When/If a "terrorist" blows up himself/plane via hiding bomb in his ass...

[Reason]

The recent "underwear bomber" had the explosives hidden in a condom so...

This has sorta been the obvious question everyone in the mainstream has no doubt thought of but hasn't discussed...

With the recent backlash against the sexual abuse style fondling & sexual abuse style disrobing scanners I kinda wish the TSA would come out tomarrow and tell everyone that there will be mandatory anal cavity searches in order to fly just so I could watch the backlash from the sheeple.

At what point are we letting the terrorists "win"? Is the fondling & naked scanning the limit? If so, how do you think everyone would react if a "terrorist" blows up himself/plane via hiding bomb in his ass...

Considering tests have shown that the TSA fails to detect 60+% (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMLqzPAWgDI) of contraband items such as explosives, it seems like the whole TSA system needs to be scrapped and reexamined from scratch.

Thoughts?

[squarepusher]

its not about bombs its about preparing the public for tyranny

[Sola_Fide]

I've been in planes where, judging by the smell, I'm sure they had a few bombs waiting in thier ass.

[Arion45]

Security theatre.

[Agorism]

Vagina bombs

[hugolp]

Vagina bombs

mmm, I almost could not hold myself...:rolleyes:

[Reason]

////

[AGRP]

They wouldn't even have to blow themselves up.

It could all mysteriously happen and we would have to take the CIA's word for it.

[ghengis86]

http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=5347847&index=1

http://cbs4.com/national/suicide.bombers.rectum.2.1216373.html

Not on a plane, but bombs up the butt is already here

[Reason]

http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=5347847&index=1 (http://iphone.cbsnews.com/site?sid=cbsnews_ip&pid=sections.detail&storyId=5347847&index=1)

http://cbs4.com/national/suicide.bombers.rectum.2.1216373.html (http://cbs4.com/national/suicide.bombers.rectum.2.1216373.html)

Not on a plane, but bombs up the butt is already here

I hadn't heard about that :eek:

[pacelli]

They will never abolish the TSA. If a "terrorist" blows up a plane using some kind of smuggled bomb, they'll just make it ILLEGAL TO REFUSE SCREENING PROCEDURES. They will make an entire growth industry out of it. Look at how far things have come in 9 years.

[emazur]

YouTube - al Qaeda rectum bomb trumps security, almost kills prince (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWPiL9R4k_g)

[sofia]

whats the point in making pilots go through a scanning machine?

If the pilot is a 'suicide pilot"....he'll just fly his plane into the ground..or worse!...He doesnt need a flippin bomb

[Anti Federalist]

With the recent backlash against the sexual abuse style fondling & sexual abuse style disrobing scanners I kinda wish the TSA would come out tomarrow and tell everyone that there will be mandatory anal cavity searches in order to fly just so I could watch the backlash from the sheeple.

At what point are we letting the terrorists "win"? Is the fondling & naked scanning the limit? If so, how do you think everyone would react if a "terrorist" blows up himself/plane via hiding bomb in his ass...

There would be little or no backlash from most.

The situation is such that the weak, mollified, pussified population of Americunts would willingly, happily submit themselves and their children to full anal and vaginal probing, as long as "it keeps them safe" from a government created problem that poses a risk 1000 times less than the risk associated with the drive to the airport.

:mad:

[aGameOfThrones]

Youtube comment:


"Tolerating a doctor seeing you unclothed is exactly as arbitrary as tolerating a TSA worker seeing you unclothed; both are trying to keep you safe and healthy."

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments=1&v=7txGwoITSj4

[fj45lvr]

Are we ever going to see a airline that goes rogue and doesn't make people go through this shit??

I bet it would do well financially.

[goldenequity]

http://www.boingboing.net/201011111141.jpg

[Anti Federalist]

Youtube comment:


"Tolerating a doctor seeing you unclothed is exactly as arbitrary as tolerating a TSA worker seeing you unclothed; both are trying to keep you safe and healthy."

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments=1&v=7txGwoITSj4

If TSA Pat-Down = Medical Examination, then Rape = Lovemaking

[Pauls' Revere]

Drug dealers go so far as to surgically implant drugs in order to transport them. I suspect a terroist could do the same thing with a bomb of some sort.

[Anti Federalist]

The miserable mother fuckers are mocking us.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3584/3304306634_0a9e51503c_z.jpg


http://www.boingboing.net/201011111141.jpg

[Anti Federalist]

Drug dealers go so far as to surgically implant drugs in order to transport them. I suspect a terroist could do the same thing with a bomb of some sort.

Already been done.

[Tyr]

whats the point in making pilots go through a scanning machine?

If the pilot is a 'suicide pilot"....he'll just fly his plane into the ground..or worse!...He doesnt need a flippin bomb

The point being this is what happens when the Government is allowed to come up with an idea.

[Tyr]

Are we ever going to see a airline that goes rogue and doesn't make people go through this shit??

I bet it would do well financially.

I doubt it. Aren't most large airports owned by the Government? They would have to build their own private airlines capable of handling large volumes of customers which takes ALOT of money plus Governments signing off on them creating competition with the Government.

Although on a positive thought it's possible if TSA gets much worse the Airline companies go in together on something similar.

[fj45lvr]

I doubt it. Aren't most large airports owned by the Government? They would have to build their own private airlines capable of handling large volumes of customers which takes ALOT of money plus Governments signing off on them creating competition with the Government.

Although on a positive thought it's possible if TSA gets much worse the Airline companies go in together on something similar.


I don't know what federal regulations control this but I think that there is a real opportunity for a entrepreneur with a libertarian streak to set up their own runways and cash in on this INSANITY....

I'd fly with them even if I was not landing in a metro area and had to commute to where I want to get to.

[PeacePlan]

Soon you will be getting cavity searches at the airport..

[qh4dotcom]

whats the point in making pilots go through a scanning machine?

If the pilot is a 'suicide pilot"....he'll just fly his plane into the ground..or worse!...He doesnt need a flippin bomb

I recall it's not just one pilot flying a plane...all pilots would have to have to fly the plane into the ground

[MelissaWV]

The TSA was pointless long before any of this. People think safety needs to begin when they are ready to go to the gate, but why?

A plane holding, let's say, 200 souls blows up over someplace and kills another dozen people on the ground. This is the "worst case" scenario other than the plane flying into a crowded building or event, of course, but it'd be the easiest "worst case" to pull off. In other words, it's the "worst case" that the TSA is supposedly designed for, to prevent bombs on board and planes from exploding, raining down debris and body parts on an unsuspecting public.

Now, think of the airport near Christmas. Think of it just before Thanksgiving. Think of the people pressed, like cattle, into security lines. There is extensive information as to which airports have the biggest crowds, the longest lines, and the most notable delays. When you get in line, you have not been patted down. You might be wearing a big coat in the winter. You will likely be carrying a rollaway bag that has not been screened by anyone. There are no bomb-sniffing dogs likely to be roaming the airport. You are probably on one floor of a multi-floor airport, with numerous people bustling around below you. You are surrounded by a hundred people, plus workers, and there are multiple security checkpoints just at that airport alone.

If this isn't familiar to you (maybe you don't fly, or your airport isn't very busy?), let me illustrate:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/74/221441650_581830f8dc_o.jpg

One of those folks can have a bomb --- a very big one --- in any one of those unchecked, unverified, unexamined bags.

If the TSA was designed to "care about security," then why doesn't it actually secure the airport altogether? It doesn't. It purports to secure your journey aboard the planes, and it doesn't even do a good job at that.

I could go on about other places where you could detonate a bomb and have a far greater impact, but you get the idea. This is not about safety. Your lack of safety and the big red target painted on your back for people who want to make a statement by blowing people up do not spontaneously appear after you walk towards your gate.

[ghengis86]

The TSA was pointless long before any of this. People think safety needs to begin when they are ready to go to the gate, but why?

A plane holding, let's say, 200 souls blows up over someplace and kills another dozen people on the ground. This is the "worst case" scenario other than the plane flying into a crowded building or event, of course, but it'd be the easiest "worst case" to pull off. In other words, it's the "worst case" that the TSA is supposedly designed for, to prevent bombs on board and planes from exploding, raining down debris and body parts on an unsuspecting public.

Now, think of the airport near Christmas. Think of it just before Thanksgiving. Think of the people pressed, like cattle, into security lines. There is extensive information as to which airports have the biggest crowds, the longest lines, and the most notable delays. When you get in line, you have not been patted down. You might be wearing a big coat in the winter. You will likely be carrying a rollaway bag that has not been screened by anyone. There are no bomb-sniffing dogs likely to be roaming the airport. You are probably on one floor of a multi-floor airport, with numerous people bustling around below you. You are surrounded by a hundred people, plus workers, and there are multiple security checkpoints just at that airport alone.

If this isn't familiar to you (maybe you don't fly, or your airport isn't very busy?), let me illustrate:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/74/221441650_581830f8dc_o.jpg

One of those folks can have a bomb --- a very big one --- in any one of those unchecked, unverified, unexamined bags.

If the TSA was designed to "care about security," then why doesn't it actually secure the airport altogether? It doesn't. It purports to secure your journey aboard the planes, and it doesn't even do a good job at that.

I could go on about other places where you could detonate a bomb and have a far greater impact, but you get the idea. This is not about safety. Your lack of safety and the big red target painted on your back for people who want to make a statement by blowing people up do not spontaneously appear after you walk towards your gate.

I think one of their reasons is to prevent people from hijacking planes and flying them into buildings causing more damage than just 200 or so deaths. Problem is, locked, secured cockpit doors pretty much solved that. Armed air marshalls also helped. So it still begs the question, why just at the terminal gate?


i think we all know why, and it has nothing to do with our security.

[MelissaWV]

I think one of their reasons is to prevent people from hijacking planes and flying them into buildings causing more damage than just 200 or so deaths. Problem is, locked, secured cockpit doors pretty much solved that. Armed air marshalls also helped. So it still begs the question, why just at the terminal gate?


i think we all know why, and it has nothing to do with our security.

Ah but that's a bit of a Catch 22, isn't it? We've had screenings long before 9/11, and when 9/11 happened the Government said they had no idea that planes would be used in such a way. In addition, there could be literally thousands of deaths at airports (not to mention the damage to the airports, the impact on shipping, etc.) in the scenario I described. With absolutely no screening, someone could even detonate the mythical "dirty bomb" and cause everyone in the airport to sizzle to a nuclear crisp! Or, what's more likely, they could release some deadly pathogen (which people would then merrily transport to their ultimate destination). All of these things are infinitely easier than trying to sneak a device onto a plane, even with zero security at the gate.

So yeah, it's obviously not about safety. :)

[pcosmar]

So yeah, it's obviously not about safety. :)

Only obvious to a functioning mind. Or a tactical mind.
;)

[amy31416]

I used to think that flying was so freaking cool.

At least I have the memories.

[Kylie]

Any reasonable person can come to this conclusion. Unfortunately, there are not that many reasonable people in this country anymore.

[pcosmar]

I used to think that flying was so freaking cool.

At least I have the memories.

Two times I thought flying was really cool.

Nap of Earth in a Huey through the Hawaiian mountains. and on a rope under a chopper . (extraction)
:D

[aGameOfThrones]

The miserable mother fuckers are mocking us.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3584/3304306634_0a9e51503c_z.jpg



You know... that's kinda F**ked up.

[Noob]

A camera that sees you as a walking skeleton would take of the need for body scanners and pat downs. Every one would just appear as a skeleton walking pass the security check point.

[Pericles]

Ah but that's a bit of a Catch 22, isn't it? We've had screenings long before 9/11, and when 9/11 happened the Government said they had no idea that planes would be used in such a way. In addition, there could be literally thousands of deaths at airports (not to mention the damage to the airports, the impact on shipping, etc.) in the scenario I described. With absolutely no screening, someone could even detonate the mythical "dirty bomb" and cause everyone in the airport to sizzle to a nuclear crisp! Or, what's more likely, they could release some deadly pathogen (which people would then merrily transport to their ultimate destination). All of these things are infinitely easier than trying to sneak a device onto a plane, even with zero security at the gate.

So yeah, it's obviously not about safety. :)

Stop making sense. The terrorist has a target rich environment, which is why a defensive strategy is the wrong one.

[EvilEngineer]

There is nothing the TSA can do to stop something like this... just be glad this linked video is only a video game.

http://notcliche.com/tsurupettan/wp-content/gallery/Modern%20Warfare%202/No%20Russian.jpg

YouTube - Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 - No Russian - Airport Mission Uncut - Veteran - High Quality (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXBDkevx5lM)

Action starts about 2 minutes in.

[South Park Fan]

I'm surprised MelissaWV hasn't been detained as a "terrorist" yet.