Testicle Stroking Agency: Had your balls cupped yet?

[ericlp]

http://www.ketv.com/r/25798328/detail.html

Don't touch my junk! hahahaha

John Tyner posted a cell phone audio recording of his half-hour encounter Saturday at Lindbergh Field. The software engineer couldn't board a flight after refusing a full-body scan that reveals an image of what's under his clothes. He also wouldn't allow a Transportation Security Administration worker to conduct a groin check. Tyner told the worker, "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested." Tyner's blog said he left the airport -- but only after being threatened with a lawsuit and fine for failing to complete security screening.

I guess he had to take a train or rental car. Seems if he didn't leave the airport he would have been served up a 10K dollar fine for failing the screening process. I sure hope they work this crap out fast before I have to fly.

Haven't found one bomb yet. NOT one fucking bomb. This is a waste of american tax payers money. I don't know but I think they should just leave the metal detectors in place. It ought to be interesting to see how many other people are gonna get rejected to fly. I dunno, I suppose if I were flying to Hawaii I'd just do all the scans it's not like you gonna drive there or take a boat.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Don't fly overseas, you will go through more screening before you can catch your connecting flight (even if it's the same plane).

 

[ericlp]

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

 

[DominionSeraph]

Huh? The OP's picture is over a Gen 1 machine. The non-inverted part of the picture I posted came from an OEM's website advertising the greatness of their machines.

 

[dali71]

Go ahead. I'd love to see it, since I know this is one of those things that lay far beyond even my extraordinary abilities.

 

[PottedMeat]

Bin Laden: "Hahaha, I fucked you guys up so bad"

 

[Darwin333]

Oh really? You can prove the counterfactual?

Go ahead. I'd love to see it, since I know this is one of those things that lay far beyond even my extraordinary abilities.

This should be quite entertaining, especially given your name.

Prove? That is rather objective because you can always say "but the bad guys didn't try because of the increased security, so it worked!!".


But how about we inject some common sense and use our brains for a moment, shall we? Tell me if I need to slow down....

TSA generally implements reactionary policies after an incident has already occurred such as the shoe bomber. The fact that we have had several incidents in which sheer incompetence on the part of the terrorists is the main reason that they did not succeed. We have had untold cases of people getting both real and fake weapons onto planes. Hell, I forgot a small pocket knife in my briefcase and didn't realize it until I was in my hotel last year. Then you have the fact that the TSA has gotten nothing but bad press in the last few years, I wonder why they wouldn't publicize at least one of the times that they successfully prevented a bomb from getting on a plane or otherwise thwarted some terrorist plot? Hell, I would have expected them to at least exagerate some shit or something by now but I haven't heard of many "successes", have you?

Now lets get to the common sense part. I can rather easily implement a policy or two (that at least have partially already been implemented, maybe completely) that will prevent another 9/11 style attack. While I doubt another 9/11 will happen (you see, they have lots of other ways to fuck with us besides planes.... they haven't really had a tendency to do the same shit over and over) it can easily be avoided by simply denying them entry into the cockpit. Reinforced doors that remain locked during the entire flight, problem solved. Now we are down to the lives of the people on the plane and potentially secondary deaths on the ground if the plane is blown up. While the TSA has been frisking grandma and grandpa they haven't been checking the luggage very well. You know, that place where you would put a large device? I read that they are increasing the percentage of baggage they scan but we have been getting fucked with for quite a while now.

Oh but it gets better, since we can prevent them from taking control of the plane and our down to pure body count what has TSA effectively created by its slow and intrusive methods, especially in large airports? BIG MOTHERFUCKING MASSES OF PEOPLE ALL IN A VERY SMALL AREA ON THE "UNSAFE" SIDE OF SECURITY. They can kill more people waiting in line to get on a plane then they could blowing the damned plane up and they don't have to sneak a damned thing anywhere. While some asshole is feeling up a 6 year old kid they detonate the samnsonite full of explosives and ball bearings in the middle of the sea of people that the TSA security has created. The same number of assholes that pulled off 9/11 could do much worse damage in terms of lives AND "terrorizing" people with a coordinated attack like that. It would also effectively shut down air travel in the US if done at a couple of hubs as the investigation would take forever and it would take the TSA quite a while to figure out a new way of fucking with people in response.


