# Post-Christmas Airport Security



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

I'm about to fly to the US, and I'm wondering if anyone else has been unfortunate enough to get stuck with the new draconian security measures in place for flights to the US. More importantly, how much were you allowed on the plane? Laptops are acceptable, but what about a bag for the laptop, and other peripherals?

Thanks!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I am thinking the whole crotch bomber thing was staged to justify those new intrusions on our privatesy.

I am thinking that any one hoping for an eternal rendezvous with a harem of virgins would be highly unlikely to initiate such a venture by castrating himself.

Still if I had to travel by air (thank God I don't) I would go with the rule; If it is important to you leave it behind. You know if that laptop ends up in baggage it won't end up in the same place as you do.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

I flew from Maui to Seattle then to Victoria a couple days ago.

Security wasn't much of a problem. I had a few carry on bags and I only had to throw away some water I wanted to bring on board.

I had a laptop, blackberry, iPod, cords, lots of pens and pencils. No problems with that stuff.

YMMV


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

i wonder if terrorists would target airlines if we weren't so paranoid over air travel. If we treated getting on a plane just like getting on a train or bus, would it be a big problem? After all, more Americans are killed by other Americans in violent crime, car accidents, etc. than by terrorists; even in 2001, year of 9/11. So why are we all afraid of air travel and submit to ridiculous security procedures?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I travel a lot, and the level of scan varies by airport, though DC was the worst--they actually checked my hair (it was up in a bun) to see if there is anything concealed in there.

But overall, it's really not that big a deal. Check your airline for your carry-on bag size limits, but considering the number of people travelling with those big carry-on roller-bag things, that's not a terrible restriction.

Taking your peripherals carry-on should be fine. You may have to take your laptop out to scan it separately, so it helps if it is easy to get to. You might need to turn it on in front of them as well (though it's been a while since I had to do that) so make sure it's got some charge. If you have anything liquid or gels in your carry-on, makes sure the total amount is under 100 mL, and keep it all in a ziploc bag. You will probably need to put that through separately as well, so make sure it's easy to get to.

Oh, and just to make life easy on yourself, keep the amount of metal on your person to a minimum--keep it all in the bag. It just saves a bit of time if you can walk through without needing a separate body scan or pat down.

It also helps to wear shoes that are easy to remove and put back on again, since you may need to scan them, and if you walk in wearing a jacket you will probably need to remove it and put it through the scanner. That varies, though.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Some Canadian Statistics, that are as accurate as my varied internet sources. May help put things in perspective.

Chance of Dying in a Terrorist attack ~1/5,000,000
Chance of Dating A Supermodel ~1/1,000,000
Chances of that Supermodel flattening you with a golf club if your name is Tiger Woods ~1/1
Chance of being struck by lightning~1/500,000
Chance of being tasered by a mountie suffering from God Syndrome ~1/30,000
revised to 1/10,000 after news reports that ~70% of incidents are not reported.
Chance of dying in an auto crash ~1/7500
Chance of taxes being audited 1/500 (Gives new meaning to the term terrorist)
Chance of being injured in an auto crash ~1/250 (1/60)
Chances of dying due to a preventable medical error ~1/3500


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

Main thing - get to the airport and make sure you check-in at least a couple of hours ahead of your flight - and I mean check-in, not "get to the airport". Unless you are one of the "special" people (meaning someone with frequent-flyer perks), you will find that the check-in lines for cattle-class are quite long and time-consuming.

For the rest of it, Sonal's right.

Re. liquids and gels, I have read on some frequent-flyer fora that it is OK to carry large quantities as long as they are frozen solid. Then they are considered solids and not liquids or gels. Various flyers have reported success in doing this with water, juices, shampoos, beauty-products etc. This whole experiment of seeing what the TSA would allow started after the famous Britney Spears incident where she carried a huge cup of frozen pop right through security (she put it on the belt and it went through x-ray etc. and then she just continued drinking it while waiting for the rest of her carry-ons to come through the x-ray).

And of course, this is legal and is permitted by the TSA in the US (you can read it on their web-site actually) but since you will be going through security and immigration in Canada instead of the US, YMMV.

Cheers


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Sonal said:


> I travel a lot, and the level of scan varies by airport, though DC was the worst--they actually checked my hair (it was up in a bun) to see if there is anything concealed in there.
> 
> But overall, it's really not that big a deal. Check your airline for your carry-on bag size limits, but considering the number of people travelling with those big carry-on roller-bag things, that's not a terrible restriction.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I travel often as well - just not since the new security levels. I still can't get a straight answer out of CATSA or Air Canada as to whether or not I'll be permitted on the plane with a backpack with computer stuff.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

The irony of the whole ridiculous thing is that if you showed up at the airport naked -- ie no security threat at all -- they wouldn't let you on the plane.

PS. America's ridiculous over-reaction to this stuff just proves that the terrorists DO win, quite frankly.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> I am thinking the whole crotch bomber thing was staged to justify those new intrusions on our privatesy.
> 
> I am thinking that any one hoping for an eternal rendezvous with a harem of virgins would be highly unlikely to initiate such a venture by castrating himself.
> 
> Still if I had to travel by air (thank God I don't) I would go with the rule; If it is important to you leave it behind. You know if that laptop ends up in baggage it won't end up in the same place as you do.


Plus, what's with the whole virgins thing? Wouldn't you want women with more experience, anyway? Women who knew what they were doing? Just saying. :heybaby:


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> Plus, what's with the whole virgins thing? Wouldn't you want women with more experience, anyway? Women who knew what they were doing? Just saying. :heybaby:


Not if you had blasted the essential tool into oblivion.beejacon


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

John Clay said:


> Yeah, I travel often as well - just not since the new security levels. I still can't get a straight answer out of CATSA or Air Canada as to whether or not I'll be permitted on the plane with a backpack with computer stuff.


Specifically what will you be carrying with you?

I usually travel with my laptop, cell phone, camera, assorted plugs and cables for these all in my backpack. No problem. My brother (who is in the US, and therefore does this regularly when he visits here) does the same with his laptop, iPhone, cables, etc. No problem at all. 

Now knitting needles, mind you.... 

In your absolute worst case, they may allow you to check your backpack, in which case, make sure you have lots of time, and maybe keep a separate bag for the essentials, but honestly, I have never seen that happen.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Sonal said:


> Specifically what will you be carrying with you?
> 
> I usually travel with my laptop, cell phone, camera, assorted plugs and cables for these all in my backpack. No problem. My brother (who is in the US, and therefore does this regularly when he visits here) does the same with his laptop, iPhone, cables, etc. No problem at all.
> 
> ...


Nothing I bring usually causes an issue - computer, camera, associated cables, etc... but the new rules are very vague and restrictive. Hopefully they'll be lifted this week...


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

eMacMan said:


> *I am thinking the whole crotch bomber thing was staged to justify those new intrusions on our privatesy.*
> 
> I am thinking that any one hoping for an eternal rendezvous with a harem of virgins would be highly unlikely to initiate such a venture by castrating himself.
> 
> Still if I had to travel by air (thank God I don't) I would go with the rule; If it is important to you leave it behind. You know if that laptop ends up in baggage it won't end up in the same place as you do.


