TCUnation
social network for conservatives
TSA, Controlling Our Freedom to Travel Anywhere, Anytime.
I Do Hope that everyone will not only read this but consider the worst part of this "Control of All People' by the TSA. moving toward the USSR of America.
They will be able to control your Freedom to travel by Air any where in America or the World, just like Russians in Russia, a Chinese in China, N Koreans in Korea, Muslims in all Muslim Nations, ETC.
THINK ABOUT IT! ! ! Next will TSA be used to Control all Ground Travel, using the same excuse, the detection of Terrorists? ? ?
TSGT Clough
ACT FOR AMERICA
In WorldNetDaily interview, Brigitte Gabriel addresses controversy over full-body scanners and pat downs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINES
Expert: TSA scans would let al-Qaida duplicate 9/11
Brigitte Gabriel warns unless U.S. starts profiling, nation is vulnerable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 18, 2010
12:10 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=229613
Brigitte Gabriel
A terrorism expert says the invasive screening procedures demanded by the Obama-run Transportation Security Administration would do almost nothing to stop a determined terrorist because they already are experimenting with inserting explosives in a body cavity or even surgically implanting the destructive charges.
The comments come from Brigitte Gabriel, who is the founder of Act! For America, a 150,000-strong group that works to warn Americans against the dangers of militant Islam and the Muslims who follow it.
She also is a member of the board of advisers for the Intelligence Summit, and she lectures internationally on global terrorism.
Join more than 17,000 others in a petition demanding action against the intrusive airport screening procedures implemented by Janet Napolitano and send a letter to Congress, President Obama and others telling them exactly what you think about the issue.
The issue has hit a flashpoint in the last few days as newly installed TSA procedures demand that airline passengers submit to a full-body scanning machine that generates an essentially nude image of the passenger for TSA workers to see, or a full-body pat-down that includes what critics have called "groping" of private parts of the body.
"These procedures are not effective at all with terrorists," Gabriel told WND in an interview today. "If a true terrorist wants to go blow up an airplane, these machines will not detect it."
She said like drug dealers already have proven, substances hidden inside body cavities or even embedded surgically remain undetected by any or all of the TSA's procedures.
"If al-Qaida is planning against the U.S. multiple attacks in a day, in multiple airplanes, it could duplicate 9/11," she told WND. "Al-Qaida is testing inserting breast implants, stuffing breast implants with explosives."
She said a woman then could go into an airplane restroom and use a syringe similar to those used by diabetic patients to trigger an explosion that would disintegrate a modern jet.
"This is what al-Qaida is resorting to, and they're exploring surgery for men," she warned. "They want to implant explosives inside the body.
"Terrorists are conditioned and trained to blow themselves up, to become suicide bombers," she said. "They are ready to die to go to heaven to meet Allah."
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Pamela Silver on
-
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!
-
Permalink Reply by American Man on -
Are all Muslims our enemy? Should we hate and profile all of them? What will all this ultimately lead to? I am Christain, I dont want my children and grandchildren to be forever at odds with anyone. What can we do to alleviate so many problems. Forgive me for always looking for for solutions, as opposed to looking to exacerbate the problems. This is what the Bible teaches...
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mott on -
Huh? This is an example of a strawman argument.
Saying that all terrorists are Muslims is not the same thing as saying all Muslims are terrorists. These are in no way, shape or form logically equivalent. OK? Let's put aside this silliness and have an argument based upon facts.
Having said that, we screen everybody at an airport as if they are a terrorist. There is a video of a young boy (7 years old, I think) having to strip so that he can be patted down and get through security. There is also the priceless picture of a Muslim TSA agent patting down a nun.
Now come on. If we want to be a little more selective about who we screen, would it make more sense to select a 24-year old male from Yemen here on a visa or a nun who was born in America? We are subjecting everyone to this silly, intrusive, and humiliating procedure because we can't make a common sense call.
