poncho
Well-Known Member
And isn't it odd that the very person who claims to be so offended by these "naked pictures" would put a link to them on the board?
What I said was . . . (basically) I find it offensive to be undressed by full body scanners that failed to do what they were advertized to do.
Namely, finding hidden bomb parts and what not.
Full-body scanners failed to find the firecracker in Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab’s panties, so what does the brilliant federal government do? They use tax money stolen from you to order 150 more at $170k a piece.
Who benefits? The security-industrial complex founded by the Bush regime. It has nothing to do with your safety.
http://disinter.wordpress.com/2010/...prevent-crotch-bomber-so-tsa-orders-150-more/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/23/full-body-scanner-fails-t_n_433286.html
http://askville.amazon.com/full-bod...onstration/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=65534639
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/24/body_scanner_fail/
I never claimed to be offended by naked pictures.
False advertizing? Now that really really really offends me!
Now, don't you feel all safe and secure knowing the stupid things don't even work as advertized or is that propagandized?
Last edited by a moderator: