Talk politics.

I wonder who these TSA ppl are, to be honest.

as far as scanners on train stations go, I am not an American, but I do work in transport myself, and I will have a go at answering your question.

Planes do not go take off every two minutes, and on London underground they do.

people urning up at an airport can all be mulled over as they go through customs - people boarding a train just turn up and get on. We can't hold everyone for a search, so we don't. even after 7/7, when London had 4 bombs go off withing a few minutes, there was only a heavy polive presence and random checks. most people holding a briefcase went straight through, but if you looked young, or had a rucksack, or were of Arabic appearanace , you got stopped and searched. Tough if you happened to be all three at once :)

From:

... planes do not take off on LUL, but trains will be leaving at that rate, usually :)

From:

Watching for behavior instead of checking everyone is also a better security method anyways.

From:

nikoel.livejournal.com

Amtrak isn't like the Tube though. You buy a ticket and show up when the train is scheduled to leave. There is definitely time and room for security checking.

From:

Well, if there is a scheduled departure and time between trips, good luck - it might just work.
But thi s won't work for all syatems like busses and tube trains. being cautios might.

(deleted comment)

From:

I thought you Euros had regular Army full-on stationed in airports, locked and loaded with assault rifles/SMGs using live ammunition standing in full view of people. Pity. One would think there would be a lot to gain from fear of army troops hosing an area down with lead. So much for the vaunted Euro security of things...
Oh, this is quite true - but I work in what the Americans would call a Subway station. What we had was cops with sniffer dogs standing about in groups and looking people up and down. I think that maybe your average would be Jihadist would be more worried about an unclean animal like a dog getting close to them than a cop with a loaded gun.

But yeah, when it comes to parking a tank on the apron of a runway, I don't really see it as doing anything more than making a symbolic gesture. the cops with the guns? Well, we actually had a guy trying to bang his way into an airport up in Scotland, but regular security stopped him.

I think the Israelis have the right idea. It is low key, but very effective. As a Brit, I don't really think the tanks, the SMGs and the hi profile presence was as effective as the tip off from people in the Islamic community who put the Law onto the young men responsible for the bomb that went off two weeks after 7/7.

But thanks for explaining about the TSA- you would think though, that anyone in America would know what the Congressional Medal of Honour was, and not stop a war veteran from carrying one on board a plane.

From:

a-new-machine.livejournal.com

Did you see that some of these images, supposedly deleted immediately, weren't? And by "some" I mean 35,000 (http://gizmodo.com/5690749/).

From:

Loved the last line in that article:

"We look forward to seeing your next vacation photos."

From:

I can see the turmoil if similar security methods were employed on the Northeast Regional route of AMTRAK - all those corporate execs/bankers having their "junk" x-rayed TWICE a day going to and from their jobs.

This bullshit is happening because we are willing to let it happen.

From:

nikoel.livejournal.com

This bullshit is happening because we are willing to let it happen.

This. I'm really glad that people are getting mad and loud about this issue.

From:

tridus.livejournal.com

If you're trying to find someone to defend TSA, good luck. Hell, even the Drudge Report was after them yesterday over this nonsense.

This is a bureaucracy run totally out of control, with no political will to rein it in.

From:

The scanners - and the extreme privacy invasion - are indefensible if they only apply to airline travel, and not ALL public transportation. The whole point of this 'security' exercise is so the government can say: "We have your private parts in our hands, and don't you forget it."

From:

Actually, I would say they are indefensible when applied to everyone indiscriminately rather than only those people likely to be a threat.

(deleted comment)

From:

Or simply use a Hui for a suicide bombing or something. People might profile Arabs or Italians only to be hit by a suicide bomber who's an Al Qaeda operative from East Asia. In fact, that actually would be *too* sensible for OBL and his motherfuckers as any attempt to bring that profiling to East Asians following *that* would create a political firestorm of epic proportions.

From:

I think the article about El Al's procedures posted above shows a reasonably good process.

From:

Bah, if it's security that's the priority the USSR's methods worked very, very well. No terrorists existed in Soviet Russia until the system broke down. Totalitarian surveillance societies are very, very good at killing in carload lots anyone they remotely suspect of real or imagined trouble. The problem is if we still wish to pretend the United States values liberty then there are some lines we can not cross.

Liberties, once lost, can only be regained if the forces that take them degenerate.

From:

The problem is if we still wish to pretend the United States values liberty then there are some lines we can not cross.

You might be pretending, but I don't see any reason to think that it's widespread.

From:

Anderson Cooper had some guy on defending the TSA last night, and he wasn't completely critical of it himself.

From:

terminator44.livejournal.com

The Department of Homeland (In)Security in general has been a bureaucratic abomination from the day it was born. Creating it was one of the stupidest things Bush did during his presidency, and that's saying a lot.

(deleted comment)

From:

tridus.livejournal.com

Unless TSA steps on someone's jurisdiction at DHS, that's not likely. It's not like DHS gives a damn about people either.

Besides, no bureaucracy tries to reduce its own influence. Ever. The saying "the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy" isn't just witty, it's also accurate.

From:

Well, Sean Hannity did it, but then defending the indefensible is what the SOB is good at.

From:

dv8nation.livejournal.com

The TSA is just going too far. Security is all well and good but at this point traveling is just an absurd hassle and that's on top of the BS the airlines dump on you. Quality of life has to be taken into account.

From:

malasadas.livejournal.com

It's time for us all to make a choice --

We can either have reasonably non invasive security screenings that deter most obvious threats but will never be 100% effective.

Or we just go the whole El Al route and give up any pretense that we can be nearly 100% safe without being 100% scrutinized. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/10/01/elal-usat.htm) This decade of hastily set up half measures to LOOK thorough has been a joke.

From:

It would better than sexually assaulting everyone.

From:

But don't you understand? Jesus would be displeased if we let these brown people on airplanes without strip-searching them?

From:

If efficient counter-terrorism is what people want, totalitarian societies never have problems with terrorism. The least hint of trouble can lead to the complete annihilation of a city or two and all is well. If what we want is a democracy, then this is the furthest the line can go.

From:

Prince Muhammad Abdul Aziz Al-Saud, the Saudi Deputy Minister of the Interior was attacked by a terrorist who had a bomb inserted in his anus.

It has been pointed out that such a bomb would not be detected by our brand spankin' new scanners. Since the terrorists are certainly aware of this, I think the next logical airline security step will be full body cavity searches. I expect my 91 yr. old mother-in-law and my teenage granddaughters will realize the necessity of this, and be glad to comply. Like Hell.

From:

evildevil.livejournal.com

This is just PR to give a false sense of security because they dont want to be accused of being soft on terrorism. Unfortunately the backlash will end badly as more people continue to have a negative experience with the aggressive pat downs and the malfunctioning porn machine, sorry I meant to say "Body Scanners"

From:

sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com

A personal anecdote:

Since 2008 I have driven across much of the US, Canada, and Mexico because I refuse to put up with this kind of bullshit.

Having a foriegn sounding name and strange stamps in my passport always marks me for special attention. The Ironic thing is that most of those stanps were aquired on US Government business. Still, if I have to go overseas I drive to Mexico and fly from there.

From:

At Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Napolitano reiterated points she made in a column published Monday in USA TODAY — that the imaging technology does not violate fliers' privacy (since your asses belong to us anyway).
But, she said, "if there are adjustments we need to make to these procedures as we move forward, we have an open ear. We will listen (then we will ignore)."
She added that "if people want to travel by some other means," they have that right (buy your own plane).

From:

retrofire.livejournal.com

"Airport security has always been compromised by corporate interests. When it comes to high-tech screening methods, the TSA has a dismal record of enriching private corporations with failed technologies, and there are signs that the latest miracle device may just bring more of the same."

It's just a money maker - manufacturers pay lobbyists, lobbyists pay congressman - $25 million gets allocated to the scanner manufacturers - and we are the dupes caught in the middle. It's business as usual.

Last time I was at Newark Airport some passengers had a pass that allowed them to go right through security with no questions asked. It involved pre-screening and cost just under $200 a year.

cha-ching.

From:

I assume they were sitting in First Class, not steerage.

From:

retrofire.livejournal.com

I don't know what became of them - they were whisked through security and I was left behind with the rest of the rabble taking off our shoes and sweaters, hoping we would not get picked for more intense screening.

I think I would be embarrassed to fly now.

From:

I used to worry slightly about the remote possibility of a terrorist on board my flight. Now I dread going through security more than that. I feel like someone trying to quietly walk pass a group of brownshirts - hoping they won't notice me.

(deleted comment)

From:

We pay enough for airline tickets, baggage, etc. I'm not willing to pay 'extra' to avoid stupid, invasive, and ineffective procedures that do nothing but minimally make me 'safer'.

Anyone who accepts this government behavior is a frightened sheep that believes TSA might catch an airline pilot hiding a box cutter up his butt - thus he will be prevented from holding it to his own throat and forcing himself to dive his plane into a building.

From:

Everybody is not happy. Want to cast your vote?

http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/archives/228691.asp?from=blog_last3

From:

ninboydean.livejournal.com

All these verified passenger programs are is a government welfare program for private firms. The TSA could just as easily perform these checks but they subcontract them out so someone can make 1 or 2 hundred bucks a years to pass information between parties.

Free enterprise to the rescue, indeed!

From: