If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   TSA chief explains that those inconsistencies you're seeing in its procedures at different airports aren't inconsistencies, they're unpredictabilities built into the system to fool terrorists. See? It's all good   (npr.org) divider line 261
    More: Unlikely, TSA, Steve Inskeep, Morning Edition, security policy, airports, terrorists  
•       •       •

5311 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Nov 2010 at 11:42 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-11-23 12:02:10 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu: Fourth Amendment, remember that thing?

Is there some sort of farked up fine print that says you consent to search when you purchase a plane ticket?

Was at the bar arguing with some friends who were defending - defending - the TSA. I said to one, "You're more of a small government type, yes? Well how is it that you can complain about the fed and in the same breath defend one of the most bloated, intrusive and inept government agencies?"

Mind blown.
 
2010-11-23 12:02:16 PM  
halotosis: We once purchased the wrong domain name for a clients internal testing site. The clients name was spelled with one 'l' instead of two. They noticed and asked during a meeting with us about the domain name. In a move of absolute brilliance, one of my coworkers told them it was misspelled for "security purposes." The client believed him.

Oh jaysus h. rockefeller christ on toast.
 
2010-11-23 12:03:03 PM  
RedT: /or maybe a crotch full of explosive cranberry relish?

It's bursting with flavor!
 
2010-11-23 12:03:08 PM  
Then you could do us the courtesy of not yelling at us when we don't know what the rules are today.

For example, I was once told off for putting my "4-1" bag in a tray because apparently they were supposed to stay in our carry ons at that airport.

And do our shoes go on the belt or in a bin this week. I can't ever get that one right.
 
2010-11-23 12:03:38 PM  
Dr. Rosenrosen: I can predict the future of this thread!

Men

viagra
kilts
cucumber in the pants

Women

Tampons
Scream "rape"
Fake boobies

Did I forget anything?


Yeah, you forgot one of the actual problems - the radiation. C'mon, keep up!
 
2010-11-23 12:03:51 PM  
RedT: But will your 4th Amendment protect you when some turrist blows a plane out of the sky with a crotch full of explosives?

Given that the last guy with a crotch full of explosives managed to only burn his crank, and the dude with the shoe bomb only managed to give himself the hotfoot, I'm actually thinking that a copy of the Fourth Amendment would provide adequate protection. You could use it to smother the flames coming from the dude's crotch, after you'd waited a sufficient amount of time to ensure proper junk charring had occurred.
 
2010-11-23 12:03:54 PM  
Here's something weird:

They had some TSA bozo on MSNBC this morning, and he was asked specifically about the inconsistencies. You know, kinda out of the blue, like. He gave the SAME "planned unpredictability" explanation.

Kinda odd how he just happened to be asked that specific thing. Almost kinda like it was a scripted lead-in to a talking point, or something all theatrical like that. . .
 
2010-11-23 12:04:42 PM  
ultraholland: Is there some sort of farked up fine print that says you consent to search when you purchase a plane ticket?

Inalienable rights are inalienable.
 
2010-11-23 12:04:57 PM  
APPROVES:
http://i55.tinypic.com/izavj7.jpg
(SFW, copy & paste)
 
2010-11-23 12:05:01 PM  
Banacek: I want to meet the person who watched Brazil and thought 'Yeah, I like that future. I'm going to make it happen.'

Meet Skeletor. First head of the DHS, now completely coincidentally happens to sell scanners to the DHS. I'm sure there's absolutely nothing untowards there.

a.abcnews.com
 
2010-11-23 12:05:28 PM  
Yeah, "security purposes". IOW, covering the asses of the MFWIC's who haven't got their shiat together enough to formulate a proper, consistent procedure.
/MFWIC= Mother Farker(s) What's In Charge.
 
2010-11-23 12:05:31 PM  
Weaver95: the TSA really doesn't have a clue, do they? And yet some people still support them. amazing.

The people against the TSA really don't have a clue, do they?
 
2010-11-23 12:05:56 PM  
It is a little misleading for the TSA to claim so few passengers are getting full-body screens or fraternity-party pat-downs.

Most airports don't have full-body screen equipment. Thus there is nothing to opt-out from. Thus, there are not rigorous pat-downs.
 
2010-11-23 12:06:17 PM  
StreetlightInTheGhetto: Needlessly Complicated: FTFA: yes, you can take pies on board; no, you can't take cranberry relish


THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!


You have no way of knowing what I put in a pie. If the purpose is to deter possible explosive materials, wouldn't it be much easier to hide them in a pie than it would to hide them in a SEALED can of cranberry sauce?

Real cranberry sauce/relish is gelatinous.

I assume if you have a pie, you had to cook whatever's inside the shell to cook the shell itself, which you probably wouldn't want to do if you had some sort of gelatinous chemical material inside. I guess you could carefully cook a pie top over a upside down empty tin and just carefully place it on top...

Anyway, still stupid, but this psycho overabundance of TSA threads is getting pretty f--king old.


Why use a gelatinous filler for the pie? There are many choices available that can be explosive, but don't react to heat. C4 for example. You can light C4 on fire, and it won't explode.

Hell, there are likely many gel like explosives that you can bake without risk of explosion
 
2010-11-23 12:06:48 PM  
Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Needlessly Complicated: FTFA: yes, you can take pies on board; no, you can't take cranberry relish


THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!


You have no way of knowing what I put in a pie. If the purpose is to deter possible explosive materials, wouldn't it be much easier to hide them in a pie than it would to hide them in a SEALED can of cranberry sauce?

Hmm. What if you bake a pie that uses cranberries? I see via Google that you can make an apple-cranberry pie. What happens then? Do the cranberries supercede the apples? Or does it specifically have to be "cranberry relish"? Even worse, I see a couple of recipes for cranberry sauce pie--now that is a security conundrum for sure. I bet our helpful TSA agents would know immediately what to do (confiscate it and then check your crotch for any hidden cranberry sauce.


I think you found the loophole! Also, apple cranberry pie sounds delicious.

And you CAN put cranberry sauce in your underwear, but only up to 3 ounces.
 
2010-11-23 12:07:06 PM  
Leeds: Sure.

And Microsoft's Blue Screen of Death is an "Undocumented Enhancement."

Riiiiiight.


It's a very pretty blue.
 
2010-11-23 12:07:25 PM  
Somehow if tomorrow goes like it is suspected it will go there will be a much different experience for travelers come this next holiday.

But...hey....they're making pamphlets, right? That ought to fix everything!
 
2010-11-23 12:07:43 PM  
I heard this on the drive in this morning. Commented to my brother about how convenient it is that their incompetence is intentional.

Also, nice farking softball questions there, Robert Siegel. "How many pies can I bring on board?" Well since the whole system is inconsistent, how the fark can the TSA chief answer that question anyway? How about asking him if he would be happy with his children being touched by the TSA goons? Or how about letting his wife go through the backscatter machine? Or how about confronting him about the lie that's being perpetuated by the head of the DHS that the machines can't save or transmit images?

Nah, we'll ask about frozen meat. Give me a farking break.
 
2010-11-23 12:07:59 PM  
This is why evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.
 
2010-11-23 12:08:21 PM  
"our adversary" aka "The 'Merican people"
 
2010-11-23 12:08:37 PM  
Skarekrough: Somehow if tomorrow goes like it is suspected it will go there will be a much different experience for travelers come this next holiday.

But...hey....they're making pamphlets, right? That ought to fix everything!


Considering the TSA website is apparently a big fat mechanism of lies, forgive me if my faith is weak. ;-)
 
2010-11-23 12:08:50 PM  
Sticky Hands: If Hollywood has taught me anything it is that clever, focused, evil individuals and organizations will always, ALWAYS, lose out to bumbling simpletons.

TSA knows what they are doing.


I can't wait until they hire meddling kids.
 