It amazes me that people can think, let alone say, that the thing was "staged." I'm pretty sure the people on the plane where this happened were pretty terrified, and I'm pretty sure you don't want to be on a plane where someone is going to blow a hole in the plane and you get to crash to your fiery death.

And what's with "privatesy?" What is that?

As for "why planes," I guess you missed the whole September 11, 2001, event.



chas_m said:


> PS. America's ridiculous over-reaction to this stuff just proves that the terrorists DO win, quite frankly.


So if you heard that one airline or airport was lax on this kind of stuff, you would knowingly fly with them/there? Yeah, I didn't think so.

I mean, you chose to live in an entirely different country with some of this personal safety stuff in mind. Would you risk all that on a purposely dangerous airline flight? Really?


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

If I'm attending a seminar, either instructing or learning, I'll have my Brenthaven briefcase filled with MBP, Wacom 6x11 tablet, external HD and various cables, etc. My camera gear is carried in a ThinkTank Airport Addicted backpack (typically 2 bodies, 7 lenses and various flashes, converters, light meter, remote trigger, cables, etc.), which conforms to international flight dimensions. Depending on the airline, it may be overweight (typically around 40 lbs).

In the past, I've never had an issue bringing both pieces on board with me. I think twice I've been asked to fire up the laptop. Occasionally I'm asked to open the backpack and they'll swab gear looking for explosives traces. Usually a trip through the x-ray machine is all that is done.

With the advent of the newest regs, it's been noted by some airlines that only one piece of carry on will be allowed. Frankly, I'm not interested in checking either a soft briefcase with about $4000 worth of gear in it or a backpack with about $15K worth of gear in it.

If push comes to shove, I'll either drive or simply not attend.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

chas_m said:


> The irony of the whole ridiculous thing is that if you showed up at the airport naked -- ie no security threat at all -- they wouldn't let you on the plane.
> 
> PS. America's ridiculous over-reaction to this stuff just proves that the terrorists DO win, quite frankly.


Actually it establishes that the real terrorists work for the government.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

You want ridiculous? The new U.S. rules on extra screening for "nations that sponsor terrorism" includes Cuba. CUBA! Give me a friggin' break! The only terrorists to fear in the U.S.-Cuba scenario are the bastards living in Miami.

As for airport security in general... let's hope Al-Qaeda never gets their hands on a ScottEvest!





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

I'm slightly worried about how I'm going to get my camera down south this summer when i go for work.

I usually have my huge laptop case packed to the bursting point with cables and accessories, a duffel bag with my DSLR (in its own bag) and a couple lenses in their own cases. 


I'm sure this setup wont fly now.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

"The State Department lists Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria as state sponsors of terrorism. The countries of interest include Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, *Saudi Arabia*, Somalia and Yemen." Source

Good to see KSA on the list, considering where most of the terrorism originates, even if it isn't 'state sponsored'.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

My wife is a travel agent. Right now they are receiving about 15-20 calls per day regarding the airport security situation with clients reporting that all sorts of different results from being allowed to take everything as normal to not being allowed to take anything at all carry on. If you are planning on travelling with expensive electronics (laptop, cameras, etc...), they are advising that you check your own insurance (via credit card, etc) and top up for additional coverage for your electronics (read the fine print on the policy carefully!)...

Generally speaking, they are hearing, and being advised, that small purses are ok for women, while laptops, etc..., are asking to be checked. Note: Many travellers are having their electronics checked AT THE GATE or beyond, not just at check-in.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

>


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

G-Mo said:


> My wife is a travel agent. Right now they are receiving about 15-20 calls per day regarding the airport security situation with clients reporting that all sorts of different results from being allowed to take everything as normal to not being allowed to take anything at all carry on. If you are planning on travelling with expensive electronics (laptop, cameras, etc...), they are advising that you check your own insurance (via credit card, etc) and top up for additional coverage for your electronics (read the fine print on the policy carefully!)...
> 
> Generally speaking, they are hearing, and being advised, that small purses are ok for women, while laptops, etc..., are asking to be checked. Note: Many travellers are having their electronics checked AT THE GATE or beyond, not just at check-in.


I wish there was some semblance of consistency. It seems nuts to force people to check a $1000+ laptop, when the maximum insured value of a bag, at least by the airline, is $750. You can't even get a straight answer out of the airlines, or CATSA. I called Air Canada today, and was told that a 'personal item' of 8"x10"x12" was acceptable, but nothing larger than that. When I called CATSA, I was told a laptop would be fine, but they had no idea what size would be acceptable, or if you could bring a case for it. The blind leading the blind, it would seem. And not a bit safer for the hassle, either.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Well, flying into the US was easy. My laptop bag was permitted with no issues, after being box x-rayed and hand inspected. My was turned on to check that it was functional, but nothing beyond the password prompt. Everyone was subjected to a pat-down, prior to being permitted into the gate. This was after the initial security, and after the duty free shop, food, etc - right before the gate.

Flying out of the US will be equally interesting. The airport I'm flying out of apparently has the new full-body scanners, requiring that you either be imaged or be patted down. I'll be damned if I'm going to volunteer for a strip search, so I guess it's a pat-down for me.

I can't imagine how these invasive searches are not a violation of 4th amendment rights in the US, and similar privacy rights in Canada. I'd rather just have a simple metal detector and have luggage x-rayed, as was done in the past. Increased security won't reduce the number of terrorist attacks, as they ones that attempt now are the really keen ones. Since 9/11, the only real improvement to aviation security is the requirement that cockpit doors be reinforced, and locked at all times. Scanning every passenger isn't going to prevent the bomb, or whatever, from being placed aboard by a baggage handler, aircraft cleaner, or any of the other myriad of workers behind the scenes at airports.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

Just use the full-body scan... What are you afraid of??


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

(Bruce Mackinnon)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*'Privacy'? Turns Out Airport Scanners Can Store, Send Images*





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






(CrooksAndLiars.com)


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Just as an update, the imagers were being used as secondary screening only, and in the 15 minutes or so I was waiting to go through, nobody used it. Security was much more lax flying out than it was flying in - I was patted down and my carry-on searched on the way in, but nothing of the sort flying out.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

A great tip from LifeHacker / BoingBoing:



> If you don't like your bags being out of your sight and it makes you uncomfortable to think that airline workers are rifling through your stuff, you can take advantage of the TSA's own security rules by—eek—packing a gun.





> A "weapons" is defined as a rifle, shotgun, pistol, airgun, and STARTER PISTOL. Yes, starter pistols - those little guns that fire blanks at track and swim meets - are considered weapons...and do NOT have to be registered in any state in the United States.
> 
> I have a starter pistol for all my cases. All I have to do upon check-in is tell the airline ticket agent that I have a weapon to declare...I'm given a little card to sign, the card is put in the case, the case is given to a TSA official who takes my key and locks the case, and gives my key back to me.
> 
> That's the procedure. The case is extra-tracked...TSA does not want to lose a weapons case. This reduces the chance of the case being lost to virtually zero. It's a great way to travel with camera gear...I've been doing this since Dec 2001 and have had no problems whatsoever.


(LifeHacker) (BoingBoing/Schneier)


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

mrjimmy said:


> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> ...


And all Rick Mercer wanted to do was to fly home to St.John's, NL. Shows what happens when a whole province does not elect a single Conservative member of Parliament ............. even when they are sitting in The House of Commons.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*The naked truth about future airline travel*



> The Edmonton Journal Jan. 7, 2011
> 
> The federal government says Canadian air travellers will soon be asked to undergo full-body cavity searches.
> 
> ...


(more)


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

CubaMark said:


> *The naked truth about future airline travel*
> 
> 
> 
> (more)


New arrival attire for check-in:


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*TSA plants baggie of white powder in traveller's bag*





> A TSA agent at the Philadelphia International Airport slipped a baggie full of white powder into an unsuspecting passenger's baggage, then terrorized her when he "found" it, before announcing that he was just kidding. When she complained to airport security, she was dismissed because "the TSA worker had been training the staff to detect contraband."


(BoingBoing)


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Naked airport scanner catches cellphone, misses bomb components*



> Check out this German TV clip highlighting the failure of the new, privacy-violating full-nude scanners going in at an airport near you. As Bruce Schneier notes, "The scanner caught a subject's cell phone and Swiss Army knife -- and the microphone he was wearing -- but missed all the components to make a bomb that he hid on his body... Full-body scanners: they're not just a dumb idea, they don't actually work."






+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






(BoingBoing)


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Shows how we really aren't any safer if faced with a determined fanatic.


Sad, but all too true, MCB. Determination will eventually win out, despite all of our efforts. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Just flew to the US, within the US and then back to Canada...different stories each time.

The strictest was at the Calgary Airport flying out - I was carrying a lot of camera equipment and where I usually carry-on most of my cameras & lenses in a large camera gear back-pack, this time I was prepared by packing the packed backpack within another medium sized piece of luggage to check. Of course I was charged extra for the second checked piece of luggage. First piece of checked luggage was free*.

The surprise came when I was not allowed to carry-on a small nylon backpack that mainly contained my purse, a book and some papers. No backpacks of _any_ kind or size were allowed. I had to empty it and pack it and its contents, except for my small purse, within the checked luggage. Luckily there was extra room.

My purse was allowed because it was smaller than the not so scientific measurement of an 8.5 x 11" piece of paper held up against the proposed carry-on item. Anything, with the exception of simple laptop sleeves, which exceeded these dimensions in any way, was rejected as a carry on. 

*If your checked luggage exceeded the 50 lb. limit after you had stowed your rejected carry-on inside, you will also be penalized with a $50 over-weight charge. I saw a few passengers wearing multiple layers of clothing through security in order to avoid this extra fee. It seemed quite unfair; we couldn't carry it on, but if we stowed it as requested in the checked luggage, we may be subjected to a _hefty_ extra charge.

Flying to destinations within the US, the security was greatly relaxed. Passengers were allowed to carry-on backpacks and even some pony sized luggage that I would have thought wouldn't/shouldn't be allowed as carry-ons even in the pre-underwear bomber days. 

On the return flight to Canada, the security measures were a little tighter but still not as strict as those flying into the US. My sister was surprised by a new fee for her one and only checked bag even though it met the weight requirements. My first bag fee was waived only because I had frequent flyer status and I still had to pay an extra $30 for my second checked bag of gear.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Unbelievable....*





> a brawl between pilots and cabin crew that reportedly left the cockpit unmanned during a flight between Sharjah, UAE to the Indian capital Delhi.
> 
> Indian newspaper The Times of India reports that the pilot, Captain Ranbir Arora and co-pilot, Aditya Chopra, on flight IC 884 got into a full-blown brawl with two members of the cabin crew, a man and a woman.
> 
> ...


(ABCnewsBlog)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*TSA detains Middle-Eastern Studies major for carrying Arabic-English flashcards*





> Nicholas George, a senior in Middle-Eastern Studies at Pomona College, was detained, handcuffed, and intensively questioned by the TSA while trying to catch a flight back to school from Philadelphia. The TSA guards found English-Arabic flashcards in his luggage and said that because Osama bin Laden spoke Arabic, "these cards are suspicious." The FBI was called in, and an agent called him a "****ing idiot" when he asked why he was being held. After being asked if he was a communist or a Muslim, he was released. He was not read his rights at any time.
> 
> The ACLU has taken on his case, and they're suing.
> 
> ...


(BoingBoing)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> *TSA detains Middle-Eastern Studies major for carrying Arabic-English flashcards*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Glad you posted that one. The TSA nazis have developed God Syndrome and it appears to be beyond treatment.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

> TSA supervisor: "Do you know what language he spoke?"
> 
> George: "Arabic."
> 
> TSA supervisor: "Do you see why these cards are suspicious?"



Using this logic, God help the Germans.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

There really oughtta be some immediate recourse when dealing with neanderthals like these...

*TSA forces travelling policeman to remove his disabled four-year-old son's leg-braces*





> Philadelphia TSA screeners forced the developmentally delayed, four-year-old son of a Camden, PA police officer to remove his leg-braces and wobble through a checkpoint, despite the fact that their procedure calls for such a case to be handled through a swabbing in a private room. When the police officer complained, the supervising TSA screener turned around and walked away. Then a Philadelphia police officer asked what was wrong and "suggested he calm down and enjoy his vacation."
> 
> Ryan was taking his first flight, to Walt Disney World, for his fourth birthday.
> 
> The boy is developmentally delayed, one of the effects of being born 16 weeks prematurely. His ankles are malformed and his legs have low muscle tone. In March he was just starting to walk...


(BoingBoing)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

If Obama was serious about change; he would be giving the TSA gangsters 24 hours to get out of Dodge with the alternative being a permanent residence at Boot Hill.beejacon


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I too picked up on this tale:

Airport Security - The Ridiculous Side


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

It was only a matter of time.

Thankfully they had the common sense to stop her from boarding instead of caving to the politically correct faction.



> A Muslim woman was barred from boarding a flight after she refused to undergo a full body scan for religious reasons.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Denver flight bomb scare sees man subdued*



> A Qatari diplomat is in custody after U.S. air marshals wrestled him to the ground on a Denver-bound flight Wednesday evening, but officials said they found no explosives in his shoes and the whole incident have resulted from a misunderstanding.
> 
> The man, said to be a vice-consul at the Qatari Embassy in Washington, is thought to have been trying to sneak a cigarette in one of the plane's lavatories when he was confronted by flight crew. Initial reports said he then remarked, "I'm lighting my shoes on fire."


(CBC News)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

That vice-consul is an idiot! Good on the air marshals.


----------



## Mckitrick (Dec 25, 2005)

That "diplomat" needs to learn something about diplomacy. Even joking about lighting your shoe on fire because you have a cigarette in it is not something to do these days.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Two carry-ons now OK for U.S. flights*



> Travellers to the United States can once again board a plane with two pieces of hand luggage, Transport Canada announced Wednesday.
> 
> Transport Minister John Baird said that restrictions on carry-on items, put in place in December after the failed terrorist attack by the so-called Underwear Bomber, have been eased but he stressed that both U.S. and Canadian governments have made security a top priority.


(Montreal Gazette)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Mckitrick said:


> That "diplomat" needs to learn something about diplomacy. Even joking about lighting your shoe on fire because you have a cigarette in it is not something to do these days.


This one stinks a little of cover-up. The "diplomatic immunity" angle is just too convenient.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Well... this might work...*

Best idea I have heard………and so very simple



> Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? A really neat solution heh?
> 
> Here's a solution to all the controversy over full-body scanners at airports.
> 
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

CubaMark said:


> *Well... this might work...*
> 
> Best idea I have heard………and so very simple


http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/86041-fabulous-alternative-airport-scanners.html


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Crap... I'm caught in a Möbius circle... find things on ehMac, open them amongst my 3-dozen other open tabs, eventually look at it and forget where I got it, and share it with my fellow ehMacers again. Apologies to FeXL for stealing his thread!

_(Here's how I work: I have three folders full of bookmarks on my Bookmark Bar in Safari. I open one, which has 15 tabs. Once it loads, I open another window with about 20 tabs while I'm reading the first batch. And another, with 20-odd more tabs. Then I open links from within each of those pages into new tabs. Yeah, I like to push Safari... and I complain when it starts taking up 170% of my processor power!)_


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Use the Archie Bunker solution -- provide everyone with a small handgun as you board the plane and then collect them as people leave the plane. That way, any skyjacker will be outgunned. XX)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

TSA. Goons. Thugs. Ignoramuses. Idiots. (Not all of 'em, I know, but enough to make them all look bad)

*TSA applesauce "assault" case thrown out*





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






(BoingBoing)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*British Airways chairman: "stop kowtowing to US aviation security demands"*



> Martin Broughton, the chairman of British Airways, has called on Britain's aviation industry to stop "kowtowing" to the USA's ridiculous and inconsistent aviation "security" procedures. Broughton points out that carriers flying to the US from Britain are forced to subject their passengers to inconvenient and expensive checks that internal US flights often omit. Meanwhile, Colin Matthews, the head of BAA, has called for scrapping all security procedures and starting over with "a clean sheet of paper."
> 
> He suggested the practice of forcing passengers on US-bound flights to take off their shoes and to have their laptops checked separately in security lines should be dropped, during a conference of UK airport operators in London.
> 
> There was no need to "kowtow to the Americans every time they wanted something done", said Broughton. "America does not do internally a lot of the things they demand that we do. We shouldn't stand for that. We should say 'we'll only do things which we consider to be essential and that you Americans also consider essential'."​


(BoingBoing)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*UNBELIEVABLE!!!*

*Man in disguise boards international flight*





> Canadian authorities are investigating an "unbelievable" incident in which a passenger boarded an Air Canada flight disguised as an elderly man, according to a confidential alert obtained by CNN.
> 
> The incident occurred on October 29 on Air Canada flight AC018 to Vancouver originating in Hong Kong. An intelligence alert from the Canada Border Services Agency describes the incident as an "unbelievable case of concealment."


(CNN)


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Wow.

That would attest more to Chinese security than anything else though.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Back on the topic of "Brain Dead With A Badge"....*

*TSA official slipped white powder into fliers' bags, told them they'd been caught with coke and were under arrest*



> A TSA bomb appraisal officer in Philadelphia International Airport repeatedly "pranked" fliers by slipping a bag of white powder (creatine, a nutritional supplement, being used in equipment testing) into their luggage and then threatening them with arrest.





> You know how the TSA has all those signs saying you can be arrested for joking or "making remarks" about bombs? One law for them, another for us, apparently.


(BoingBoing)


----------



## RunTheWorldOnMac (Apr 23, 2006)

I just flew to Edinburgh from Ottawa via Heathrow.

A. They never checked passports from Heathrow to Edinburgh; just boarding passes.
B. As we were getting off the plane, a man in his late 50s reaches into his coats and pulls out 2 shotgun shells "Oops, I forgot to take these out, I went bird hunting yesterday".

I keep meaning to email the BAA.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

RunTheWorldOnMac said:


> I just flew to Edinburgh from Ottawa via Heathrow.
> 
> A. They never checked passports from Heathrow to Edinburgh; just boarding passes.


But this is within the same state. I am not asked to produce my passport on trips within Canada either.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Ralph Nader and EPIC Take On Full-Body Airport Scanners*





> Privacy watchdog group EPIC and legendary consumer watchdog Ralph Nader claim the full-body scanners are easily hackable, store nude pictures for unknown periods of time, and don't even catch terrorists. *Worse: They run a version of Windows XP*.


(FastCompany)


----------



## RunTheWorldOnMac (Apr 23, 2006)

chasMac said:


> But this is within the same state. I am not asked to produce my passport on trips within Canada either.


In Canada when I flew to Toronto from Ottawa they checked. I think they should check; takes 2 seconds.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

(BoingBoing)


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

And the hits just keep coming.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Another delightful TSA encounter. Love the new meme... "porno-scanners"...*

*TSA encounter at San Diego Airport*



> ...because I had opted out of the backscatter screening, I would now be patted down, and that involved running hands up the inside of my legs until they felt my groin. I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight.
> 
> The supervisor informed me that it was a standard administrative security check and that they were authorized to do it. I repeated that I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal. I believe that I was then informed that if I did not submit to the inspection, I would not be getting on my flight. I again stated that I thought the search was illegal. I told her that I would be willing to submit to a walk through the metal detector as over 80% of the rest of the people were doing, but I would not be groped.





> ....informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine.


(via BoingBoing)


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Nice...*

A pilot from Skywest was going through security in Denver with his 18-year-old daughter and overheard a TSA officer saying into his headset, “heads up, got a cutie for you.”

I think I may just become singularly unglued if I ever hear sh!t like this about my wife or children...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

FeXL said:


> A pilot from Skywest was going through security in Denver with his 18-year-old daughter and overheard a TSA officer saying into his headset, “heads up, got a cutie for you.”
> 
> I think I may just become singularly unglued if I ever hear sh!t like this about my wife or children...


The good news is; if the Government ever decides to take out terrorists altogether; it can start by marching the entire TSA, NSA and HS bunch over the edge of a very high cliff. That should reduce the number of terrorists in the US to mere handful and those would be nicely concentrated in the DC corridor.


----------



## Dick Hertz (Mar 29, 2007)

You mean post-Xmas security theatre?

9/11 changed two things: One, the cabin doors are now armoured. People were clamouring for this forever, but the airlines in their inveterate greed and stupidity fought it, saying it would bankrupt them. Two, passengers and aircrew will now actively fight any hijacking attempt. Everything else is there to make bubble-headed yuppies feel better about flying.

Now, if we really wanted to, we could do like Israel and Europe do: Hire actual professionals to be airport screeners and pay them accordingly. That would cost money, though, and allowing them to unionise is anathema to the right-wing crank politicians currently in power in both Canada and the U.S.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

FeXL said:


> A pilot from Skywest was going through security in Denver with his 18-year-old daughter and overheard a TSA officer saying into his headset, “heads up, got a cutie for you.”
> 
> I think I may just become singularly unglued if I ever hear sh!t like this about my wife or children...


