rape victims if you're not outraged" charge. Please..

It just makes me want to punch someone right square in the nads.

Even if we didn't have a goddamn Bill of Rights, your line of reasoning should have kept us from submitting to such idiocy.

[Mnemosyne]

181. I was NOT calling it rape. I was referring to the long lasting psych effects that will

be set off from such groping. I cannot tolerate being touched.

And I am a rape and a molestation/incest survivor, so don't fucking tell me about insults to survivors.

[Odin2005]

204. Reading comprehension fail.

The poster said it would cause flashbacks.

[woo me with science]

192. It is wrong even if you aren't a rape survivor.

It is an invasion of liberty, privacy, and dignity.

It is unconscionable for our own government to have its hands in our pants.

[Mnemosyne]

210. Hear, hear! Thank you, wmws. n/t

[stray cat]

19. I did not vote for Gore either

[Sky Masterson]

21. Depends on who and how hot the President is

:hide:

[laughingliberal]

104. Indeed. nt

[dennis4868]

24. Okay...

Then support the repub party by not voting in 2012 or voting repub in 2012...that will change the TSA procedures!

[TheKentuckian]

39. Lame and simpleminded cop out there.

and a mentality that absolutely precludes any accountability to nation.

We cannot have more than the mere trappings of a democracy (or a republic, if you insist on the distinction) with the attitude you and others have.

[IdaBriggs]

76. I plan to do neither. I will, however, find another candidate and

work to support them instead. I don't even want to go there, frankly. But I'll join a "Draft Howard Dean" campaign if one starts up - altho my preference would be that this administration start LISTENING to the people who elected them.

[Whisp]

242. will Dean drop all searching at airports? maybe you should ask him

before you go campaigning for him on this.

There is no president that will disallow security checks at airports. If you think otherwise, well I just don't know what to say to you.

[catgirl]

28. Would you rather blow up?

"Incompetent assholes" would ignore that threat. Thank goodness they are not. You mention no solution here to the
problem of terrorist attacks on airplanes. All you're doing is taking this opportunity to diss President Obama.

How 'bout this for a solution? Children and persons with prostetics, and anyone who prefers being checked in private
go to a special room for that purpose. I'm sure they are already working on a resolution.

I'd recommend you avoid flying and going to the doctor's office. Or perhaps you've never flown before? I've been patted
down many times by female airport security. No big deal. At least I'm still in one piece.

I find it offensive that you are so quick to bash Obama.

[dennis4868]

43. DU is not the same anymore....

It's bash Obama 24/7 here....I have flown 3 times in the past week with kids and we have not been groped...we went through a metal detector with our shoes offf and we moved onto our gate for the flight....WTF is happening to DU....it used to be a site about the facts, not myths or a few instances of airport security going bad....

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liquid diamond]

102. Obama gets more love at free republic than this place.

And I agree. This board has gone to shit. Who would have thought it would be over having a democratic president.

[Pirate Smile]

153. They changed the rules. People who don't like the 24/7 Obama bashathon are leaving and the bashers

are taking over - along with the libertarians.

No, it's not the same DU anymore.

It is a good place to check out what the daily hysteria is about though.

[woo me with science]

211. A few instances?

This is POLICY.

[CreekDog]

61. if the White House thought Obama's political future was in danger over this --things might change

that's PRECISELY why people make an issue of it. it's effective.

[IdaBriggs]

68. I guess I missed the five million planes all blown up by groin bombs

in the last couple of years. Oops! There weren't any!

There was ONE attempt *that didn't work* and now everyone's genitals have to be fondled? When I say the people in charge need to "get a grip" I mean on REALITY not my husband's testicles!

[fifthoffive]

152. Thank You!

These new TSA procedures are completely unnecessary.

[Odin2005]

115. GIVE ME LIBERTY, OR GIVE ME DEATH!

[krabigirl]

165. You sound exactly like the Bush apologizers did several years ago.

[Mnemosyne]

184. I find your cowardice disgusting. And if you were an actual survivor of a rape/molestation,

which you apparently aren't based on your cold insensitivity, you would understand what I said.

[Whisp]

243. you call this rape and molestation?

are you fucking serious?

yeh, guess you are.

how shameful.
jeebus this place has gone fucking nutz

[ima_sinnic]

202. ooooh, i'm so afwaid!

where's a bed I can hide under??? :scared:

oh, please, TSA workers, grope me so I feel "safe"!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:



unbelievable.

[sudopod]

248. OH GOD, NOT TERRORISTS!1111

What are my chances of dying in a terrorist attack? 1 in a 100 million?

Maybe we should ban umbrellas during thunder storms while we're at it.

Or maybe we could all get a clue and see that whatever the reasons are for this security theater, protecting us isn't one of them.

I'll take a higher damn risk of dying a plane crash if I get to live like a free man, because that's what America is, or is supposed to be. That basic truth should over-rule any party loyalty or incremental increase in security (as if this bullshit actually helps).