2010-11-23 12:09:11 PM  
forfarkonly: I'm sure having his fed job, and all the benefits for life, have nothing to do with his un-biased opinion. Look, whenever you have a president who adds jobs, that are primarily state jobs, you have a fool working against you! Bush was a socialist who faked being a conservative for their vote, and Obama is a media messiah clown, a habitual lying doofus. Anyone who would not fire Pelosi is a tool, if Barry had fired her, the election would have not been so damaging to the DNC. I have to give Obama credit for one thing: ruining the democratic party even worse than Bush ruined the republicans. That's the hope and change I can believe in - Not yes we can, but, Yes you did!
Some more fun trivia - Obama has never lied to anyone about anything, not one single time. Ever. He doesn't even take sh_ts.



I'm sure glad this is happening under Obama. Now all the screaming Teabag talking heads can biatch about the violations of our privacy by the evil democrats. I believe the more folks against this the better, but it's usually the Dems and ACLU screaming about civil rights, it's nice to have a little help from the other side.

That said, I am verrry disappointed in Obama continuing all the civil rights violations started during the Bush administration (like warrentless wiretaps), the continuation of the line item veto -- err -- signing statements, then continuing with this type of unconstitutional, fake security insanity.

Thus, I have concluded that all politicians suck.
 
2010-11-23 12:09:42 PM  
Banacek: I want to meet the person who watched Brazil and thought 'Yeah, I like that future. I'm going to make it happen.'

You have to admit those magnifying glasses in front of the monitors would come in handy these days, what with all the movie watching being done on phones and stuff.
 
2010-11-23 12:09:45 PM  
content8.flixster.com
Yes, the random difference isn't due to incompetence, it's um yeah, built in to confuse the enemy...
Yeah, that's the ticket.
 
2010-11-23 12:09:48 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu: Inalienable rights are inalienable.

So do you not know?

quick analog: when you get your driver's license it clearly states that you are subject to a mandatory revocation of six months should you refuse a breathalyzer/sobriety test. You consent to getting your shiat taken away should you refuse to consent to that type of search. I'm wondering if this isn't the same.
 
2010-11-23 12:09:49 PM  
Let us use common sense and racial profiling.
 
2010-11-23 12:10:23 PM  
Weaver95: the TSA really doesn't have a clue, do they? And yet some people still support them. amazing.

Of course people support them. They are professionals. Like this guy, a TSA employee based at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson, who tried to kill himself after abducting a young woman from the airport's MARTA station, sexually assaulting her, then giving her a suicide note to deliver.

/no need to kidnap her to sexually molest her, you could have done that legally in the airport dumbass
 
2010-11-23 12:10:43 PM  
SweetSilverBlues: "We purposely and with intent poorly train our barely-graduated-from-high-school agents so better to keep the terrorists confused."

Seems to be working on everyone else.
 
2010-11-23 12:11:24 PM  
I got your unpredictability right here.
i.imgur.com
 
2010-11-23 12:11:27 PM  
Needlessly Complicated: FTFA: yes, you can take pies on board; no, you can't take cranberry relish

You've missed something. It's not the relish, it's the jar. A sealable jar provides a pressure vessel that facilitates certain chemical reactions that make a big explosion out of a small amount of easily smuggled chemicals. That's probably the real reason behind the restriction on liquid containers greater than 100ml, not that the TSA checkpoint goons are bright enough to know that; they'd probably let you through with whatever so long as it's empty.
 
2010-11-23 12:11:48 PM  
DeadZone: SweetSilverBlues: "We purposely and with intent poorly train our barely-graduated-from-high-school agents so better to keep the terrorists confused."

Seems to be working on everyone else.


I know I'm all kinds of confused.

But some would argue that's normal.
 
2010-11-23 12:12:21 PM  
the_sidewinder: Why use a gelatinous filler for the pie? There are many choices available that can be explosive, but don't react to heat. C4 for example. You can light C4 on fire, and it won't explode.

PETNcherpumple pie? Similar to cherpumple (new window), it's PETN, in a cherry pie, inside a pumpkin pie, inside an apple pie, inside a cake. The streets will flow with the blood of the nonbelievers...and the tasty filling of holiday pies! BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!
 
Bf+
2010-11-23 12:12:21 PM  
Gate Rape
Learn it, use it.
 
2010-11-23 12:12:29 PM  
See, I don't fly much, but if I did, I'd love (or pay money to see)to watch a TSA agent capture a cap in the head. Now, if he/she has a family which relies on his/her income, that would be even funnier.

