For those of you flying on Wednesday, why not make it easy for TSA? Walk into the terminal, and remain, naked.

Arrested for indecent exposure comes to mind.

Others have had a better idea. Going commando in a kilt and insisting on a manual inspection.

Be sure to moan a lot and ask for seconds.

---

I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.

You forgot, the body cavity search! Then they will handcuff you to the seat for the duration of the flight. Safety at all possible costs.

---

wear some depends. make an anomoly in them.

---

Janice

TSA's new slogan: "We now handle more packages than UPS."

---

Janice

TSA's new slogan: "We now handle more packages than UPS."

Ouch!

Unfortunately one of the founders of the "We Won't Fly" website has gone on to make statements that not only TSA needs stepped back, but that the government
"Must be abolished".

I happen to love my country and feel a duty to help correct it when it strays. Not destroy it.

Passive resistance. If enough people stop flying, the airlines will support reason. Court challenges are in order. But the clowns at We Won't Fly can not be counted on for rational action.

General advice: never follow anyone crazier than yourself.

---

Janice

Unfortunately one of the founders of the "We Won't Fly" website has gone on to make statements that not only TSA needs stepped back, but that the government
"Must be abolished".

I happen to love my country and feel a duty to help correct it when it strays. Not destroy it.

Passive resistance. If enough people stop flying, the airlines will support reason. Court challenges are in order. But the clowns at We Won't Fly can not be counted on for rational action.

General advice: never follow anyone crazier than yourself.

Unfortunately, that happens often enough: some people with a good idea get their idea co-opted by a smaller group with ideas that are more fringe.
P.S.-I was so tempted to copy and paste some of your quips, like the bit about Depends and anomalies. :)

Unfortunately, that happens often enough: some people with a good idea get their idea co-opted by a smaller group with ideas that are more fringe.
P.S.-I was so tempted to copy and paste some of your quips, like the bit about Depends and anomalies. :)

My little quotes/quips/insights/truism's have become well known over the years.
In fact, the term "Softism" was adopted by many.

They are not all my words, but I often do not know where I picked them up. Indeed some are quite original. Others are not. So it could be kind of a "confucious say" type of thing. Or not.

One meaning of softism became a solution that does not match the problem.

Anyway, I have written down no collection of them. One original saying became(with my online permission) widely used on greeting cards. Others, well might be found in a garbage pile. Some can be a pile of anomoly ;)

I hold no copyright on them. But you might want to triple check for other origins before using any for commercial purposes.

---

Janice

Hmm.. it appears that Soft^Spirit has the only good advice in the thread.

If you don't approve of the TSA's procedures, just stop flying. Any other form of protest is just more trouble than its worth. If you absolutely must fly somewhere (death in the family, job requirement, etc.) just put up with it.

Naked in public = crime. Since it involved nudity, its a sex crime. You don't wanna be on that Register, now do you?

Stunts to twit the TSA will only irritate them. You risk, at best, missing your flight. At worst, you may not be allowed to fly again.

I am not opposed to court challenges, people showing up in swim suits or leotards, or anything else to attempt to avoid the 2 bad choices. That is either be fondled and/or naked scanned. But I am no Rosa Parks to the cause.

We have a bill of rights for a reason. It needs to go to court for final decisions to end this madness. (security theatre comes to mind. Puts on a show of security where there are 1,001 back doors to it, and the best security is an alert public) Ultimately financial pressure on the airlines by people NOT flying because of it will perhaps allow Airline companies to join in the cause.

The fact is since the 9/11 attacks, no hijacking of a commercial airline has succeeded, nor is it likely to succeed. Prior to that the risk was considered to be delays, not to be turned into a missile.

Terrorists are already exploring explosive components hidden in body cavities.
Are we really ready to have our grandparents and children cavity searched because you can not grow (some courage) and deal with your fears?

If you can not overcome your fears, the terrorists have won. I do not fear flying. But I will not subject myself to being invaded. Nor should you. Just consider the airports closed until further notice.

---

Janice

Obviously, the original post was a joke.
What is serious is:

If you can not overcome your fears, the terrorists have won.

Obviously, the original post was a joke.
What is serious is:

If you can not overcome your fears, the terrorists have won.

As far as it goes, Sarge, you are correct.

The 'terrorists' won, in so far as they were an excuse for fundamental negative changes in the fabric of our society.

The actions of the terrorists provided an excuse for the more authoritarian elements in power in this country to justify actions that significantly curtailed the freedoms and liberties of the people in this nation with very little if any gain in security. I would go so far as to say that given the loss of the safeguards of our freedoms and liberties, we are LESS secure. The 'security' used as justification was illusion, nothing more.

But, regardless of who you class as the 'winners', the terrorists or the authoritarians, it is clear that The People were the 'losers'.

Obviously, the original post was a joke.
What is serious is:

If you can not overcome your fears, the terrorists have won.

As far as it goes, Sarge, you are correct.

But, again, it was Soft that said it.
However, this has been said before, by many.

The 'terrorists' won, in so far as they were an excuse for fundamental negative changes in the fabric of our society.

The actions of the terrorists provided an excuse for the more authoritarian elements in power in this country to justify actions that significantly curtailed the freedoms and liberties of the people in this nation with very little if any gain in security. I would go so far as to say that given the loss of the safeguards of our freedoms and liberties, we are LESS secure. The 'security' used as justification was illusion, nothing more.

But, regardless of who you class as the 'winners', the terrorists or the authoritarians, it is clear that The People were the 'losers'.

Agreed.
But can we blame Bush for this one?
Or do we have to go back to 98 or 99-Clinton had his shot at bin Laden and missed?
Personally, I haven't flown since 2007. I don't need to do a lot of flying.

I would say the patriot act was a suspension of civil liberties.

One town, Arcata, California has made it a city ordinance to enforce the patriot act between city limits. Symbolic, but to the point.

It is also not allowed to detonate a nuclear weapon within its city limits.l

---

Janice

It is also not allowed to detonate a nuclear weapon within its city limits.

Take heed, Russia, should you wish to re-form the USSR, and all ye dirty bombers of al Qaeda.

Since constitution seems to be pounded by many recently, as if it was exclusively of conservative interest:

Article VI

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.

---

Janice

Since constitution seems to be pounded by many recently, as if it was exclusively of conservative interest:

Article VI

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.

Agreed.

Of late, certain tactics used by law enforcement in combating drunk driving have been in the news.

They have gotten around the constitutional objection to 'no option, either a breath test or a blood test' tactic by having a judge on hand at the checkpoint to review each case and issue a search warrant on the spot.

Not that I travel by air anymore, but if I did...

At the airport, if you want to search me in a manner that I object to, show me a search warrant. I think they need to have a judge on site too.

It is common knowledge that airports have suspended civil liberty. For "the greater good(the greater good)". (obscure movie reference).

I personally recommend avoiding them until they are restored. "implied consent" needs to be overturned as well.

---

Janice