The administration boasts about its convictions of 390 terrorists in federal court, and have released the list of those convicted (see http://www.justice.gov/cjs/docs/terrorism-convictions-statistics.pdf). All on the list don't have Muslim-sounding names, but the vast majority of them do. So either Obama's Administration is profiling and convicting only Muslims of terrorism, or the vast majority of terrorists are Muslim. Pick one. This is simply a fact and the use of facts is NOT HATE and it is NOT PROFILING, it is common sense.
Does the Bible teach us that we should not use our common sense?
-
Permalink Reply by Sharona on
-
I agree that profiling needs to be done but there are terrorist that look just like a regular american person. I have thought about this and if given the choice of a plane full of people who have been scanned and a plane full of people not scanned, I would take the scanned plane.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mott on
-
I am certainly glad that you are thinking about it. Just remember that the last two attempted airline terror attacks were by Muslins and they were nearly successful. Oh, and everyone on the flight was screened, which says we were fortunate that the failure of the screening systems didn't result in the deaths of hundreds of people.
I would feel more comfortable if I knew our security mechanisms WORKED. The best evidence that we have of a system that works is Israel in which they use BEHAVIOR PROFILING. They look for the terrorists and not the device. As far as what they look like -- I don't know, but what I do know is that MOST of them we have successfully prosecuted have Muslim names.
So while you are thinking, here is something to ponder. While screening passengers are we more likely to find a terrorist among those with Muslim names or those with names other than Muslim? The answer is, of course, Muslim names. The logical conclusion, therefore, says our time and money is better spent screening people who have Muslim names -- it is OK to use this clue to help us find and stop the terrorists.
While you are thinking, may I suggest you keep your eye on the ball, which is to find the best way (we need to set aside this PC junk) to stop terror attacks.
-
Permalink Reply by Sharona on
-
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic about "my thinking". Sorry, I thought thinking through issues was a good trait to have but sarcasm is fine. I am simply saying have all passengers walk through the new scanners which can detect non-metal explosives like the Christmas day bomber used. It is not like a nude photo is being projected with a picture of your face. And yes, profile Muslims all day long, I am saying that there is an increasing amount of terrorist that do not look like traditional muslims and they can change their names to non-muslim names. And how do we know the nun is not in disguise? I have read some about the profiling the Israelis are doing and think it's a great idea but it takes money to train/school preferred people for the job and I am sure they are expected to be paid more than the security people get paid now. America has more airport and more people flying every day than Israel. Using all the resources and technology available seems to make sense. And that is what I have been "thinking" about. I plan to read up on the new bioscanners and "think" about them and draw a conclusion
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mott on
-
Be careful about what you read and hear and be sure about the sources. For instance (I will let you look it up), DHS is saying the scanners were built so that they could not record. However, the specifications for them say that they can record. Which is it?
Having been a government contractor for a long time, I know that you get paid when you fulfill the terms of the contract specifications. It the specs say it will record then it does record and the DHS spokesman is ill informed (charitably) or lying (uncharitably). I don't know which it is, but I don't trust anything they are saying with respect to this.
I also do not believe that these scanners will detect all of the non-metallic explosives. But lets assume that they do for the sake of an argument. It is clear that all they are designed to do is to prevent another underwear bomber. So it is a reactive response to a threat we have seen.
What is TSA going to do when the terrorists put the stuff in an orifice? If you didn't know a cup of these explosives is enough to put a h*** in a plane and it will have a good chance of bringing a plane down. One person, or two at most, could conceal enough of the stuff in a body cavity to do the trick. The machine doesn't detect that; so are we all going to have to undergo a proctological exam to be safe? This is my point about looking for the device. We will ALWAYS chase an old problem.
