• 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!

Obama stands by controversial air security screening methods

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
31,283
Reaction score
34,694
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Lisbon, Portugal (CNN) -- President Barack Obama stood by new controversial screening measures Saturday, calling methods such as pat-downs and body scans necessary to assure airline safety.

Speaking at a NATO press conference in Lisbon, Portugal, the president called the balance between protecting travelers' rights and their security a "tough situation."

Per the new rules, travelers may be subject to full-body scans at 400 such machines in 69 airports nationwide. Those who voluntarily opt out -- as well as those who set off a scanning machine or a metal detector -- are subject to a pat-down. Some travelers have likened the pat-downs to groping.

The president said such methods are needed after what happened December 25, 2009, when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria allegedly boarded a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit with a bomb hidden in his underwear. Abdulmutallab reportedly failed to set off the bomb, which metal detectors didn't detect, though his attempt led to airport screening procedures that have caused a holiday travel uproar.

"At this point, the Transportation Security Administration, in consultation with our counterterrorism experts, have indicated to me that the procedures that they've been putting in place are the only ones right now that they consider to be effective against the kind of threat that we saw in the Christmas Day bombing," said Obama.

Ok Obama. You lost me here. You're actually suggesting that I'm gonna be safer travelling as long as some security dude can touch my balls.

**** that.

You're telling me that there's not one TSA agent that's gonna get a ****ing stiffy from feeling up me, or my mom or anybody else for that matter, it's ****ing rediculous and indefensible.

Since when did it become Ok to say

"you've bought a plane ticket, now bend over, and we're gonna get to do with you what we want".

No son of a bitch is touching my junk.

All your howling during the campaign about how bad it was under Bush in terms of personal privacy and you're defending this rubbish.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The safety and well-being of America cannot be assured until the powerful Hand of the Government rests firmly upon the genitals of the entirety of it's people.

Shades of 1984!! :lamo:lamo:lamo
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,982
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Remember how I'd always say "I voted for change and I got Bush III?"

This is what I'm talking about. For 9 years now we've been slowly forced to accept more and more harassment and intrusion from the agencies who are supposedly there to protect us. And we keep accepting it. I've talked to co-workers whose response is "well, it keeps us safe."

What? That's it? No questions? Jesus, people. The TSA has virtually no oversight. Congress gives them everything they want because to do otherwise is to give your opponent the "OPENED THE DOORS TO TERRORISTSSSSS" attack ad. And we've gone along with it. People who vote against the TSA get voted out of office. The sole senator to vote against the PATRIOT act got voted out of office.

The really sad part? The terrorists who hate us probably don't even care about airplanes anymore. They've done the damage there, they're switching to other tactics. Mailing bombs via UPS costs them almost nothing, but we're going to end up with massive mail screening procedures I bet. Then what? They blow up one bus, and suddenly the TSA is at every intercity bus hub.

My future travel predictions:
Naked, handcuffed, and sedated. Don't think it wont ****in happen.
 
Last edited:

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,654
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If it's not written on the teleprompter Obama can't respond.

Israel has a system that works but because we have allowed the Liberals and their political correct BS to take over we have to put up with Janet Napolitano's please touch me in places non Homosexuals would never touch me in policies.
 

Kernel Sanders

Norville Rogers
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
3,730
Reaction score
1,931
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The president said such methods are needed after what happened December 25, 2009, when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria allegedly boarded a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit with a bomb hidden in his underwear. Abdulmutallab reportedly failed to set off the bomb, which metal detectors didn't detect, though his attempt led to airport screening procedures that have caused a holiday travel uproar.

To play devil's advocate, if the TSA were to end the pat-downs tomorrow what would stand in the way of a repeat of the Christmas Bomber?
 

topshelf

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
85
Reaction score
25
Location
Fly Over Country
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
President Obama could use some advice from a late 20th century philosopher...

"if every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right”.
- George Costanza

I think it applies.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
If it's not written on the teleprompter Obama can't respond.

Israel has a system that works but because we have allowed the Liberals and their political correct BS to take over we have to put up with Janet Napolitano's please touch me in places non Homosexuals would never touch me in policies.

