Your War on Terror: The Terrorists Are Winning

I'm pretty good now, thanks.

But I've got no problem with unobtrusive scanning for weapons before boarding a plane, which is what they do now.

You go through a metal detector that looks for sufficient metal that could be a weapon.

Your carry on baggage is similarly screeed by a device that again, is optimized for metal in weapons.

They don't care what you are reading.
They don't care what's in your computer.
They don't care what's on your music player.

They aren't, in fact searching for anything but weapons, and if there is something you don't want seen you do have the option of checking your bag.

A quite reasonable trade off between the security needs and the 4th Amendment right against UNREASONABLE searches.

Note the UNREASONABLE part in the 4th.

What the TSA does is reasonable.

Of course you go the Godwin route immediately.

As expected.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's about time. My friend traveled from California to Oregon on the train with a suitcase full of martial arts weapons, handcuffs and chains and no one said a thing. This was after 9/11.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Godwin route, lol, you putting up picture of bombing victims sure was a classy act, tasteless I say.

Enjoy your police state.

TSA pulls pants off 71 y/o man with knee implant
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-jdDE6bFow&feature=related

TSA still groping kids...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba030UmbkCo&feature=related

TSA Twisting Genitals, Treating Kids as if they should be carrying weapons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX8IgzKIVcs&feature=related

TSA Pats Down Pregnant Woman As Possible Security Threat, Police State In Full Force
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E2nk8UAQks&feature=related

TSA Harasses 9 Year Old Boy AFTER Train Ride
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR0G7t609Zc&feature=related

Young Boy Strip Searched by TSA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4&feature=related

TSA Treats 4 Year Disabled Boy like A Terrorist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlYIgSMQyYg&feature=related

8 Year Old on TSA's Watch List
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PH7713V8dM&feature=related

TSA Thugs Lose Case Against Woman with Applesauce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz8OocnnH0g&feature=related

And it goes on and on, and you want this shit in bus stations, subways, train stations...
Now go ahead and make some apologies behalf of the government policies,
convince me that its just isolated incidents and so on...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What's wrong with that? If terrorists know that old people in wheelchairs won't get searched, guess where the next bomb is going to be hidden?

 

Another apologist, enjoy your police state...

Do you understand implications of this kind of logic ?
If there is will there is the way...
Where do you stop ? What is stopping suicide bombers stuffing their assholes full of C4 or something,
does that mean you are welcoming the TSA stretching out your ass to see that there isnt anything there ?
LOL, I know that was extreme example but I think you get it ?

 

Pseudo-, not-quite fascism

We are, in the U.S., developing a pseudo-, not-quite fascism. Decisions are not being made according to their results, but, rather, according to what they can do for the private marketplace and its investors.

TSA's body scans, according to some experts, are useless. The invasive groping, according to those experts, is useless. I recall last year an Israeli security consultant who had helped design detection procedures at Ben Gurion Airport made the rounds on American cable news, explaining that far less invasive procedures did a better job than what TSA is doing.

But even Republicans accuse that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff appears to have profited from the body scanners:

During a one-minute speech on the House floor, Rep. Ted Poe (Texas) also blasted former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff as a "political hack" and accused him of profiting from the proliferation of the devices.

"There is no evidence these new body scanners make us more secure. But there is evidence that former Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff made money hawking these full body scanners," Poe said.

He went on to explain that Chertoff, who served under President George W. Bush, had given interviews promoting the scanners while he was "getting paid" to sell them.

"[T]he populace is giving up more rights in the name of alleged security. These body scanners are a violation of the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures ... There must be a better way to have security at airports than taking pornographic photographs of our citizens, including children, and then giving apparent kickbacks to political hacks."

Chertoff has advocated for the use of full-body scanners since he took his post at DHS in 2005.

As of January, his consulting agency, the Chertoff Group, counted among its clients one of the machines' manufacturers.

(Viebeck)​

So one of the more apparent alleviations of the problem would seem to be making decisions based on actual security issues instead of pandering to the private sector.

However, beyond even that, there is a deeper concern. My personal beef with Customs and Border Protection is that they seem dishonest.

In 2010, I had to pass through US CBP at Vancouver International Airport. That is, entering Canada from England, I had to go through a US checkpoint. It makes sense in a certain way, since I was flying home to Sea-Tac.

But on sovereign U.S. soil reserved inside the airport for this purpose, I was instructed to submit to secondary screening. My bag was taken from me and scanned while I answered questions in a stupid interview. At the end, Officer Hill of CBP asked if I had any questions. I asked why I was being detained. According to CBP, I was not being detained. To the other, I wonder what would have happened if I refused the secondary screening. I asked why my bag was being searched. According to CBP, my bag was not being searched. I told Officer Hill I did not appreciate being lied to, which apparently is so threatening that the situation ended with several armed goons standing around me with their hands on their holstered weapons while the shift supervisor (honestly, his name was "Officer Busto") tried to dress me down, refusing to return my passport until he finished chewing me out. The one thing he would not do is answer any questions about their definitions of detention and search.