Of the hundreds of terrorist prosecutions in this country well over 90% of them are Muslim. So that is still a reasonable place to start. But the point isn't how they look; it is how they are acting and who they associate with. As I said in another point ... the 9/11 Commission was very clear on the point that the root cause problem was a failure to connect the dots in the terrorist's activities. We have made ZERO progress in our ability to do that. We are buying scanners that won't detect and stop the next threat and we are patting down nuns and little children. This simply won't get it done and it is not a good use of our resources.
We need to get busy on the task of building our capability to connect the dots. When we find suspicious activity we need to work not only at what the activity is, but who all is associated with it. I don't care what they look like or who they are, we need to figure out who all is involved in the network. If we wait for the network to show up at an airport with the bomb, then we have waited far too long.
So I'm merely suggesting that we do as the 9/11 Commission advised us to do. That was the failure leading up to 9/11 and it will be the obvious failure again if we fail to do this.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mott on
-
More to think about ...
The United States is going broke, and therefore needs to spend its security money as wisely as possible. I am therefore left to wonder if patting down a nun at the airport is the best way to spend our security dollars.
What we know
1. Every week a flight listed as commercial leaves Tehran and arrives in Caracas, and you can't buy a ticket on that flight.
2. that bad actors have been on the flight.
3. that the bad actors are dispersing to somewhere in Venezuela and from there who knows where
4. our border with Mexico is wide open and gangs routinely smuggles thousands of pounds of contraband
5. a stinger missile, explosives or anthrax would be easy to smuggle, along with bad guys, across our Mexican border
What does it mean?
* Well how about a stinger missile that shoots down a commercial airliner on approach or takeoff over a populated area. Easy to do.
* How about dropping a few pounds of anthrax upwind from a major city, which allows the wind to disperse it. Could kill a million people and make the city uninhabitable for months.
* How about putting some bombs into the cargo holds of planes as a plane's cargo isn't screened at the moment.
That's the difference between you and me. You are comfortable with screening every passenger because you thought about it. I'm uncomfortable because we are spending our money fondling nuns when we have real security problems to address.
If we continue to look for devices, instead of terrorists, then a scenario as I've provided above, or a similar one, will occur. It is inevitable. When, as a security measure, you look for the device you are ALWAYS solving an old problem; you will NEVER be ahead of the terrorist. Furthermore it will be impossible to spend enough money to plug all of the leaks. Such a policy is unwise. We need to secure our borders, we need to find out who is here, and we need to get a better handle on who is boarding airplanes. That is the path that will make us as safe as possible with whatever we choose to spend tackling the problem. Priority spending MUST go towards Muslims and people who associate with them.
-
Permalink Reply by Sharona on
-
Sounds great, now how to stop the flow of illegals from the Mexican border, the "fence"? I don't believe that will keep them out. Why would we not look for devices while looking for the terrorist. Chances are you find a device you will find a terrorist. Will we ever be ahead of the terrorist, probably not. And yes, I am comfortable screening every passenger. Flying is a privalege and not a right so if some people are offended they can take boat, train, bus, car. People are always going to be offended about something. You can never please everyone so adjustments have to be made. I honestly can't believe there would be such an outcry about this. If they didn't introduce these and another bomber did blow up a plane I bet some people would be crying out that not enough was done, why wasn't better technology used etc. Sorry, just me thinking again
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mott on
-
Do you understand the concept of a signal to noise ratio? By stemming the flow of "good" illegal aliens it makes it easier to find the "bad" ones. A fence, perhaps that's a part of it. The point is that bad stuff will sooner or later come across the border and to stand around saying a fence won't keep them out while we pat down nuns is insane.
You won't build a fence because it won't keep the out. Why then do we search for bombs when we know that doesn't keep them off the planes? Seems inconsistent. Have you really thought it through?
We can be ahead of the terrorists IF WE FOCUS ON ACTIVITY rather than devices. 10 years ago we failed to detect the 9/11 plots because we didn't connect the obvious dots. We are still in the same place now as we were 10 years ago, except we strip search children to consider ourselves safer.
