Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
boots

Touchy TSA

Recommended Posts

Yeah no fair, why are we subject to forced seat belt laws? It's a infringement on our essential liberty!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah no fair, why are we subject to forced seat belt laws? It's a infringement on our essential liberty!

Move to New Hampshire?

 

Live Free or Die, Mother FUCKER!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

got an email from mom;

 

Here's a solution to all the controversy over full-body scanners at the airports:

All we need to do is develop a booth that you can step into that will not x-ray you, but will detonate any explosive device you may have hidden on or in your body. The explosion will be contained within the sealed booth.

This would be a win-win for everyone. There would be none of this crap about racial profiling and the device would eliminate long and expensive trials.

I can see it now: you're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion. Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system, "Attention standby passengers, we now have a seat available on flight number..."

Works for me!

 

Lol. Genius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

got an email from mom;

 

Here's a solution to all the controversy over full-body scanners at the airports:

All we need to do is develop a booth that you can step into that will not x-ray you, but will detonate any explosive device you may have hidden on or in your body. The explosion will be contained within the sealed booth.

This would be a win-win for everyone. There would be none of this crap about racial profiling and the device would eliminate long and expensive trials.

I can see it now: you're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion. Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system, "Attention standby passengers, we now have a seat available on flight number..."

Works for me!

 

Lol. Genius.

 

Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was using the numbers 1 in ~30 million as a point of comparison that a physicist made when he said that was the odds of getting cancer from one of these scans, which is about equal with the rate of terrorists blowing up planes. Those were numbers quoted from the article, I didn't make them up. Feel free to count the average number of flights per year and the number of foiled terrorists and/or successful terrorist attacks on them and come up with a more specific number Mr. Specifics-Patrolman.

 

This isn't about specifics, this is about gross misrepresentation of stats to further your side. If you are going to use numbers, you should use accurate numbers. Otherwise use a general term.

 

The quote is not misused. Using public transportation without having my children photographed naked or subjected to untested levels of possibly dangerous radiation or being touched in inappropriate places by government officials IS an essential freedom that has now been lost.

 

Yet again, you are making the false assumption that A) It's public transportation. B) The pictures are saved (Photographed) C) The pictures show nudity (This is clearly not agreed upon). D) The radiation has been tested, you are claiming it isn't untested with very little supporting evidence.

 

Them enacting such measures WITHOUT asking the people first is ALSO an ESSENTIAL freedom that WAS IGNORED. This might not be "taxation without representation" but its definitely SOMETHING without representation and it IS wrong.

 

Typing in caps doesn't make it an essential freedom. You also are making the assumption that "the people" weren't asked. Since when do we have to be directly asked about shit like this? Seriously, look at all of the legislation that you DON'T have a direct vote on. You are represented by people, they are the ones who vote for you. You are represented. This is nothing like taxation without representation.

 

Here's the actual costs of the machines, I was being lazy and vague with my "bazillions" term Mr. Specifics-Patrolman:

 

Stop with the name calling please. Let's really just leave that crap for other people who can't handle a discussion, please.

 

65 million. That's your figure. Now here's a figure that you should appreciate.

 

A Boeing 747 costs 216 million. *One* plane costs over 3 times the total cost of all of these detectors. The new airbus A380 costs 343 million... So the figure of 65 million is a drop in the bucket in terms of airport costs.

 

As for the liquid/asshole thing, you think only ONE person is involved in terrorist attacks? You are naive. If they want to blow us up, they'll figure out how to do it. Fortunately I only have a 1 in 30 million chance of that happening, and I can cross my fingers and hope that they're pretty fail about the whole thing like the Detroit-underwear bomber LOL.

 

It was hard enough for one person to have an underwear bomb. Think how hard it would be for 4 or 5 terrorists to assemble an asshole bomb? Seriously, are they going to shit in the isle real quick? Line up for bathroom breaks and pass their bottles to each other? I think the logistics behind 4 to 5 people smuggling asshole bombs onto the same plane is very very much harder than one person with a pants bomb.