/don't sweat it, I hate everyone
//please die and go to hell.
 
2010-11-23 12:12:58 PM  
ultraholland: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Inalienable rights are inalienable.

So do you not know?

quick analog: when you get your driver's license it clearly states that you are subject to a mandatory revocation of six months should you refuse a breathalyzer/sobriety test. You consent to getting your shiat taken away should you refuse to consent to that type of search. I'm wondering if this isn't the same.


PA license doesn't say that anywhere on it. Usually when asked to give a breathalyzer there is probable cause involved. I've never seen random or mandatory sobriety tests given anywhere.
 
2010-11-23 12:13:56 PM  
drworm: ultraholland: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Inalienable rights are inalienable.

So do you not know?

quick analog: when you get your driver's license it clearly states that you are subject to a mandatory revocation of six months should you refuse a breathalyzer/sobriety test. You consent to getting your shiat taken away should you refuse to consent to that type of search. I'm wondering if this isn't the same.

PA license doesn't say that anywhere on it. Usually when asked to give a breathalyzer there is probable cause involved. I've never seen random or mandatory sobriety tests given anywhere.


DUI checkpoint. They normally won't pull out a breathalyzer without probable cause, but they are perfectly able to legally.
 
2010-11-23 12:14:30 PM  
ultraholland: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Inalienable rights are inalienable.

So do you not know?

quick analog: when you get your driver's license it clearly states that you are subject to a mandatory revocation of six months should you refuse a breathalyzer/sobriety test. You consent to getting your shiat taken away should you refuse to consent to that type of search. I'm wondering if this isn't the same.


Yes but if you're pulled over and asked to blow, *usually* the LEO has reasonable suspision at that time that you may be intoxicated. I say usually because there's the issue of checkpoints which are complete bullshiat for the same reason the TSA is bullshiat. They are searching you without any suspicion that you've commited a crime or that you will commit one.
 
2010-11-23 12:15:13 PM  
StreetlightInTheGhetto: Needlessly Complicated: FTFA: yes, you can take pies on board; no, you can't take cranberry relish


THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!


You have no way of knowing what I put in a pie. If the purpose is to deter possible explosive materials, wouldn't it be much easier to hide them in a pie than it would to hide them in a SEALED can of cranberry sauce?

Real cranberry sauce/relish is gelatinous.

I assume if you have a pie, you had to cook whatever's inside the shell to cook the shell itself, which you probably wouldn't want to do if you had some sort of gelatinous chemical material inside. I guess you could carefully cook a pie top over a upside down empty tin and just carefully place it on top...

Anyway, still stupid, but this psycho overabundance of TSA threads is getting pretty f--king old.


They will stop greenlighting threads as soon as the TSA stops saying and doing really noteworthy stupid things.

So, I'm figuring they will have their own tab soon.
 
2010-11-23 12:17:04 PM  
SweetSilverBlues: "We purposely and with intent poorly train our maybe-graduated-from-high-school agents so better to keep the terrorists confused."

FTFTSA:
"Have a high school diploma, GED or equivalent;
OR
Have at least one year of full-time work experience in security
work, aviation screener work, or X-ray technician work."
 
2010-11-23 12:17:27 PM  
Aidan: Leeds: Sure.

And Microsoft's Blue Screen of Death is an "Undocumented Enhancement."

Riiiiiight.

Feature. FEATURE. Security feature.


It's stopping those illegal operations from happening so it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.
 
2010-11-23 12:17:51 PM  
Vacation Bible School: SweetSilverBlues: "We purposely and with intent poorly train our maybe-graduated-from-high-school agents so better to keep the terrorists confused."

FTFTSA:
"Have a high school diploma, GED or equivalent;
OR
Have at least one year of full-time work experience in security
work, aviation screener work, or X-ray technician work."


Nice fix! tyvm!
 
2010-11-23 12:18:27 PM  
ultraholland: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Inalienable rights are inalienable.

So do you not know?