You see that grandpa in the OPs post? Yeah, he ain't a terrorist bud. My 9 year old daughter and the 6 year old that was molested by TSA in front of his parents, not a terrorist either. All the TSA does is give the illusion of safety, some people like to call it theater which fits very well. For fucks sake the dumber than dogshit TSA even molests and/or increases risk of cancer the only people that could easily cause another 9/11 type event and no matter how many times you stick your finger up their ass you won't be able to prevent it because they are the ones flying the goddamned plane. If they are determined to crash the thing then guess what, its gonna fucking crash regardless if he has a sore ass from some $12/hour flunky or not.

The TSA is a fucking joke and anyone who objectively looks at the situation knows it. We are an even bigger joke for putting up with the bastards. The terrorists have won, we are terrorized enough to allow ourselves, wives, and children to be felt up, groped, molested, degraded, and demeaned.

 

[pcgeek11]

I can tell you right now that I will not allow my 9 year old daughter to be subjected to molestation by some $12/hour TSA agent. The actions required to ensure she is not subjected to that are completely up to the agent and if the consequence of my actions is a ride in the back of a police cruiser than so be it. Fucking with me is one thing, fucking with my kids will not be tolerated. Full stop, end of discussion.

I'd bet that you don't have children do you?

Drawing a lot of conclusions there aren't you buckshot.

I didn't say you should allow your daughter to be molested by the TSA. I was just pointing out the stupidity of your comment that you " would give the TSA Agent a knee to the chin ". That is BS and you and I both know it. You have the right to NOT to be searched or scanned. The results of this is you don't get to fly. Simple. The whole body scans are nothing... The searches are NOT supposed to touch your privates anyway the same as a police search.

Are you going to beat up the perverted doctor for molesting your daughter too. How about when you get a physical, did you tell the Doctor not to touch your "Junk"?

Or would you rather have your daughter see her daddy get hauled off to jail for assault. Or just not search anyone and have her get blown to tiny little pieces by the bomb that wasn't found?

Yes I do have children, well actually grown children...

I just think you are overly paranoid, and talk crap about what you will or won't do. One thing is for sure though. You won't be flying anywhere with that attitude.

Enjoy the drive.

 

[dali71]

The whole body scans are nothing... The searches are NOT supposed to touch your privates anyway the same as a police search.

In order to validate your statement, please post a link to official TSA protocol for enhanced pat-downs.

 

[pcgeek11]

In order to validate your statement, please post a link to official TSA protocol for enhanced pat-downs.

Official protocol quoted on the ACLU Web site:http://aclum.org/tsa/kyo_airport.php

The "standard pat-down"

The TSA's "standard pat-down procedure" is now a more invasive form of the pat-down search that you might have experienced in the past.

TSA says that during the new standard pat-down, a screener of the same sex will examine your head, shirt collar area, and waistband, and may use either the front or back of his or her hands to feel your body, including buttocks, around breasts, and between the legs, feeling up to the top of the thigh. Women in tight skirts that don't allow an agent to feel the thigh area may be asked to remove the skirt in a private screening area and will be given a gown or towel to put on.

Option: Let TSA know about sensitive areas

Tell TSA agents about things such as injuries or conditions that could cause you pain if certain parts of your body are touched or pressed, as well as any medical devices that could be dislodged by a search, or any other reason that TSA agents should be careful when touching your body.

Option: Ask to be patted down in a private location

If you are uncomfortable being patted down in front of other passengers, you can request that TSA agents take you to a private area.

The "resolution pat-down"

If an "anomaly" is detected during the pat-down--or when you go through the AIT scanner--you will be subjected to a "resolution pat-down." TSA agents will take you to a private area and do a more intense pat-down, which includes using the front of the agent's hands for a more thorough search, including the groin area.

Option: Ask to take a witness with you.

If you are taken to a private area for a "resolution pat-down" search, you can ask to bring a witness with you, or ask TSA to provide a witness for you. This search should also be conducted by a person of the same gender.

 

[jackstar7]

Where's the top of the thigh again?

Oh right, half-way up my wang. Yes, only half-way.

