TSA Strut

24

  Comments


  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    ost said:
    This is not the solution.

    Yeah, exactly. But my point is that there is no "solution." Security is a piece of theatrical ritual designed to allow passengers and airlines to maintain the belief that "flying is safe" (which, statistically speaking, it is).

    Or to put it another way, if someone got publicly caught trying to sneak a bomb on a plane tomorrow, you'd see complaints fall the fuck off very quickly. People want that fig leaf.

  • DB_CooperDB_Cooper Manhatin' 7,823 Posts
    mannybolone said:
    People want that fig leaf.

    I'm not really seeing the fig leaf analogy. The problem is seeing dick and balls. The fig leaf solves that problem. Yes, the dick and balls are still there, but the problem isn't their existence, it's the fact that you can see them. The dick and balls, I mean.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    Rockadelic said:
    This is the perfect time for a new airlines to start up......call it "Waiver Air" and make all passengers sign a waiver that if there is a terrorist attack during the flight that they or their families won't be able to sue the airlines for any reason whatsoever.

    No security checks at all beyond a background check and proof of ID.

    No boarding lines and no crotch related "baggage handling".

    They already have this. It's called chartered and private flights.

    The problem with your idea (and I know it was meant as a joke) is that you'd need an entirely new infrastructure to accommodate Waiver Air. WA couldn't fly out of normal airports because its passengers would be a security risk to the rest of the airport. Which means WA would have to use smaller, out of the way airports, which would make them less convenient. And their staffing costs would likely be higher (who wants to pilot a plane where you don't screen passengers at all?) which means higher ticket prices for the passenger.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    DB_Cooper said:
    mannybolone said:
    People want that fig leaf.

    I'm not really seeing the fig leaf analogy. The problem is seeing dick and balls. The fig leaf solves that problem. Yes, the dick and balls are still there, but the problem isn't their existence, it's the fact that you can see them. The dick and balls, I mean.

    I always thought of the fig leaf as functioning on some "out of sight, out of mind" tip, which would mean that "not seeing them" is equal to "not having to think about them being there at all."

    So in this case, the threat of terrorism are the dick and balls and the fig leaf is having your dick and balls probed for explosives.

  • DB_CooperDB_Cooper Manhatin' 7,823 Posts
    mannybolone said:
    DB_Cooper said:
    mannybolone said:
    People want that fig leaf.

    I'm not really seeing the fig leaf analogy. The problem is seeing dick and balls. The fig leaf solves that problem. Yes, the dick and balls are still there, but the problem isn't their existence, it's the fact that you can see them. The dick and balls, I mean.

    I always thought of the fig leaf as functioning on some "out of sight, out of mind" tip, which would mean that "not seeing them" is equal to "not having to think about them being there at all."

    So in this case, the threat of terrorism are the dick and balls and the fig leaf is having your dick and balls probed for explosives.

    Ah. See, I see the threat of terrorism as the seeing of the dick and balls, and the TSA screening as the fig leaf. But since the screening procedures aren't effective in preventing many terrorist techniques, it's like a fig leaf that falls off a lot thus displaying the dick and balls, or maybe like a fig leaf that works if you're standing up, but when you sit down on the subway, the dick and balls are plainly apparent to the person sitting across from you. Plus, the screening techniques don't address the attendant problems of dick and ball display, such as the fact that the fig leaf isn't stopping you from sitting bare-assed and back-balled on the subway.

  • UnherdUnherd 1,880 Posts
    You guys don't think these machines have the ability to see a bomb stuffed up your ass?

  • ostost Montreal 1,375 Posts

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    If you guys are okay with this shit (or at least its current disastrous implementation) after watching this, I don't know what the fuck to say. And fuck all that, this is an isolated incident shit.


    The TSA ABSOLUTELY failed in rolling these new security measures out. People should not be finding out about this shit from the news. And in the event there's another terrorist attack, what the fuck kind of "security" measures do you think will be taken then?

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    Shout outs to the lady @ 3:48

  • Actually those 'flying is the safest mode of travel' stats are gamed by the airline industry.

