Who REALLY opposes the TSA love pat downs?

[Revere]

Again with the false alternatives. As if "scrutiny" is real safety.

False. For enough scrutiny you can be made safe from a terror attack.

I notice you are still too cowardly to actually state what degree of terror you would be willing to accept for the degree of scrutiny you can swallow.

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

When someone figures out a way to get enough explosives on to a plane in the fillings of their teeth, he'll want to look at everyone's teeth, and then tell you can't be safe until they do that, too.

They're never satisfied.

 

[loosecannon]

Again with the false alternatives. As if "scrutiny" is real safety.

False. For enough scrutiny you can be made safe from a terror attack.

I notice you are still too cowardly to actually state what degree of terror you would be willing to accept for the degree of scrutiny you can swallow.

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

The problem is that Revere is only willing to whine for it.

He refuses to post what level of risk he is willing to assume for reduced scrutiny.

 

[Revere]

But the problem is that without this much scrutiny and more there is no way to prevent sufficiently motivated terrorists from eventually succeeding at downing an airplane.

So what can you live with, far more invasive scrutiny and a smaller window of opportunity, or far less and a greater chance that you and yours will be targets of terror attacks?

Please quantify what level of risks you are willing to assume.

Think of Mexico, 7 mayors assassinated in a few months. The risks are real.

You're a phony sack of shit. It's not a choice between a pimple faced TSA agent shoving his finger in your wife's pussy and a guarantee of safety. Because the TSA can guarantee nothing of the sort.

Nobody in the US is forced to be be penetrated before they can get near a mayor. The problem with drug cartels is not that the TSA doesn't screen them. In fact, they move back and forth across the US border with almost no resistance.

Actually you are the phoney sack of shit.

I am just the guy asking questions without revealing a hint about my own actual position.

I didn't post this thread to watch you squirm like a slug on a slat bed, but I do enjoy that aspect of it!

Meanwhile what level of scrutiny will you trade for what corresponding level of security. Terrorism is real, 9/11 was just an opening act. Many tens of thousands have been killed by terror attacks in Russia, India, Indonesia, Iraq Iran and Afghanistan since 9/11.

Please be blunt and on point or stfu.

All you offer is false promises of security. You can't promise anything for what you are asking should be traded.

 

[Revere]

False. For enough scrutiny you can be made safe from a terror attack.

I notice you are still too cowardly to actually state what degree of terror you would be willing to accept for the degree of scrutiny you can swallow.

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

The problem is that Revere is only willing to whine for it.

He refuses to post what level of risk he is willing to assume for reduced scrutiny.

It's an absolute asinine premise, since you can't quantify safety in terms of the number of body cavities I would be required to have searched to achieve safety.

 

[loosecannon]

False. For enough scrutiny you can be made safe from a terror attack.

I notice you are still too cowardly to actually state what degree of terror you would be willing to accept for the degree of scrutiny you can swallow.

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

When someone figures out a way to get enough explosives on to a plane in the fillings of their teeth, he'll want to look at everyone's teeth, and then tell you can't be safe until they do that, too.

They're never satisfied.

Actually Israel has been astonishingly effective at reducing terror in Israel. But they still endure more than we do.

It is a trade off, more risk for less scrutiny vs more scrutiny for less risk.

That's an absolute. So where on the scale of options do you weigh in?

You can't have it all.

You have to choose either more risk or more scrutiny.

 

[loosecannon]

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

The problem is that Revere is only willing to whine for it.

He refuses to post what level of risk he is willing to assume for reduced scrutiny.

It's an absolute asinine premise, since you can't quantify safety in terms of the number of body cavities I would be required to have searched to achieve safety.

Actually Israel has been astonishingly effective at reducing terror in Israel. But they still endure more than we do.

It is a trade off, more risk for less scrutiny vs more scrutiny for less risk.

That's an absolute. So where on the scale of options do you weigh in?

You can't have it all.

You have to choose either more risk or more scrutiny.

 

[Paulie]

False. For enough scrutiny you can be made safe from a terror attack.