[ProSense]

29. This is a great opportunity to start a bunch of threads implying that the President is a pervert

Let me add his words to support this opportunistic claim:

With respect to the TSA, let me, first of all, make a confession. I don't go through security checks to get on planes these days, so I haven’t personally experienced some of the procedures that have been put in place by TSA. I will also say that in the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing, our TSA personnel are, properly, under enormous pressure to make sure that you don't have somebody slipping on a plane with some sort of explosive device on their persons. And since the explosive device that was on Mr. Abdulmutallab was not detected by ordinary metal detectors, it has meant that TSA has had to try to adapt to make sure that passengers on planes are safe.

Now, that's a tough situation. One of the most frustrating aspects of this fight against terrorism is that it has created a whole security apparatus around us that causes huge inconvenience for all of us. And I understand people’s frustrations. And what I’ve said to the TSA is that you have to constantly refine and measure whether what we’re doing is the only way to assure the American people’s safety. And you also have to think through are there ways of doing it that are less intrusive.

But at this point, TSA, in consultation with our counterterrorism experts, have indicated to me that the procedures that they’ve been putting in place are the only ones right now that they consider to be effective against the kind of threat that we saw in the Christmas Day bombing.

But I’m going to -- every week I meet with my counterterrorism team and I’m constantly asking them whether -- is what we’re doing absolutely necessary? Have we thought it through? Are there other ways of accomplishing it that meet the same objectives?

link

If he doesn't accuse every TSA agent of being a child molester/pervert and unilaterally abolish the TSA then he is a pervert. This country has lost its collective mind.

[Major Hogwash]

36. No, just this forum.

They ought to make it against the rulez to start threads saying stuff like this.
The 2012 campaign has already began.

[cornermouse]

37. Be reasonable.

No one thinks he's a pervert. They are extremely unhappy with his stance on this issue and to be honest, I find it odd that he would support what is an extremely intrusive, maybe even abusive, policy.

I won't add the words "constitutional scholar" but I'm definitely thinking them.

[ProSense]

48. You think hyperbole is being reasonable? n/t

[CreekDog]

62. you started the "pervert" accusations --towards other DUers

please don't be offended by your own tactic.

[boston bean]

69. Really? People who don't want to be groped were sexual perverts?

WOW!

:crazy:

[CreekDog]

70. not quite that bad...just saying that people who were complaining were fascinated

rather than concerned, like a perverted fascination.

[CreekDog]

125. actually that was another poster, i got hem mixed up

same message overall, but different posters.

sorry.

[de novo]

75. I don't think he's a pervert at all. I think he is tone-deaf to this.

I also think he has consistently reinforced the war on terror and fear-mongering that got so old under bush.

[bahrbearian]

82. "Christmas Day Bombing", What Bombing?

Why didn't he just say "911, 911, 911, 911" it seems to work on Sheeple.

[Go2Peace]

216. This is what "conservative values" lead to....

Our country is as confused as it has ever been with any issues related to sexuality. The media has people so spun up envisioning perverts around every corner the reaction is automatic. I agree with you on this one, which I know is unusual for either of us.

Just goes to show how powerful framing is. And why we need to counter it with a full frontal assault and replace the regressive ideas with modern ones.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[ChairmanAgnostic]

32. when he earns it again, he will get it.

[ProSense]

33. Keep it.

People who resort to this shit will never respect the President.

[catgirl]

38. Unbelievable huh?

Any chance to attack Obama with skewed "points of view".

[jefferson_dem]

41. Dirty secret...that's becoming more transparently obvious.

Some (i'm not accusing anyone in particular) are simply trying to employ this issue to bludgeon President Obama.

[catgirl]

44. Yup, election 2012 is on n/t

[Whisp]

241. how big of you

and generous, I am sure.

[pecwae]

42. I'm with you.

[Generic Brad]

47. I wanted to hear that he was outraged over this

Instead, he just says that he "gets it". He "get's" that we are all angry.

But if he truly "gets it", he would demand an immediate change in policy. Claiming to "get it" without taking action is nothing more than lip service, in my opinion. Perhaps he needs to be imaged and groped by the TSA every time he needs to board Air Force One. Seems to me that would be the only way he would truly "get it".

[ima_sinnic]

209. I keep wondering how he'd feel about

his daughters getting groped by TSA wokers.
Since he "gets it," I guess he doesn't have any problem with that.

[Whisp]

244. how would you change the policy?

what would you do to ensure security if you took away the patdowns and the screening and all that is objectiional to you?

what is your solution instead of suggesting that The President of the United States of America, his wife and his two young daughters get 'molested' at an airport to satisfy something for you?

Do you think he is really guilty of all this 'birther' shit, do you think he is actually not who he says he is? How many past presidents and their families have ever had to go through regular security at airports?

Ridiculous request. beyond ridiculous.
But having the image of Obama and his family 'molested' might satisfy a lot here, so job well done.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

50. Get ready. They're going to start calling the president a pervert right about....

NOW!!

Stay tuned.

I think it's a very bad move on his part. VERY bad!! :(

[OHdem10]

52. Fox has been just as successful with this as they were in developing

the Tea Party. Even DUers joining the fox anarchists.

[Pisces]

55. Maybe you just can't support this President. It's ok on this forum to declare yourself.

[ClarkUSA]

66. Only until the 2012 re-election season starts. Then such anti-Obama sentiments are unwelcome at DU.

DU Rules: "Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hydra]

122. We'll still be allowed to criticize when he does something this bad

If not, I'll be popping the popcorn and practicing my salutes to the corpratocracy while I pretend my vote means something.