    They calculate your risk of dying per mile traveled. Not per trip. Since flights involve such long distances, of course, your chance of dying per mile traveled are minuscule.

    When you calculate it by death per journey - flying is less safe than bus, rail, car, foot, etc. Only bikes and motorcycles are more dangerous.

    I'm not saying flying is particularly dangerous. Just that it's not SO much safer than other forms of travel, like they pretend it is. Just, the stats are more of the airline industy's theater.


  • covecove 1,567 Posts
    DB_Cooper said:

    Ah. See, I see the threat of terrorism as the seeing of the dick and balls, and the TSA screening as the fig leaf. But since the screening procedures aren't effective in preventing many terrorist techniques, it's like a fig leaf that falls off a lot thus displaying the dick and balls, or maybe like a fig leaf that works if you're standing up, but when you sit down on the subway, the dick and balls are plainly apparent to the person sitting across from you. Plus, the screening techniques don't address the attendant problems of dick and ball display, such as the fact that the fig leaf isn't stopping you from sitting bare-assed and back-balled on the subway.


  • mannybolone said:
    I can't remember where I read this but it came out a few years ago, probably around the time they started confiscating water bottles because some jerk off tried to mix a chemical bomb on a plane, but it basically argued that TSA basically serves to psychological function rather than a true security function; they're a fig leaf in other words.
    Was it this article?

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/7057/

    I thought he did a pretty good job showing what BS the charade of airline 'security' is.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    My daughter was at Webster Hall in NYC for their Halloween party and tells me the search she went through to get in there was far worse than any TSA bizness.

    And she was on the VIP list!


  • DB_CooperDB_Cooper Manhatin' 7,823 Posts
    Brian said:
    If you guys are okay with this shit (or at least its current disastrous implementation) after watching this, I don't know what the fuck to say. And fuck all that, this is an isolated incident shit.

    The TSA ABSOLUTELY failed in rolling these new security measures out. People should not be finding out about this shit from the news. And in the event there's another terrorist attack, what the fuck kind of "security" measures do you think will be taken then?

    You just mad 'cause you live on an island and have to get a TSA handjob to go anywhere.

  • RAJRAJ tenacious local 7,783 Posts
    DB_Cooper said:
    TSA handjob


  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    DOR said:

    I don't understand this at all.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    I'm okay getting a TSA handjob; not okay with borderline sexual assault, humiliating handicapped people, fondling children, cancer survivors being forced to remove prosthetics, dude with a pee bag having shit detatched on him risking infection and you know, being covered in pee, among other things

  • bluesnagbluesnag 1,285 Posts
    Brian said:
    I'm okay getting a TSA handjob; not okay with borderline sexual assault, humiliating handicapped people, fondling children, cancer survivors being forced to remove prosthetics, dude with a pee bag having shit detatched on him risking infection and you know, being covered in pee, among other things

    Yes.

    A few years ago I probably would not give a fuck about this. But now that I have a son, the thought of some idiot who does not know how to deal with kids, scaring my kid for no fucking good reason really pisses me off. This shit is completely pointless. There is some effort to protest the new procedures tomorrow, with the goal of getting as many people as possible to refuse the x-ray and make the pat-downs as difficult as possible. Good thing I'm not traveling tomorrow, but I hope this shit happens.

    I'm not a constitutionalist by any measure, but in the end this shit does seem like excessive search and seizure. The first time I've been pissed at Obama was when he said publicly a few days ago that these new security measures were "necessary". What a bunch of horse shit.

  • bluesnag said:
    I'm not a constitutionalist by any measure, but in the end this shit does seem like excessive search and seizure.

    uh, not really.

  • ostost Montreal 1,375 Posts
    There is some effort to [...] make the pat-downs as difficult as possible.
    How? By making it uncomfortable for them, like putting a cucumber in your pocket to simulate an erect penis for instance? Or more along the lines of moving around while they try to search you which will lead to further accidental groping of the genital region?

