So you guys think it's not worth it to give up some privacy to save lives?
Your premise is based on the TSA saving lives. They don't. In fact, they have been tested many times and have failed to catch weapons.
Saving lives is certainly important. One might think airlines would have a more vested interest in seeing to passenger safety than TSA agents. Our airports should be modeled after Israeli airports and we should use their methods which are more effective and far less intrusive than what we use.
I'll let my buddy Ben answer your question:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
They are attempting as they might to save lives, but they are ultimately playing catch up. Every weapon that was used for terrorist threats on airplanes were not on the list prior to the event. Even in 9/11, nothing was used that was on the banned items list. They will find a new way each time to get on the plane.
We also have to think about the next possibilities. If they can get away with body scans (which expose you to radiation, and if you fly all the time can cause cancer) showing your nude body to world and having agents stick their hands in your privates what say they won't get away with something else when the next threat arises?
On JF someone mentioned that her friend works for an airport and they men scramble to feel up on the women. They do not screen these people before they allow them to do this.
Sadly, the terrorists are going to find ways to get on these airplanes, without these TSA regulations.
I will not fly plain and simple. I am not going to give up right for privacy for some false sense of security.
Firstly, there's no need for personal attacks - this is your one and only warning.
Secondly, I grew up around the scriptures, so I am familiar with the tower of Babel.
I did read the link you gave me, along with a few of the articles on the page, if you don't mind. I just can't find how the tower of Babel relates to this particular situation.
Could you explain to me that?
I don't recall attacking you, or at least it was not my entention. Being a mil guy you must have thicker skin than that, yeah?
Pasted from my response elsewhere:
Quote:
It's a funny thing to sit and watch the news anymore, repubs this and dems that, left and right and all the bull**** between. Same applies here. Meaningless.
In the story of The Tower of Babel, Nemrod is described as a hunter, a hunter of men, not to kill them but to entice them to become his serfs. Secondly he says let's build bricks. Bricks represent people, stones represent people too but stones are unigue just as God is, but bricks are man-made. In other words, let's separate people from God and make them all the same, interchangeable, replaceable, meaningless. The word mortar in the original Hebrew actually translates to the word 'materialism'. What bound Babylon as a society was not God, history, faith, culture, but materialism. The Tower was built to reach the heavens, the heavens of humanity, not the Heaven of God. All this was done to serve man, to serve the 'greater good', humanism, or, anti-god.
If we look we find the same thing is happening or has happened to our society, we have gone from a God-centric society to one that serves the 'greater good'. We have no nation, no history, no culture, we are not one people, not any longer. We rely not on God, not on ourselves, but the gov, for guidence, safety, sustinence, and a feeling of well-being. We worship at the alter of man and all his creation and wealth. We have fallen and I don't know that God will be so merciful this time.
What is happening here at the airports is just one of countless examples of being conditioned to being a 'brick'. All that we relinquish on behalf of the greater good, our individuality, our sovreignty, our God given rights, our privacy, our dignity, our soul, is by design to deprive us, to demoralize us, to separate ourselves from God, to make us serfs.
Hah my skin is plenty thick, my friend - it's City Profile rules, not my own.
I have to say I don't agree with over-analyzing over the word "brick." There's no way to tell if the text was simply referring to making bricks - I think one guy just picked up that idea for his sermon one Sunday and it just took off.
But that aside, I do agree that our country is moving away from God, and therefore losing God's favor as a nation. We're certainly not the nation that we used to be, nor the nation that I wish we were.
However, I don't think that security measures are a way of demeaning and just beating us down. Going down the line of that thinking, we should just have anarchy, because all rules and regulations are just to make you, like I said before, demean you and beat you down.
Jacko, as we do often, I think we're agreeing to disagree on this one.
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!
Respectfully, I don't think anyone's advocating anarchy.
Laws are meant to serve us. They should not cause us upset, embarrassment or loss of natural rights while we go about our lawful business in order to make it easier for the government or law enforcement to do its job.
We need the rule of law in order to have liberty. As a liberty-loving society, we should be against those who lie, cheat, steal and cause harm to individuals and private property which is why we have laws to punish people who engage in those behaviors.
In its capacity as an entity that detects, monitors, and eliminates internal threats to the U.S., the DHS has a legitimate purpose: they route out the bad guys inside the country and deal with them. But for the DHS to presume every American is guilty until proven innocent by way of a potentially harmful exposure to radiation with the obligatory dispensing of any idea of modesty with which you walked into the airport, and/or physical contact which would constitute egregious sexual harassment in any other context is unacceptable.
[QUOTE=Brian;39478]Respectfully, I don't think anyone's advocating anarchy.
Laws are meant to serve us. They should not cause us upset, embarrassment or loss of natural rights while we go about our lawful business in order to make it easier for the government or law enforcement to do its job.
We need the rule of law in order to have liberty. As a liberty-loving society, we should be against those who lie, cheat, steal and cause harm to individuals and private property which is why we have laws to punish people who engage in those behaviors.
In its capacity as an entity that detects, monitors, and eliminates internal threats to the U.S., the DHS has a legitimate purpose: they route out the bad guys inside the country and deal with them. But for the DHS to presume every American is guilty until proven innocent by way of a potentially harmful exposure to radiation with the obligatory dispensing of any idea of modesty with which you walked into the airport, and/or physical contact which would constitute egregious sexual harassment in any other context is unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
I believe this is totally Unconstitutional and meant to treat us like criminals. Fear is being used against us, but right before the holidays. Really who has been fearful? Or is that again being said as the excuse to bring on more control over Americans. The incident last year by a man who couldn't even lit a match, I call that a false flag to make us surrender our rights. The people need to speak up and tell them "enough is enough"
Here is the TSA Prohibited List---You can bring a 7 inch or less screwdriver in your carry-on or 4 inch or less scissors. So really we need our undies checked but a item that could be used as a weapon is ok.
There is plenty of information out their that shows this really isn't to protect us. They are inching us closer and closer to giving up our Constitution for our safety, just like they planned.
Linear Mode
