Airport Body Scanners..

[Al_Davis 28]

This is a brief interview with a former Israeli EL Al security agent, making much sence.

 

 

 

 

http://bit.ly/bnoqeW

[nidnoyham 30]

This is a brief interview with a former Israeli EL Al security agent, making much sence.

 

 

 

 

http://bit.ly/bnoqeW

 

 

That's great for the traffic flow rate of TLV, or one or two 747's a day. A departure every few minutes like LHR, would make it impractical.

 

I once checked in downtown Tel Aviv on EL-AL with my Greek Cypriot mate. After 3 months in the sun, he looked rather Arabic. The Check in girl called a security guard to ask why he has a larger number page British passport. When the guard asked where he came from, my mate replied Cyprus. Darned if the guard didn't speak the local Greek Cypriot dialect to him. If my mate had been lying he would have been found out. That was impressive.

 

Scanners are more a deterrent than a detector. How many bombs have they found ?

 

Even so, would you get on a flight where passengers hadn't been security checked ?

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

I voted for a female to grope me.

[jacko 8,778]

Even so, would you get on a flight where passengers hadn't been security checked ?

Well I suppose I used to...... before blowing up complete strangers because you couldn't get your own way became common.

[joekicker 53]

Last January, I was scanned by one of the full body scanners. The whole process took about 15 seconds. Then, I was on my way. What's the fuss?

 

I picture this post from you soon:

 

Last night, the police stopped me. They put me up against the wall and gave me a full-body frisk and I was on my way in less than half a minute. What's the problem?

 

The weird part is that in the United States it is ILLEGAL for the police to frisk you. But rent-a-cops can get you to bend over and spread 'em, just because they feel like it. IN NO WAY do either of these make you safer, so the fuss is, why should authority figures have such invasive authority?

 

.

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

I picture this post from you soon:

 

Last night, the police stopped me. They put me up against the wall and gave me a full-body frisk and I was on my way in less than half a minute. What's the problem?

 

The weird part is that in the United States it is ILLEGAL for the police to frisk you. But rent-a-cops can get you to bend over and spread 'em, just because they feel like it. IN NO WAY do either of these make you safer, so the fuss is, why should authority figures have such invasive authority?

 

.

It is NOT illegal for the police in the USA to frisk you.

 

They have every right to make certain of their safety.

 

Evidence gained in such a search may be subject to legal scrutiny but it is NOT illegal to search a person or their vehicle.

 

You need to post evidence of your position on this one!

[lovedog100 1,372]

I was thinking about this the other night as I was watching the news. I really don't want to go through a body scanner that can see threw my clothing. Maybe it would have been fun when I was 20 years old, but not now. I don't want some guy feeling me up either. I decided that I should have the option of having a woman do it, at least I could get some enjoyment out of having a woman feel me up. Then it hit me.... What I want is a lesbian to frisk me. If I have to have some stranger feel my body in a way my friends and relatives aren't allowed to, I want her to detest it as much as I do. So, I want a Lesbian to feel my junk. I could even make a game out of it, and make myself hard before I go through. Seeing the lump in my pants, she will have to check to see what it is That's when I tell her I have a few hours before I leave, would she like to meet me somewhere simi private.

[joekicker 53]

It is NOT illegal for the police in the USA to frisk you.

 

It is illegal for the police in the USA to stop you in the first place, let alone to search you while walking peacefully through the mall -- in the manner that it is MANDATORY for rent-a-cops hired from pizza-box ads to detain you, restrain you if "necessary" and to search you no matter how peacefully you are walking along the airport concourse in the legal conduct of your life. You get the contrast or (it seems) you don't.

 

I'm sure it's me, but I don't grasp why you don't grasp a major escalation of infringing on your rights. These know-nothing theatre workers bussed to the airport and kitted up in dark blue MUST do things that highly trained career lawn forcement people have been forbidden to do for centuries. They MUST do it on behalf of the government or lose their minimum wage position and chance at promotion to supervising abuser.

 

I just hope you are consistent about your government violating human rights. I hope you weren't one of those hyprocrites whining about how George Bush was listening illegally to your phone calls a few years ago, or whinging about the terrible human rights violations at Guantanamo. Where the HELL did all those protectors of human rights go when the focus of government intrusion and invasion switched from several hundred foreign terrorists to 300 million citizens? I don't get it. The only consistency I can find is the ACLU ferpetesake. The New York Times and fellow travellers think it is horrible to wiretap terrorists' phone calls but wonderful for strangers to grope children.

 

.

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

It is illegal for the police in the USA to stop you in the first place, let alone to search you while walking peacefully through the mall -- in the manner that it is MANDATORY for rent-a-cops hired from pizza-box ads to detain you, restrain you if "necessary" and to search you no matter how peacefully you are walking along the airport concourse in the legal conduct of your life. You get the contrast or (it seems) you don't.

 

I'm sure it's me, but I don't grasp why you don't grasp a major escalation of infringing on your rights. These know-nothing theatre workers bussed to the airport and kitted up in dark blue MUST do things that highly trained career lawn forcement people have been forbidden to do for centuries. They MUST do it on behalf of the government or lose their minimum wage position and chance at promotion to supervising abuser.

 

I just hope you are consistent about your government violating human rights. I hope you weren't one of those hyprocrites whining about how George Bush was listening illegally to your phone calls a few years ago, or whinging about the terrible human rights violations at Guantanamo. Where the HELL did all those protectors of human rights go when the focus of government intrusion and invasion switched from several hundred foreign terrorists to 300 million citizens? I don't get it. The only consistency I can find is the ACLU ferpetesake. The New York Times and fellow travellers think it is horrible to wiretap terrorists' phone calls but wonderful for strangers to grope children.

 

.

non-sequiter!

 

My comment was pointed to something you are incorrect about. The police can stop you in America and detain you and search you legally.

 

How you extrapolated the rest from that I have no idea as I made no comment about it.

 

All your posting on this subject has been nothing but a tirade and when I ask you to back your argument, you accuse me of things I have not commented on.

 

This is your usual MO, imho, when you are caught out in something incorrect. Make the other guy look bad!

 

I suggest you watch COPS to learn about what the police can do. It is a good show for the uninitiated to American policing. I have experienced the police first hand in MY country. As this is not YOUR country, try commenting on things you know about in your own or in Thailand.

 

To say that the police in America do not have the right to stop, detain, search... is inane. All they need is suspicion. They do not need a warrant to search you. They can detain you without arrest - just for suspicion. For instance, no state in the Union has a law requiring someone to have ID on them. The police do have the right to identify you if warranted and can detain you up to 48 hours without charging the individual or until they are satisfied that the individual is not wanted on warrants. And, if they detain you, they can and do search you - they have the right to make sure you are not a physical threat to them.

 

You have no idea what a police state America is, Joe. None at all.

 

And please do not say that I made comments that I did not make.

Edited November 26, 2010 by midlifecrisis

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

I went to the ACLU website. Joe claims it is "illegal" in America for the police to search you:

 

http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform-immigr...-what-do-if-you

 

"I have edited from the above as it is quite long"

 

June 30, 2010

 

Note: Some state laws may vary. Separate rules apply at checkpoints and when entering the U.S. (including at airports).

 

YOUR RIGHTS

- You have the right to remain silent. If you wish to exercise that right, say so out loud.

 

- You have the right to refuse to consent to a search of yourself, your car or your home.

 

If they do search you and they find something incriminating, it MAY be inadmissible as evidence in a court of law (that is up to a judge)

 

- If you are not under arrest, you have the right to calmly leave.

 

detaining you by moving you becomes a de facto arrest and the police must charge you within a few days or let you go - but it is legal to do so and you can sue later for false arrest.

 

- You have the right to a lawyer if you are arrested. Ask for one immediately.

- Regardless of your immigration or citizenship status, you have constitutional rights.

 

 

IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING

Stay calm. Don't run. Don't argue, resist or obstruct the police, even if you are innocent or police are violating your rights. Keep your hands where police can see them.

Ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, calmly and silently walk away. If you are under arrest, you have a right to know why.

You have the right to remain silent and cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions. If you wish to remain silent, tell the officer out loud. In some states, you must give your name if asked to identify yourself. You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, but police may "pat down" your clothing if they suspect a weapon. You should not physically resist, but you have the right to refuse consent for any further search. If you do consent, it can affect you later in court. If they find drugs while patting you down for weapons you could be in deep shit.

