14

11/23/2010 3:59:22 PM

TSA approved dogs

11/23/2010 4:30:28 PM

rofl these people spreading their cheeks for the government will be climbing into dog crates for flights in 5 years

11/23/2010 4:31:56 PM

"What you won't get in the Freedom Carriage? HA HA grow up dummy WOOF WOOF"

11/23/2010 4:33:06 PM

Save time this holiday season: take naked pictures of yourself before you go to the airport.

11/23/2010 5:07:04 PM

im down for that im hot

im the kinda sexy that makes TSA workers look forward to comin to work.

[Edited on November 23, 2010 at 6:18 PM. Reason : d]

11/23/2010 6:17:41 PM

thanks to these jokers we all now have to take off our shoes, get fondled and stand in line for hours.

11/23/2010 6:53:42 PM

man, i wish i was flying this week.

i'd opt out and go for the pat down. then let one rip so hard in the dumb shit incompetent TSA worker' face.

11/23/2010 7:11:48 PM

^ that would do nothing against people like myself who would suck a fart out of your butthole given the chance

11/23/2010 7:15:14 PM

Quote :

"POOT"

[Edited on November 23, 2010 at 7:45 PM. Reason : s]

11/23/2010 7:45:31 PM

it's a mess

11/23/2010 7:47:33 PM

http://gawker.com/5695677/special-underwear-makes-your-privates-invisible-to-tsa-scanners

Special Underwear Makes Your Privates Invisible to TSA Scanners

Quote :

" Citizens, take heart: Even as our country falls under the total domination of our new TSA overlords, capitalism continues unabated. A Colorado man has developed undergarments with special body scanner-blocking fig leaves to hide your privates. Obama just needs to buy every American a pair of these underwear. Problem solved!"

Link goes to article with video

11/23/2010 8:11:28 PM

Quote :

"People have no problem with the military dropping bombs all over Iraq and Afghanistan, often times killing innocent civilians, but as soon as you get a pat down then thats just crossing the line "

I'm OK with us bomging the middle east into oblivion BECAUSE it eliminates the need to get patted down at the airport.

11/23/2010 9:50:27 PM

Lol

11/23/2010 11:01:32 PM

It doesn't matter the terroist have won. They have our country up in a hissy over this. We are all terrified to fly enough to allow someone to see us naked or someone to feel us up. Might as well bend over and take it up the ass from Osama now.

Here is our white flag.

11/23/2010 11:08:23 PM

thats what i was sayin a few posts ago but these retards can only see their own perspective

they have no respect for counterargument or other peoples thoughts

11/23/2010 11:25:04 PM

I’ll miss the National Opt Out Day, so I chose to stand up for my rights today in RDU. Here’s the summary. I’m providing this in a separate thread not because the events of today were remarkable, but as a warning notice to all NOOD participants.

Things started pretty normal with an opt out. Intead of a secondary, they immediately insisted on a resolution frisk and started yelling REFUSAL. I was told I had to comply (without any mention of what the “or else” would be. The clerks were pleasant, but had to be reminded to change gloves.

Here’s where it got interesting. I asked if I could have a witness. I was told there was one (the other TSA guy in the room). I asked specifically, “Am I permitted to have my own witness. I was told no. After a standard groping, I exited the private room. At that point, The clerk demanded I provide my boarding pass and ID. I very politely asked why. Instead of answering, the clerk called a supervisor. When she arrived, the clerk said “He is refusing to comply.” Knowing where that was going, I immediately responded, that I was not refusing annoying, I simply asked a question. The supervisor said “We need the data for our records.” I again asked why. She asked if I wanted to fly today.

Here’s where it gets more interesting. I replied that didn’t answer my question. At this point, she summoned an LEO. Same story offered by the TSA (I wasn’t complying). I showed my ID at that point and repeated my question. They wrote down my name and rudely walked away. I walked up to the supervisor’s station to asked for a complaint form and asked for her name. She gave it. I asked for the name of the person that refused to allow me a witness. She said “I can’t give you that information, you will have to get it yourself.” I went to find the clerk that screened me, and got his name without issue. A few seconds later, another supervisor confronted me, saying that I do not need to get names of the officers. I asked for his name, and wouldn’t you know it, the LEO shows up again. I politely asked the LEO if he would stand by me while I asked my witness question again. He cautioned that “You are about to be escorted out of the airport.” I asked why and he said “I was pushing it and I have to escort you out if the TSA asks, there is nothing I can do.”