  • bluesnagbluesnag 1,285 Posts
    walter_chron said:
    bluesnag said:
    I'm not a constitutionalist by any measure, but in the end this shit does seem like excessive search and seizure.

    uh, not really.

    Can you explain why not? If you refuse the x-ray and don't want your shit touched, they can hold you with no cause. So what is that?

  • bluesnagbluesnag 1,285 Posts
    There is some effort to [...] make the pat-downs as difficult as possible.
    How? By making it uncomfortable for them, like putting a cucumber in your pocket to simulate an erect penis for instance? Or more along the lines of moving around while they try to search you which will lead to further groping of the genital region?

    I think some people were talking about wearing kilts and going commando. Others were probably going to make the "that's sexual assault" claim to get the supervisors out and drag that shit out.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    I think, the idea might be, when you choose to travel you voluntarily agree to those conditions.

    The question some people are asking is air travel truly voluntary?
    If you have to travel great distances for family or work most people have few other options.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    There is some effort to [...] make the pat-downs as difficult as possible.
    How? By making it uncomfortable for them, like putting a cucumber in your pocket to simulate an erect penis for instance? Or more along the lines of moving around while they try to search you which will lead to further groping of the genital region?

    I think some people were talking about wearing kilts and going commando. Others were probably going to make the "that's sexual assault" claim to get the supervisors out and drag that shit out.

    Fun to talk about, but people who go through security have a plane to catch.
    If you are not nice to security you are not catching a plane.

  • bluesnagbluesnag 1,285 Posts
    There is some effort to [...] make the pat-downs as difficult as possible.
    How? By making it uncomfortable for them, like putting a cucumber in your pocket to simulate an erect penis for instance? Or more along the lines of moving around while they try to search you which will lead to further groping of the genital region?

    I think some people were talking about wearing kilts and going commando. Others were probably going to make the "that's sexual assault" claim to get the supervisors out and drag that shit out.

    Fun to talk about, but people who go through security have a plane to catch.
    If you are not nice to security you are not catching a plane.

    Clearly. Who knows if the people who are saying this stuff will do it. Or if the people planning on doing it are willing to sacrifice their flight to get the point across.

    I do think, though, that the new TSA procedures are ridiculous and need to end. Complete waste of resources, and an unnecessary invasion.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    Just to throw some cold water on the discussion...

    9/11 was possible, in part, because of lax airport security.
    It is thought that Boston was chosen as the departure airport because security was famously lacking there.

    In response we tighten security in a way to hopefully prevent another such attack.
    So far so good.

    Security guidelines change (presumable) to address ever changing security challenges.

    What some people seem to be saying is; whatever we do, they will adjust and do something else. Such as internal explosives.
    That raises the question, should we do anything at all?
    Is it all meaningless given the terrorists ability to adapt?

  • still on this topic, just stumbled upon this on the ol CNN....


    http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/23/plane.magazine.found/index.html?hpt=T2

    Southwest: Law enforcement officer left loaded gun magazine on plane

    November 23, 2010 4:08 p.m. EST
    A loaded gun magazine was found on board a Southwest Airlines flight Tuesday after a law enforcement officer left it there from a previous flight, officials said.

    The discovery was made after the flight from Burbank, California, to Phoenix, Arizona, landed, a member of a CNN crew aboard the plane said.

    "The item was immediately turned over to the crew working the flight who called in the local authorities to handle the investigation," a Southwest Airlines statement said. "The passengers who were remaining on that flight were rescreened and the plane was thoroughly inspected before returning to service."

    hope you "feel" safe flying...lol

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
    Am I missing something? Why are they scanning people getting off flights?

    Just finished reading this dude who refused to be scanned and patted down after getting off a flight. Where he claimed that according to the constitution he had the right to travel freely within the united states as long as he could provide proof of citizenship and there was no reasonable cause to be detained. And they let him through after a few hours of going around in circles.

    Why are they scanning getting off? Is this really nothing more than trying to find people with drugs and money and not really about terror?

    http://noblasters.com/post/1650102322/my-tsa-encounter
Sign In or Register to comment.