 

When are they going to notice their machine isn't functioning right? a year or so later when 20% of the passengers from a single airport develop some forms of cancer?

 

This is more fear tactics. Simple diagnostics are performed on the most routine and mundane airport machines. Why would you expect anything less on these machines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, I'm ok with rectum sized bombs. I hope they take 4-5 terrorists for each plane they want to blow up, cuz they'll run out of terrorists long before they'll run out of planes. Also, blowing up a plane is significantly less bad than flying it into something is, (Hey, 9/11 or United 93).

 

 

Wait.

 

What? What is this?

 

I don't even...

 

I mean, I put this comment through my "Troll Scanner" and came up with nothing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

OMG

 

 

ultrasounds is not the same as backscattered x-rays though? The focused ionized radiation has yet to be tested with longterm results on humans, let alone pregnant women?

 

and even then, some people I know still don't "believe" in using ultrasounds because they've only been in regular use about 20 years, so we've yet to see if the cancer rates will increase or something else as time progresses. Very FEW people I know have this fear, but still its out there and they HAVE THE CHOICE to NOT get one from their doctor, while still getting regular medical care without it.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound

Ultrasound is cyclic sound pressure with a frequency greater than the upper limit of human hearing.

 

The reflection signature can reveal details about the inner structure of the medium, a property also used by animals such as bats for hunting. The most well known application of ultrasound is its use in sonography to produce pictures of fetuses in the human womb.

 

Although the possibility exists that biological effects on humans may be identified in the future

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray

Biochemists and biophysicists at the University of California, San Francisco in a May 2010 letter[31] to the head of the Transportation Security Administration raised several concerns about the validity of the indirect comparisons the Food and Drug Administration used in evaluating the safety of backscatter x-ray machines,[32]

 

They argued that the amount of radiation is higher than claimed by the TSA and the body scanner manufacturers because the dose was calculated as if distributed throughout the whole body. However, the radiation from backscatter x-ray scanners is absorbed in the skin and tissues immediately underneath.

 

 

I'm too busy right now to look for the energy levels/wavelengths etc. Maybe they are similar, but you don't get ultrasounds multiple times when traveling, I had ONE for about 5 min on my first baby. And its also been around 20+ years and have only shown to have negative effects on mouse fetuses after 30 min of ultrasound radiation. That study was just done in 2006. This backscatter radiation has very very little studies done on it for longterm negative effects at like what, 2 institutions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm moving to Australia... they don't have these problems there...the people are nicer too...

 

The United States is not the place I want to be... this entire society is a fucking lie... run by corrupted greedy assholes that cant see beyond the tip of their nose... don't even get me started on the ignorant bible thumpers.. now don't get me wrong here i have faith and i consider myself a christian and i believe there is higher power..and i don't care what people believe in... the sun, Buddha what ever floats your boat... but please don't tell me I'm wrong about this.. I worked in the airport for over a year...and 30% of the customer base were church groups coming from places like Detroit and other huge city's that have serious issues with poverty and disgusting people that need their head checked, saying that god called them to go up to this Indian reservation to help the poor people there... when the people that live there have tons of money from the tribes casinos they just don't change their lifestyles cause it draws attention to them.... aww poor us.. we cant find a job but we still get a decent sized check every month and the heat is on all winter and were still primarily overweight.... these church groups out with a good intentions should stay and fix their own damn states problems... North Dakota is cold and has winter to remove the filth of our society for the state naturally.

 

Knowing the population of the TSA in the Bismarck Airport, and their personality's i'm going to say that almost all of them are feeling sick as hell knowing that they have to stare are peoples junk through a scanner..

I personally think we should just have a EMP gate that you walk through after you walk through the ole metal detector... this will ensure that any electronics will just get zapped.. now i know what your thinking... pace makers... well the person's that have these little life saving devices should have a line called the i have a friggen pace maker please don't kill me bro...

One more thing... guns.. if you want to bring a loaded gun on to an airplane and make it through a metal detector you need to have a ceramic made firearm... so lets think of the implications of shoving a fully loaded handgun up your ass.. and a ceramic handgun needs to be made thicker in order to withstand the pressure of firing a bullet.....ugh... unless you got some sicko that has designed the barrel to function as a dildo i have a feeling your going to find yourself farting much quieter through the rest of your days...or just dead cause your ass cheek's puled the trigger and turned your insides in to guacamole...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm moving to Australia... they don't have these problems there...the people are nicer too...

 

The United States is not the place I want to be... this entire society is a fucking lie... run by corrupted greedy assholes that cant see beyond the tip of their nose... don't even get me started on the ignorant bible thumpers.. now don't get me wrong here i have faith and i consider myself a christian and i believe there is higher power..and i don't care what people believe in... the sun, Buddha what ever floats your boat... but please don't tell me I'm wrong about this.. I worked in the airport for over a year...and 30% of the customer base were church groups coming from places like Detroit and other huge city's that have serious issues with poverty and disgusting people that need their head checked, saying that god called them to go up to this Indian reservation to help the poor people there... when the people that live there have tons of money from the tribes casinos they just don't change their lifestyles cause it draws attention to them.... aww poor us.. we cant find a job but we still get a decent sized check every month and the heat is on all winter and were still primarily overweight.... these church groups out with a good intentions should stay and fix their own damn states problems... North Dakota is cold and has winter to remove the filth of our society for the state naturally.

 

Knowing the population of the TSA in the Bismarck Airport, and their personality's i'm going to say that almost all of them are feeling sick as hell knowing that they have to stare are peoples junk through a scanner..

I personally think we should just have a EMP gate that you walk through after you walk through the ole metal detector... this will ensure that any electronics will just get zapped.. now i know what your thinking... pace makers... well the person's that have these little life saving devices should have a line called the i have a friggen pace maker please don't kill me bro...

One more thing... guns.. if you want to bring a loaded gun on to an airplane and make it through a metal detector you need to have a ceramic made firearm... so lets think of the implications of shoving a fully loaded handgun up your ass.. and a ceramic handgun needs to be made thicker in order to withstand the pressure of firing a bullet.....ugh... unless you got some sicko that has designed the barrel to function as a dildo i have a feeling your going to find yourself farting much quieter through the rest of your days...or just dead cause your ass cheek's puled the trigger and turned your insides in to guacamole...

 

 

Wait.

 

What? What is this?

 

I don't even...

 

This thread is bizarre. I am sure this one isn't a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait.

 

What? What is this?

 

I don't even...

 

This thread is bizarre. I am sure this one isn't a troll.

 

I have no clue man, I was very confused as well. Maybe he misclicked the drunk thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I posted your link on my facebook today thanking TSA for indiscriminately choosing the possible terrorists to inspect completely fairly and including pregnant women in for the possibly dangerous x-ray backscattering scans.

 

One of my classmates sent me this link which I found extremely interesting and informative:

 

http://myhelicaltryst.blogspot.com/2010/11/tsa-x-ray-backscatter-body-scanner.html

 

He gets bonus points for the "Hide your kids, Hide your wife" title imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted your link on my facebook today thanking TSA for indiscriminately choosing the possible terrorists to inspect completely fairly and including pregnant women in for the possibly dangerous x-ray backscattering scans.

 

One of my classmates sent me this link which I found extremely interesting and informative:

 

http://myhelicaltryst.blogspot.com/2010/11/tsa-x-ray-backscatter-body-scanner.html

 

He gets bonus points for the "Hide your kids, Hide your wife" title imo.

 

The most important part of this article is understanding that it's focusing on people with a genetic defect BRCA1 or BRCA2 who are extremely prone to cancer.

 

Over the course of their lifetime, the incremental exposures to relative small and seemingly safe doses of ionizing radiation (which is everything from UV light to X-rays to gamma radiation) statistically accumulate damage (or the effects of damage and improper repair) until the probability of developing cancer becomes almost certain.