[SwampG8r]

177. like kendrick meek?

[superduperfarleft]

71. "I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just

support that."

[Sky Masterson]

63. He hee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wvsYCaAEds
Glee-Touch a Touch a Touch a Touch Me

[Name removed]

65. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RetroLounge]

72. Yup, I'm with you.

and not the appeasers in this thread.

RL

[Milo_Bloom]

73. Don't fly.

[IdaBriggs]

185. I believe I mentioned that would be the option if this isn't resolved

before our flights are scheduled. Our tickets are already purchased for Florida in late January (to visit family who winter there), so I am hoping for the sake of not wasting money that the situation is addressed such that I can get on a plane with reasonable security, instead of this crazy stuff. :)

[mtnsnake]

74. If some stranger is going to grope my genitals in the airport

Then she better not be ugly! :evilgrin:

[otohara]

77. Men and Their JUNK -

go revolt, go rogue, don't vote for POTUS, the screenings will go on.

It was announced last week, children under 12 won't be searched. You should edit that part of your whine!

Isn't there a difference between being groped and being patted down?

I've been groped by men many times during my life (unwanted), I've been patted down at the airport due to my brace, there is a difference.

[Bluenorthwest]

230. Wrong, they have to search kids or not search anybody

And they most certainly do screen children. Deal with it. If they don't, then why screen anyone? This is a world filled with child soldiers so youth is not a free pass.

[HipChick]

79. I'm sure President Palin will keep us safe

:sarcasm:


She introduce Racial Profiling quicker than she can wink

[NorthCarolina]

80. Well, exactly how much freedom are you willing to sacrifice to stay "safe"?

For me, I think America has sacrificed far too much freedom in the name of "terrorism". I would say, pull all troops out of the middle east, mind our own business, and I'll take my chances with the underpants bombers.

[ibegurpard]

81. +1

[Milo_Bloom]

100. You aren't being asked to sacrifice ANY freedom at all.

You are FREE to not fly.

[Michigan-Arizona]

105. +10000 n/t

[rbilancia]

84. Hyperbole city. Once again, people are over-reacting. A few annecdotes don't account for the entire

program, and let's at least allow them to evaluate and re-calibrate their procedures if there is in fact a real problem. 80% of Americans polled support the program.

[CreekDog]

88. 75% of amputees calling it "unpleasant" is hyperbole?

"Swabs are taken immediately in and around all prosthetics to detect for bomb-making material... The next step is to go under the CastScope...you go under the machine, prosthetic limbs still on. They take X-ray images on the front, back and sides—about 10 X-rays per below-the-knee prosthetic, more if your prosthesis has a mechanical knee. After these X-rays pass inspection, you're free to fly."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/the-problem-with-prosthetics-and-airport-security

maybe you are purposely ignorant.

[catgirl]

86. BTW, my husband is traveling right now

He flew to D.C. and beyond in two days. We've spoken a few times and neither of us brought up the subject
of airport security. Must not be too bad. He is european- perhaps they aren't as prudish as americans. I for
one could care less if a woman, doing her job, touches my breasts for two seconds. Whoopee. It's not a sexual
thing and it's not a big deal.

If this continues to rear its head on DU, then I'll know it's just a fake anger thing. We'll see.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[superduperfarleft]

93. Did he remember to take out his tampon? n/t

[Name removed]

96. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Misskittycat]

121. Ok. Now I'm angry. It is not a" fake anger" thing if someone disagrees with you on this point.

[catgirl]

130. Um, got the wrong gist?

Creekdog is putting words in my mouth because he didn't like that I shared my personal experience. I never
accused Creekdog of "fake anger". He's just harassing me. You shouldn't jump on people blindly like this.

[Misskittycat]

135. You're the one who suggested a different view might be "fake anger."

From your post: "If this continues to rear its head on DU, then I'll know it's just a fake anger thing. We'll see."

[catgirl]

143. Whatever

Be angry. Thousands of people have traveled this weekend. Let's see what they have to say.
I don't believe MSM covers things in a responsible way. It's usually slanted. I'll wait for more
reports from travelers. Just my opinion. Fair enough?

And there are some people here who are "angry" (not referring to you) at Obama about everything.

[Misskittycat]

148. Fair enough. And it pains me to disagree with Obama on this, but there it is. n/t

[ClassWarrior]

191. "And there are some people here who are 'angry' at Obama about everything." Yeah. They're called...

...trolls. Welcome to DU. Learn to ignore them and don't broad brush the real DUers based on your anger at them.

NGU.

[krabigirl]

166. LMAO, my French husband is as pissed off as I am, this has nothing to do with "prudishness."

Is this DU?!?!

[golfguru]

90. K&R

[kentuck]

94. perhaps the President needs to be reminded that he does not take an oath..

to keep us "safe"?

He takes an oath to protect the Constitution of the United States.

[truedelphi]

101. Plus my household. And the more he and Napolitano support

counter productive but lucrative screening appliances, and counter productive gropings, the less safe we all are.

[laughingliberal]

106. Right on! nt

[Lorien]

172. If keeping us safe were his priority then he would have promoted Universal health care. nt

[BlueIris]

103. Job Fail, indeed. Epic Fail. Huge.

And so very, very unnecessary.

