Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security United States News Your Rights Online

TSA 'Secured' Metrodome During Recent Football Game 364

Posted by Soulskill
from the a-large-an-oddly-shaped-airplane dept.
McGruber writes "Travel writer Christopher Elliott touches down with the news that the U.S. Transportation Security Administration was spotted standing around outside a recent American football game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Green Bay Packers (picture). According to Mr. Elliott, the 'TSA goes to NFL games and political conventions and all kinds of places that have little or nothing to do with ... travel. It even has a special division called VIPR — an unfortunate acronym for Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response team — that conducts these searches.' He continues, 'As far as I can tell, TSA is just asking questions at this point. "Data and results collected through the Highway BASE program will inform TSA's policy and program initiatives and allow TSA to provide focused resources and tools to enhance the overall security posture within the surface transportation community," it says in the filing. But they wouldn't be wasting our money asking such questions unless they planned to aggressively expand VIPR at some point in the near future. And that means TSA agents at NFL games, in subways and at the port won't be the exception anymore — they will be the rule.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TSA 'Secured' Metrodome During Recent Football Game

Comments Filter:
  • Nazi America (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2013 @05:56PM (#42490327)

    Why not just get it over with and change your flag to the swastika, we all know that's where this is heading.

    • Re:Nazi America (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Frosty Piss (770223) * on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:01PM (#42490379)

      Why not just get it over with and change your flag to the swastika, we all know that's where this is heading.

      Well, I think the first step is to change their uniform shirts to a sort of a chocolate brown color, that has a "calming" effect...

    • Re:Nazi America (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:27PM (#42490587)

      How was this marked troll? This is making it look like the US is gifting itself with a third, politically inspired police corps. Just like the SS.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      It's part of American culture and you should be tolerant. Americans are mostly supportive of these security measures since they overwhelmingly voted for either Republican or Democrat, both of which look to expand domestic security. As you are tolerant of Middle Eastern dictatorships and countries like China, you too should be tolerant of America. Your criticism is a sign of bigotry.

      • Re:Nazi America (Score:5, Insightful)

        by crazycheetah (1416001) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:39PM (#42490657)

        Americans are mostly supportive of these security measures since they overwhelmingly voted for either Republican or Democrat

        You're forgetting the part where most Americans are brainwashed into thinking that the only point that their vote is going to do any good (or bad for that matter) is if they vote Republican or Democrat. I keep meeting more and more people that hate both parties but vote for them, because "there's no other choice that's not throwing my vote away!" There's a pretty good chunk of people in the US right now that despise our government and are trying all kind of different means outside of starting a revolution to correct it. Unfortunately, that's MUCH easier said than done.

        • by Golddess (1361003)

          I keep meeting more and more people that hate both parties but vote for them, because "there's no other choice that's not throwing my vote away!"

          What states do they live in? If it's a solidly red state, and they vote Democrat, tell them that they are already throwing their vote away. Likewise for solidly blue states and Republican voters.

          • Last November, I didn't vote for a single incumbent in any race, voted no on all ballot initiatives, and voted third party (L), where there was an option...
      • Ok, I get that, and I also get that none of this is about security, but merely about control and power. What I don't get is why the security theater / homeland security smoke screen is so effective, but that's probably just me and owed to the fact that I've been taught history. History tells us where all of this will lead. As we now by now: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
        • by canesfan (607211) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @11:14PM (#42492447)

          Ok, I get that, and I also get that none of this is about security, but merely about control and power. What I don't get is why the security theater / homeland security smoke screen is so effective, but that's probably just me and owed to the fact that I've been taught history. History tells us where all of this will lead. As we now by now: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

          As for why the "security theater / homeland security smoke screen is so effective"? Stop and think and honestly try and take stock of how many people you currently know personally who could be objectively called independent thinkers who are not afraid to live what they proclaim they believe. I am in my 40's and I can say this is not the America I grew up in. Very few people have the courage to live by the set of principles which made America a great Country to begin with.

          • by jahudabudy (714731) on Sunday January 06, 2013 @12:48AM (#42492887)
            Very few people have the courage to live by the set of principles which made America a great Country to begin with.
            Uh, like self-centered obsession with getting ahead personally regardless of the expense to others? Not that there haven't been some few stellar individuals that stood out, but the overall history of America is voracious greed thinly disguised as "individualism" or "manifest destiny". There are no longer free resources that are easily taken from the natives, or an endless supply of desperate newcomers to step on; we can't even overtly loot Central and South America now, thanks to global international relations. So now, we have turned inward and are eating ourselves. Very few stood on principle when it was every one else being digested, especially since the American middle class got the scraps. Don't pretend that now that it is the middle class that is the entree that somehow the principle of the matter has changed.
    • Re:Nazi America (Score:5, Interesting)

      by waspleg (316038) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @07:38PM (#42491037) Journal

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”
      --C.S. Lewis

  • TSA at Every Home (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EmagGeek (574360) <gterich@aoMONETl.com minus painter> on Saturday January 05, 2013 @05:58PM (#42490357) Journal

    It won't be long before there is a TSA agent posted at every home, to interview its occupants before they are allowed to leave.

    • by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:05PM (#42490415)

      My biggest problem is that the TSA has not caught a single terrorist yet.

      Everything they do and all the money they spend has accomplished NOTHING except to harass regular people.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:14PM (#42490487)

        It has also greatly increased the government's awareness of the locations and activities of regular people. In-and-of itself that isn't valuable, but the moment any of these regular people become problematic (by engaging in perfectly-legal protests, for example), the knowledge will be invaluable in shutting them down.

        Catching terrorists is only the ostensible purpose of the TSA. The real purpose is to keep YOU and your ilk in line.

        And since Americans seem to love trading freedom for security, you may as well get used to it.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:19PM (#42490523)

        We're seeing an erosion of our freedom and privacy and your problem is that they just haven't caught a terrorist yet? Does that imply that there actions will be justified if they do? Would it therefore make more sense to give them even MORE power and take away even more personal liberty if that helps and leads to catching terrorists?

        • by Mitreya (579078)

          We're seeing an erosion of our freedom and privacy and your problem is that they just haven't caught a terrorist yet? Does that imply that there actions will be justified if they do?

          No, I just think it would be a no-brainer to dismantle an organization that serves no purpose. Even if they had caught a terrorist I'd suggest dismantling them, but in that case there would be two sides to the argument (one for TSA, one against TSA)

          As it stands, there seems to be only one side to this debate -- a long list of reasons why TSA should be eliminated. You'd think it would be easier to get rid of a completely useless organization (rather the one that is simply less useful than the associated exp

        • by Firethorn (177587) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @10:09PM (#42492099) Homepage Journal

          If they stopped a bomb/terrorist attack every day, I might be willing to put up with the erosion. As the actual rate is, at this point, somewhere below a thousandth of that, we could suffer a 9/11 attack something like once every 3 years and STILL be better off without the TSA.

          Some practical changes like the reinforced doors make sense. Combined with the attitude changes of the passangers and that threat has already been pretty well remediated.

          Making us take off our shoes and go though the x-ray scanners as opposed to a simple metal detector is overkill.

          The TSA is practicing risk avoidance, not risk management. The military learned that lesson over 30 years ago. It simply costs too much to avoid ALL risk; you end up not being able to do anything. Thus, you manage the risk - don't take stupid chances, but don't fret over extremely unlikely events, out of proportion of the damage it could cause. The underwear and shoe bombs were too small to have any realistic chances of taking the plane down. Ergo, they could have done as much or more damage in the waiting line at the TSA. More, if they turned it into a proper suicide vest with fragmentation additives. Or at a mall or some such.

          Risk management is simple in theory. You look at the risk - the chance that it will happen as a percentage, and the average damage it would cost. If mitigating the risk would cost more than the damage multiplied by the chance it'll happen, then you don't perform that mitigation.

          That's the simple type, of course. Some mitigations fix multiple risks, for example. Armored windows that will stop a gunshot also tend to be rather overkill for hurricane/tornado, after all. Vehicle barriers not only stop vehicle bombs, they stop drunk drivers. Etc...

      • by poity (465672)

        I don't think the TSA is used to catch terrorists (doesn't the FBI do that anyway?) as much as it is used to displace potential acts of terrorism to lower profile targets/less critical infrastructure, in order to mitigate 1. public hysteria and 2. economic fallout. The latter probably being the more important consideration. A terrorist could bomb an office building or super market right now and still kill a lot of people, but the economic impact wouldn't be as great as that experienced by the airline indust

        • by memnock (466995)

          You make an interesting point with "... less critical infrastructure ...". I'm not saying you're wrong, but by applying what you're saying, the TSA (thus the Feds?) considers a sports arena a critical infrastructure? Sounds like the perfect way for the security theater apparatus to claim just about anything critical infrastructure in order to apply their mission creep and extend their tentacles into everything else around.

          Geez, when is the security bullshit gonna stop piling up?

        • by dbIII (701233) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @09:24PM (#42491817)
          US Intelligence is in such chaos now that it was possible for the FBI to remove the head of the CIA on "moral" grounds and thus assert their dominance. In such a mess a parasite such as the TSA cannot be controlled and will grow whatever way it likes.
      • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @10:14PM (#42492127)

        I have a large rock in my backyard. it keeps tigers away.

        and its about as effective as the TSA is in their 'goals'. but my rock is a lot cheaper.

    • Re:TSA at Every Home (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Samantha Wright (1324923) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:23PM (#42490563) Homepage Journal

      Oh, you're going to the movie theatre? Didn't you say you were a student? How is a student able to afford gasoline and movie tickets?

      (I have actually been asked by a TSA agent how I was able to afford airline tickets.)

      • by newcastlejon (1483695) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:37PM (#42490645)

        (I have actually been asked by a TSA agent how I was able to afford airline tickets.)

        What was your answer? Did it include the words "none", "damn", "business", "yours"?

        • by 0111 1110 (518466) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:45PM (#42490695)

          To which the TSA brute would reply, "Do you want to fly today?"

        • Re:TSA at Every Home (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Samantha Wright (1324923) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:52PM (#42490739) Homepage Journal
          ...actually, being a Canadian, I started giving my life story until she told me to shut up. I think the only thing people can really do to defend themselves against the TSA is to waste the agency's time.
          • by paiute (550198) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @07:25PM (#42490939)

            ...actually, being a Canadian, I started giving my life story until she told me to shut up.

            Something along the lines of this:

            "I don’t reckon them times will ever come again. There never was a more bullier old ram than what he was. Grandfather fetched him from Illinois–got him of a man by the name of Yates–Bill Yates–maybe you might have heard of him; his father was a deacon–Baptist–and he was a rustler, too; a man had to get up ruther early to get the start of old Thankful Yates; it was him that put the Greens up to jining teams with my grandfather when he moved west. Seth Green was prob’ly the pick of the flock; he married a Wilkerson–Sarah Wilkerson–good cretur, she was–one of the likeliest heifers that was ever raised in old Stoddard, everybody said that knowed her. She could heft a bar’l of flour as easy as I can flirt a flapjack. And spin? Don’t mention it! Independent? Humph! When Sile Hawkins come a browsing around her, she let him know that for all his tin he couldn’t trot in harness alongside of her. You see, Sile Hawkins was–no, it warn’t Sile Hawkins, after all–it was a galoot by the name of Filkins–I disremember his first name; but he was a stump–come into pra’r meeting drunk, one night, hooraying for Nixon, becuz he thought it was a primary; and old deacon Ferguson up and scooted him through the window and he lit on old Miss Jefferson’s head, poor old filly. She was a good soul–had a glass eye and used to lend it to old Miss Wagner, that hadn’t any, to receive company in; it warn’t big enough, and when Miss Wagner warn’t noticing, it would get twisted around in the socket, and look up, maybe, or out to one side, and every which way, while t’ other one was looking as straight ahead as a spy-glass. Grown people didn’t mind it, but it most always made the children cry, it was so sort of scary. She tried packing it in raw cotton, but it wouldn’t work, somehow–the cotton would get loose and stick out and look so kind of awful that the children couldn’t stand it no way. She was always dropping it out, and turning up her old dead-light on the company empty, and making them oncomfortable, becuz she never could tell when it hopped out, being blind on that side, you see. So...."