I notice you are still too cowardly to actually state what degree of terror you would be willing to accept for the degree of scrutiny you can swallow.

People who love freedom to such an extent are typically willing to die for it.

I just as soon thank the rebels from the US colonies for their bravery and sacrifice to oppose and defeat the absence of said freedom, and do them proud by living similarly.

The problem is that Revere is only willing to whine for it.

He refuses to post what level of risk he is willing to assume for reduced scrutiny.

Well my point was basically, that he most likely is willing to die for it.

If you know that the possibility of an attack creeps higher in the absence of excess security, then you have accepted the fact that you yourself could very well possibly be the beneficiary of such an attack.

I happen to think it's debatable to a certain extent though, that risk increases as security decreases. In a macro sense, I'm sure it probably does. But in a micro sense, it could just as easily be argued that no pat downs would not necessarily lead to more attacks, considering how many snafus there have already been with airline security since 9/11.

 

[Revere]

The scam is to tell people they will be safe, if only the TSA can touch their genitals.

Israel practices racial profiling.

Knock yourself out.

 

[Paulie]

I'm not really sure how effective racial profiling would be in the long term.

As soon as islamic terrorists realize that muslims are being singled out, they'll adapt and pick new martyrs that are anglo saxon.

Or if they're REALLY smart, they'll use african american martyrs. We know damn right well blacks are never going to be singled out for airport security. The NAACP, the ACLU, amongst others, would be all over that.

 

[RadiomanATL]

I'm not really sure how effective racial profiling would be in the long term.

As soon as islamic terrorists realize that muslims are being singled out, they'll adapt and pick new martyrs that are anglo saxon.

Or if they're REALLY smart, they'll use african american martyrs. We know damn right well blacks are never going to be singled out for airport security. The NAACP, the ACLU, amongst others, would be all over that.

Something that seems to be lost on most here.

 

[Revere]

I'm not really sure how effective racial profiling would be in the long term.

As soon as islamic terrorists realize that muslims are being singled out, they'll adapt and pick new martyrs that are anglo saxon.

Or if they're REALLY smart, they'll use african american martyrs. We know damn right well blacks are never going to be singled out for airport security. The NAACP, the ACLU, amongst others, would be all over that.

I concede nobody can guarantee anything. The other asshole wants you to believe you can give up more and really be safer.

 

[Paulie]

I'm not really sure how effective racial profiling would be in the long term.

As soon as islamic terrorists realize that muslims are being singled out, they'll adapt and pick new martyrs that are anglo saxon.

Or if they're REALLY smart, they'll use african american martyrs. We know damn right well blacks are never going to be singled out for airport security. The NAACP, the ACLU, amongst others, would be all over that.

Something that seems to be lost on most here.

I mean shit, there's plenty of middle eastern muslims that can blend right in with just a shave, a hair cut, and a business suit.

It's like these people think a terrorist is going to come through the airport with his Thobe or his Bisht screaming "la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la!!!!!!!"

 

[shintao]

The scam is to tell people they will be safe, if only the TSA can touch their genitals.

Israel practices racial profiling.

Knock yourself out.

You are a stupid fuck if you actually think TSA gets off touching sex organs. Immature moralist bastards like yourself is what is wrong with America. Your another terrorist sympathizer, a 911 waiting to happen, and a complete imbecile.

 

[asterism]

Would you be willing to accept an airliner taken down by explosives smuggled aboard once, twice, 5 times in 5 years instead?

Who REALLY opposes the same kind of invasive searches at train stations and bus stations?

Would you be willing to accept a bombing like the Madrid train bombing instead? 2004 Madrid train bombings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The reason I am asking is because it is easy to just say "don't touch my junk". But there can be and have been real world consequences for lax security in the US and Europe dozens of times in the past decade.

As long as we actively cultivate terrorism it seems kind of bizarro to simultaneously resist efforts to contain it while complaining fiercely if a shoe bomb or underwear bomber succeeds occasionally.