[krawhitham]

107. WTF is wrong with people, SUCK IT UP

We started wars, killed innocent civilians all in the name of keeping us "safe" and this is where we draw the line? Are you fucking kidding me. Suck it up

[ClarkUSA]

109. Then what is your suggestion as to how someone like the Christmas bomber be stopped?

Personally, I could care less if I'm frisked.

However, I do care if my plane is blown up in mid-air by someone with a bomb in his underwear or her bra.

There are seldom pleasant solutions in cases of national security.

Do you prefer racial profiling? That's the only other option -- no doubt the practice would draw as many if not more howls of outrage -- unless you have a better idea.

[superduperfarleft]

110. Um, the "christmas bomber" WAS stopped.

And that was BEFORE these things were in place.

But I guess it would be terrible to show that Obama was right in the form of a mushroom cloud over Los Angeles. Or something. I don't know, what does Britney Spears think?

[ClarkUSA]

111. Only through his own incompetence & intervention by others. Do you think this will always happen?

I said "like" which meant someone who uses a similar method to escape detection by former means of security scanning, not the Christmas bomber himself.

Why do you think there was a change in TSA rules?

[superduperfarleft]

112. Do you think these new procedures are actually going to prevent something like that?

When was the last time TSA pulled a terrorist out of line?

[ClarkUSA]

116. Yes. Coupled with other travel restrictions, nothing similar would be tried now.

<< When was the last time TSA pulled a terrorist out of line? >>

So? What's your point? It's obvious terrorists are not going to try to secret explosives in the genital regions now.

[superduperfarleft]

119. So what about if they try stuffing bombs in body cavities?

Will you then support the TSA giving rectal exams to each passenger? At what point will you decide that it is getting too invasive?

"So? What's your point?"

My point is that the most recent attempted attacks have been stopped by using intelligence services and law enforcements mechanisms that were already in place, NOT by giving individual TSA rent-a-cops more leeway to violate passengers. Israel (and for the record, I'm not a huge supporter of replicating Israel's security apparatus in the US) doesn't do this sort of thing, and they haven't had an attack involving a plane in decades, and they deal with far more attempts than the US ever will.

This is security theater, nothing more. It won't make anyone safer, and if anything, it does nothing but give the right more ammo against Obama's administration (especially the awful quotes coming out of Napolitano's office). As I said upthread, it's a tone-deaf and ultimately destructive policy (for both the preservation of our rights and for Obama's political career). You'd think someone who counts themselves as an unwavering supporter of Obama would understand that.

[ClarkUSA]

123. Terrorists aren't going to try. Smugglers try to do that already & they fail due to full body scans.

[superduperfarleft]

124. So this is doing nothing but keeping us safe from people smuggling balloons of heroin in their

asses?

Geez, totally worth it in my opinion. :eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

127. Is that what you think? I disagree but you're entitled to your opinion.

Let's just say I doubt Al-Awlaki will be training anymore underwear bombers to blow up US airliners in midflight.

[unapatriciated]

168. how would the scanners detect drugs in body cavities

since they do not penetrate the skin, unless tsa is lying to us about this.:shrug:


http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/fda-sidesteps-safety-concerns-over-tsa-body-scanners.ars

Unlike a medical X-ray, the TSA X-ray machines are a sci-fi fan's dream: they are lower-energy beams that can only penetrate clothing and the topmost layers of skin. This provides TSA agents with a view that would expose any explosives concealed by clothing. But according to the UCSF professors, the low-energy rays do a "Compton scatter" off tissue layers just under the skin, rather than the bone, possibly exposing some vital areas and leaving the tissues at risk of mutation.

[golfguru]

206. The mushroom cloud over LA will come thru Mexican border

Even a crude nuclear device is too heavy to be flown via
commercial airliner.

[golfguru]

207. !

[Odin2005]

113. The defending of this fascist crap is DISGUSTING.

[ClarkUSA]

117. Are you calling Pres. Obama and SoS Clinton fascists? Because they are on the same page re: this.

[Odin2005]

118. Fascism: Corporatist Police State

[ClarkUSA]

126. Catchy buzz phrases are not an answer to my question. So what is your answer?

[ima_sinnic]

208. draw your own conclusions

it's really not that hard--in fact, it's quite fucking OBVIOUS.

what is this, flypaper or something?
did you "trap" me? sheesh.

[superduperfarleft]

120. Again with the Clinton red herring.

If they're on the same page, all that means is that they're BOTH wrong.

[ClarkUSA]

128. Red herring? It happens to be a fact. And I wasn't asking you.

<< If they're on the same page, all that means is that they're BOTH wrong. >>

That's your opinion. I disagree. And that's not an answer to my question to Odin2005, is it?

[superduperfarleft]

129. Again, I'm not disputing that she said it. I'm wondering why you think it's relevant.

Something you refuse to answer.

[ClarkUSA]

131. Why do you think it's not relevant, given both have given similar statements about this issue?

Is it verboten for me to mention Hillary's name? Why is it any of your business what I say? :eyes:

BTW, I would think that VP Biden also supports this policy.

