Captain, if I strapped a cucumber to my leg I would look like a cornucopia with l large ear of corn, 1 cucumber and two large purple valencia onions. Capt, I believe that post was some of your best work. Outstanding! Good job having the sack to say what the rest of the guys were already thinking.

From http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/11/adam-savage-of-myth-busters-goes.html

Adam Savage, from the Myth Busters TV show, flies a lot and has dangerous items on his person for his job. He tries to make sure he leaves all that at home. But after the TSA finished shooting Adam Savage with radiation and looking at his "tiny junk", Adam noticed he had forgotten two 12 inch long razor blades in his suit jacket. He noticed the razor blades in his pocket once he was ON THE PLANE.

I wonder how they will react to this.

No Joe I loathe most of your opinions but I have to agree that there is not one good reason that all means available should not be used to screen for terrorists, political correctness makes me sick, the only person who can have their so-called "rights" violated without an orchestrated outcry of discrimination is the "white male", either people have to let the screeners do their job, which means if someone "fits" the description of a terrorist , they are scrutinized accordingly or they can get blown all to hell because security was not allowed to do their job, that’s the two choices, take your pick people.

I would prefer profiling those who are most likely to be terrorist. Israel has been doing this successfully for years. Political correctness is killing America.

What we have here is a misunderstanding of profiling should be and should not be. Few object to profiling when it is done as intended. If a white male in a red stocking cap driving a green ford pickup is stopped because he fits the description of a bank robber, that is profiling based on knowledge. If intelligence is received that states a dark-skinned male in a NY Yankee baseball cap plans to board a plane and has a hidden explosive materials, everyone who fits that description should be profiled, scanned and watched. Simply targeting everyone who looks Muslim is improper profiling and accomplishes nothing because it allows the, let's say African who is black, terrorist to walk right by because everyone is watching for those in middle eastern clothing. What must be done is what they are doing, look for suspicious people regardless of ethnicity or what they wear and do it so that everyone is subjected to the same requirements for screenings.

either people have to let the screeners do their job, which means if someone "fits" the description of a terrorist , they are scrutinized accordingly or they can get blown all to hell because security was not allowed to do their job

Nope, here's the problem. Once the measures are in place, they really won't change. So, in 5-10 years, after sending sufficient folks through our security to get an understanding of all facets of our 'security,' the terrorists will find the cracks, exploit them, and we have another tragedy.

Meanwhile, the REAL tragedy that is the rapid waning of our freedoms and the respect of one's person have gone out the window due the the terrified little sheep who value safety so above their own freedoms, that they happily surrender their freedoms for a bit of illusory safety. Now where was that quote that seemed to be a direct refutation of such a policy....?

As a frequent business traveler I make about 4/5 round trips per month. This frisking and strip searching of little kids and grandparents has to stop. Part of the terrorist goal is to disrupt American life, that goal has been accomplished. We have to start profiling. Any Muslim (or anyone else for that matter) that has purchased a ticket with cash must be subjected to more extensive screening. CAIR is demanding that Muslim women in a Burka not be searched beneath the neck, THAT IS the MOST RIDICULOUS thing I have ever heard. It is a well known fact that Muslim women have served as suicide bombers. WHAT IN THE CRAP ARE WE THINKING, THEY MUST BE SUBJECTED TO ANY SCREENING ANYONE ELSE WOULD BE. CAIR’s argument is that is against the Muslim religion, to have any male other than her husband touch her. Well I’m protestant, and its against my religion too. But its okay to offend my religion.

I really don’t care if the Muslims are offended when they try to fly, if they don’t like it, don’t fly.

Of course profiling should be used. The term has gotten conflated with racial profiling by the inept media.

You can profile by a combination of behaviour, citizenship, recent travel, etc. As long as you don't discriminate by race, religion, or ethnicity there is no problem.

Yes. Poach them in an off dry red wine, (try a Zinfandel,a or, if the beaujalais neouveau is good this year, use that). Add some chopped garlic, tarragon, parsley, and a little thyme. There is your stock.

Should make a very good giblets gravy.

Enjoy!

Thanks NoJoe

Either you let the screeners do their job or you run the risk of a bomb getting on your plane, it's that damn simple, your civil liberties won't mean much if you are dead, do you idiots know that the terrorists read this shi$ hoping security will be eased, get your head out of your a$$, you can't have it both ways.

I am confused about how the scanners are invasive, No one can see YOU, What they see is a computer outline graphic of a basic human form (same outline for male or female) Nothing shows up on the graphic unless it is a foreign substance or object,,,,plastic, metal, etc Absolutely none of the complaints would have ever been made if people were more informed (or more correctly informed) and simply went through the scanners instead of refusing. There is a slight bit of radiation but you would have to pass through the scanners 1000 times a day to recieve the same dose of radiation as one full dental x-ray

your civil liberties won't mean much if you are dead,

Wow....just...WOW. Such hyperbolic rhetoric, such a scary attempt to get folks to accept the erosion of their rights.

You sir, scare me FAR more than a terrorist.

Did they add insult to injury by putting out a tip jar?

You ever read the 4th amendment?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

And to cover "You do not have a "right "or "civil liberty" to get on a plane" there's the 9th:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

I think travelling would be a candidate for an obvious inherent right.

Pete,

You are what is wrong with this whole issue.