 

IF YOU ARE STOPPED IN YOUR CAR

Stop the car in a safe place as quickly as possible. Turn off the car, turn on the internal light, open the window part way and place your hands on the wheel.

Upon request, show police your driver's license, registration and proof of insurance.

If an officer or immigration agent asks to look inside your car, you can refuse to consent to the search. But if police believe your car contains evidence of a crime, your car can be searched without your consent.

Both drivers and passengers have the right to remain silent. If you are a passenger, you can ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, sit silently or calmly leave. Even if the officer says no, you have the right to remain silent.

 

IF YOU FEEL YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED

Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. Don't physically resist officers or threaten to file a complaint.

Write down everything you remember, including officers' badge and patrol car numbers, which agency the officers were from, and any other details. Get contact information for witnesses. If you are injured, take photographs of your injuries (but seek medical attention first).

File a written complaint with the agency's internal affairs division or civilian complaint board. In most cases, you can file a complaint anonymously if you wish.

Call your local ACLU or visit www.aclu.org/profiling.

 

This information is not intended as legal advice.

Produced by the American Civil Liberties Union 6/2010

 

Joe makes it sound cut and dry. It is not. The TSA falls under the category of "pat down" searches. The idea of a search being illegal only pertains to evidence being admissible in court. The police can do what they want and often do. They will search people and cars (teenagers for instance) confiscate what they find, put a scare into the kids and send them on their way. The police have no intention of arresting anyone at times like that, if they were they would get a warrant.

 

Again - legal and illegal searches is a matter for the courts to interpret. It is not against the law, Joe, for police to search without permission, the legality is for making court cases. The police here often search people and "pat searches" are legal.

[jacko 8,778]

I went to the ACLU website.

Oh, must be right then.....

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

Oh, must be right then.....

don't be obtuse, read the material, read other material. Object to the information I posted. Typical of today, attack the source of information and you trivialize the message. Hitler trivialized the Jews that way.

 

I am a conservative, white male. I don't like the ACLU but I am enough of a critical thinker that I can separate fact from fiction. You obviously are not a critical thinker.

 

Speak up! Offer something that disproves what I posted from the ACLU's website.

 

I was making a point, I referenced info. That is not the only place I found information.

 

Besides being a jerk what have you contributed to the discussion?

 

Relegate yourself to the movie quiz!

[jacko 8,778]

don't be obtuse, read the material, read other material. Object to the information I posted. Typical of today, attack the source of information and you trivialize the message. Hitler trivialized the Jews that way.

Oh, the old Nazi line now.....

ACLU education at it's best......

Edited November 27, 2010 by jacko

[joekicker 53]

Joe wrote:

It is illegal for the police in the USA to stop you in the first place, let alone to search you while walking peacefully through the mall.

 

I don't find anything in your cut-and-paste that contradicts that. And there is definitely nothing in your cites that police can stop you AND search you for doing nothing at all - as MUST happen at the airport under all circumstances, all the time, for doing nothing at all.

 

Tell you what. This time, if you can make your fingers bring themselves to do it, tell me that US police can stop you and search you for no reason, exactly as happens at the airport by NON-police. Because that's a definite statement that can be proved wrong. And then I'll prove you're wrong. If you don't want to say this, why are you arguing with me at all about it?

 

I "accused" you of nothing. I wrote that *I* don't get why you don't care about massive escalation of searches of your person. And I don't get it.

 

I went to the ACLU website. Joe claims it is "illegal" in America for the police to search you:

 

Hitler trivialized the Jews that way.

 

Godwin's Law. You lose.

 

.

Edited November 27, 2010 by joekicker

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

Joe wrote:

 

I "accused" you of nothing. I wrote that *I* don't get why you don't care about massive escalation of searches of your person. And I don't get it.

MORON, I never said I don't care. I said nothing on the subject at all.

 

Are you THAT obtuse?

 

Where did I say anything of the sort?

 

You are as disingenuous as they come. You can do no wrong and when you are called on it you profess your brilliance.

 

And...you lie!!!!!

 

I never said it did not bother me? I never commented on that at all.

 

How can you make up LIES like that?