I asked both the supervisor’s and the clerk that screened me the witness question again. They said they do provide a witness and pointed at the other TSA clerk the did that. I asked if I had the right to have my own witness. They said it had to be the same sex. I asked specifically, “I asked for a witness and was told that in no uncertain terms that I could not have one.” the response was not surprising. “Sir, you are causing a disturbance, you either need to leave or you will be escorted out.” Not wanting to ruin the vacation of my witness, I whistled for a cab and when it came near the license plate said fresh and it had dice in the mirror. If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought, “Nah, forget it. Yo, holmes to Bel-Air!” I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8 and I yelled to the cabbie, “Yo holmes smell ya later!” Looked at my kingdom I was finally there, to sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air.

11/23/2010 11:43:20 PM

11/23/2010 11:48:34 PM

11/23/2010 11:54:24 PM

I read the whole thing. Didn't look ahead, and was actually interested to see how the story ended.

11/23/2010 11:54:26 PM

http://www.newraleigh.com/articles/archive/story-of-rdu-passengers-opt-out-of-body-scan/

11/23/2010 11:55:48 PM

What I really want to know, is what 4chan is going to do about this.

11/24/2010 12:09:45 AM

not really planning on flying anytime soon, but i will refuse to do the scan thing. i wonder just how much trouble i'd cause if i demand that a female tsa person sexually harass me.

11/24/2010 12:15:18 AM

Well its same sex.

I wonder how much trouble i will get into if I ask that person if they are hetrosexual or gay. I don't want a pat down by a lesbian that would be extremely uncomfortable for me.

11/24/2010 12:22:38 AM

write on your body with tape "FUCK OFF" or something...

or better yet wear a thong under a pair of warmup pants and then strip down 'party boy' style then dead eye stare at them as you refuse the scanner...

11/24/2010 12:29:53 AM

http://www.wral.com/lifestyles/story/8678928/

Also--heard on the radio yesterday, and I can't remember the citation to the U.S.C. to look it up, but apparently you can be a sex offender/rapist and work for the TSA, so long as the offense occurred 10+ years ago.

11/24/2010 8:09:13 AM

I'm glad I don't have to fly anytime soon.

11/24/2010 10:15:16 AM

11/24/2010 10:17:44 AM

Of course, the source/validity of this is highly questioned, but this excerpt of a memo to the TSA from Napolitano is making rounds on the internet today:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/30286

Quote :

"I was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Indeed, both the terminology and content contained in the document are troubling. The dissemination of the document itself is restricted by virtue of its classification, which prohibits any manner of public release. While the document cannot be posted or published, the more salient points are revealed here. ... The introductory paragraph of the multi-page document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President. In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections. The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” The label is then broadened to include “any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures. For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security."

The 'collection of identity' is certainly confirmed by that RDU story posted above:

Quote :

"After a standard groping, I exited the private room. At that point, The clerk demanded I provide my boarding pass and ID. I very politely asked why. Instead of answering, the clerk called a supervisor. When she arrived, the clerk said “He is refusing to comply.” Knowing where that was going, I immediately responded, that I was not refusing annoying, I simply asked a question. The supervisor said “We need the data for our records.” I again asked why. She asked if I wanted to fly today."

also, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/130549-next-step-for-body-scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-

Quote :

"The next step in tightened security could be on U.S. public transportation, trains and boats. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says terrorists will continue to look for U.S. vulnerabilities, making tighter security standards necessary. “[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through,” Napolitano said in an interview that aired Monday night on "Charlie Rose." “I think the tighter we get on aviation, we have to also be thinking now about going on to mass transit or to trains or maritime. So, what do we need to be doing to strengthen our protections there?”"

also, Re: "America supports this, you are in the minority"

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2010/11/new-poll-says-61-oppose-new-airport-security-measures.html

Quote :

"On the eve of one of the nation's busiest travel days, a poll has found that 61% of likely voters oppose the newly enhanced security measures at the country's airports. The poll by Zogby International of 2,032 likely voters also found that 48% said they would probably seek alternatives to flying because of the new measures."

Too bad Napolitano and several other officials want to expand the use of much stricter screening policies to all other mass transit facilities.

Oh, wait, what about cars? Car bombs exist...ah shit, we're fucked.

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM. Reason : moar bold]

11/24/2010 10:36:05 AM

IF YOU DONT LIKE IT THEN YOU CAN WALK

11/24/2010 10:41:29 AM

But people who walk could bomb the sidewalk. We're safe nowhere

11/24/2010 10:42:15 AM

i dont understand the infatuation with bombs.

there are other forms of weapons.



(that being said dont construe this with me saying i agree with the scanner or whatever)

11/24/2010 10:44:39 AM

the "infatuation with bombs" is that these types of scanners are needed because typical x-rays can not catch the underwear and shoe type bombs; essentially it's the entire reason for these scanners.

11/24/2010 10:48:07 AM

bombs strike the most fear into the hearts of the moronic majority, and are also the easiest to grasp as a method of terror given the number of terrorist events that use bombs. Therefore the TSA, DHS, and other agencies continue to use that as a tool to make the largest portion of the public comply with invasive and unreasonable methods of "security."

I just re-read what I wrote, and it sounds like some serious tinfoil hat shit, but fuck if it isn't true.

11/24/2010 10:48:22 AM

I thought labeling normal citizens as extremists/terrorists just because they ask questions or disagree with government policy went out with Bush/Cheney. I'm sad to hear Obama endorsing this.

I had to stop engaging in these discussions on Facebook. Too many of my friends are also friends with ignorant old folks who don't understand being tactful or respectful to people with whom they disagree.

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 10:51 AM. Reason : l]

11/24/2010 10:49:16 AM

ahhh. ok



whenever i first thought about this whole scanner thing, bombs were not the first thing i thought of


^really? i think the exact opposite. i would expect obama to support this.....

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 10:53 AM. Reason : dfedrfdes]

11/24/2010 10:50:27 AM

I'm continually amazed by how private jets are nearly immune from the whole screening process. In the half dozen or so times I've been lucky enough to fly that way, it was nothing more than a simple metal detector wand over my midsection. I could have had a pistol in an ankle holster and a shoe bomb and gotten aboard just fine.

11/24/2010 10:53:00 AM

^thats because they are private though.

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 11:00 AM. Reason : idiot=me]

11/24/2010 10:53:59 AM

This money would be better spent by building high speed trains to cut down on the 33,000 US motor vehicle deaths per year, rather than all this bullshit to cut down on the 0.0 US terrorist attack deaths per year.

11/24/2010 10:54:53 AM

That's the point. If rich politicians and other people of power had to go through the same process as the rest of us, this process wouldn't exist in its current form.

11/24/2010 10:55:25 AM

The Private title doesn't stop someone from aiming it a building

11/24/2010 10:55:47 AM

^^like celebrities? (thats what i think of when i hear private jets)

^fair enough


[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 10:57 AM. Reason : fgfdgdf]

11/24/2010 10:56:35 AM

or middle east oil tycoons with ties to al qaeda.

11/24/2010 10:57:49 AM

^whats the percentage of that do you think?

11/24/2010 10:59:10 AM

My Girlfriend went through security at RDU this morning. She didn't see any pat downs and only a few people went through the scanners. shrug.

11/24/2010 10:59:38 AM

their

private

though

11/24/2010 10:59:41 AM

^thatnks. totally missed that.

^^same thing happened to me a few weeks ago.



[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 11:01 AM. Reason : which is why im kinda shrug too i think]

11/24/2010 11:00:24 AM

Quote :

"^whats the percentage of that do you think?"

If i had to guess, probably higher than the percentage of commercial passengers that pose a threat.

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 11:03 AM. Reason : I'm assuming there's at least one such owner of a private plane. ]

11/24/2010 11:03:17 AM

yeah. probably so.

well actually, i guess it depends the way you look at it.

im sure, in general, people with links to al qaeda will have a much easier time getting on a "public" plane than to find someone with a private plane who will let you use it (aha that sounds so.....understated).

its such a weird situation to me.
everything.

[Edited on November 24, 2010 at 11:05 AM. Reason : hence all the questions]

11/24/2010 11:05:36 AM

Quote :

"If rich politicians and other people of power had to go through the same process as the rest of us, this process wouldn't exist in its current form."

11/24/2010 11:41:16 AM