The last time I flew, a travel agent made the reservations for me, my company paid, and I printed out the ticket at home. Nowhere did I sign anything indicating my inalienable right (which I was under the impression meant it can't be taken from me, even if I wanted it to) of my person to be free of unreasonable search could be taken away from me. The ticket I printed didn't indicate anything about that; it just told me where to show up.

You'd think that I'd remember agreeing to something like being stripped of my Fourth Amendment right, wouldn't you?
 
2010-11-23 12:18:41 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu: "Trust me. I know what I'm doing."

Is that Pat Sajak?
 
2010-11-23 12:19:09 PM  
Thunderpipes: DUI checkpoint. They normally won't pull out a breathalyzer without probable cause, but they are perfectly able to legally.

How do those things stand up in court? Simply operating a vehicle is not probable cause to stop and question people. Same with the airports; being there and using the service does not constitute suspicious behavior.
 
2010-11-23 12:19:34 PM  
Some people still don't get it. The terrorist have already won. When we started wiping our collective arse's with the Bill of Rights (and yes, I know, it started with Bush), the terrorist smiled. When we started taking off our shoes, they chuckled. When we implemented the current debacle, they laughed so hard they fell off their camel and now wishes they would have invested in the two hump model. (apologize if I offended any camels there.)

In the spirit of Oliver Stone, I submit this.

It is a fact that some of the people that brought us the penis measuring machines. aka full body scanners, actually had invested in the companies that made them. Hmmmm, no conflict of interest there.

But going deeper. I think that this could be a "plot" by the federal government to take over the airlines. You know that the ticket sales are going to be down because people don't want to be sexually molested or put in a TSA easy bake oven, as a condition to fly. Therefore, they will use alternative means of transportation. A few weeks from now, the airlines will start to beg for a bailout. In steps the liberal lord and savior, BHO. "My teleprompter tells me that we MUST save the airlines, they are too big to fail." Then he has another layer of controlling the masses.

Come on guys. We teach our children that if someone touches them, to tell the parent, now we are telling them that that is out the window if a person dressed as a smurf at the airport wants to touch them, its ok.

They will spin every way they can to make everything seem as if it was intentional. Remember J.Napoleon, I mean Napolitano, said, after the Christmas day attempt? She actually said that the "system worked". A guy makes it on to the plan and almost sets it off, only to be stopped by other passengers, and the "system worked"? Really? No different here.

We should NEVER give up liberty for security.
 
2010-11-23 12:20:03 PM  
Needlessly Complicated: wouldn't it be much easier to hide them in a pie than it would to hide them in a SEALED can of cranberry sauce?

Unless it's this seal they won't trust it.
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2010-11-23 12:21:07 PM  
Grass Hopper: They will stop greenlighting threads as soon as the TSA stops saying and doing really noteworthy stupid things they stop generating Fark revenue.

Fixed.
 
2010-11-23 12:21:08 PM  
telemakhos: Needlessly Complicated: FTFA: yes, you can take pies on board; no, you can't take cranberry relish

You've missed something. It's not the relish, it's the jar. A sealable jar provides a pressure vessel that facilitates certain chemical reactions that make a big explosion out of a small amount of easily smuggled chemicals. That's probably the real reason behind the restriction on liquid containers greater than 100ml, not that the TSA checkpoint goons are bright enough to know that; they'd probably let you through with whatever so long as it's empty.


They're not specific about what container it's in. (they just kinda mention it) If it's a jar, I can kinda see it (esp. if it looks homemade)... if it's something that looks like it was purchased in a store, a can or a jar where the vacuum seal is obvious, isn't it sort of a given that it hasn't been tampered with?

I'm just mad cuz the goons wouldn't let me bring a big jar of Nutella through security once.
 
2010-11-23 12:23:44 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu: You'd think that I'd remember agreeing to something like being stripped of my Fourth Amendment right, wouldn't you?

I'd sure as shiat hope so.

So it seems that the most important issue here is not the radiation, the nature of the searches or the fact that the TSA is utterly worthless, but that 4th Amendment rights are being violated. This is not a new concept but people seem to be going off on tangents when this is the most important aspect.

Also, any word on peoples' computers being checked/files copied? I know it's been done and that is a bog no-no.
 
Displayed 50 of 261 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report