 

[ShawnD1]

Bin Laden: "Hahaha, I fucked you guys up so bad"

Maybe this was his plan from the beginning. Not to kill a couple thousand Americans, but to cause radical policy changes which anger millions of Americans for probably decades to come.
If he was a little more up to date on how the US works, his confession videos would say something to the effect that his dream of destroying the WTC was inspired by marijuana. That would sure stir up some shit. Then he should make a video thanking Obama "for your support" and hope it causes a violent revolution.

 

[dali71]

Official protocol quoted on the ACLU Web site:http://aclum.org/tsa/kyo_airport.php

I asked for a link to the official protocol, not the opinion of the Massachusetts ACLU website (which provided no link to the official information they were "quoting"). Try again.

 

[pcgeek11]

I asked for a link to the official protocol, not the opinion of the Massachusetts ACLU website (which provided no link to the official information they were "quoting"). Try again.

Nope. Do your own google.

 

[Zorba]

Believe whatever you want. I did not create the image I posted, but the original (Non-inverted) was on an OEM's website, so that part is legit. Then anyone can put it into GIMP, paint, photoshop, etc and invert the image. I just did this and got the same results. But why even try it yourself when you can just be a d-bag on a forum.

 

[alphatarget1]

ITT: A whole lotta insecure people.

I've done pat-downs. Guess what? Your balls are nothin' special. And they get paid no mind, either.
If you've lost your keys in the couch and you've got your hands down in there fishing for them... are you paying any attention to what the cushions feel like? No, you're looking for keys, not couch. so your brain does you a favor and filters out the background noise.
Same goes when you're patting someone down. You're feeling for things that should not be there -- lumps, hard edges. The feel of clothing and fleshy bits is filtered out.
There's no similarity whatsoever to sexual groping.

So don't be such pansies about it.

You should have your voting rights taken from you.

 

[dali71]

Nope. Do your own google.

That's what I expected you to say. You can't post a link because the TSA refuses to publicly state their protocol regarding enhanced pat-downs.

 

[Zorba]

That's what I expected you to say. You can't post a link because the TSA refuses to publicly state their protocol regarding enhanced pat-downs.

I had a non-enhance pat-down a couple months ago after I decided to opt out from the body scanner. The dude definitely touched both of my balls.

 

[Darwin333]

Drawing a lot of conclusions there aren't you buckshot.

I didn't say you should allow your daughter to be molested by the TSA. I was just pointing out the stupidity of your comment that you " would give the TSA Agent a knee to the chin ". That is BS and you and I both know it. You have the right to NOT to be searched or scanned. The results of this is you don't get to fly. Simple. The whole body scans are nothing... The searches are NOT supposed to touch your privates anyway the same as a police search.

Don't have the correct information there do ya buddy?

The whole body scanners safety is questionable but lets pretend they are safe. The privacy issues are very real though. When a child walks through the scanner the TSA has in their possession child pornography by the definition of the law. This is the same law that has been used to harass grandmothers taking pictures of their grandkids and kids taking pictures of themselves. Then you have the entire "trust" issue that you or your wife's or childs naked picture won't end up on the internet. Do you really trust some $12/hour flunky that much? Remember the story about the TSA agent going nuts because other TSA agents teased him about his small pecker after being "scanned"?

Furthermore, you obviously don't know what the new "enhanced pat downs" are if you refuse to be electronically strip searched and subjected to radiation that may or may not be harmful to your health in minor ways, like cancer. I suggest you read up on it because it isn't the simply "wanding" that you are used to. The "enhanced pat down" is the equivilant of a custody search by the police which they are only allowed to do AFTER they have arrested you. This is not the simply pat down they are allowed to do BEFORE you are arrested for a crime.

Are you going to beat up the perverted doctor for molesting your daughter too.

If he is a "perverted doctor" then you are damned skippy. If they decide to start sticking stuff up your ass are you going to say "well are you going to be mad at the doctor doing your colonoscipy"? A doctor doing a medical procedure and TSA investigating people who have done absolutely nothing wrong, well beyond what a police officer is allowed to do in similar situations, is not a valid comparison.

Or would you rather have your daughter see her daddy get hauled off to jail for assault. Or just not search anyone and have her get blown to tiny little pieces by the bomb that wasn't found?