Israel's level of security isn't feasible for the U.S. in the big picture, although some of it would make sense. El Al's security protocols add about $77 to the cost of a ticket for its 1.3 million/year plane trips. U.S. security procedures add $7.80 to the cost of a ticket for its 735 million/year plane trips.

What would it cost for the U.S. to get Israel-level airport security? | FP Passport

One tier of their security protocol is to pressurize all luggage 'to altitude' to guard against bombs that are designed to explode at altitude. I like that a lot. Their baggage screening:

•Swabs are taken of carry-on luggage and examined using hi-tech bomb sniffers
•Hi-tech liquid explosive detecting devices on passengers’ personal belongings both check in and carry-on
•Checked luggage is stored in a secure room that's constantly guarded by El Al personnel
•All baggage and cargo also go through a decompression chamber on the ground (simulates pressure in the cargo compartment during flight to test for bombs set to go off at high altitudes)

http://aviationknowledge.wikidot.com/aviation:el-al-the-world-s-most-secure-airline
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,982
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
To play devil's advocate, if the TSA were to end the pat-downs tomorrow what would stand in the way of a repeat of the Christmas Bomber?

You mean the type of attack that has failed twice because the chemicals mixed to make the explosive are too sensitive to mix properly in coach class on an airliner?

Nothing. Of course, that's about what stands in the way now. The scanners wouldn't pick up that crotch pouch.
 

randel

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
5,758
Reaction score
2,093
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Ok Obama. You lost me here. You're actually suggesting that I'm gonna be safer travelling as long as some security dude can touch my balls.

**** that.

You're telling me that there's not one TSA agent that's gonna get a ****ing stiffy from feeling up me, or my mom or anybody else for that matter, it's ****ing rediculous and indefensible.

Since when did it become Ok to say

"you've bought a plane ticket, now bend over, and we're gonna get to do with you what we want".

No son of a bitch is touching my junk.

All your howling during the campaign about how bad it was under Bush in terms of personal privacy and you're defending this rubbish.
if he put an end to the screenings, and someone got through and blew up a plane, then he would hear how he didnt do enough to prevent it...a lose lose situation
 

theangryamerican

Can't stop the signal...
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
2,233
Reaction score
1,184
Location
The Wild West
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
To play devil's advocate, if the TSA were to end the pat-downs tomorrow what would stand in the way of a repeat of the Christmas Bomber?

This statement makes it sound as though the TSA successfully prevented the first incident...
 

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,832
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
To play devil's advocate, if the TSA were to end the pat-downs tomorrow what would stand in the way of a repeat of the Christmas Bomber?

Probably the same thing that prevented it last time.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Remember how I'd always say "I voted for change and I got Bush III?"

This is what I'm talking about. For 9 years now we've been slowly forced to accept more and more harassment and intrusion from the agencies who are supposedly there to protect us. And we keep accepting it. I've talked to co-workers whose response is "well, it keeps us safe."

What? That's it? No questions? Jesus, people. The TSA has virtually no oversight. Congress gives them everything they want because to do otherwise is to give your opponent the "OPENED THE DOORS TO TERRORISTSSSSS" attack ad. And we've gone along with it. People who vote against the TSA get voted out of office. The sole senator to vote against the PATRIOT act got voted out of office.

The really sad part? The terrorists who hate us probably don't even care about airplanes anymore. They've done the damage there, they're switching to other tactics. Mailing bombs via UPS costs them almost nothing, but we're going to end up with massive mail screening procedures I bet. Then what? They blow up one bus, and suddenly the TSA is at every intercity bus hub.

My future travel predictions:
Naked, handcuffed, and sedated. Don't think it wont ****in happen.

You voted for an ultra-Liberal president and that's exactly what you got.

Profiling is illegal and that's the way you want it. It's profling to target an African Muslim, whose name is on the no-fly list and paid for a one-way ticket, with cash and didn't have any luggage. That wasn't enough evidence for them to decided that he didn't need to board an aircraft. Instead, they insist that if they had played with his sack for a few minutes, they would have caught him red-handed.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
31,283
Reaction score
34,694
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You voted for an ultra-Liberal president and that's exactly what you got.

Profiling is illegal and that's the way you want it. It's profling to target an African Muslim, whose name is on the no-fly list and paid for a one-way ticket, with cash and didn't have any luggage. That wasn't enough evidence for them to decided that he didn't need to board an aircraft. Instead, they insist that if they had played with his sack for a few minutes, they would have caught him red-handed.