I recently took my wife and her friend to PETrudeau in Montreal for a flight to Egypt. My wife is 60ish and looks pretty much as you might expect for a well maintained person of her age. She walked through security unmolested. Her friend is 50 and could pass easily for 40 and has a physique that could work as a fashion model. She got groped inside her jeans....


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Please, it's a "Freedom fondle", not gate rape.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Talk about employment opportunities for soon-to-be-paroled (not to open up that particular can o'worms) sex offenders..... I wonder if these "security" types are screened for that sort of thing....


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Ottawaman said:


> Please, it's a "Freedom fondle", not gate rape.


:lmao:


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine*



> A retired special education teacher on his way to a wedding in Orlando, Fla., said he was left humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an enhanced pat-down by TSA officers recently at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.




(MSBNC)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> *TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Detroit should know better as their local papers did an adequate job of pointing out the fact that the crotch bomber had no passport and was escorted around security at the other end of his flight. Course right after that the head of TSA cashed in when his company was able to sell a large number of in-stock scanners that prior to that point in time no-one would buy.

FWIW I am now joining my wife in refusing to fly commercial airlines, until TSA is abolished and the gate rapers are behind bars.


----------



## Optimize (May 7, 2005)

rgray said:


> I recently took my wife and her friend to PETrudeau in Montreal for a flight to Egypt. My wife is 60ish and looks pretty much as you might expect for a well maintained person of her age. She walked through security unmolested. Her friend is 50 and could pass easily for 40 and has a physique that could work as a fashion model. She got groped inside her jeans....


Was their flight going through the US? I'm curious if those were our own Canadian molesters...

Curious because I want to avoid as much as possible this treatment. Sad. Really sad.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Optimize said:


> Was their flight going through the US? I'm curious if those were our own Canadian molesters...


Thru Paris, no US connection. These were our guys...


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

When will people say enough is enough?

TSA Forces Woman to Cut Off Her Nipple Rings With Pliers.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Innovator fights back....

Underwear invention protects privacy at airport - The Denver Post


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

> It's unclear whether it would lead to an automatic, more intrusive pat down by federal Transportation Security Administration officials.


I'd consider that a rhetorical statement...
___________

My spice & I have been talking about the possibility of a trip somewhere stateside next year. We spoke yesterday & decided that there is no way in hell we'd subject either ourselves or the littluns to that kind of invasion.

We'll still go, it just ain't gonna be on a plane.

Certainly not going to attend any seminars related to work that require flight, either.

When the airlines start going under you'll see a change, quick like.

Oh, and that innovator should change the fig leaves to a bird. And I'm not talking the flying kind...


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_*More insanity. You'll get a kick out of the mental image that forms at the end of this tale...
*_
*You Don't Need to See His Identification*

M


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> _*More insanity. You'll get a kick out of the mental image that forms at the end of this tale...
> *_
> *You Don't Need to See His Identification*
> 
> M


Interesting.

I've never been subjected to security screening while entering the US. I wonder if that's a relatively new policy.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Yeah - I have no idea what the point of screening-on-entry makes. The passengers have already been screened to the point where they're "safe" to be allowed on an airplane...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

And on it goes . . .

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyin...got-detained-by-the-tsa-at-the-airport-today/


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Add "going to the bathroom too often" to things you can't do on an airplane.

Flier hauled off plane over bathroom breaks - Travel - News - msnbc.com



> A passenger on a flight from Fort Lauderdale to Denver was pulled off a plane Tuesday after other passengers said he was taking too many potty breaks..............
> 
> It's unclear if this is was classified as a terror alert yellow or brown.......


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

rgray said:


> Add "going to the bathroom too often" to things you can't do on an airplane.
> 
> Flier hauled off plane over bathroom breaks - Travel - News - msnbc.com


So diabetics should not fly. First cause they can't take insulin with them and second cause they can't pee.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*After reading this, it is now pretty obvious.... compulsory cavity searches are not that far away...*

*Menstruating woman subjected to TSA grope because panty-liner obscured her vulva on pornoscanner*



> A self-described "rule follower" went through an airport pornoscanner wearing a panty-liner (she was menstruating). Because the hygienic item obscured the screener's view of her vagina vulva, she was made to endure a humiliating fondling, "so invasive that I was left crying and dealing with memories that I thought had been dealt with years ago of prior sexual assaults."


(BoingBoing)


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

TSA Stickers for your luggage


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

It looks like they're using the backscatter machines for primary screening now. Flying out of Toronto City-Center Airport today, they asked me to go through the backscatter machine for no apparent reason - before my bags had gone through the X-ray. When I declined, I they patted me down, but it wasn't offensive or anything grotesque. The only part a bit off-putting was the fingertips around the waist, under the pants.

I'm hoping it's a similar experience flying back, but knowing the TSA they'll botch it, somehow.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Two posts earlier. 



KC4 said:


> TSA Stickers for your luggage


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Whooops! My Bad.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Dog attack on US Airways plane forces emergency landing*



> A flight was diverted to Pittsburgh after a little old lady's dog escaped its box and went on a yapping rampage. She was allowed to board another flight but may be charged with *terrierism*.
> 
> [Toronto Star via BoingBoing]


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*TSA misses enormous, loaded .40 calibre handgun in carry-on bag*



> A man who flew out of Houston's George Bush airport discovered a loaded handgun in his carry-on bag after landing; he'd forgotten he was carrying it and the eagle-eyed TSA screeners were too busy ogling his penis to spot the loaded gun in the nearly empty bag from which he'd dutifully removed his laptop.





> A person briefed on the latest tests tells ABC News the failure rate approaches 70 percent at some major airports. Two weeks ago, TSA's new director said every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports.


(BoingBoing)


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Could also be in "Visual Humor"...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

That one's got SAP written all over it, thanks!


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

John Clay said:


> It looks like they're using the backscatter machines for primary screening now. Flying out of Toronto City-Center Airport today, they asked me to go through the backscatter machine for no apparent reason - before my bags had gone through the X-ray. When I declined, I they patted me down, but it wasn't offensive or anything grotesque. The only part a bit off-putting was the fingertips around the waist, under the pants.
> 
> I'm hoping it's a similar experience flying back, but knowing the TSA they'll botch it, somehow.


For every nine people that resent the intrusion, there's always one that enjoys a little human contact. I wonder what would they do if you gave them some helpful suggestions: down a little....over to the right...now scratch really hard....yes! That's the spot! Thank you!


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> For every nine people that resent the intrusion, there's always one that enjoys a little human contact. I wonder what would they do if you gave them some helpful suggestions: down a little....over to the right...now scratch really hard....yes! That's the spot! Thank you!


That's... disturbing - and I'm not sure what to make of your post.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

John Clay said:


> That's... disturbing - and I'm not sure what to make of your post.


I'm suggesting that since the whole airport security thing is really about intimidation and power, one could use the reverse psychology tactic and act like they actually enjoy the patdowns. Personally, I think it's criminal the way all air passengers are treated as guilty until proven innocent now, and yet all kinds of weapons have somehow slipped by security in spite of the "increased watchfulness." That's what I'm saying. It's a sham and a disturbing encroachment on our freedoms.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

fjnmusic said:


> I'm suggesting that since the whole airport security thing is really about intimidation and power, one could use the reverse psychology tactic and act like they actually enjoy the patdowns. Personally, I think it's criminal the way all air passengers are treated as guilty until proven innocent now, and yet all kinds of weapons have somehow slipped by security in spite of the "increased watchfulness." That's what I'm saying. It's a sham and a disturbing encroachment on our freedoms.


Thought that's what you were saying. 

If enough people simply refuse to fly the airlines money will put pressure on the darkside powers and force a change, hopefully for the better this time.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

My new going to the airport policy is to not bathe or change underwear for at least a week before hand, have two cups of bran, a can of beans and a couple of beer as a meal before going to the airport..... Hand search me at your peril TSA....


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

It has been recommended that you moan erotically during the hand search. I reckon the poor agent would be more uncomfortable than his victim.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

rgray said:


> My new going to the airport policy is to not bathe or change underwear for at least a week before hand, have two cups of bran, a can of beans and a couple of beer as a meal before going to the airport..... Hand search me at your peril TSA....


Gas warfare was banned soon after WWI, rgray. Check out the Geneva Accords of 1925 for full confirmation.  

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> Gas warfare was banned soon after WWI, rgray. Check out the Geneva Accords of 1925 for full confirmation.
> 
> Paix, mon ami.


Still I believe that Bush asserted that the Geneva Accords no longer apply to the Paranoid State of America so he should be OK as long as it's on US soil.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Woman, 82, 'humiliated' by airport security - CTV News

Tsk. Terrible treatment. Surely there has to be a better option for those with a medical prothesis to navigate airport security without the risk of being so horribly humiliated.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Well, this makes me feel safer...*

Not!



> Although millions of dollars are spent on airline security each year in the United States, it only took $100.00 for a JetBlue ticket agent to allow a unknown package to go onto a flight, coming from an unknown person.
> 
> On November 19, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was at Charlotte Douglas Airport testing out JetBlue's security. Their goal was to try and get an unaccompanied package onto a flight headed to Boston and unfortunately, they succeeded. An undercover TSA agent told a JetBlue ticket agent that he needed to get a package to Boston that day and would pay the agent $100.00 for helping. The agent took the $100, put it in his pocket and proceeded to follow the unknown person's instructions. The ticket agent chose a passenger's name at random, which just happened to be an unaccompanied minor, and the package went through the screening process with no problems. Although the package was harmless, the TSA pulled the package just before being loaded onto the aircraft.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Take heart. You are twice as likely to be hit by lightning than to die in a terrorist attack.

Does help to keep things in perspective. Though it also makes it difficult to justify the continued reign of terror by Team Sexual Assault.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Jesse Ventura Sues TSA in Pat-Down Smackdown*

Linky.



> Ventura accuses the agencies of violating his "basic rights to privacy and dignity, and his right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures," after he received a pat-down by a TSA agent at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in November 2010.
> 
> Ventura, who said he has a titanium implant after hip replacement surgery in 2008, alleges the pat-down included "warrantless, non-suspicion-based offensive touching, gripping and rubbing of the genital and other sensitive areas of his body," which, the lawsuit contends, met "the definition for an unlawful sexual assault."


Good for him!

I hope he wins.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Airport security officials brand three inch toy gun "firearm"*

Linky.



> IT may be three inches long and made of plastic – but that didn’t stop a toy soldier’s gun being branded a “firearm” by zealous airport officials.
> 
> Ken Lloyd and his wife bought the “signaller crouching” figurine during a recent visit to the Royal Signals Museum at Blandford Garrison.
> 
> But when the box containing the figure passed through the scanning machine at Gatwick airport, security officials declared the tiny plastic rifle a “firearm”.


Jeez, what are they going to call a nail clipper...oh, wait.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

What do you make of this?



> An immigration officer put his own wife on a terrorist watch list – so she could not get home from a trip to Pakistan.
> The officer was so sick of his partner that when she was visiting family overseas he added her name to the register of people banned from flights into the UK.
> When she went to the airport to get her return flight back, officials told her she could not board the plane and did not explain why.
> She called her husband, who promised to look into it – but left her stuck in Pakistan for THREE YEARS. He was sacked after bosses found out about his antics.


Source:Immigration officer sacked for putting wife he didn't like on terror watch list - mirror.co.uk


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

I think it's very...creative.

Totally & utterly immoral, but very creative.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Mice trained for airport security



> Israeli scientists have created a detector, similar looking to a full-body scanner but with three concealed cartridges each containing eight specially trained mice.
> 
> ...
> 
> The device was tested last year on 1,000 shoppers in a Tel Aviv shopping mall when the mice successfully picked out 22 people carrying mock explosives.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

FeXL said:


> Mice trained for airport security


Now that is unique, FeXL. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

When I had just read the headline I had this hilarious visual of squeamish passengers with mice crawling all over (& under )...


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

And in other news, it looks like there might even be an outbreak of common sense happening. Every set of nail clippers I have has had the 1" nail file broken off because apparently I, an overweight middle aged woman, might overcome airline staff and take over an aircraft with it.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

FeXL said:


> When I had just read the headline I had this hilarious visual of squeamish passengers with mice crawling all over (& under )...


:lmao::lmao::lmao:

True. Miami tried something like this, but was searching for people who were trying to smuggle Caiman into Florida from South and Central America.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

FeXL said:


> When I had just read the headline I had this hilarious visual of squeamish passengers with mice crawling all over (& under )...


I'd much prefer the USB (Undercover Search Beasties) Mice to the PS2 (Pat and Search too) method.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*I guess you can stare at T&A for only so long before it gets...*

...boring.



> An undercover TSA agent was able to get through security at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport with a handgun during testing of the enhanced-imaging body scanners, according to a high-ranking, inside source at the Transportation Security Administration.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_So... looks like the killing of Osama Bin Laden has dragged people's fears of "evil muslims" back to the surface...._

*Muslim imams pulled from plane en route to Islamaphobia conference*



> Two Muslim religious leaders who were removed from a commercial airliner in Memphis say they were told it was because the pilot refused to fly with them aboard.
> 
> Masudur Rahman and Mohamed Zaghloul were supposed to travel on an 8:30 a.m. Delta flight, run by a subsidiary, from Memphis, Tenn. to Charlotte. They were traveling to attend a conference of the North American Imam Federation that, ironically, intends to address prejudice against Muslims.





> Both men were removed from the plane, and screened again.
> ...
> After that security check, he said a Delta employee at the gate informed him that the pilot of the flight would not allow him on board. He says the employees in the airport were very apologetic--even angry--and said they tried repeatedly to convince the pilot that he was wrong.


(Crooks & Liars)


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

It was the pilot's (captain's) decision no one else's. Hardly a cause for declaring mass fear of Islam. 

However, considering that 99.99% of the world's terrorists are Muslim and a great portion of them are clerics and that al Queda threatened retaliation against Americans for the assassination of bin Laden....that's just the way it is and going to be until the Muslims themselves sort it out.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

kps said:


> However, considering that 99.99% of the world's terrorists are Muslim and a great portion of them are clerics and that al Queda threatened retaliation against Americans for the assassination of bin Laden....that's just the way it is and going to be until the Muslims themselves sort it out.


Sounds like Hitler's logic. 99.99% of all the usury lenders are Jewish so let's annihilate the Jews.

It was flawed logic in the late 30s and 40s. Still flawed today. 

To date the TSA has committed millions of sexual assaults, inconvenienced countless fliers and has as yet to catch a single terrorist.

I will repeat Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning than to be killed by a terrorist. Abolish the TSA and Homeland Security. There are wiser ways to spend our money.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Sure, bring Hitler into it...LOL!

This has nothing to do with the TSA either, your pet cause. The captain made the decision as is his prerogative. Those are the rules with all airlines.

As far as the rest of it goes, well, those are the undeniable facts and consequently all muslims will be scrutinized and suffer for it.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

Even if your 99.99% figure was accurate, that doesn't mean anything. How many muslims are there? How many terrorists are there? Even if 99.99% was accurate, that could still be only 0.001% of muslims. You can't apply a generalized statistic to an individual with any validity. Couple the 0.001% with the fact they were cleared by security, twice, makes the odds they are terrorists virtually zero.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

hayesk said:


> Even if your 99.99% figure was accurate, that doesn't mean anything. How many muslims are there? How many terrorists are there? Even if 99.99% was accurate, that could still be only 0.001% of muslims. You can't apply a generalized statistic to an individual with any validity. Couple the 0.001% with the fact they were cleared by security, twice, makes the odds they are terrorists virtually zero.


You are correct...except that in this particular case the captain of the flight exercised his prerogative to refuse boarding to the two imams. Rules of the air. This was one individual and not the airline, the TSA, or anyone else...one individual.

...and just to be clear...I do not condone any of this, I'm not generalizing in any way, and I do not call for the annihilation of Islam. Just stating the facts as presented and understanding the reality of the situation.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Terrorism stats published by the FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center. 2009 were the latest published data I could find. The charts starting on page 13 were interesting.

http://www.nctc.gov/witsbanner/docs/2009_report_on_terrorism.pdf


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Stun gun found in Boston-to-NJ jet after arrival*

The chick who carried this on must have had a big rack, distracting the poor sod running the scanner...

I jes' luvs the disclaimer (from the "expert", of course...):



> "The big picture is, airports are safe, this is all security theater," he said. "Airport security doesn't have to be perfect to be good enough; perfect is too expensive."


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Good for her. She deserves a Purple Heart for Bravery. I'm thinking that if this happened a few more times to the TSA agents, they'd get a clew...

Unfortunately, turnabout is not considered fair play:



> TSA staff say Mihamae refused to be go through passenger screening and became argumentative before she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Seems like the right place to post this (or maybe "You Can't Make These Things Up" thread?

*Infuriatingly amazing...*

*"Racial Profiling First Hand"*





> Via the ACLU and the Boston Globe, a first-hand account of how "security theater" makes us no safer, and a lot less free.
> 
> Massachussetts-based folk musician Vance Gilbert (Twitter), a law-abiding citizen who is black, 6 feet tall, and loves poodles, was harassed and humiliated on a flight out of Boston—apparently in part because he was reading book about old-time airplanes.
> 
> The TSA scanners and screeners had no problem with him. His problems began after he boarded his United Airlines flight, and appear to have been the work of the flight crew.


(Boston.com via BoingBoing)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*What Did We Get For A 10-Year Homeland Security Spending Spree That Cost Billions?*





> The expensive and time-consuming screening now routine for passengers at airport boarding gates has detected plenty of knives, loaded guns and other contraband, *but it has never identified a terrorist who was about to board a plane*. Only 14 Americans have died in about three dozen instances of Islamic extremist terrorist plots targeted at the U.S. outside war zones since 2001 — most of them involving one or two home-grown plotters.
> 
> [...] State and local emergency responders have undergone a dramatic transformation with the aid of $32 billion that has been dispensed in Homeland Security grants since 2002, much of it in the early years spent on Hollywood-style tactical gear, often with little connection between risk and outlay.
> 
> "After 9/11, it was literally like my mother running out the door with the charge card," said Al Berndt, assistant director of the Emergency Management Agency in Nebraska, which has received $163.7 million in federal anti-terrorism and emergency aid grants.


(Crooks & Liars)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_*(We should ask a moderator to remove the "post-christmas" title of this thread)*_

*Air Space - a trip through an airport detention center*



> It is, hands down, the most welcoming detention area someone might visit, lacking any kind of nationalist propaganda. This is more than one can say about other airport detention facilities, such as *Toronto Pearson's pre-clearance area*. Operated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on Canadian soil, it's covered in flags and giant eagles. Everyone has a firearm.
> 
> I've met just a single nice person in half a dozen detainments in that airport. Those guys are also just following orders, but man, *what a bunch of jerks*. The small detention area in Reykjavík, by comparison, is downright relaxing. There are free bottles of water in a fridge, and usually a plate or four of cookies, snacks and condiments. There's even a nice little espresso machine, with a button that might produce an alright café latté. I've never managed to get this machine to make anything more than black coffee, but I admit that I didn't want to trouble the staff.


(BoingBoing)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

*TSA: We have seen the terrorists and they are us.*

Lord now the Terror and Sexual Assault team is making onto the Lamestream media.



> 'Security Theater'? TSA Confiscates Woman's Frosted Cupcake
> By Olivia Katrandjian | ABC News Blogs – Sat, Dec 24, 2011
> 
> A Massachusetts woman who flew home from Las Vegas this week says an airport security officer confiscated her frosted cupcake because he thought its vanilla-bourbon icing could be a "security risk."
> ...


Link:
'Security Theater'? TSA Confiscates Woman's Frosted Cupcake | ABC News - Yahoo! News


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Does Airport Security Really Make Us Safer?*



> As you stand in endless lines this holiday season, here’s a comforting thought: all those security measures accomplish nothing, at enormous cost. That’s the conclusion of Charles C. Mann, who put the T.S.A. to the test with the help of one of America’s top security experts.





> As we came by the checkpoint line, Schneier described one of these aspects: the ease with which people can pass through airport security with fake boarding passes. First, scan an old boarding pass, he said—more loudly than necessary, it seemed to me. Alter it with Photoshop, then print the result with a laser printer. In his hand was an example, complete with the little squiggle the T.S.A. agent had drawn on it to indicate that it had been checked. “Feeling safer?” he asked.





> “The only useful airport security measures since 9/11,” he says, “were locking and reinforcing the cockpit doors, so terrorists can’t break in, positive baggage matching”—ensuring that people can’t put luggage on planes, and then not board them —“and teaching the passengers to fight back. The rest is security theater.”





> So much inconvenience for so little benefit at such a staggering cost. And directed against a threat that, by any objective standard, is quite modest. Since 9/11, Islamic terrorists have killed just 17 people on American soil, all but four of them victims of an army major turned fanatic who shot fellow soldiers in a rampage at Fort Hood. (The other four were killed by lone-wolf assassins.) During that same period, 200 times as many Americans drowned in their bathtubs. Still more were killed by driving their cars into deer.