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

Oh, the old Nazi line now.....

ACLU education at it's best......

You are a dunce. I hate the ACLU but I can use them for research.

 

I was explaining the law not using them for political references you dolt!

 

My Hitler reference was to point out the current leftist model of attacking the messenger (as you do) to trivialize their point.

 

You cannot carry on a discussion so you resort to trivialization.

 

jacko, go back to the kid's game section, please!

[joekicker 53]

How can you make up LIES like that?

 

Heh. Speaking of untruth.

 

I swear I had totally forgotten your silly post equating the police and Testicle Searchers of America (TSA) when I ran across this item in an entirely different context (for me). It shows what happens when police try to search citizens who are doing nothing:

 

On Oct. 6, 2008, Jerry Corliss, a law-abiding citizen who then lived in Allentown, was carrying a Glock handgun in a holster when he visited the Home Depot store just off Lehigh Street. It appears that somebody there became hysterical over the idea that anyone not in government might exercise his or her right to bear arms.

 

Soon, according to court documents, Dale Stokes, an Allentown police officer, stormed into the store, detained Corliss for doing absolutely nothing illegal, searched him without a warrant and seized his pistol.

 

Corliss was not charged and the weapon was returned, but those actions clashed with both the Bill of Rights and the Pennsylvania Constitution, which will cost the city, or its insurance carrier, $23,500 to settle a federal lawsuit brought by Corliss, who now lives in Lebanon.

 

Full report from the Allentown fish wrapper

 

MORON, I never said I don't care. I said nothing on the subject at all.

 

Um. Er. Yes. That was my point. You didn't care, even enough to comment. Still don't, apparently.

 

Tell you what. This time, if you can make your fingers bring themselves to do it, tell me that US police can stop you and search you for no reason, exactly as happens at the airport by NON-police. Because that's a definite statement that can be proved wrong. And then I'll prove you're wrong. If you don't want to say this, why are you arguing with me at all about it?

 

.

Edited November 27, 2010 by joekicker

[jacko 8,778]

You are a dunce. I hate the ACLU but I can use them for research.

 

I was explaining the law not using them for political references you dolt!

 

My Hitler reference was to point out the current leftist model of attacking the messenger (as you do) to trivialize their point.

 

You cannot carry on a discussion so you resort to trivialization.

 

jacko, go back to the kid's game section, please!

And you retort by insult and the old Nazi comments, talk about attacking the messenger...

Nope, I shall hang about, fun here watching Joe mince you!

 

Will you be doing this again soon.

Edited November 27, 2010 by jacko

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

And you retort by insult and the old Nazi comments, talk about attacking the messenger...

Nope, I shall hang about, fun here watching Joe mince you!

 

Will you be doing this again soon.

Again, you are not intelligent enough to understand an insult from a comparison to the tactics you used in your argument. I never thought you are the equivalent of Hitler. I simply pointed out how onerous the tactic you used is. You are not alone in that. Go back to FOX news now and you can inundate yourself in it, or CNBC. Whatever your political leanings are you will be the right kind of sycophant for one or the other. Because.....? You cannot think critically. You see ACLU and that is as far as you read. The fact that I used them to illustrate a non-political point is lost on you. The fact that I cannot stand the ACLU's political positions is irrelevant to you.

 

All you need to see is ACLU and off goes your brain!

 

Talk about mince meat! You would be perfect on someone's holiday table!

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

Heh. Speaking of untruth.

 

I swear I had totally forgotten your silly post equating the police and Testicle Searchers of America (TSA) when I ran across this item in an entirely different context (for me). It shows what happens when police try to search citizens who are doing nothing:

 

On Oct. 6, 2008, Jerry Corliss, a law-abiding citizen who then lived in Allentown, was carrying a Glock handgun in a holster when he visited the Home Depot store just off Lehigh Street. It appears that somebody there became hysterical over the idea that anyone not in government might exercise his or her right to bear arms.

 

Soon, according to court documents, Dale Stokes, an Allentown police officer, stormed into the store, detained Corliss for doing absolutely nothing illegal, searched him without a warrant and seized his pistol.

 

Corliss was not charged and the weapon was returned, but those actions clashed with both the Bill of Rights and the Pennsylvania Constitution, which will cost the city, or its insurance carrier, $23,500 to settle a federal lawsuit brought by Corliss, who now lives in Lebanon.