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

133. Yes, they're all wrong and you're right. Let's let underwear bombers travel with impunity.

:sarcasm:

It's easy to be Outraged yet I note that none of those who are complaining on this thread are offering any viable alternatives to the present policy.

[superduperfarleft]

134. Hey, now it's a strawman!

Where did I say underwear bombers should travel with impunity? Link, please?

[ClarkUSA]

137. No, it's sarcasm. Note my use of the icon. But that is what would happen if this policy was ended.

I also note that you and others complaining about this policy have yet to offer any viable alternatives.

[superduperfarleft]

142. Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.

And don't forget to pay your taxes for the Bear Patrol.

[dbmk]

190. There are viable alternatives

Though I am inclined to agree that this situation is being painted with hysterical colours, I am also in agreement with those that think that this has gone too far/is the wrong way to go about it.

Getting explosives through security, from a technical perspective, is not a huge problem. All internal tests in the airports show that they catch a a _very_ low percentage (<15% if I remember correctly). And thats in the carry on luggage - not on your person.

The real security is in finding the person - not what he is carrying. So while a lot of time, training and investment is made in implementing the current systems - they might actually be lessening the training in what really works: Recognising the guy with the explosives, not the finding the explosives.
You could argue that the extra precautions puts additional pressure on such persons. But a full body scan will probably do little to a person who has just seen his bag with explosives pass through undeteced.

Hell, I have twice had rather large kitchen knives pass through undetected - not realising they were in my carry on before I unpacked. Had I known and tried knowingly - my demeanor would have changed. But not because of a full body scan or pat down.

Food for thought:
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother

So, yes. I think there are viable alternatives that are way less intrusive.

[catgirl]

146. I applaud you for attempting to reason

I gave up on this thread. I didn't realize it was so aggressive on weekends. Added a couple Ignores today.
My short list was old and needed updating, I guess. ;-)

[superduperfarleft]

149. You think posting a ridiculous strawman is "reason?"

I can't even get this poster to answer a simple question. Doesn't seem very "reasonable" to me.

[donco6]

223. Yeah, what is with that anyway?

It's all about Clinton with ClarkUSA. ??

[Little Star]

136. I hear you Ida!!!

[AsahinaKimi]

139. This is not the Change I voted for.

eom.

[impik]

141. So don't. The next president will be better

[superduperfarleft]

144. One can only hope. n/t

[Mnemosyne]

147. Land of the groped and the home of the terrified... n/t

[ClarkUSA]

150. Is that the new Faux News motto? nt

[KoKo]

157. No...it's actually the NEW PROGRESSIVE DEM..motto...just because you asked.

:-)

[ClarkUSA]

158. I doubt it. Drudge and the right-wing noise machine is pushing this latest anti-Obama outrage now

His front-page reads: "Hands On Boy" and features other juicy headlines at the moment. He must be delighted that his spin has been brought here.

[KoKo]

159. Glad you checked out what Drudge and RW are Doing. Most of us DU'ers don't follow that news...

In case you were wondering.

Are you suggesting we monitor them so we can react or interact with them? What is it you want folks who know Drudge is a mouthpiece for Freepers and so are most of the Murdoch Owned Rags and their FAUX NEWS.

So...are we supposed to keep an ear up for the lies they report and react ONLY to THEM? :shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

161. "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer." Anything Drudge is pushing is garbage.

[SwampG8r]

179. i have read two of these threads

and you were in both of them talking up the drudge report
no one else mentioned drudge just you
why is drudge going to be a fulcrum of discussion? even drudge can be right
i have a clock that is right twice a day
every day at the exact same time
tsa is an offence to the constitution and needs disbanding

[muffin1]

155. K&R n/t

[ClarkUSA]

156. Breaking News: Due to "pressure from the White House" TSA will revise its policy.

Read more: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x529687

I hope this ends today's Outrage.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

160. When did this policy officially go into effect? I ask because my brother and I traveled

from D.C. to Atlanta with no pat downs and no incidents.

In fact, our TSA experience went well and the people around us going through the process...it went smoothly.

[KoKo]

162. Apparently from what I can find this past week..Holiday Terror Threats from Intelligence

Community...had them ramp it up for TG and XMAS.

Hubby saw the Scanners lined up at Dulles Airport in DC on a Business trip three weeks ago. They were wrapped (as if just delivered)...So..this is new. What we read from TSA site is that by end of 2011 most airports in US will be in compliance because they hope to have a 1,000 scanners by then, but unspecific as to the rest of the airports all over the USA that will have them in Op. This first crop of machines are in effect in 68 Airports for this holiday. It seems it's a TEST CASE for them to see how it goes.

We got this from our local Newspaper in North Carolina.. You can Google TSA probably for the stats that were reported in my newspaper.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

163. GOTCHA. I'm flying out of D.C. again during the holiday season, so I'll report back.

Someone asked a poignant question:

How many of those now against this TSA policy are ALSO against racial profiling. I ask because my brother is black and I'm fearful of the implications of this new law in terms of giving TSA a reason to stop any person of color or ANYONE they don't like.

[IdaBriggs]

169. Apparently started in earnest 3 weeks ago -

and has been getting worse ever since. Some of the bad stuff was going on for a while, but the latest outrages have been getting louder in the last week or so, with the tipping point being "don't touch my junk-man". Glad your experience was good; it appears to be an airport/screener specific issue, with some "normal stuff" - touching of breasts / genitals getting more egregious.

