The Obama Approved (Nazi)TSA sexual assault of former Miss USA

[TheBrain]

You could have just said no and saved yourself the trouble of typing all of that.

In other words you have no retort so you just try to come back with something snappy.

Look junior , you might have gotten away with your bullshit around here in the past, but from this point forward if you make a claim you better be able to back it up. So back up your claim that something is unconstitutional even though the SCOTUS has in fact not ruled that is is unconstitutional per our Constitution.

I asked you if you could make an argument without resorting to a logical fallacy, and you resorted to an appeal to authority. Pointing out that you actually failed at the what I asked is not a snappy comeback.

Can you argue that invasive pat downs are reasonable without claiming that the fact that they have not been ruled unreasonable proves they are? Would a strip search be reasonable if we discovered terrorists using fake skin to hide bombs? How, exactly, do you think me locking my bag when I carry it mean that I do not have an expectation of privacy regarding the contents of that bag?

Try to use your brain and actually think for a change, don't just jump up and down and claim that it is legal because no one said it isn't, provide some type of logic that proves you have thought about the issue.

First, show me where anyone is actually being subjected to invasive searches, then we'll talk.

 

[Contumacious]

You keep pretending I don't care about civil liberties...


Why do you not answer to the downside of the alternative methods as opposed to physical search and admit that your efforts to dishonestly pervert this method will only result in aggressive interrogation tactics which would be a WORSE offense to our civil liberties...?

Valerie, Valerie, Valerie.

Why don't you first research the reasons the Muslims want to retaliate?

And then determine if there are alternative ways of addressing their concerns which do not involve waiving our 4th and 5th Amendment rights?


.

I don't make policy, I just don't buy into bullshit drama propaganda tactics either...

What do you consider "bullshit drama propaganda tactics"?!?!?!?

.

 

[xsited1]

This is a very disturbing thread. I honestly can't believe how many people defend the TSA. And these are people who have a problem with the Patriot Act, but they don't seem to have a problem with the TSA. Whether they want to admit it or not, my hunch is that they are going along with what the TSA is doing because Obama has said that it is necessary. End of story. Sad, very sad.

Here's something more to chew on:

My Washington Examiner column this week covers two developments last week that may make you somewhat less likely to “Give Thanks for the TSA” as former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen urged on National Review’s website.

The first is the viral video of a TSA agent at New Orleans airport giving the “freedom fondle” to a six-year-old girl. The second is Friday’s revelation that among the “behavioral indicators” TSA uses to scope out travelers who deserve extra manhandling is the “arrogant” expression of “contempt against airport passenger procedures.”

‘Give Thanks for the TSA’? | Cato @ Liberty

 

[Contumacious]

This is a very disturbing thread. I honestly can't believe how many people defend the TSA.

Every politically controlled educational system will inculcate the doctrine of state supremacy sooner or later. . . . Once that doctrine has been accepted, it becomes an almost superhuman task to break the stranglehold of the political power over the life of the citizen. It has had his body, property and mind in its clutches from infancy. An octopus would sooner release its prey. A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state.

–Isabel Paterson, The God of the Machine (1943)

.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You could have just said no and saved yourself the trouble of typing all of that.

In other words you have no retort so you just try to come back with something snappy.

Look junior , you might have gotten away with your bullshit around here in the past, but from this point forward if you make a claim you better be able to back it up. So back up your claim that something is unconstitutional even though the SCOTUS has in fact not ruled that is is unconstitutional per our Constitution.

I asked you if you could make an argument without resorting to a logical fallacy, and you resorted to an appeal to authority. Pointing out that you actually failed at the what I asked is not a snappy comeback.

Can you argue that invasive pat downs are reasonable without claiming that the fact that they have not been ruled unreasonable proves they are? Would a strip search be reasonable if we discovered terrorists using fake skin to hide bombs? How, exactly, do you think me locking my bag when I carry it mean that I do not have an expectation of privacy regarding the contents of that bag?

Try to use your brain and actually think for a change, don't just jump up and down and claim that it is legal because no one said it isn't, provide some type of logic that proves you have thought about the issue.

claim that it is legal because no one said it isn't..
The above uniquely resembles the Al Gore argument of "no controlling legal authority"..
In other words, "do what ever you want as long as no one is watching."
This cuts both ways.....Doing something wrong is still wrong even if the thing is not illegal.

 

[Skull Pilot]

In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that a search occurs only when 1) a person expects privacy in the thing searched and 2) society believes that expectation is reasonable.

Where society's need is great and no other effective means of meeting the need is available, and intrusion on people's privacy is minimal, checkpoints toward that end may briefly detain motorists. In Michigan v. Sitz 496 U.S. 444 (1990), the Supreme Court allowed discretionless sobriety checkpoints. In United States v. Martinez-Fuerte 428 U.S. 543 (1976), the Supreme Court allowed discretionless immigration checkpoints. In Illinois v. Lidster 540 U.S. 419 (2004), the Supreme Court allowed focused informational checkpoints. However, discretionary checkpoints or general crime-fighting checkpoints are not allowed.[28] Further, in Delaware v. Prouse 440 U.S. 648 (1979), the Supreme Court stated that, absent articulable and reasonable suspicion that a motorist is unlicensed or that an automobile is not registered, or that either the vehicle or an occupant is otherwise subject to seizure for violation of law, stopping an automobile and detaining the driver in order to check his driver's license and the registration of the automobile are unreasonable.

Another exception is at borders and ports of entry.

The above excerpts clearly show that the Court has ruled that these types of searches do NOT violate your 4th Amendment rights.

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have the right to be secure in my person.

There is no compelling reason to grope everyone at an airport. How many people does the Israeli airport security grope and what is their safety record compared to ours?

It's a slippery slope which we should avoid at all costs. With your attitude, cavity searches are certainly in our future.

Again, stop comparing us to El Al. You know why they don't search everyone? Because they profile. IF you are a Muslim flying into or out of any Isrealie airport, your ass is getting strip searched. Some pussies in our country won't allow us to focus on the actual suspects, so everyone gets the same treatment. You don't like that, then look to YOUR "side" and tell them to stop being dipshits.

By the way, do you know WHO provides security as Isreali airports? Mossad, that's who, and if you don't think they scrutinize passengers more than the TSA does here in the US , well you are just lying to yourself, or uneducated.

profiling obviously works.

And don't call me uneducated until you learn how to spell Israeli.

Scrutinizing is not the same as groping. The fact that we have to treat everyone like a terrorist so as not to offend terrorists is offensive. The fact that we are being compelled by the fucking government to submit to no warrant searches is unacceptable.

 

[Contumacious]

And so my fellow Americans , not that OBL is dead, will TSA be abolished?

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Close enough!

Do you support Obama and fascist care?

 

[Valerie]

Close enough!

Do you support Obama and fascist care?

Are you ever able to focus on the OP?



Why don't you just make up an answer and ASSume like you always do... Or you could always search for my posts on the topic if you're that infatuated with me.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Before long, we'll have to take a fist up to the wrist before we can get on a plane.

 

[Valerie]

Before long, we'll have to take a fist up to the wrist before we can get on a plane.

Nice imagery there, but I'd say that is just another unreasonable fear...

 

[High_Gravity]

And so my fellow Americans , not that OBL is dead, will TSA be abolished?

.

Was Bin Laden the only terrorist on this earth?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Before long, we'll have to take a fist up to the wrist before we can get on a plane.

Nice imagery there, but I'd say that is just another unreasonable fear...

All it will take is a terrorist with a TNT suppository blowing up a plane.

It follows the natural progression.

Shoe bomb... everyone must take off shoes

Underwear bomb...everyone must get groped

Suppository bomb.....everyone bend over.

 

[Contumacious]

And so my fellow Americans , not that OBL is dead, will TSA be abolished?

.

Was Bin Laden the only terrorist on this earth?

I see, so the alleged assassination was motivated by political gain?

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Are you ever able to focus on the OP?

So then, he was spot on in his assessment?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Now they just killed Bin Laden so expect things to get even worse at Airports. If you think things were Gestapo-like before? You aint seen nothin yet.

 

[Valerie]

Are you ever able to focus on the OP?

So then, he was spot on in his assessment?

Did I not already answer your question in my rep comment...?


When you're too lazy to verify it's much easier to just make shit up... It doesn't matter to me what lying idiots claim to "assess" about my opinions, so knock yourself out.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Did I not already answer your question in my rep comment...?

So then, you are a coward?

When you're too lazy to verify it's much easier to just make shit up...

What did I make up?

You whined that someone called you a "Nazi," you were lying about that. Someone DID reference you being a fascist, so I asked if you supported fascists care. IF you do, then the charge is reasonable.

It doesn't matter to me what lying idiots claim to "assess" about my opinions, so knock yourself out.

I hadn't called you a "lying idiot," I merely asked whether you supported the merger of corporate power structures with government ones such as is being done under Obama's health care plane? If you do, then you are indeed a fascist.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yay! Bin Laden's dead! Now can we have our rights back? How bout it Mr. President? How bout it Republicans & Democrats?

 

[midcan5]

What we need is an airline with no security so private parts are safe - yikes, I'm one big private part - what would you have folks, security or now I lay me down to snooze I sure as hell hope this plane don't blow up in the sky, I'd miss my life and my wife. Having just flow out of LAX they turned off the scanner just before we got to it, they used the old stuff. Personally I worry more about mechanical failure, must be a guy thing, they can touch me all they want but I'd prefer a woman doing it. If there were time a nice massage would be great. LOL