TSA Speedo Protestor

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Nov 24, 2010 6:58 PM GMT
    TSA Speedo Protestor



    http://jonanderic.blogspot.com/2010/11/tsa-speedo-protester.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 7:17 PM GMT
    ...and all this time we're told to watch out for Big Brother!
    What a ruse.
    icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 7:23 PM GMT
    THIS WAS AMAZING.

    This is exactly the kind of protesting video I want to see: smart, political, equable, non-violent, and kinda mind expanding (I had no idea I could go through in a bathing suit!).

    A+

    I would try this myself but I'm sure it'll end up with some minority tazing me and then turning it around saying I beat him up even though the cameras show the opposite.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 10:17 PM GMT
    The TSA security charade at the gates make none of us safer. They are an expensive waste of public money, and ought to be defunded.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 10:29 PM GMT
    The whole TSA thing is to go ahead and give people a job :-s which to me seems unfair to the travelers trying to get through security. What a great idea "big sis"
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Nov 24, 2010 10:44 PM GMT
    JAKEBENSON saidTHIS WAS AMAZING.

    This is exactly the kind of protesting video I want to see: smart, political, equable, non-violent, and kinda mind expanding (I had no idea I could go through in a bathing suit!).

    A+

    I would try this myself but I'm sure it'll end up with some minority tazing me and then turning it around saying I beat him up even though the cameras show the opposite.


    For what it's worth jakebenson, if you went anywhere in nothing but a swim suit it was a great treat for all those around you!

    I'm glad to see nothing escalated with the Speedo Protestor.
  • BIG_N_TALL

    Posts: 2190

    Nov 24, 2010 10:47 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidThe TSA security charade at the gates make none of us safer. They are an expensive waste of public money, and ought to be defunded.




    +1
  • Descamisado

    Posts: 95

    Nov 24, 2010 10:57 PM GMT
    Good on him for pointing out the essential absurdity of the TSA rules.

    And when we get to the point of strip-searching all airline passengers, he can say he was ahead of his time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 10:58 PM GMT
    If you don't like the TSA regulations, don't fly. I, for one, am not opposed to less people flying.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 10:59 PM GMT
    Cute little treasure trail!
  • BIG_N_TALL

    Posts: 2190

    Nov 24, 2010 11:07 PM GMT
    Descamisado saidGood on him for pointing out the essential absurdity of the TSA rules.

    And when we get to the point of strip-searching all airline passengers, he can say he was ahead of his time.


    We should all fly nude. (sarcasm) icon_rolleyes.gif The TSA's policies are just a joke. They only created another terrorist target by making "checkpoints". I mean just what the hell are these poorly trained/unarmed TSA people supposed to do if they actually encounter a terrorist at the checkpoint??? It's too damn late then...icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Sk8Tex

    Posts: 738

    Nov 24, 2010 11:12 PM GMT
    2,976 people (more than most people will ever know personally) died in a matter of minutes due to lack of security in our own airports on September 11th, 2001.

    Just making sure SOMEONE out there remembers what this is really all about.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 11:22 PM GMT
    "Fuckin grope me!"

    *moan*

    *Arrested*
  • TexanNC

    Posts: 39

    Nov 24, 2010 11:22 PM GMT
    SanDiegoNewbie said2,976 people (more than most people will ever know personally) died in a matter of minutes due to lack of security in our own airports on September 11th, 2001.

    Just making sure SOMEONE out there remembers what this is really all about.


    HOOOAH!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 11:25 PM GMT
    That's not a political statement. This one is if he refused to go through the metal detector and asked for a manual checkup with a speedo (I doubt that he's ABLE to go through the metal detector):

    obese_fat_guy.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 11:37 PM GMT
    SanDiegoNewbie said2,976 people (more than most people will ever know personally) died in a matter of minutes due to lack of security in our own airports on September 11th, 2001.

    Just making sure SOMEONE out there remembers what this is really all about.


    The fact that we do not want a repeat of this means that we should be looking for ways to stop terrorism that are *effective*.

    Airport security is a false promise: it will not stop a sufficiently well-determined and well-organized group of people from carrying out an attack.

    What does work is background checks of travelers, entry/exit databases and good intelligence. We know these work because where terrorist attacks have been prevented, they have been prevented by these mechanisms [and never once by a baggage check at the gate].

    Airport security is about giving people the illusion that something is being done to make them secure. I would prefer that the money is spent on things that actually do make us more secure.

    The truly terrifying thing about September 11th is that it seems to be used to justify any invasion of people's privacy, any loss of civil liberties, any extra inconvenience---whether rationally justifiable or not. Every time I hear more of such things, the more I think that the terrorists have won.
  • Sk8Tex

    Posts: 738

    Nov 24, 2010 11:55 PM GMT
    SO with all of that in mind ^ Someone tell me how a revealing full body scanner that everyone would be required to pass through is not effective. Because if you can come up with a valid argument for why its not, I would actually listen to it.

    But this guy in the video...all he did was waste peoples time who are there to make sure murdering lunatics dont succeed a second time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2010 12:03 AM GMT
    SanDiegoNewbie saidSO with all of that in mind ^ Someone tell me how a revealing full body scanner that everyone would be required to pass through is not effective. Because if you can come up with a valid argument for why its not, I would actually listen to it.

    But this guy in the video...all he did was waste peoples time who are there to make sure murdering lunatics dont succeed a second time.


    Because all imaging technologies can be fooled by someone with sufficient technical knowledge of how they work.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2010 12:08 AM GMT
    And the many potential loopholes between checking your luggage and having it loaded on the plane physically. Who says bombs need to be physically on your person for it to work (idiots like Richard Reid aside)?
  • bchbum

    Posts: 161

    Nov 25, 2010 12:13 AM GMT
    This is ridiculous. Don't like the rules...don't fly. I'd love to see less passengers. Time for a little education. Not every airport has the backscatter devices. People are selected to go through this randomly....unless you set off the metal detectors. If you don't want to be exposed to the backscatter device, then you get a pat down.

    I've been pat down before..not the latest techniques...but, it was much ado about nothing. I was also flying out of Reagan last week, and I only saw a couple people go through the scanner and didn't see anyone going through an enhanced pat down. I fly anywhere from 35-50k miles a year. I'd like to think that the government is doing something to prevent another 9/11. Yes, this is what it is all about. This is more a case of the media, attention whores (such as this guy, and the "don't touch my junk" guy), and politicians trying to create a controversy.
  • BIG_N_TALL

    Posts: 2190

    Nov 25, 2010 12:16 AM GMT
    TigerTim said
    The truly terrifying thing about September 11th is that it seems to be used to justify any invasion of people's privacy, any loss of civil liberties, any extra inconvenience---whether rationally justifiable or not. Every time I hear more of such things, the more I think that the terrorists have won.


    I agree with TigerTim. All the safety precautions and "checkpoint procedures" we have in place NOW are a product of PAST attempts.... not possible future attempts. So, with this logic/train of thought in mind, we give people the pretense that they are safe even though it's not reality.

    So, what if some terrorist blew up a plane while 'body packing' explosives??? Should we start to x-ray people at the airports too (even though it's not healthy at all for frequent flyers)? What if some terrorist blew himself up standing in a line of hundreds or thousands of people waiting to pass through security to get on a plane? Then what? Don't fly???? It's not like TSA has any substantive procedure to preclude a would-be terrorist from blowing himself up at an airport before he even boards a plane! We are not proactive; we are only reactive, and it's glaringly obvious from the evolution of procedures (i.e. shoes, toiletry bottles, etc.).

    The TSA has only made more problems than rectify the issues we had prior to 9/11. People who claim flying is a privilege are genuine jackasses. The TSA administrator is a prime example - someone needs to remind him that his job is also a privilege (and can be terminated at any time). The American economy requires free travel to even function, so "privilege" statements are just scare tactics used to quell descent.

    Sooner or later, Americans need to determine whether they want their rights 'cut down' in the name of security. The ends don't justify the means. So before someone goes ape shit crazy on me, I'm not advocating 'no security' at airports - just practical and effective security... and not at the expense of my constitutional rights or anyone else's.

    Let's not forget security measures are not universal around the globe. Some countries have very relaxed security procedures... what about them??? Yet another example of how ridiculous this situation is... icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2010 12:20 AM GMT
    bchbum saidI'd like to think that the government is doing something to prevent another 9/11.


    The question people seem to fail to ask is: are the measures being taken likely to work?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2010 12:25 AM GMT
    What good is a thread without an ad hominem attack? icon_razz.gif

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-11-22-scanner-lobby_N.htmL-3 Communications, which has sold $39.7 million worth of the machines to the federal government, spent $4.3 million trying to influence Congress and federal agencies during the first nine months of this year, up from $2.1 million in 2005, lobbying data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show. Its lobbyists include Linda Daschle, a former Federal Aviation Administration official.

    Rapiscan Systems, meanwhile, has spent $271,500 on lobbying so far this year, compared with $80,000 five years earlier. It has faced criticism for hiring Michael Chertoff, the former Homeland Security secretary, last year. Chertoff has been a prominent proponent of using scanners to foil terrorism. The government has spent $41.2 million with Rapiscan.
    ...
    The lobbying by both firms covered a broad array of topics. This year, L-3 Communications reported lobbying on nearly two dozen bills, ranging from homeland security appropriations to military construction. Among the bills targeted by L-3 lobbyists: legislation proposed by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, that would limit the use of the scanners at airports as a backup measure only.

    Chaffetz's measure passed the House last year, but it stalled in the Senate after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's alleged attempt in December 2009 to ignite an explosive powder on a flight to Detroit.

    The attempted bombing contributed to the bill's demise, Chaffetz said, "But I also routinely heard that 'Secretary Chertoff believes this is the right thing to do. Who are you to challenge him?' "


    I like this Chaffetz (R) guy more and more I hear about him.
  • Sk8Tex

    Posts: 738

    Nov 25, 2010 12:27 AM GMT
    Do you know what happens when you fail to learn from the past?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 25, 2010 12:33 AM GMT
    33-year-old Jason Rockwood is so damn cute and sexy. He is our heroicon_lol.gificon_lol.gif

    alg_jason_rockwood%20.jpgicon_redface.gif

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/11/24/2010-11-24_new_yorker_strips_to_underwear_for_laguardia_security_wanted_pat_down_to_stand_u.html