[Inuca]

174. I went through two screenings

exactly 2 weeks ago, and the most egregious thing that happened is that they confiscated my half empty water bottle (I offered to take a sip to prove it's not something that can go "Boom!!" but it obviously did not help). Annoying because I love my liquids but not exactly earth shattering. My point is that I guess (and it obviously cannot be more than a guess) that the more egregious acts are most likely far and in between but they are the ones that we hear about. How many clips on youtube of people passing through airport security without anything "interesting" happening?

[krabigirl]

164. I am with you.

[Vidar]

167. I don't blame you at all. Recommended.

[akbacchus_BC]

176. I am at a loss, Did President Obama personally groped you or

asked the TSA to grope you? If he groped you, I can see your attitude!

[IdaBriggs]

186. No. He is in charge of the people who are implementing this policy.

He released a statement saying he "understood" this was difficult, but his employees were assuring him it was necessary, so he was supporting *THEM* instead of the people who were trying to tell him that it was inappropriate/unacceptable. Truman said it best: "The Buck Stops Here."

Part of why I want the *government* (as opposed to private contractors) in charge of TSA is so that there is some accountability when there is a problem. This is one of those accountability moments. :)

[Mimosa]

178. If President Bush was the CiC now, D.U. would be nearly unanimous in opposition.

Here's an article about how Israel has protected airline passengers.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother

Excerpt:

While North America's airports groan under the weight of another sea-change in security protocols, one word keeps popping out of the mouths of experts: Israelification.

That is, how can we make our airports more like Israel's, which deal with far greater terror threat with far less inconvenience.

"It is mindboggling for us Israelis to look at what happens in North America, because we went through this 50 years ago," said Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy. He's worked with the RCMP, the U.S. Navy Seals and airports around the world.

"Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don't take s--- from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for — not for hours — but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, 'We're not going to do this. You're going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport."

That, in a nutshell is "Israelification" - a system that protects life and limb without annoying you to death.

[IdaBriggs]

187. Nicely Said - THANK YOU! nt

[akbacchus_BC]

180. The President do not go grope people, it is the airlines and those policies

were in before he got elected! However, I agree with you, the airlines idiocy needs to go but the President cannot solve all of bush's stupid policies, one thing at a thing!

Did President Obama tell Delta Airlines to check their own chairs when people who are disabled needed to use them? Ever thing is this President's fault!

[IdaBriggs]

188. He appointed Neapolitan (or whatever her name is).

He's been in office for two years, and I know darn good and well he examined HUNDREDS of policies even *BEFORE* he came into office Because He Told Us So.

This policy has now been in place for THREE WEEKS. Pay attention, please. This isn't a "Bash Obama" issue because of anything *BUT* the SPECIFIC POLICY that *HE* has HIS OWN PEOPLE implementing.

[Pisces]

193. Your true colors are showing. What is going on with this site????

[IdaBriggs]

195. What are you talking about my "true colors"? Is this some Cyndi

Lauper reference that I'm missing? Or a joke because I was typing in a hurry and had a brain blur about Janet Napolitano's name? Don't ask why, but "Neapolitan ice cream" kept going through my head! Lol!

[superduperfarleft]

203. What's going on with this site? People disagreeing with me and everything?

It's disgraceful! People should not be allowed to disagree with each other about anything!

[woo me with science]

213. "True colors"?

Oh for pete's sake.

[DebJ]

198. and he sure knows about it NOW.

[eleny]

194. K&R

This issue has me tearful and I haven't flown since before 9/11/01.

[ima_sinnic]

196. you speak for me!

I wonder how President Obama feels about his daughters being groped in airports by TSA goons?
The First Family could set a good example, if this is not a big deal, by showing us how to endure the groping and probing while maintaining our cool :eyes:

rec & :kick:

[Papagoose]

197. Drive - you're free to crash at my place for the night when you hit Georgia!

But...and I know it's hard to keep it in perspective sometime, don't stop supporting President Obama - things would be MUCH worse under a President McCain or other R. Don't abandon him, but let's hold his feet to the fire and force him to bring about the changes we want.

[nunyabidness]

199. Why do you invent worst-case scenarios to argue weak points?

"Strip searching children, demanding to see breast prosthetics, bursting colostomy bags - it just keeps getting worse every time it comes up." It keeps getting worse in your head. Ask yourself how bad is it when 300 people get shredded at 30,000 feet. Is that better than a bit of discomfort at check in? And I`m not making that up. That has happened. Please tell me when the TSA has bursted a colostomy bag. When?

[ima_sinnic]

200. ooooh, i'm so afwaid!

better to be terrorized by TSA agents and made to feel all humiliated and stuff, then.
or maybe hiding under my bed would be a better "solution"?

If they even pretended to search cargo containers coming into this country, I might think they were serious.
Until then, it's just more dog & pony show to give the illusion of "security."
And apparently, some here are okay with that. Like, what 4th Amendment to the Constitution?

If they told you you could no longer worship at the church of your choice because of "terrorist threats," would you be ok with that?
If they told you you could no longer write letters to the editor criticizing government policies, or arrest you for doing so to "prevent terrorism," would you be okay with that?

where do YOU draw the line on unconstitutional actions and policies?