How many bombs have the TSA found? You willing to submit you and your family to similar searches everytime you leave your house just to protect you and yours from an insanely unlikely event? What about the luggage that they haven't been checking for the last few years? Wouldn't you think that would be a better and easier way to get a bomb on board to blow you and your family to itsy bitsy pieces? What about the fact that they can still shove enough explosives up their ass to blow you and your family to bits on that plane, are you really ok with the TSA sticking something up your ass, your wifes ass, and your kids ass to ensure you are safe enough to fly? Or that little fact that now that your family and a thousand other people are all in one small area waiting to be screened the terrorists will get a much larger body count detonating a bomb in the security line?

Yes I do have children, well actually grown children...

I am glad that they are grown and can protect themselves from overly invasive search if they so desire.

I just think you are overly paranoid, and talk crap about what you will or won't do. One thing is for sure though. You won't be flying anywhere with that attitude.

I am not the one that is paranoid. The idiots that think these measures are required to protect them from something that is extremely unlikely (I would bet lightning is higher statistically) AND believe that they make them safer are the paranoid ones. I simply refuse to allow some $12 an hour flunky to grope my child and I am the paranoid one? Really?

How safe has the TSA really made you and why do you fear flying so much that you are willing to be strip searched everytime you fly? I am not the paranoid one.

Enjoy the drive.

For most places that I travel it is actually quicker to drive now than to fly, mostly due to the bullshit security that doesn't make you anymore safer. Enjoy the strip searches and watching some highschool dropout feel up your wife.

 

[cumhail]

Believe whatever you want. I did not create the image I posted, but the original (Non-inverted) was on an OEM's website, so that part is legit. Then anyone can put it into GIMP, paint, photoshop, etc and invert the image. I just did this and got the same results. But why even try it yourself when you can just be a d-bag on a forum.

Ok, then link to a reputable web site showing that it's an actual body scanner image. That might be difficult, though, when the use of the images you posted has already been proven to be a hoax.

The reason the photo of the woman shows so clearly when you invert it is that that's how it was created. Someone took a photo of a nude woman, which has been shown to be from a collection of nude images, photoshopped in the weapons, inverted it, and combined it with some stock images that might actually be from marketing materials. Then when you, and others who were similarly either duped or trying to dupe others, invert the image, it puts it back to how it started.

All it took was 20 seconds on Google to find plenty of discussion confirming this as a hoax and demonstrating/pointing out that none of the actual body scan images invert successfully.

Look, I'm against the damned things, too. And barring any emergencies or work obligations, I have no intention of flying anywhere until/unless these things go away. But faking crap like this and/or helping to keep such hoaxes going doesn't help anything. It just gives the other side ammunition against opponents as deliberately misrepresenting things and makes the fence-sitters question them as much as they do the TSA.

 

[Zorba]

Ok, then link to a reputable web site showing that it's an actual body scanner image. That might be difficult, though, when the use of the images you posted has already been proven to be a hoax.

The reason the photo of the woman shows so clearly when you invert it is that that's how it was created. Someone took a photo of a nude woman, which has been shown to be from a collection of nude images, photoshopped in the weapons, inverted it, and combined it with some stock images that might actually be from marketing materials. Then when you, and others who were similarly either duped or trying to dupe others, invert the image, it puts it back to how it started.

All it took was 20 seconds on Google to find plenty of discussion confirming this as a hoax and demonstrating/pointing out that none of the actual body scan images invert successfully.

Look, I'm against the damned things, too. And barring any emergencies or work obligations, I have no intention of flying anywhere until/unless these things go away. But faking crap like this and/or helping to keep such hoaxes going doesn't help anything. It just gives the other side ammunition against opponents as deliberately misrepresenting things and makes the fence-sitters question them as much as they do the TSA.

Damn it, photoshop bets me again . I could've sworn I saw the source pic on a legit site, but now I can't find it at all, so lol at me .

 

[DominionSeraph]

Prove? That is rather objective because you can always say "but the bad guys didn't try because of the increased security, so it worked!!".

First off, as an aside, just what on Earth do you think, "objective," means? "Subjective," doesn't even fit in your sentence construction. "Difficult" would work pretty well, but I think that's a bit too smart and straightforward to come out of you -- I don't think that's the flavor you were going for. Seems to have about 90% less whine than what underlies the original.

Grow up a little. The universe is not going to change the rules it operates by just to make you right. When you are wrong there are no real outs, no matter how you dash about looking for them under the delusion that they just must be there because God just wouldn't do that to you. He would. When you lock horns with me don't expect things to go your way, for I stand on the shoulders of giants, and I wouldn't have engaged in this line if it didn't fall under their shadow. Their combined efforts have created a very big club and I have considerable practice in wielding it, so do not think yourself immune to a pulping.

Moving on, the burden of supporting the implication is not on me. You jumped on the counterfactual unbidden. However, just for fun, yes, I could point out that the 9/11 terrorists did not use handguns even though they are readily available and quite more effective than small, bladed weapons. As pre-9/11 screening was quite effective at detecting handguns, this supports the notion that terrorists do see screening as a problem.

But how about we inject some common sense and use our brains for a moment, shall we? Tell me if I need to slow down....

TSA generally implements reactionary policies after an incident has already occurred such as the shoe bomber. The fact that we have had several incidents in which sheer incompetence on the part of the terrorists is the main reason that they did not succeed.

Do you know what is good at reducing the overall competency level? Taking away the easy routes.

If we remove security from airports, well, let's see... I have over 60 firearms in my house and plenty of ammo. I know how to fly, and I've flown in the co-pilot's seat of a Cheyenne 400LS so I'm not unfamiliar with complicated cockpit layouts such as you'd find in a commercial airliner (actually my dad is in the 5th picture on google image search for that plane); I know what Va and Vne are and I understand the concept of "structural limits" so I'm protected against incompetent maneuvering that would rip the wings off. So, I'm 15 seconds into the planning stage and I am already on to target selection. The criteria would be, "High value targets susceptible to impact or fire damage," with a note to research just how much impact force a highly deformable airliner could impart. (I wouldn't kamikaze into, say, the Hoover Dam if I didn't have some good data indicating that it would fail.)

It really shouldn't be that easy. So we make it so it isn't. We've been quite successful at that, too.
With the security we have in place right now, I wouldn't even know where to begin. THIS IS NOT A BAD THING.

While the TSA has been frisking grandma and grandpa they haven't been checking the luggage very well.

Except putting every piece through x-ray and having free reign in hand-checking.

Oh but it gets better, since we can prevent them from taking control of the plane and our down to pure body count what has TSA effectively created by its slow and intrusive methods, especially in large airports? BIG MOTHERFUCKING MASSES OF PEOPLE ALL IN A VERY SMALL AREA ON THE "UNSAFE" SIDE OF SECURITY. They can kill more people waiting in line to get on a plane then they could blowing the damned plane up and they don't have to sneak a damned thing anywhere. While some asshole is feeling up a 6 year old kid they detonate the samnsonite full of explosives and ball bearings in the middle of the sea of people that the TSA security has created.

And you're being utterly retarded. Your only criteria is "crowd," and those exist all over the place, most of which are absent in the quality of, "hundreds of law enforcement personnel in the area on alert for suspicious activity."

So all I hear is whining.

 

[DominionSeraph]

I did not create the image I posted, but the original (Non-inverted) was on an OEM's website, so that part is legit.

Location does not make legitimacy.

Damn it, photoshop bets me again . I could've sworn I saw the source pic on a legit site, but now I can't find it at all, so lol at me .

Welcome to Earth.
Perhaps you should keep this in mind: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." If you had a good baseline understanding of what technology could do and why it can do what it does, you'd have known that such an image would represent a humongous leap in imaging ability and should have taken it with a HUGE grain of salt. In fact, the salt should've outweighed anything else.

 

[bamacre]

For most places that I travel it is actually quicker to drive now than to fly,

What entity other than government could make a plane slower than a car? :biggrin::biggrin:

It's like the complete opposite of some kind of MIT student group project.

:biggrin::biggrin:

:thumbsup::thumbsup: for your entire post.

 

[Darwin333]

Grow up a little. The universe is not going to change the rules it operates by just to make you right. When you are wrong there are no real outs, no matter how you dash about looking for them under the delusion that they just must be there because God just wouldn't do that to you. He would. When you lock horns with me don't expect things to go your way, for I stand on the shoulders of giants, and I wouldn't have engaged in this line if it didn't fall under their shadow. Their combined efforts have created a very big club and I have considerable practice in wielding it, so do not think yourself immune to a pulping.