And this is the problem. We're protected against unreasonable searches under the Constitution, and CBP's work-around is to simply say it's not a search. We're protected against detention without cause, and CBP's work-around is say it's not detention.

Of course, anyone who wants to argue whether it is detention or not is welcome to attempt to refuse secondary screening should they ever be instructed to submit. Or simply ask them questions about why they're doing what they're doing, and you'll find yourself surrounded by people trying threatening to pull their firearms on you for asking questions. You know, when they ask you if you have any questions.

The fact that CBP is a bunch of useless thugs is what it is. They're likely the bottom of the barrel among law enforcement officers. But the worrying aspect is that they are able to redefine notions like detention under force of law, or what constitutes a search.

It is telling to me that in places like Ireland and England, where they have a longer history of suffering terrorist attacks, authorities don't bother with that kind of stupid crap, as they have better things to do.

And yet, CBP apparently does not trust either British or Canadian authorities, which I think is hilarious. No, really, think about it. I clear to fly out of England at Heathrow, clear to enter Canada, and somewhere in there, what, I'm going to sneak a bomb into my bag? Just how incompetent are our international neighbors that CBP has to redefine detention and search in order to keep the country safe while some asshole pissed off about his taxes flies a private airplane into an IRS office?

It is my assertion that if we actually had effective security procedures in place, we would not need such paranoid idiots as Officers Hill and Busto "protecting" (ha!) our borders by trying to evade their obligations under the law.
____________________

Notes:

Viebeck, Elise. "GOP lawmaker: Full-body scanners violate Fourth Amendment". The Hill. November 17, 2010. TheHill.com. January 10, 2012. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...r-full-body-scanners-violate-fourth-amendment

 

I understand that I don't want my airplane to get blown up. Would you prefer no searches at all?

 

Apparently I was wrong presuming that you would get it.
Maybe you want this shit going on in the malls, concerts, sport events and so on, you cant be never safe enough...

 

I feel in my heart of hearts that Arthur is a terrorist and an imminent threat to the safety of every single goddamn freakin' citizen of the United States, and that the Sciforums administration ought to turn over his I.P. address to the relevant authorities and insistently persuade them to accept that this is indeed the case--is that too much to ask of "y'all"? Am I way out of line in saying so (oh, and I assure you: I am not jokingand am not making light of an oh-so-serious threat)? Do I even fucking care?

At the moment, I kinda feel that Spidergoat is too... but normally I don't--so please don't act on this.

Is this an inappropriate accusation? (Again, do I care?) I mean, just the fact that we're like 500 times less likely to die by a "terrorist" act than we are by an automobile accident, or heartburn (not the right number, but probably close (again...)--Fraggle posted this factoid the other day, so look it up), ought to make taking action on my "concern" a lawful obligation of the Sciforums administration, right? Especially as we're all so willing to throw away our liberties one by one, and spend billions and freakin' billions dollars on this, right?

And then there's the fact that I personally am perhaps ten million times more likely to die of status epilepticus or SUDEP than by "terrorist" action--ought I concern myself with terrorism or epilepsy? Well, terrorism obviously FFS.

I need a new chew toy.

 

What part of UNREASONABLE didn't you understand?

Clearly what they are doing, with scanners that just look for weapons and explosives, and wait times down to 4 minutes, is reasonable.

Get over it.

 

Which we can thank the TSA for.

 

Well do tell us Tiassa, what to you would constitute EFFECTIVE Security Procedures?

-------------

PS, left out of your previous post was the rebutal from the Chertoff Group:

 

LOL, yeah, you are right, lets take this shit to bus stations, subways, train stations, malls, concerts, sport events, political rallys, schools, restaurants, everywhere !
Then the War On Terror is won and we can move on !

 

I think there are metal detectors associated with many of those events.

 

And according to other experts they are very useful. As in they would have found this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Airlines_Flight_253

And you weren't being detained any longer than it takes to make sure you are entering the country legally though.

You wouldn't be allowed to enter the US.

Well you said it was scanned and scanning for weapons/explosives is not the same as a search. Regardless, coming into the country by law everything you bring in can be searched, and that is not considered unreasonable.

Well what do you expect, he doesn't make the laws but he has to deal with people like you who take it out on him every day.

You have a complaint about our security procedures, he really isn't the person to go off on now is he?

Too bad for you, but it wasn't either an unreasonable detention or search

Customs isn't just looking for bombs you know. Other things need to be declared and some things which are legal in England/Canada, like Cuban Cigars, aren't legally brought into the US.

 

That isnt just enough, we need the whole nine yards like TSA has shown us, metal detectors just dont cut it, you know, chemical weapons, plastic explosives, ceramic weapons and all that shit get through !

 

The rest of us have moved on.

You seem bent out of shape over taking reasonable precautions to keep guns and explosives out of sensitive/vulnerable areas.

Why is that?

 

If they ever attack a stadium (like in the novel Black Sunday), you can bet there will be such precautions.

 

What part of REASONABLE don't you understand?

 

Me ? Talk to TSA about that.

And dont get soft now, or otherwise we are going to lose The War !