 

Also, I'm sorry for the writer's loss, but clearly this article has an emotional appeal throughout. Their mother died to breast cancer and has multiple other losses due to cancer.

 

The entire article deals in hypothetical speak "They could reconfigure this to make it like a normal x-ray machine." And "It might be worse."

 

And then it somehow suggests that a much lower dose and frequency of radiation is worse than higher rads. It's just baffling that they argue both that the machines *could* be used like a normal x-ray machine, but that it is potentially worse than an x-ray machine.

 

If they were actually sure of it, why would they even bother with anything but "These are worse than a normal x-ray."?

 

Because they know they don't have any solid footing, so the article quickly addresses SO many different topics its impossible to really focus on anything. With so many scary suggestions in such a short article, with scary graphs, secret looking documents with 75% of the words blocked out, and other pseudo-science looking pieces... It's no wonder people are fooled into thinking this is some informative document. The result is "Hide yo kids, hide yo wife, the radiation is going to melt us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not being objective, Nate. The author is quoting multiple points from a peer-reviewed group of UCSF scientists. He doesn't have to focus on one point -- there are multiple concerns. We should certainly dismiss them all on the word of mid level govt technicians who were told to make the very inconvenient debate go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important part of this article is understanding that it's focusing on people with a genetic defect BRCA1 or BRCA2 who are extremely prone to cancer.

 

Also, I'm sorry for the writer's loss, but clearly this article has an emotional appeal throughout. Their mother died to breast cancer and has multiple other losses due to cancer.

 

The entire article deals in hypothetical speak "They could reconfigure this to make it like a normal x-ray machine." And "It might be worse."

 

And then it somehow suggests that a much lower dose and frequency of radiation is worse than higher rads. It's just baffling that they argue both that the machines *could* be used like a normal x-ray machine, but that it is potentially worse than an x-ray machine.

 

If they were actually sure of it, why would they even bother with anything but "These are worse than a normal x-ray."?

 

Because they know they don't have any solid footing, so the article quickly addresses SO many different topics its impossible to really focus on anything. With so many scary suggestions in such a short article, with scary graphs, secret looking documents with 75% of the words blocked out, and other pseudo-science looking pieces... It's no wonder people are fooled into thinking this is some informative document. The result is "Hide yo kids, hide yo wife, the radiation is going to melt us."

 

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/BRCA

Are specific mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 more common in certain populations?

 

Yes. For example, three specific mutations, two in the BRCA1 gene and one in the BRCA2 gene, are the most common mutations found in these genes in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. In one study, 2.3 percent of participants (120 out of 5,318) carried one of these three mutations (9). This frequency is about five times higher than that found in the general population (10). It is not known whether the increased frequency of these mutations is responsible for the increased risk of breast cancer in Jewish populations compared with non-Jewish populations.

 

Other ethnic and geographic populations around the world, such as the Norwegian, Dutch, and Icelandic peoples, also have higher frequencies of specific BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

 

In addition, limited data indicate that the frequencies of specific BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations may vary among individual racial and ethnic groups in the United States, including African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, and non-Hispanic whites (11–13).

 

This information about genetic differences between racial and ethnic groups may help health care providers in selecting the most appropriate genetic test(s) (see Question 5).

 

So 0.46% of the general population carries one of three common mutations of the BRCA genes that is associated with breast cancer. There are approximately 2 million passengers that fly every day in the U.S (http://www.bts.gov/press_releases/2006/bts020_06/html/bts020_06.html). That means that every day 9,200 people that carry one of the known BRCA gene mutations would be exposed to this extra radiation. This isn't even including any of the other mutations that make you prone to DNA mutation following radiation exposure. 9,200 per day is a pretty big fucking number. ONE of those passengers getting cancer from the extra radiation every day is almost the equivalent of a massive airline disaster. I must also mention that 2.5% of the Ashkenazi Jewish population carry one of these three mutations, thereby making the TSA anti-Semitic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×