that is what the tsa screener in okc told me. because i asked what could do it so i didnt go through that again. she told me the glycerin residue can last a few days on the cast since it isnt soaking into skin. and of course, i use hand sanitizers like crazy because its so hard to properly wash my hands. i do my best, but getting the flu (or even a cold) doesnt appeal to me. so im sitting in the dallas airport a few hours later using the anti-bac stuff and reading the label at the same time. in the top 3 ingredients... glycerin. freakin great!
You make an awesome, eloquently stated argument in support of state sponsored institutionalized race/ethnic/religious based discrimination against innocent American citizens. It's as wrong as when Goebbels said basically the same thing about Jews some 70 years ago, but stated very well and almost convincingly. You're still wrong though. I reject your suggestion that "liberty for each" isn't the goal of our system if governance. It's ludicrous and I think by reading your previous posts that you of all people are intelligent enough to know that. If it's not, then the principles that every man is innocent until proven guilty and that the constitution applies to all of us and to each if us are invalid. If that's the case, then our government is within it's rights to do whatever they want to any of us they want to do it to for any reason they deem in "our" best interests. Am I the only one that sees that this is contrary the argument that the masses are putting forth in this thread, that their rights are being trampled by airport security searches? If you have those rights, then so does every other law abiding citizen. Even if they are brown or speak Arabic or pray several times a day toward Mecca. Unless you're trying to say that racism and illegal discrimination are acceptable whenever you deem it convenient? LBJ would not be pleased.
Hyperbole. Invoking Goebbels is just a way to try to discredit me, I've said nothing remotely similar to Goebbels, find me a quote if you can. I said that I think there are two issues here, but you missed it completely. These is discrimination against a citizen, with which I agree with you. There is also the duties incumbent of a citizen, which you don't seem to have understood. Pity. You miss the point. I maintain that the citizens have a duty to put up with minor inconveniences in the interest of the greater good of saving lives of many citizens. I did not say governments have a right to do whatever they wish. LBJ can kiss my ass. We are the most free society on earth and have rights unheard of in most of the world. But this political correctness of thinking that we must put common sense aside and hassle everybody instead of actively trying to seek out real terrorists is the problem that everyone objects to. Citizens can do their part to make it safer for everyone by putting up with the security hassles, even if it seems like they bear an heavier burden than some other citizen. It pales in comparison to sacrificing a life for your country. Sacrificing some convenience in order to be a citizen and enjoy those rights does not seem onerous to me.
Fact of the matter is, they could have people strip down completely upon going into the terminal and fly nude, and some jackwagon would still find a way to get around security. Whether it be smuggling something onto the plane, infiltrating the TSA, airport personnel, or otherwise. All the terrorists want, whether planes crash or not, is for us to live in fear of them. We're giving it to them on a silver platter. People dying is just lagniappe for them. Personally, I'm fairly aware of what needs to happen mechanically and electrically for one of these big birds to stay in the air. I'm much more concerned about the other things that can bring a plane down then some jackass with C-4 up his butt.. Air traffic control error, pilot error, fuel starvation, weather, engine failure, faulty air speed indicators, pilot incapacitation, cabin depressurization, faulty wiring, metal fatigue, weight imbalance, stalls, hydraulics failure, escaped crocodile (yes it happened), etc... the list goes on and on, and as a whole all of these things statistically speaking, have more chance of killing you than a terrorist attack. It's almost ironic that people have accepted those risks in the name of getting to their destination faster, but something that has a far more remote chance of happening is striking fear in them... Again, the terrorists win, and we get a strip search..
1. I can't wait for a rectal bomb to be found (not the kind I get after eating Mexican food). Or Johnny Jihad swallowing several balloons of C4. Get ready for the anal probes. 2. It is telling why neither the media or the TSA is talking about the actual effectiveness of these security techniques. History has shown that if these agencies actually find something, they tout it to the high-heavens as justification of its use. 3. Michael Cherthoff, the former head of the TSA is the chief paid lobbiest for the company making the new scanning devices, yet gets quoted by the press only as "Former TSA Head". What's with the white lies? The press seems pretty authoritarian here.
This. I heard that TSA screens around 2 million people a day. Lets see, how many terrorist have they caught so far? Thats right, NONE! Surely someone is doing something wrong.
I don't know what airports this is happening at but, just this year, I've been to Newark, LaGuardia, O'Hare, Hartsfield, Heathrow, Logan, San Francisco, DFW and Bush and I have not even seen a scanner, let alone be scanned, and I have never been patted down.
you can have the middle aged 300 pound bull dyke that patted me down in okc the first time. she scared me
