Backscatter

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Sorry I don't do guilt.

I'll see your guilt and raise you manipulation.

[Gemme]

Originally Posted by Brock

This puts things into incredibly sharp focus for me.

Let's go back to the 9/11 tragedy for a moment.

How about the people in the plane that went down in the Pennsylvania field?
They did not go down instantly. Due to events that were transpiring on their plane, they had a pretty good idea they would not make it. Try and put yourself in their position for just a minute. (although that is impossible to even imagine what a horrible feeling) Those poor souls had to endure absolute fucking terror for a long time as their situation became progressively worse on their airplane.

Pretend those people had been given these two choices that day before they boarded the plane.

Keep this in mind. This is a little exercise in the absolute. There can be no what ifs, no questions, no altering of the choices, no saying this could never happen, no saying this type of guarantee could never be provided. Remember this is a hypothetical scenario, it is only pretend.
Their only two selections are listed below:
1.
Go through what we have to undergo today in order to travel by plane. If they willingly agree to this, they are guaranteed personal safety.2.
Board the plane exactly as they did that day - take their chances because they are highly indignant and sick of being intimidated by terrorism.

Wonder what their choice would be.
Wonder what your choice would be.
I know what mine would be.

Here's the fly in the ointment...there IS no guarantee. Someone above just mentioned that the machines can't see inside body cavities. If drug mules find ways to swallow or insert balloons of drugs inside them, what makes anyone think a terrorist and/or someone bent on hurting others for whatever reason won't do the same with something that could be used to bring a plane down?

I think that there should be ways to go about this without violating people. I don't see it happening any time soon, but there should be that option too.

[RockOn]

Gemme,
Thanks for your comments on my post. There is a great deal more than just one fly in the ointment in my little discussion. But remember, the entire thing was based on "let's pretend." I agree, there is no way the guarantee could EVER be provided in a bazillion years.

Better options would be great. Also, I read the article about the pregnant woman. It made me very, very angry. So sexist as someone already pointed out.

Today I have freedom to chose if I travel by plane, drive or stay home. I respect anyone's ideas and choices about their own lives. We are all different. We have different agendas and different life experiences in our past. I was in the army guard as a weekend warrior type in my 20s. If I had been full time military and had made a career of it, I am positive I would feel differently about this situation than what I feel now. My mindset would have incorporated "militant mindset."

(From this point on, my comments are to the general open forum and not directed at Gemme in any way.)

I don't buy into "SHOULD'VEs" from anyone. When I agree with someone, it is the result of what I see as best for me and not because I allowed someone to should've all over me.

[Waldo]

Originally Posted by Brock

This puts things into incredibly sharp focus for me.

Let's go back to the 9/11 tragedy for a moment.

How about the people in the plane that went down in the Pennsylvania field?
They did not go down instantly. Due to events that were transpiring on their plane, they had a pretty good idea they would not make it. Try and put yourself in their position for just a minute. (although that is impossible to even imagine what a horrible feeling) Those poor souls had to endure absolute fucking terror for a long time as their situation became progressively worse on their airplane.

Pretend those people had been given these two choices that day before they boarded the plane.

Keep this in mind. This is a little exercise in the absolute. There can be no what ifs, no questions, no altering of the choices, no saying this could never happen, no saying this type of guarantee could never be provided. Remember this is a hypothetical scenario, it is only pretend.
Their only two selections are listed below:
1.
Go through what we have to undergo today in order to travel by plane. If they willingly agree to this, they are guaranteed personal safety.
2.
Board the plane exactly as they did that day - take their chances because they are highly indignant and sick of being intimidated by terrorism.

Wonder what their choice would be.
Wonder what your choice would be.
I know what mine would be.

Really? Guarantee? Bwahhahaha. Sure thing, pal.

And? My memory is pretty awesome about this stuff because it impacted me. Think back, please... to the training that air crews had... which was absolute cooperation with hijackers.

I have zero doubt those people suffered unbearable torment ONCE THEY REALIZED they were not going to land safely anywhere. But that realization likely did not come until the very last moments of their lives. Whereas the people of Flight 93, which went down in Pennsylvania, figured it out and tried to over take the hijackers.

Up until those attacks that was the standard operating procedures of hijackers. Take control of a plane (via intimidation of the crew and passengers) and demand the plane be flown to an alternate location and make demands. Keep passengers and crew until such time your demands are met.

There is no way in hell that works any more. Just won't. Today, if a passenger were to try to overtake the flight they would be taken down by other passengers.

The choice isn't about indignation. The choice is about paranoia and reality. When the tactics that the government employs makes sense, I will gladly submit to enhanced security measures.

In the meantime I'll happily move through airports in countries which have suffered innumerable terrorist attacks with security measures that are not meaningless.

Security theater or real security. That's the choice we should have. And I know my choice.

[Corkey]

I see your point Brock, but entirely disagree with it. I fought for ALL Americans freedoms, not just my own. I didn't have the luxury of thinking only for myself. I still don't.

[Waldo]

Latest news: 100 images leaked.

Obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request after it was discovered that agents in Florida had, perhaps illegally, saved the images.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Waldo

Latest news: 100 images leaked.

Obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request after it was discovered that agents in Florida had, perhaps illegally, saved the images.

I don't for one minute beleive that some assbites will do this- because they are assbites. They should be prosecuted for this is in fact, they broke the law. There are always idiots like this that will take advantage of a situation.

[RockOn]

Corky, I totally respect whatever stance you take. It is yours, serves you and belongs to you. I do not feel any need to have opinions similar to yours. You elected to make a career in the military, correct? From my very, very limited experience in the military, I noticed there were certain things that my mind was forced into embracing and accepting. It was your choice to sign up and it is no secret the military platform is designed to decrease individual luxuries. I can very easily see why your opinions on this topic in here are what they are.

As I mentioned, had I been career military, my comments in this particular thread would not be the same as what I have presented. I am sure of that.

[RockOn]

Yep ... you are correct. There will always be jerks waiting for an opportunity to take advantage of anything and everything.

[Corkey]

I have been trying to respond for awhile now and this may not post.
Brock you would presume wrong. I neither made the service my career nor did the service mold my opinions. But thanks for engaging.

[RockOn]

Corkey, my apologies. You wrote this in previous post:

"I don't easily give up my freedoms, seeing how I fought for them, and neither should you. If we do so then the terrorists have indeed won."

I did that assume thing after I read the part where you said "seeing how I fought for them"

By the way, weatherboi informed me in a little note that I spelled your name incorrectly not once, but twice. Thanks weatherboi!

[RockOn]

Hey Waldo -

Your opening comment, which is:

"Really? Guarantee? Bwahhahaha. Sure thing, pal."

leads me to believe you did not understand it was a hypothetical, totally unrealistic situation I made up ... as in "pretend like."

A lot of the rest of what you said was a good history refresher. Much of it I agreed with.

Waldo, my pal - everyone was impacted. Our whole fucking nation was tramatized.

You don't mind me calling you pal, do you? I see you used that endearing term towards me. LOL!

This has been interesting discussion. I am out of here. Past my bedtime.

[Waldo]

Originally Posted by Brock

Hey Waldo -

Your opening comment, which is:

"Really? Guarantee? Bwahhahaha. Sure thing, pal."

leads me to believe you did not understand it was a hypothetical, totally unrealistic situation I made up ... as in "pretend like."

A lot of the rest of what you said was a good history refresher. Much of it I agreed with.

Waldo, my pal - everyone was impacted. Our whole fucking nation was tramatized.

You don't mind me calling you pal, do you? I see you used that endearing term towards me. LOL!

This has been interesting discussion. I am out of here. Past my bedtime.

Um... but it's not. It's a real situation which did, in fact, happen. And the scanners and the pat-downs are also real. You are not asking a hypothetical question at all. What you are asking is a moot question. It's really not my fault you don't understand the concept.

It's a moot question because even if the people on that plane submitted to the scans and the pat-downs it wouldn't have changed the outcome. Heck, they could have submitted to cavity searches and it wouldn't have changed one thing. It wasn't explosives or guns and even knives. The hijackers had box-cutters. Which, at the time, were perfectly acceptable to fly with. Box-cutters.

But you're right. Everyone was impacted and my own impact is no greater than that of anyone else. But then again, that was my point, you see?

And no, I don't mind you calling me "pal". I do mind you doing it in a way which comes across, here in writing, like some sort of posturing, but that's only because I find that sort of behavior to be annoying and childish.

[RockOn]

......

Ok

[Nat]

I most likely will not stop flying over this, but I find the situation traumatizing. There are many, many people who (like me) have experienced sexual trauma, and the situation feels really violative. There are a lot of people who don't have a problem with it - which is swell for you. But I totally understand that guy when he says that basically he doesn't want to have to endure sexual assault to fly. That is what it feels like to me to have to choose between a naked pic and being thoroughly groped - and if you freak out and want to leave, you could face an 11k fine.

I have some PTSD symptoms, but not nearly as bad as others I've known. Just *thinking* about this situation is pretty triggering to me, but I think I could force myself to go through with it if there were no other choice. (And when I say, "it," I mean the patdown most likely because that will be a woman and I will be able to see her face - and because my "pat-down" can't be "leaked" - all of which are slightly better though still potentially very traumatizing depending on how it goes. I've had no problems with the old-style back-of-hands patdowns, but the fingers and palms patdowns sound pretty frightening to me.

The pictures that were leaked are both comforting and upsetting. Comforting because they are far more obscuring than the backscatter naked pics on the first page of this thread. Upsetting because of the lies TSA has told about how they aren't saved or sent anywhere.

I don't think this situation is alright at all. I think if I were a mom, I would be even less alright with my child facing these choices.

[Andrea]

I would prefer to take the chance on a one-in-gazillion terrorist attack than be violated by our government every time I fly.

Andrea

[Waldo]

And because you can't make up stuff this good, the NYT writes about the TSA being concerned at the growing support for National Opt Out Day.

The author of the piece writes: "Do the imagers, for example, detect sanitary napkins? Yes. Does that then necessitate a pat-down? The T.S.A. couldn’t say. Screeners, the T.S.A. has said, are expected to exercise some discretion."

Feministing has a great write up about that little gem.

[Nat]

[Nat]

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Nat

This is insane.