(Vanity Fair)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Time to repost this one. It's short just under a minute and a half.
If I Were A Terrorist A James Pence Video! - YouTube


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*STRIP Act targets TSA uniform: End 'impersonation' of 'real cops'
*


> ...a new House bill that stands for Stop TSA's Reach In Policy and would prevent Transportation Security Administration officers from wearing law enforcement uniforms and police-like badges and calling themselves officers unless they receive law enforcement training.
> 
> "Congress has sat idly by as the TSA strip searches 85-year-old grandmothers in New York, pats down 3-year-olds in Chattanooga, and checks colostomy bags for explosives in Orlando. Enough is enough!" said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) "The least we can do is end this impersonation, which is an insult to real cops."
> 
> The American Federation of Government Employees said the bill was insulting to the 44,000 TSA workers it represented and did "nothing to add to our national security.’’





> A TSA official said the badge and uniform represent "the professionalism of our employees and the seriousness of our work."
> 
> The agency, which changed the name of screeners to officers in 2005, said in a statement:
> 
> "TSA's frontline workforce protects the traveling public at airports across the country every day, and every day our officers stop deadly weapons from getting on aircraft. In 2008, as part of the organization's continued efforts to transition the workforce to a cadre of well-trained, professional transportation security officers, TSA introduced uniforms more reflective of the critical nature of their work and of the high standards they uphold."


(LA Times)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*The Transportation Safety Administration (TSA): Bats**t Insane.*

*British tourists arrested in America on terror charges over Twitter jokes*



> Two British tourists were barred from entering America after joking on Twitter that they were going to 'destroy America' and 'dig up Marilyn Monroe'.
> 
> Leigh Van Bryan, 26, was handcuffed and kept under armed guard in a cell with Mexican drug dealers for 12 hours after landing in Los Angeles with pal Emily Bunting.
> 
> The Department of Homeland Security flagged him as a potential threat when he posted an excited tweet to his pals about his forthcoming trip to Hollywood which read: 'Free this week, for quick gossip/prep before I go and destroy America'.





> Despite telling officials the term 'destroy' was British slang for 'party', they were held on suspicion of planning to 'commit crimes' and had their passports confiscated.





> Leigh was also quizzed about another tweet which quoted hit US comedy Family Guy which read: '3 weeks today, we're totally in LA p****** people off on Hollywood Blvd and diggin' Marilyn Monroe up!
> 
> Federal agents even searched his suitcase looking for spades and shovels, claiming Emily was planning to act as Leigh's 'look out' while he raided Marilyn's tomb.












(Daily Mail UK)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*I've heard of passengers freaking out... even a flight attendant... but yoikes...*

*JetBlue Flight Diverted After Pilot's Meltdown
- He reportedly screamed about bombs and al-Qaeda*



> A pilot tore through the cabin of a JetBlue plane yelling about terror threats, warning passengers about al-Qaeda and bombs on board, passengers tell the Amarillo Globe-News. The captain started "shouting, ‘Iraq, al-Qaeda, terrorism, we’re all going down,'" witnesses said. Passengers tackled him and held him down, and the flight was forced to make an emergency landing in Amarillo, Texas.





> The crew had forced the captain to leave the cockpit because of his "erratic behavior," says the FAA. He tried to use the intercom, but it was shut off; when he tried to reenter the cockpit, the lock code seemed to have been changed, a passenger said. The plane had left New York City en route to a security conference, and passengers included security guards, one of whom choked the captain, who was banging on the cockpit door, until he fell.






+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






(Newser)


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

The co-pilot had to lock the cabin door so as to deny the pilot no opportunity to come back and try to fly the plane.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

This is just so sad and symptomatic of American paranoia since 9/11. Have they become their own worst enemies? Overblown security, mistrust in their own government and on it goes. What a waste in that most of this type of reaction is the product of their own making.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> This is just so sad and symptomatic of American paranoia since 9/11. Have they become their own worst enemies? Overblown security, mistrust in their own government and on it goes. What a waste in that most of this type of reaction is the product of their own making.


I said on 9/11 that; I was much more worried about what the US (and Canada) would do to themselves than I was about any terrorist. Sadly what has happened since has been far worse than my most cynical prognostications.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*friggin' ****** Paranoia....*

Explain to me why the U.S. should have the ability to control who gets on a g-d airplane that has nothing to do with U.S. airspace / territory?

*People in Britain Need Permission from U.S. to Board Flights to Canada, Mexico and Cuba*



> the US is demanding passengers’ full names, dates of birth and gender from airlines, at least 72 hour before departure from the UK to Canada. The initial requirement is for flights to Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and the Nova Scotia capital, Halifax – 150 miles from the nearest US territory. A similar stipulation is expected soon for the main airports in western Canada, Vancouver and Calgary.
> 
> Any passenger who refuses to comply will be denied boarding. Those who do supply details may find their trip could be abruptly cancelled by the Department of Homeland Security, .... travellers cannot find out whether they will be accepted on board until they reach the airport.


(Cryptogon)


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"the US is demanding passengers’ full names, dates of birth and gender from airlines, at least 72 hour before departure from the UK to Canada. The initial requirement is for flights to Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and the Nova Scotia capital, Halifax – 150 miles from the nearest US territory. A similar stipulation is expected soon for the main airports in western Canada, Vancouver and Calgary." Only fair, CM. Imagine "undesireables" entering Canada in TO, or Calgary or, God forbid, Halifax, and making their way to Buffalo, Montana or, God forbid, New York City??????? Keep out these potential trouble makers, I say. Canada should be following the same sort of procedures -- let's say, keep out all those from New York City from entering or emmigrating into our fine country. Canada would be a far better country without an influx of those from New York City ............... they talk strange and have strange ways about them. 

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Ok, everybody - the judge says we can fly nude now... as long as we're protesting!* 

*Judge OKs Nudity at TSA Checkpoint*



> An Oregon man was cleared of indecent exposure charges Wednesday when a local judge said his protest of Transportation Security Administration screening procedures was constitutionally protected speech under state law.
> 
> John Brennan, a 50-year-old technology consultant, was charged with the infraction after taking his clothes off at Portland International Airport in April, on a way to a business trip to San Jose.
> 
> “I was mostly motivated by the absurdity of it all. The irony that they wanna see me naked. But I don’t get to take my clothes off?”





> Judge David Rees said nudity laws don’t apply when it comes to protest. “It is the speech itself that the state is seeking to punish, and that it cannot do,”


(Wired)


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Maybe Fred Willard could request this judge???????


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*The TSA - always looking for new ways to make it seem like they're needed....*

*TSA now checks drinks purchased inside the airport*



> In a case of "from the sublime to the ridiculous", the TSA is now apparently testing drinks that have been purchased inside the airport for explosives.





> As this was well beyond the security check, deep inside the terminal, the drinks could only have been purchased inside the airport itself, with the people holding them just waiting to board their planes.
> He asked the TSA agents what they were doing, and they replied that they were checking for explosive chemicals (as people were drinking the drinks).


*and my favourite bit:*


> He finally asks if eventually the TSA will come to your home to check you, prior to your drive to the airport?


(Digital Journal)


----------