 

Full report from the Allentown fish wrapper

 

 

 

Um. Er. Yes. That was my point. You didn't care, even enough to comment. Still don't, apparently.

 

Tell you what. This time, if you can make your fingers bring themselves to do it, tell me that US police can stop you and search you for no reason, exactly as happens at the airport by NON-police. Because that's a definite statement that can be proved wrong. And then I'll prove you're wrong. If you don't want to say this, why are you arguing with me at all about it?

 

.

You are so full of shit your eyes MUST be brown.

Edited November 27, 2010 by midlifecrisis

[terminator 0]

All this searchy stuff and liquid stuff could be stopped by a few simple questions:

1. Are you a rag head

2. If not do you sympathise with rag heads

3. What do you think of getting loads of virgins in heaven

4. Is Allah a cunt?

 

Depending on the answers to these questions you can go in the not searched and take your booze onboard the aircraft queue, or in the strip you naked queue.

[joekicker 53]

You are so full of shit your eyes MUST be brown.

 

No proof required, eh? I'm sure this statement will substitute for facts, logic and reason. In your mind, anyhow.

 

I wonder if jacko kind of nailed it and you could benefit from a little holiday. Seriously - it's the effing INTERNET! Beating up on your keyboard doesn't actually impress. You could beat up on me, but so far, not even a girly slap has landed.

 

.

[midlifecrisis 4,030]

No proof required, eh? I'm sure this statement will substitute for facts, logic and reason. In your mind, anyhow.

 

I wonder if jacko kind of nailed it and you could benefit from a little holiday. Seriously - it's the effing INTERNET! Beating up on your keyboard doesn't actually impress. You could beat up on me, but so far, not even a girly slap has landed.

 

.

 

Well, that doesn't stop you from lying, misrepresenting what people say (especially by taking things out of context), misrepresenting facts and NEVER owning up to your errors (instead turning the argument into an attack on who challenges you).

 

Put me on ignore as I will for you.

 

 

????

[Al_Davis 28]

All this searchy stuff and liquid stuff could be stopped by a few simple questions:

1. Are you a rag head

2. If not do you sympathise with rag heads

3. What do you think of getting loads of virgins in heaven

4. Is Allah a cunt?

 

Depending on the answers to these questions you can go in the not searched and take your booze onboard the aircraft queue, or in the strip you naked queue.

 

Imho, we had our Timothy McVeigh. The odds are, we will see 500 muslim based believers,if not more, before someone like McVeigh attacks again. PROFILE!!!. Young, muslim male, no brainer, he must not only go through primary but secondary maybe tertiary screening. If Little miss Texas and her over bearning mother get through with that 16oz lucky holy water because the TSA was up inside a Muslim's ass, Im all for it.

 

http://simurl.com/wahlad

Edited November 27, 2010 by Al_Davis

[terminator 0]

Imho, we had our Timothy McVeigh. The odds are, we will see 500 muslim based believers,if not more, before someone like McVeigh attacks again. PROFILE!!!. Young, muslim male, no brainer, he must not only go through primary but secondary maybe tertiary screening. If Little miss Texas and her over bearning mother get through with that 16oz lucky holy water because the TSA was up inside a Muslim's ass, Im all for it.

 

http://simurl.com/wahlad

Exactly. How about fat, red faced, obvious alcoholics with a suitcase full of condoms and a laptop being exempt from screening, I mean you are hardly going to travel to somewhere Asian with a ball sack like 3 pounds of spuds and blow a fucking plane up.

 

What is wrong with discrimination, stereotyping? Usually it is spot on. And yes, some twat like McVeigh would have no vested interest in doing a plane.

 

Now tell me, please someone who makes bombs, explain this:

I cant take a 500ml bottle of vodka on a plane or a bottle of coke bought somewhere not airside, but i can have a suposed bottle of red plax-200ml, a tube of 'toothpaste(it says), 100 ml, some roll on deoderant-200 ml and maybe some green mouthwash, 100ml, all inside a ziplock bag, which i can happily flash at a trolley dolly as i nip to the kazi and mix them up to form an explosive. Is it me or what?