• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nader unites us all in the fight against ‘federal fondlers’

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Consumer rights advocate and perennial presidential vote-splitter Ralph Nader is here to help. Not only has he joined forces with the Electric Privacy Information Center and the Council on American-Islamic Relations to protest the machines, he also told The Daily Caller that he paid a visit this week to Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform meeting to recruit conservatives in his fight against “federal fondlers.”

“I said to ‘em, ‘I want to say a few words to this group, who are fully employed, fully insured, and fully clothed.’ And I said, ‘Get ready for naked insecurity.’”

Airport X-ray machines, says Nader, are a bipartisan issue. Republican Senators Tom Coburn, Susan Collins, and Richard Burr have all raised concerns that the machines emit a dangerous amount of radiation, “and you should know,” Nader added, “that the Libertarian Party, at my urging, came out with a tough statement last week against them.”
Alright Ralph! Its been long overdue to dismantle the TSA and to fully privatize airports. Let them handle their own security.

Nader unites us all in the fight against ‘federal fondlers’ | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
14,016
Reaction score
4,077
Location
Denton, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
We need to add the right to refuse X-ray security checks to the Bill of Rights.
 

ksu_aviator

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
6,969
Reaction score
2,592
Location
Fort Worth Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
You have the right to refuse the x-ray check....you just have to go through the feel up...errrr...pat down.
 

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Consumer rights advocate and perennial presidential vote-splitter Ralph Nader is here to help. Not only has he joined forces with the Electric Privacy Information Center and the Council on American-Islamic Relations to protest the machines, he also told The Daily Caller that he paid a visit this week to Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform meeting to recruit conservatives in his fight against “federal fondlers.”

“I said to ‘em, ‘I want to say a few words to this group, who are fully employed, fully insured, and fully clothed.’ And I said, ‘Get ready for naked insecurity.’”

Airport X-ray machines, says Nader, are a bipartisan issue. Republican Senators Tom Coburn, Susan Collins, and Richard Burr have all raised concerns that the machines emit a dangerous amount of radiation, “and you should know,” Nader added, “that the Libertarian Party, at my urging, came out with a tough statement last week against them.”
Alright Ralph! Its been long overdue to dismantle the TSA and to fully privatize airports. Let them handle their own security.

Nader unites us all in the fight against ‘federal fondlers’ | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
They, and Nader, are morons...

Radiation risk low with whole-body airport scanners | Reuters
There are two types of machines -- millimeter wavelength imaging and backscatter X-ray scanners. Both are used to see under clothes and identify unusual objects.

Only one -- backscatter X-ray machines -- expose individuals to ionizing radiation such as that used in common medical X-rays.

But the radiation levels are well below the threshold that could be considered a risk to an individual's health, said Dr. James Thrall of the American College of Radiology and chief of radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

"All of the concerns that we have about the medical use of X-rays really don't apply to these devices," Thrall said in a telephone interview.

"The exposure is extremely low and the energy of the X-rays is also very, very low," he said.

"When X-rays are used for medical imaging purposes, they have to be energetic enough to get through the human body. The X-rays used in the backscatter machines in airports have such low energy that they literally bounce off the skin. That is what backscatter implies," Thrall said.
 

Coronado

Voluntary Resignation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
7,059
Reaction score
2,412
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If this were true, then any seach of you personal property before boarding would be a violation, would it not?
The Supreme Court has reasoned that it is not, because when you go to an airport you expect to be searched. Why? Because people know that they will be searched at the airport.

I guess circular logic is okay if you're the Supreme Court. :shrug:
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,172
Reaction score
5,629
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We need to add the right to refuse X-ray security checks to the Bill of Rights.
Not sure if you're being serious or just emphasizing how ridiculous it is that we're being pressed/bullied/coerced into using technology that's not only "revealing" but potentially hazardous, but if the former...

Wouldn't it be easier just to apply public pressure on politicians to ease or change the federal security regulations? Some might argue a step further to abolish the TSA.
 

Coronado

Voluntary Resignation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
7,059
Reaction score
2,412
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Not sure if you're being serious or just emphasizing how ridiculous it is that we're being pressed/bullied/coerced into using technology that's not only "revealing" but potentially hazardous, but if the former...

Wouldn't it be easier just to apply public pressure on politicians to ease or change the federal security regulations? Some might argue a step further to abolish the TSA.
People are too easily cowed these days with the "national security" bogeyman. The TSA bullies people because they know that nobody will resist, and those that do can be further harassed by "secondary screening."
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,172
Reaction score
5,629
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If this were true, then any seach of you personal property before boarding would be a violation, would it not?
I believe that's true of international travel, but certainly not domestic travel.

I think there's actually a SCOTUS decision that says the feds have the right to look through everything on your laptop if you're crossing the border.
 