So what do you really think and why, and be cautioned that if you oppose defensive or protective measures you have to state what rate of terrorist attacks you find acceptable to preserve your convenience and dignity.

Keep in mind that in places like India, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran these things happen nearly daily killing hundreds every single month.

Are you really willing to accept that level of carnage instead of a simple pass thru a back scatter x ray device?

No.

The issue with the pat downs is that they wouldn't have stopped the underwear bomber anyway and it demonstrates how absurd the TSA is.

But the problem is that without this much scrutiny and more there is no way to prevent sufficiently motivated terrorists from eventually succeeding at downing an airplane.

So what can you live with, far more invasive scrutiny and a smaller window of opportunity, or far less and a greater chance that you and yours will be targets of terror attacks?

Please quantify what level of risks you are willing to assume.

Think of Mexico, 7 mayors assassinated in a few months. The risks are real.

El Al is better at this, maybe we should try their model. Ours doesn't work.

I did quantify the level of risks above. If I was unclear, then I'll clarify by saying that I accept the risks if actual activity and demeanor is scrutinized, not random checks for things.

 

[asterism]

And yet somehow El Al doesn't have these problems and they enrage the nutjobs even more.

who is ElAl?

USA to Israel Flights | EL AL Airlines

 

[asterism]

No that really isn't the point at all, or it isn't much of the point. The point is that the government can't keep you safe unless they scrutinize every inch of you every moment of every day that you interact in public within the US.

They just can't.

So what do you really choose? No invasive scrutiny and the same kind of terrorism everybody else enjoys, or no terrorism and no privacy?

Those really are the available options. With of course the middle ground.

Please post what kind of terrorist threat you would find acceptable if you are adverse to closer scrutiny.

I find any threat that cannot be solved by a common sense approach to scrutinizing the people flying acceptable. The problem is that we have the big government lowest common denominator approach.

The guy waving that fluorescent light checking to see if my ID is real without ever actually looking at me or my demeanor? Lowest common denominator, not even qualified to be a bouncer in a bar.

So you will be satisfied with business as usual and a few successful attacks like Madrid?

No.

I'd be satisfied with business as usual and the proportionate few successful attacks like Israel adjusting for their proximity. Thousands of attempts and few successes, surrounded on three sides by enemies.

 

[asterism]

I'm not really sure how effective racial profiling would be in the long term.

As soon as islamic terrorists realize that muslims are being singled out, they'll adapt and pick new martyrs that are anglo saxon.

Or if they're REALLY smart, they'll use african american martyrs. We know damn right well blacks are never going to be singled out for airport security. The NAACP, the ACLU, amongst others, would be all over that.

That was sorta the plan with Islam making inroads in the prison system.

 

[loosecannon]

I concede nobody can guarantee anything. The other asshole wants you to believe you can give up more and really be safer.

of course that is just you lying out of your ass trying your level best to avoid answering the questions asked.

Quantify the risks you are willing to assume for less scrutiny or stfu.

 

[loosecannon]

The scam is to tell people they will be safe, if only the TSA can touch their genitals.

Israel practices racial profiling.

Knock yourself out.

You are a stupid fuck if you actually think TSA gets off touching sex organs. Immature moralist bastards like yourself is what is wrong with America. Your another terrorist sympathizer, a 911 waiting to happen, and a complete imbecile.

You gotta wonder how the TSA manages to find people willing to frisk same sex fliers with this level of intrusion tho.

I wouldn't do this day in and out for $400K/year.

 

[asterism]

The scam is to tell people they will be safe, if only the TSA can touch their genitals.

Israel practices racial profiling.

Knock yourself out.

You are a stupid fuck if you actually think TSA gets off touching sex organs. Immature moralist bastards like yourself is what is wrong with America. Your another terrorist sympathizer, a 911 waiting to happen, and a complete imbecile.

You gotta wonder how the TSA manages to find people willing to frisk same sex fliers with this level of intrusion tho.

I wouldn't do this day in and out for $400K/year.

The sad part is that there are plenty who are glad to do it for less than $20K.

TSA: Pay Scales at TSA (2010)