Imagine the outcry when a plane is shot down by a stinger missile that came across the boarder.
Again ... the issue is we don't have enough money to do everything. So will patting down nuns or strip search 7-year olds really make us safer? I don't think so. Let's prioritize the spending on things that WILL make us safer.
1. Secure the border;
2. Track the whereabouts of people who are visitors;
3. Stop the hiring of illegals (they will self deport, we don't need to bus them);
4. Stop giving illegals social services benefits -- a welfare state and open borders are incompatible.
5. Don't be afraid to use all the information we have for purposes of providing security. That is, if they have a Muslin name then we may want to take a closer look at them than if they are a nun.
6. Start looking for the terrorists, rather than the devices. Terrorists may not always have a device, and when they have the device we may find them too late. That's why it is important to look for terrorists.
7. I would also like to see cost-benefit analysis required for these expenditures. Would the money spent, for example, on the scanners be spent better building a fence. Which of those alternatives would make us safer?
-
Permalink Reply by Bob S USNR on -
This is not directed to anyone in particular, but to all.
One of the most violently anti infidel imams in the middle east is a born in the USA citizen of the USA.
cat stevens, (sang "cat's in the cradle") He is now an outspoken, anti-infidel, extreamist muslim, and a born in the USA citizen of the USA. stevens has said, publicly, many times that islam and sharia law, will conquer the USA and it is NOT a matter of "IF"... it is a matter of WHEN!!
There are many others I can't remember the names of right now. My point here is islam has been taking over the USA for quite a while now. From what I have read this process started in earnest about 30 years ago. In the last 5 or 10 years their pace is accelerating very fast!! There are towns, inside the USA, a non-muslim cannot go into. They have "guards" that make sure all incoming vehicles contain only muslims!
islam, like all other totalitarian governmental systems on this planet, will do WHATEVER it takes to be the one to conquer the biggest prize on this planet (THE USA) as quickly as possible.
Many other imams have also said this exact same thing many times, publicly, that islam and sharia law, will conquer the USA and it is NOT a matter of "IF"... it is a matter of WHEN!!
How many times do YOU have to be told this by the very people that have been doing that for the last 1500 years before you get it through you thick skull that THEY ARE NOT "KIDDING"??? Their dedication to this cause is absolute. They have been doing this top other countries for 1500 years! They are not saying these things in political, double talk and, mumbo jumbo. They have been telling us all these things in terms that CANNOT BE "interpreted" any other way!!!
These excuses for humans are NOT HOLLYWOOD actors. You can pretend this is some sort of game, if you must, but the islamists are quite literally "DEAD" serious about this. The "dead" part refers to ALL non muslims and the muslims that they decide are not adhering to the correct sect of islam.
Is it OK with YOU for islam to conquer our USA and convert our USA into another islamic 7th century medieval country???
In the USA we elect our "leaders".
In islam they don't. The most extremist minded person, willing to anything it takes to sieze power, and willing to do whatever it takes to hold that power, appoints himself the "Leader" of muslim run areas!
Just to be clear. It is NOT OK with ME!!
If I am called upon to act to defend my country, from any takeover, I will do whatever is necessary to protect my country! The president took a similar OATH but seems to have forgotten that little detail... Upon joining the UNITED STATES NAVY I took an OATH to serve and PROTECT THE USA from all enemys too. UNLIKE THE PRESENT PRESIDENT I HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN THAT LITTLE DETAIL!!
Only a typical liberal could misunderstand this.
I see the USA as being INVADED, as we speak, by several different invaders. If "We the people" don't do something now ALL WILL BE LOST SOON!!
I could stop the invasion from mexico and canada in 2 months. Those invasion points are the easy ones.
To learn more www.apostatesofislam.com
There are many links to other sites. There are links to videos with warnings. If you are "faint of heart" don't watch them. I have seen most of those videos. The videos are quite gruesome.
e
© 2013 Created by Earl B.