Am I supposed to be impressed or something? That is all of the time I will waste on your irrelevant banter.

Moving on, the burden of supporting the implication is not on me. You jumped on the counterfactual unbidden. However, just for fun, yes, I could point out that the 9/11 terrorists did not use handguns even though they are readily available and quite more effective than small, bladed weapons. As pre-9/11 screening was quite effective at detecting handguns, this supports the notion that terrorists do see screening as a problem.

Yes, the 9/11 hijackers used tools that were not prohibited at the time. It was perfectly legal to carry a boxcutter into the secure area of an airport and onto a plane. Whats your point? That is no longer legal and the old Xray and metal detectors are pretty good at finding them.

Do you know what is good at reducing the overall competency level? Taking away the easy routes.

If we remove security from airports, well, let's see... I have over 60 firearms in my house and plenty of ammo. I know how to fly, and I've flown in the co-pilot's seat of a Cheyenne 400LS so I'm not unfamiliar with complicated cockpit layouts such as you'd find in a commercial airliner (actually my dad is in the 5th picture on google image search for that plane); I know what Va and Vne are and I understand the concept of "structural limits" so I'm protected against incompetent maneuvering that would rip the wings off. So, I'm 15 seconds into the planning stage and I am already on to target selection. The criteria would be, "High value targets susceptible to impact or fire damage," with a note to research just how much impact force a highly deformable airliner could impart. (I wouldn't kamikaze into, say, the Hoover Dam if I didn't have some good data indicating that it would fail.)



It really shouldn't be that easy. So we make it so it isn't. We've been quite successful at that, too.

Reinforced and locked cockpit doors. So how are you going to get into the cockpit with pre-9/11 type security with the addition that blades are illegal as well. Sure you might be able to get a small blade on a plane but with a locked and reinforced cockpit the passengers will not allow you more than a minute or two to try and gain access. This has been proven on 9/11 and with incidents after.

So.... stand a little higher on those shoulders and try again.

With the security we have in place right now, I wouldn't even know where to begin. THIS IS NOT A BAD THING.

You could begin by telling me how you are going to gain access to the cockpit. I would go as far as allowing any and all pilots/copilots that are willing and take adequate training classes to carry weapons. So if you somehow magically bust down the reinforced door you still potentially have 2 armed people to deal with but even without that, how are you going to take over the cockpit? Put your 15 seconds into that and get back to me.

Except putting every piece through x-ray and having free reign in hand-checking.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3095592.stm

Every piece huh? You would think they would pick up a friging person in a box, maybe they weren't using the new and improved X-ray scanners? This is a post 9/11 incident. A quick google search shows that luggage screening has been an ongoing issue and often "less effective" methods of bomb scanning must be used because the system was overburdened. So while you where frisking grandpa and little Susie to make sure they aren't going to try and take over/blow up the plane "less effective" methods are used to screen the luggage. Brilliant!

And you're being utterly retarded. Your only criteria is "crowd," and those exist all over the place, most of which are absent in the quality of, "hundreds of law enforcement personnel in the area on alert for suspicious activity."

No, my criteria is terrorizing and, since we are specifically speaking about air travel, the disruption of air travel and commerce. My "plan" works insanely better than yours, took much less time to think up, involves almost no risk of being caught before they carry out the plan, is extremely easy to scale up (your limit is basically nutjobs who are willing to blow themselves up) and coordinate (push the button at 11am eastern) and could potentially shut down every hub in the US for an unknown amount of time (if you have enough nutjobs). Since you aren't trying to sneak anything into the secure area the devices can be made much better and more reliable than the shoe/underwear bombers used.

Sure the same thing can be said about malls and other places but since we can deny a terrorist the ability to take over the cockpit (unless he is the pilot already in which case you are screwed anyway) the threat has been reduced to human lives and damaging commerce. I guess your answer is to have the TSA setup similar screenings at mall entrances then?

A few more questions, in the US how many times have organized terrorists tried to do the same shit twice? The TSA's policies have all been reactions to previous attempts and I have still yet to hear you list any of their success stories. You should have at least a few shouldn't you?

How does Israel handle their airport security and how effective has it been? They are arguably a much greater target than we are so it should be a very good comparison.