          • ...actually, being a Canadian, I started giving my life story until she told me to shut up. I think the only thing people can really do to defend themselves against the TSA is to waste the agency's time.

            How can you waste the time of an agency setup to waste time AND money?

  • by Frosty Piss (770223) * on Saturday January 05, 2013 @05:59PM (#42490361)

    Not far off.

  • by ericloewe (2129490) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:04PM (#42490405)

    It's time for the US to get rid of the TSA, which has caught no terrorists, foiled no plots, cost millions, irradiated thousands with backscatter x-ray scanners, has stolen quite a few personal items and is actively trying to expand its sphere of influence.

    Replace it with common sense and profile people. That's how airprort security works, not by wasting millions of dollars.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:11PM (#42490467)

      It was time to get rid of it when it was created. The first thing Obama should have done when sworn in was dismantle the Department of "Homeland Security" and fold everything back to how it was before the World Trade Center attacks. With the exceptions of Customs, let the airports handle their own security, and get rid of the "Constitution Free Zone."

      • by Mitreya (579078)

        The first thing Obama should have done when sworn in was dismantle the Department of "Homeland Security" and fold everything back to how it was before the World Trade Center attacks.

        That would have been the "advertised" Obama which only existed in voter's imagination.

        Instead of the "platform" on which politicians run, they should sign a contract listing their promised policy. Violating any of the major promises should make them subject to impeachment (I hear the line of presidential succession is very long). Otherwise, Obama was under no obligation to follow up on any of his promises. And even if Republicans put forward a serious candidate, he'd still have 4 years before losing office

    • by Spad (470073) <{ku.oc.daps} {ta} {todhsals}> on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:16PM (#42490491) Homepage

      Good luck finding a politician willing to commit career suicide by dissolving the TSA.

      Even in the extremely unlikely event that it's seen as a popular move with the electorate as a whole, do you really think all the campaign contributors with financial interests in the TSA supply chain would let them get re-elected?

    • Freedom is inherently risky. My fellow Americans need to realize that. To be absolutely safe necessitates living in an absolutely oppressed society.

      What do you want, freedom or oppression?

      The way it looks now, too many Americans are leaning towards oppression, because being free is just too scary.

      • see: pussification of america.

        carlin (was it carlin? I think so) was right. we are pussies, by and large. soccer moms (oh, puke!) care more about perceived safety than the real things that we were founded on.

        they can't see past the end of their snowflake's report card.

        that's the core of the problem, in a nutshell. mommies and daddies who don't see the big picture and only see their own little lives.

    • by jcr (53032)

      cost millions,

      Billions, actually.

      -jcr

      • To be fair, some of that would've been used for real security, but they've certainly outright wasted millions...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Well they can't get rid of it now, can they? There would be a deluge of people who were undereducated, disgruntled and unemployed. Furthermore, these people are conditioned to see terrorism opportunities everywhere, they have insider knowledge of airport security, and they would have a motive to 'prove' that firing them had worsened security.

      "Going TSA" will be the new "going postal".

    • by Mitreya (579078)

      It's time for the US to get rid of the TSA, which has caught no terrorists, foiled no plots, cost millions, irradiated thousands with backscatter x-ray scanners, has stolen quite a few personal items and is actively trying to expand its sphere of influence.

      But terrorism is proving to be such a convenient way to funnel money to friendly contractors... Who'd want to give that up?

      I just learned that NJ had instituted a $5 (per day!) car-rental charge under the "domestic terrorism" category. I am sure other states will soon take notice -- I look forward to random tax-related charges on all of my bills... My lunch purchase may be at risk from terrorists otherwise.

  • by Rougement (975188) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:06PM (#42490421)
    You're looking for spending cuts to balance tax increases? I think I just found one!
    • by Nimey (114278)

      Bah. Republicans only want to cut spending on programs that help people who aren't stinking rich.

      Besides, I think almost everyone in Washington is terrified that if they dismantle this monster and any terrorist attack anywhere in the States succeeds, they'll be blamed. The whole situation is reminiscent of the FBI under Hoover, and I suspect the very best we can hope for is more oversight of TSA and Fatherland Security.

  • Hey TSA: Fuck off (Score:5, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:09PM (#42490451)

    You provide little actual security within your primary area of focus. Confinscating water bottles, nail clippers, groping little boys and girls, strip-searching people and putting unsolicited fingers on and in their privates, and using technology that your own people are now developing cancer from being near. You talk about terrorist threats, but how many terrorists have gotten away with irradiating our citizens? How many terrorists have stolen millions in camcorders, cell phones, and other electronics? How many terrorists have smuggled drugs onto commercial airlines? And the real kicker: Compared to those numbers, how many TSA agents have been caught doing the same?

    You bring a level of institutional incompetence to the show that makes the current fiscal cliff negotiations look like someone forgetting to give the change back after buying a candy bar... you're overpriced, underwhelming, and frankly... the "cure" you provide is worse than the disease. And the only reason the TSA hasn't been drop-kicked out the door is because the media keeps people in perpetual ignorance of just how incompetent you guys truly are.

    So when you come into my town and say "this will be the norm", I can't help but wonder how long until nobody flies, goes to public events, or even leaves their fucking house-- not because of terrorists, but because of the inconvenience of having to deal with your bullshit. Your organization is incompetent and useless. Go away.

    • by dgatwood (11270) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:48PM (#42490721) Journal

      You provide little actual security within your primary area of focus. Confiscating water bottles...

      That's pretty much it right there. The NFL probably saw what a great job they did at preventing outside beverages inside airport security, and how much better the overpriced food vendors inside security are doing as a result, and they're probably hoping that the TSA can repeat that success at their establishment.

    • I can't help but wonder how long until nobody flies, goes to public events, or even leaves their fucking house.

      Way to go. Stay home! Shut up! Do not attract attention! When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.

    • Confiscating water bottles,

      The Constitution of the United States of America, guarantees your Right to Bear Arms, not to Bear Water.

      But an organization such as the TSA would have been as welcome as a loud fart in church during the silent prayer to the Founder Fathers.

  • Catch 22 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MichaelSmith (789609) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:09PM (#42490453) Homepage Journal

    Loyalty oaths should be required throughout the day. You should have to sign one to go to the shops or eat at a restaurant.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Loyalty oaths should be required...

      I work for a California public college.

      I had to sign that I would be willing to take a loyalty oath as condition of employment (didn't have to actually take an oath, though).

      This shit has been around (at least) since the last time right-wing crazies shit all over our civil liberties-- the "red scare."

      Each time the right manages to get a bit more of this shit entrenched. Maybe this time will be the one or maybe 3 more of these right-wing police state takeovers, but eventually we will not be able to come bac

      • My cousin refused a job offer at a CA college because of the loyalty oath thing.
      • by swillden (191260)

        I work for a California public college.

        I had to sign that I would be willing to take a loyalty oath as condition of employment (didn't have to actually take an oath, though).

        This shit has been around (at least) since the last time right-wing crazies shit all over our civil liberties-- the "red scare."

        Each time the right manages to get a bit more of this shit entrenched. Maybe this time will be the one or maybe 3 more of these right-wing police state takeovers

        Yeah, those California universities are bastions of right-wing radicalism.

      • I had to sign that I would be willing to take a loyalty oath as condition of employment (didn't have to actually take an oath, though).

        Loyalty to what? (Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious).

        If it is to the USA.... what about professors from other countries? Aren't they the kind of lecturers who are in demand - but they couldn't logically swear loyalty to a country they aren't a citizen of?

    • by Maow (620678)

      Loyalty oaths should be required throughout the day. You should have to sign one to go to the shops or eat at a restaurant.

      Best to start that kind of thing in school. Oh, wait:

      "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

      ...

      the fact that the people who are most likely to recite the Pledge every day, small children in schools

      Gotta wonder if it's time to bring back the good ol' fashioned method:

      Swearing of the Pledge is accompanied by a salute. An early version of the salute, adopted in 1892, was kno

  • Just what the US citizenry needs -- a Red White and Blue equivalent of the good ol' Nazi Brown Shirts.
    I'm feeling safer already.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU

  • I thought the security craze in all its blazing public visibility was limited to the UK and a few other European countries ( especially the Netherlands ). The Control State, AAMOF, looks more and more like a "soft" version of a police state. See the Nanny State in GB and NL. But upon reading this, I begin to think that the USA, too, will succomb to this ligth-chocolate-brown dictatorial regime.
    • by tehcyder (746570)
      There is no connection between what rightwingers call the Nanny State and an actual police state (left or right wing).

