How? As I just said, if these searches are 'against human rights' then they must be against all humans rights, they can't be ok for Arabs and not ok for everybody else.

This isn't even touching on the issue of whether racial profiling itself is ok by the way, that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Why would anyone bother to shoo their way to a plane anyway?  A dozen fully armed people could probably do more damage as is, then trying to attempt another 9/11 style attack.

That's why the most recent terrorist information has been about gathering people in groups of 6 and arming them to just gun people down until taken down by police.

I dont care about the being touched thing whatever, they do it at clubs and concerts all the time. Anyone who's been to a rock show has been frisked, its standard procedure.

The issue is with the fact that the TSA has to randomly select people, to make it look like everything's fair, when everyone is damn well aware that pretty much ALL of the plane bombings/hijackings have been coming from the middle east. You know who the target of your searches is, stop inconveniencing everyone else.

If you had a serial killer on the loose that fit the description of blonde hair, blue eyes, I doubt you'd do much searching in the afro-american communities.

Call a spade a spade and search suspects, not just "randomly". Racial profiling in this instance is the correct course of action.

Not really. The ultimate question is "Why isn't this happening?" There are a lot of other situations that make you ask the same. Some make me simply question the competence of our enemy while others make me questions their number. This is one to question their number.

Do you agree with the new TSA security measures. As you may know,if you don't go through the new full body scan machines,you have to be subjective to a pat-down,no matter who you are. So is this really being invasive? Are they just doing this to be extra safe. I personally don't see what the big deal is. Just go through the scan machine and be on your way. As long as I'm safe,I don't care. I think all of this is being way overblown in the media. This is just the world we live in,you want to travel bye plane,then expect these security measures. You can always travel by some other form of transportation. I don't travel that often,but I do every once in awhile,so this is no big deal to me. So how are the security measures in other countries? Should they just get rid of the TSA all together? So,what do you guys think?

#1 i saw an article rently that said frequent use of the machin might induce cancer (so people traveling a lot)

I'm guessing by frequent they want you to think over lifetime but what they really mean is in a row.

Just like drinking 100 sodas can kill you*!

*And we mean 100 sodas in a day, not spread out over 3 months.

Also, there's a big word you might not have picked up on-- might.

I can point to any cock and bull study and say something might happen.  I have no idea what story you're talking about (links to sources always help!) but those are the things that immediately jump out at me.  Remember, news writers will do whatever they can to get you to read/watch their story.

actually I did but I can see how my sentence wasn't clear. It was for business men or people comuting a lot. So if you take say your weekly doze of scan it's bad for you.

(I forgot which tech these scaners use, but most medical scaners use rays that are bad for your body... though once every 6 months is no problem.)

Well if it's a question of numbers then I would imagine it would take a lot less people and less resources to hijack a plane than an airport.

And the ultimate answer to why they don't invade an airport-- because it would be ultimately stupid and not really work.  At best they would annoy the nation by grounding all air traffic.