This is the stuff I'm talking about. This is your 15 year old daughter(potentially NSFW scan image):




That's cool with you, right?

The kicker line of the article 27offsuit linked to:

Also, the "exemption" scenario CAIR describes is when someone wearing a hjiab goes through the metal detector and it doesn't go off -- then the person should remind TSA not to touch their goodies.

Completely unsurprising that CAIR writing Muslim women wearing a hijab should remind TSA to only touch their head or neck if they weren't flagged for additional screening pre-security line and if they go through a metal detector and it doesn't go off made its way through the right wing ****** factories and came out as "Muslim women are exempt, thanks Obama, this is why we're suspicious you're a Muslen"

pretty sure this is a trap

I actually think the scanners could be useful. Like in a situation where they would normally do a strip search they could do a virtual one instead. But subjecting random people or, at some airports, everyone to virtual strip searches without cause is ridiculous.

asking for ban ban please.

Oops

Edit: or is that just in some (sub)forums on this site you can't ask for a ban? In that case, attempted (bad?) joke is even worse.

I was thinking that if the sobriquet "child porn machines" could somehow get attached to these, that might shift a lot of people's thinking.

I've always heard the term as incrementalism and I think I like that a little better. Both convey the idea fairly well but with the latter term I think its easier to picture a tortoise or other such slow moving animal inching their way along to tyranny.

Seriously, if you were a peeping Tom voyeur type wouldn't TSA be your dream job?

When I moved to Nevada I knew I was in trouble when there was in fact a snack bar in the DMV waiting area.

how is this not posted yet?

http://gizmodo.com/5690749/

a bunch of scans from people from a Florida courthouse where 35k images were apparently saved

drrrruuuudddggeeee

For one, that's not TSA, contrary to Drudge's headline (it's the US Marshalls pictures from courthouse security. US Marshalls are part of the DoJ. TSA is part of DHS. Different federal department yo).

Second, imo, those pictures are hardly bawdy. That's some low resolution **** right there. I can't imagine there are any pervs getting off to this. The image on the right is far more, uh, revealing.

Perfect example of how some people will believe anything if it fits their preconceived notions

A couple interesting links:

Sheppard Smith makes some interesting points

and this

TSA now probing Junk Guy

and obv Junk Guy looks just like I'd expect Junk Guy to look:

Ironically, had the underwear bomber successfully detonated his bomb and the plane crashed, and all aboard were killed, it's unlikely that the pat-downs would be so invasive now because it's unlikely that the investigation would have revealed that the explosives were in his underwear.

It could be argued that his failed terrorist attempt is having a larger impact on citizens than if it had been successful.

dvaut,

the point is all of these machines they claim do not save/store images. this has been proven over and over again to not be the case and you are being outright lied to.

Well, the government required the manufacturer to add a feature allowing images to be saved but the TSA says they will never use that feature.

If I ever get the full treatment at airport security, I'm totally going to start making sex noises.

Yeah. From the TSA back in August:

http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/ba...eply_House.pdf

TSA <> US Marshalls

I don't think there's any evidence that TSA has stored the images. Maybe that have, who knows? ... but it's two different branches of the federal government. What gizmodo is highlighting is a courthouse security scanner -- operated by the US Marshall -- scanning images and saving them. What everyone is up in arms about are the TSA procedures; TSA claims that the equipment has the capability to save and transmit, but they don't use it.

snagglepuss -- if you don't like this policy, it's important to make your claims correct and have your details straight. I don't like the policy, and I'd prefer my opposition not be sullied with "Al Qaeda didn't have anything to do with 9/11" and a crude claim about how "all these machines can't save images, but it's been proven that they do over and over, we're being lied to".

Disgusting.

Just in case anybody else was thinking of refusing and then making a fuss and going home.

Edit:

While I understand this, the problem I have is that they wouldn't let him leave, and now are gonna "follow up" on him. If they had just told him he couldn't fly and let him leave and refund his money, then there's less of an issue.

Edit edit just for the lolz:

But the terrrurorists will just try to board a plane, if they get screened, refuse and go home. If not, DEATH TO AMERICA!!!!

Some nameless TSA insider basically told some reporter that the hand pat downs were designed to be invasive and uncomfortable, to discourage people from opt'ing out of the body scanners.

It's also not a surprise they are going after the junk guy in San Diego, he's become very high profile and the poster boy for defying the system, they want to send a message as to what will happen if you do.

ldo

Naturally. This **** really needs to be stopped.

left and right coming together! Can i get an amen!

nah man we're all ****ed