[woo me with science]

212. +100 nt

[Lydia Leftcoast]

225. The Argentine and Uruguayan dictatorships of the 1970s started by "protecting people from

terrorism."

Pretty soon anyone who expressed any disagreement with the government was a "terrorist."

[IdaBriggs]

201. None of the examples I cited are made up; they are linked in this thread

in some cases multiple times, all from reputable sources. Please review the thread for the specific links. And because these aren't "fantasies" but actual reports, this isn't a "worst case fantasy" but "current day reality" which is why so many of us are up in arms.

ON EDIT: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=528765&mesg_id=528774 Reply #4.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

228. Another docile person willing to give up civil liberties out of fear of

something that has happened only 25 times in the past 70 years.

If you have to be afraid of something about flying, worry about improper maintenance, tired pilots, or unexpected bad weather, all of which have caused far more people to be "shredded at 30,000 feet" in the past 70 years than any terrorist.

If you really want to live your whole life in abject, cowering fear, then worry about driving on the highway. That's much less safe than even the worst airline.

[woo me with science]

215. K&R nt

[SoCalDemGrrl]

218. Yeah I'm with you we just cancelled a Holiday vacation -I wont subject my family

to this crap.

[bertman]

220. To paraphrase a poster on HuffPo, there have been 93 MILLION passenger flights into

and around the U.S. since 9-11 and there have been a GRAND TOTAL OF THREE attempted on-board terrorist attacks--all of which were thwarted. 93 MILLION FLIGHTS. NO SUCCESSFUL ATTACKS. And that's without this body scan/groping policy in place.

Draw your own conclusions.

REC.

[Phx_Dem]

222. You don't know that. You have no idea if they have stopped attempts

in advance because the intelligence community and Homland Security doesn't share that information.

How many attempts did we have before 9/11? Zero. So by your reasoning, Bush was right to do nothing after he got his daily briefing warning.

How many people actually have to go thru the scanner or get a pat down? About 1 percent.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

226. And why would they keep thwarted attempts secret?

Wouldn't it be good PR to announce that an attempt to blow up Flight Whatever had been thwarted? Or that a potential bomber had been stopped at Wherever Airport? They wouldn't even have to be specific if they were so scared of violating "national security" (and "national security" is almost a codeword for "we don't want the public to know how incompetent/stupid/devious/mean/crooked we really are").

[Phx_Dem]

233. You'll have to ask them, but they do. It's well known

that they don't talk about intelligence successes. Probably because it gives away intelligence sources, methods and procedures, which makes it easier for terrorists to avoid them. Intelligence is always hush hush for those reasons.

The Bush Administration used to brag about their intelligence successes, but then he was more interested in getting credit and tooting his own horn than actually protecting the country.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

234. Oh come on, how would a simple

"we stopped a terrorist at Such-and-Such Airport" give away "intelligence sources, methods, and procedures"?

[Bluenorthwest]

231. Underwear bomber was reported by his own father

and nothing was done with that warning either, not a thing. They were warned, and still let him get on a plane to fly to America. No one was fired for that, no one explained it, no one has said they have addressed such huge failure. Nope, instead they claim this is the only way to stop them. They were warned, did nothing, and no one was held accountable for that.

[IdaBriggs]

235. They are predicting 10-20% of all travelers will be asked to go thru. nt

[bertman]

245. Major fail on the logic, Phx_Dem. My post said that there were no successful

on-board terror attacks since 9-11. That is a fact. So, of 93 MILLION flights we know that there were THREE thwarted attacks--and ALL were before the advent of this scanning/patdown procedure.

Apparently there was a functional system in effect for over nine years. If there have been other attackers who were thwarted and who have been kept secret, that bolsters the argument that these additional invasions of privacy are not needed.

Perhaps you should also consider the track record of Israeli airport security which has protected its citizens for over 50 years with NO terror attacks. Their airport security is considered the finest in the world and does NOT involve the invasive and unconstitutional searches that our TSA seems to love so much.

[Phx_Dem]

221. You and Mike Huckabee talking about non-existent nudie pics.

:puke:

Here's a simple solution for you. Don't fly.

[IdaBriggs]

240. For heaven's sake, either get educated about the REAL nudie pics

or go find some other thread to throw up all over.

Do your own google search - here is just *one* that came up: http://xenophilius.wordpress.com/2010/08/06/nude-body-scan-images-recorded-at-airport-leaked/

"In an open government lawsuit against the United States Marshals Service, EPIC has obtained more than one hundred images of undressed individuals entering federal courthouses. The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked. The 100 images are a small sample of more than 35,000 at issue in the EPIC lawsuit. EPIC has pursued a but the DHS refuses to release the images it has obtained. EPIC has also filed suit to stop the deployment of the machines in US airports. For more information, see EPIC Body Scanners and EPIC – EPIC v. DOJ (Marshall Service FOIA). – epic.org

… the U.S. Marshals Service just admitted that it had saved “approximately 35,314 images” from a single Orlando, Florida courthouse, according to CNN. Whoops! This follows the TSA’s original claim that the body scanners could not store or transmit images, but the follow-up from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) revealed that images can be stored when the machines are running in “test mode.” And now EPIC has just filed a lawsuit asking for an immediate injunction to halt the TSA body-scanning program. This comes only two weeks after Janet Napolitano announced that the millimeter-wave systems would be coming to nearly every major U.S. airport. – switched