      A so-called Nanny State merely protects the most vulnerable from harm, e.g. by providing unemployment benefits, medical care and education by the state. This results in a reduction in freedom only to the extent that rightwingers believe all taxation is theft.

  • http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/officials-fear-terrorists-body-bombs-us-bound-planes/story?id=16245827#.UOiuQHduKSo [go.com]

    just wait for a full body cavity searchs be for flying now this can be be bound that. But a bomb / dugs up someones butt can happen.

  • by 101percent (589072) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @06:57PM (#42490765)
    To be governed is to be watched over, inspected, spied on, directed, legislated at, regulated, docketed, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, assessed, weighed, censored, ordered about, by men who have neither the right, nor the knowledge, nor the virtue. ... To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under the pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, trained, ransomed, exploited, monopolized, extorted, squeezed, mystified, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, despised, harassed, tracked, abused, clubbed, disarmed, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and, to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, outraged, dishonoured. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality. - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
  • by bdwoolman (561635) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @07:06PM (#42490823) Homepage

    The question is obvious. During a routine search at a sports event one of the TSA agents finds cannabis on your person? Of course at an airport they would contact law enforcement (happens all the time). Would they turn you over to the local authorities, who would give you back your legal weed. Or would you be turned over to the FBI?

    Hyperbole aside, an expansion of the activities of this unpopular and relatively incompetent agency is unsettling to say the least. Most Americans would like them to disappear,. Not multiply. Feh!

  • by 0111 1110 (518466) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @07:27PM (#42490945)

    We will work to continue this battle, God permitting, until victory or until we meet God. I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in -- and the West in general -- into an unbearable hell and a choking life.

    Osama Bin Laden. 2002.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/01/31/gen.binladen.interview/index.html [cnn.com]

  • VIPR (Score:5, Informative)

    by phantomfive (622387) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @07:28PM (#42490949) Journal

    an unfortunate acronym for Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response team

    It's not an 'unfortunate acronym,' they chose it exactly BECAUSE it spells VIPR. Someone in the system likes that name.

  • What I find most interesting about all of this is even soon after 9/11 airline security was never soo bad I stopped flying.

    It happened many years later seemingly in step with Jherkove group backscatter manovourings under cover of underwear bomber the chapter of egregous nonsense of groping and irradiation started.

    It sort of reminds me of locutus/piccard taking datas arm and saying "sleep data" who had been working dilligently to find a command to stop the borg.

    I think one of few such command that stands any

  • by clonehappy (655530) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @08:39PM (#42491469)
    Is what I've been being told for years now. When I point out that it's been the plan ALL ALONG to expand them out into a Stasi-style force on the highways, in the subways, at the shopping malls, at sporting events, I was branded a tinfoil-hat nutter.

    Now what, bootlickers?
    • by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Saturday January 05, 2013 @11:12PM (#42492435)
      Had people simply refused to fly as long as the TSA continued to exist, the expansion would have ended. People kept flying, even when they could have taken a train or bus, and so the TSA never felt the heat, and eventually grew larger. People will not boycott sports events either, nor will they refuse to drive when the TSA starts creating highway checkpoints, nor will they refuse to go to malls when the checkpoints come there.

      Boil the frog slowly is how the major parties operate; the major parties consist of politicians either too corrupt to stop or too inept to even realize what they are doing.
      • by Saxerman (253676) *

        My wife and I did take the train for our holiday travel rather than flying, explicitly because I hate being manhandled like a criminal. Total transit time, one way, would have been about 4 hours by air or about 13 hours if we drove straight there. By train, one way, transit time was 28 hours. Certainly, the train was a lot less cramped than either a car or plane, plus we have outlets and no restrictions on using our electronic toys, and a dining, cafe, and observation car. (Kudos to the team who played

Real Users hate Real Programmers.

Working...