How do you knew Deuce voted for Obama?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
To play devil's advocate, if the TSA were to end the pat-downs tomorrow what would stand in the way of a repeat of the Christmas Bomber?

The 9/11 hijackers were all on the terrorist watch list; bought tickest under their real names and were in the country illegally.

Fewer pat-downs and more due diligence, perhaps?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,982
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You voted for an ultra-Liberal president and that's exactly what you got.

Profiling is illegal and that's the way you want it. It's profling to target an African Muslim, whose name is on the no-fly list and paid for a one-way ticket, with cash and didn't have any luggage. That wasn't enough evidence for them to decided that he didn't need to board an aircraft. Instead, they insist that if they had played with his sack for a few minutes, they would have caught him red-handed.

No, it's racial profiling to target someone for having brown skin.

I don't think I've ever heard a liberal speak out against psychological profiling or behavioral profiling.

Obama isn't ultra-liberal. You, and many conservatives these days, are just incapable of telling the difference between "I think we should keep the feds involved in education" and "COMMUNISM FOR ALL! MUAHAHAH!"


Was SNL ever on the TSA's side!?
 
Last edited:

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, it's racial profiling to target someone for having brown skin.

I don't think I've ever heard a liberal speak out against psychological profiling or behavioral profiling.

Obama isn't ultra-liberal. You, and many conservatives these days, are just incapable of telling the difference between "I think we should keep the feds involved in education" and "COMMUNISM FOR ALL! MUAHAHAH!"



Was SNL ever on the TSA's side!?

You wanted a system, that picks on everyone and doesn't make anyone feel like they've been singled out, because of whatever. The only way to do that is to select 7 y/o American boys for random strip searches, so we can say how PC we are and how we treat everyone equally.

Well, you got exatly what you asked for. So, stop bitching about it.
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,388
Reaction score
327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
if he put an end to the screenings, and someone got through and blew up a plane, then he would hear how he didnt do enough to prevent it.

There is a difference between opposing, and wanting to end, particular types of screening and ending ALL screening - the FORMER being what the opposition of these pat downs and body scanners are, and the latter being a convinient straw man that started out as a simple misunderstanding but seem to be increasingly used by Pistole and their ilk to slander those opposed to the patdowns and body scanners.

WE. DON'T. OPPOSE. HAVING. SCREENING. IN. GENERAL.

We just oppose the un-necessarily intrusive and un-effective.

[And last I checked, one could oppose particular methods of screening and still support having some form of screening in place]
 
Last edited:

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
There is a difference between opposing, and wanting to end, particular types of screening and ending ALL screening - the FORMER being what the opposition of these pat downs and body scanners are, and the latter being a convinient straw man that started out as a simple misunderstanding but seem to be increasingly used by Pistole and their ilk to slander those opposed to the patdowns and body scanners.

WE. DON'T. OPPOSE. HAVING. SCREENING. IN. GENERAL.

We just oppose the un-necessarily intrusive and un-effective.

[And last I checked, one could oppose particular methods of screening and still support having some form of screening in place]

Travelsonic, what kind of security do you want to see for people wearing burqas? Other flowing clothing. When they refuse to go through body scanners? Bombs don't have to contain metal, so metal detectors aren't enough. What's your pleasure?
 

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
89,059
Reaction score
28,089
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Geraldo interviewed the former head of El Al security. He said the scanners is all bull**** and a waste of money. He said trained security and profiling is the answer. That means concentrating on those individuals that come from countries that hate America.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Geraldo interviewed the former head of El Al security. He said the scanners is all bull**** and a waste of money. He said trained security and profiling is the answer. That means concentrating on those individuals that come from countries that hate America.

Which includes racial profiling. Weather you think it really is or not you can be damn sure that lots of people will look at it that way. Also the Israeli aiport security will generally wave through other Israelies but will stop pretty much everyone else and question them at length and will give them a physical screening. Something which many in this thread seemed to be opposed to...and yet I've already seen a few of them say that they wouldn't mind Israel's type of security here. (or words to that effect anyways) How ironic.
 
Top Bottom