The TSA, it seems, requires all airport body scanners to be able to store images and transmit them – strange for a device that is supposed to do neither for “testing, training, and evaluation purposes.” Don’t worry, though. The TSA says these capabilities aren’t “normally activated when the devices are installed at airports,” reports CNET. Translation: “Trust us. We could do something bad … but we won’t.” So, next time you fly and fear that images of your privates may end up being stored somewhere, consider sticking some “Flying Pasties” to your unmentionables. – gadling

[Politicub]

224. President Obama groped your genitals? OMFG

George Bush ate my balls. (old Internet meme seems apropos right now)

[IdaBriggs]

237. Reading comprehension problem alert: issue is the people he's in charge of.

He publicly made supportive noises sympathizing with how "necessary" the inconvenience is, based on what "his people" are telling him.

If he doesn't want to get "new people" who can tell him smarter ways of "fighting the terrorists who want to blow up planes" than seeing naked pictures of this fellow Americans or groping their groins, then I can't support him for re-election, and will be looking for someone who can do a better job of hiring TSA. :)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

227. If you have changed travel plans because of the new procedures:

Be sure to write a snail mail letter to the airline that you would have taken and let them know how much money they lost because you and whoever would have traveled with you decided to drive/take the train/take the bus/stay home.

My next potential plane trip is for a convention to be held in May, and it would be a domestic flight, so I am pricing Amtrak and the costs of driving. If the security procedures are not changed, I will drive or take the train and tell United and Delta (the two airlines on which I have frequent flier accounts) that I am doing so.

Why?

Well, the post 9/11 bailout (in which the airlines received all at once an amount that totaled more than Amtrak had received in its entire existence) proved that the airlines have clout in Congress. If they start losing business and know that they are losing leisure travelers because of the security procedures, they will sic their lobbyists on Congress.

If you boycott plane travel because of the security procedures but don't tell the airlines that you are doing so, your boycott is pointless.

[GOPBasher]

232. Naked pictures? What the hell are you talking about?

There are some serious problems with these security procedures, but I have not the slightest clue what you mean by "naked pictures." I went through one of these full-body scanners, and though I'm concerned about their safety -- I just don't know if they're safe or not -- I certainly don't think it took a "naked picture of me." What the hell are you talking about? It can't see skin, you know.

[IdaBriggs]

236. It took a picture of you without your clothes, and your "junk" was visible.

The person observing the picture is stationed in another area, but comments are made regularly via the radio to "warn" who is coming through; "hey, I'm sending you a cutie" is what set the father of the 18 year old girl off. TSA insists the pictures aren't stored, except a) they are, and b) we've already got 100 photos from a FIA filing from another source (linked somewhere above).

They could have bought the software that showed just a mannequin, and highlighted the areas to further investigate, but for unknown reasons, opted for the "porno picture cam." Why do you think everyone is up in arms? Oh, that and the fact the testing on the machines hasn't demonstrated "no long term cancer problems" especially if you go through it multiple times a day (see: pilots/flight attendance), the equipment requires regular testing and calibration to make sure "no leaks" develop, and the folks who sit next to it aren't wearing anything to determine if *THEY* are being exposed to a dangerous build-up of low-level radiation.

Everyone agrees that "occasional" exposure to radiation (x-rays when broken bones are suspected, for example) is probably worth the risk; multiple times while traveling? Over the top for some of us.

And then there is the "nude pictures" problem. But if you don't realize that is what is happening because you are just in a hurry, and don't mind the fact your penis is now measurable/can easily be combined with facial recognition software (yes - let's send some of my favorite celebs thru!), its a tempest in a teapot.

Except for those of us who don't want to be unnecessarily exposed to low levels of radiation regularly when we travel, or have nude photos of us bouncing around in government offices, or have our groins groped while traveling. We're kind of up in arms over the situation. :)

[GOPBasher]

250. I agree with a lot of what you're saying.

I agree that the radiation exposure is, obviously, a big concern, especially for those who travel regularly. I disagree with some semantics. I don't think my "junk" was visible, because you can't see skin. I don't think we should say "naked pictures"; that implies that skin is visible. However, what you said here:

"They could have bought the software that showed just a mannequin, and highlighted the areas to further investigate, but for unknown reasons, opted for the 'porno picture cam'." OK, if this is true, I agree with you. If there is some other software that wouldn't be so revealing, BUT would be JUST AS SAFE, then yes, they should use that, even if it's more expensive.

At any rate, I don't like these things anyway. I would not fly regularly right now unless rigorous scientific testing shows no correlation between exposure to this frequency of radiation and elevated risk of cancer.

[bobbolink]

238. I'm not sure why you are sorry... you are right on target, and I'm glad you said what you said.

:applause:

[jeanpalmer]

249. The TSA is out of control

You wonder where this is all gonna end up. Taken to its logical conclusion, there will be a secirity agent every 30 feet. That's not what this country is about. Obama is taking the country down the wrong path. He just doesn't have it. He's now the biggest cause of terrorism, by inciting half the world to hate us.