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,172
Reaction score
5,629
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
People are too easily cowed these days with the "national security" bogeyman. The TSA bullies people because they know that nobody will resist, and those that do can be further harassed by "secondary screening."
If what's being reported reflects a general trend, it's almost like they've been trained to not only harrass, but humiliate people who "opt out." I've only read 2 or 3 cases, but in each one the agents drew attention to the person by yelling "we've got an opt out!" and perform the pat down in plain view of other travelers -- it's like they're saying to those people in the security lines "you sure want to bypass the x-ray?"

The TSA bullies people because they know that nobody will resist, and those that do can be further harassed by "secondary screening."
On second thought, no. It's not harrassment. What we've got here is a failure to communicate. Some folks you just can't reach, which is the way they want it. Well, they GET it.:mrgreen:
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It should be interesting to hear the reports on air travel now that we are moving into the busiest time of the year. According to a CNN report, Growing backlash against TSA body scanners, pat-downs:

A growing pilot and passenger revolt over full-body scans and what many consider intrusive pat-downs couldn't have come at a worse time for the nation's air travel system.

Thanksgiving, the busiest travel time of the year, is less than two weeks away.

Grassroots groups are urging travelers to either not fly or to protest by opting out of the full-body scanners and undergo time-consuming pat-downs instead.
It's probably a good thing for the Dems that elections have already been held.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

Taylor

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
14,172
Reaction score
5,629
Location
US
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It should be interesting to hear the reports on air travel now that we are moving into the busiest time of the year.
I don't like it, and I don't think it helps security since you can opt to leave if you get picked for the "enhanced screening."

But I don't think it's enough to keep me from seeing my family over the holidays. I expect many would feel the same way.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You make a good argument for a road trip. I am curious to see what the public reaction will be when we hit the Thanksgiving travel peak.

Big Brother is watching...

 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
A point being missed here....
Pay attention kids, if you don't stay in school and learn something useful, your only choice for work will be flipping burgers, or feeling up fat slobs at the airport....
Of course, if you are the type to get off on that, go for it.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
50,938
Reaction score
33,151
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The terrorists used airplanes, so now we're going overboard on airport security. What will they target next? We are vulnerable in so many ways, that simply reacting to what they've done before isn't going to keep us safe. So far, security has been a reactive, not proactive:

The jihidis hijacked airplanes and used them as weapons, so we tightened airport security.
Some idiot tried to set off a shoe bomb, so now we have to take off our shoes. I used to joke that it was a good thing that he didn't use an underwear bomb, but guess what? It's no longer a joke.\

So, now we have to submit to a body search. What's next? The cockroaches will try another tack, and we'll tighten security there, then they'll find something else to do.

As for bombs, just train bomb sniffing dogs. No one is going to be able to smuggle explosives, or anything else, past a dog's nose.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
All the money spent at airports in response to 9/11 would have been better spent lobbing cruise missiles in the direction of those Arab countries who refuse to root out the terrorists within their own borders. And that includes the SA elite/royal family who donate money to the cause of terrorism....
 
Last edited:

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
All the money spent at airports in response to 9/11 would have been better spent lobbing cruise missiles in the direction of those Arab countries who refuse to root out the terrorists within their own borders. And that includes the SA elite/royal family who donate money to the cause of terrorism....
I'll drink to that!
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
50,938
Reaction score
33,151
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
All the money spent at airports in response to 9/11 would have been better spent lobbing cruise missiles in the direction of those Arab countries who refuse to root out the terrorists within their own borders. And that includes the SA elite/royal family who donate money to the cause of terrorism....
Sure, after we find another way to run our cars and trucks.
 

MKULTRABOY

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
All the money spent at airports in response to 9/11 would have been better spent lobbing cruise missiles in the direction of those Arab countries who refuse to root out the terrorists within their own borders. And that includes the SA elite/royal family who donate money to the cause of terrorism....
Causing more terrorism! Yay!
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Sure, after we find another way to run our cars and trucks.
We get about 10% of our oil from SA, and we can surely cut our usage by that much. Or would you prefer to continue this energy game that costs many thousands of lives just so Americans can drive anywhere, anytime.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Causing more terrorism! Yay!
counter-terrorism? Surely we should be allowed to use the same methods our enemies use.....
If each and every Saudi Prince (hundreds of them?) lived in fear of having his palace destroyed by a cruise missile, things might be a bit different. As it is, the Saudi govt pays the salaries of the imams who preach hatred for the USA.
And to think that the Bush clan sucks up to them so much....shouldn't that be treason?
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
50,938
Reaction score
33,151
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
We get about 10% of our oil from SA, and we can surely cut our usage by that much. Or would you prefer to continue this energy game that costs many thousands of lives just so Americans can drive anywhere, anytime.
Can you imagine what would happen to the world price of petroleum if Saudi Arabia quit pumping oil? Remember the late '70s? And I thought we were going to send missiles to all of the countries that harbor terrorists.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom