Well, boomboomdog, why not a little intelligence and common sense? Profiling works. On top of that, we have Do Not Board lists that don't get used nearly enough, intelligence reports that don't get passed along soon enough and a variety of other red flags that happen all the way through the chain that could be tagged. Instead of spending all that money to violate civilians in yet another demeaning manner, why not use our brains to put together an information system that tracks details of a flight from the purchase of the ticket all the way up to walking through the gate onto the plane? But sure, let's take the easy way out and go for the anal cavity search instead.
As far as your statement that the TSA never stated that this system was designed to "catch" terrorists, they aren't making a strong claim that it was designed to "deter" terrorists either. Or haven't you been listening to the passengers interviewed in the news talk about how much "safer" they feel? They're all operating under the misconception of what the TSA is actually doing for what we are being asked to give up.

The truth is the TSA cannot protect any of us. Janet is nothing more than a snake oil salesman selling us a bill of goods. American's want to feel a measure of safety when they are miles over the ground after 9/11, and to buy that feeling they are willing to sell their own freedom and the freedom of their fellow Americans in order to have it.

But once you are on board that plane, the TSA can do nothing to help any of us. The TSA is on the ground going through the motions, putting on a farce of a show as they slow down the throughput at airports. If you really believe that a determined terrorist cannot get on a plane to do damage, you are sadly mistaken. Where there is a will, there is a way. No metal detector, no back scatter scanner, no modified pat down on earth is going to detect and prevent him or her from getting on board. The most any of us can hope for us that if we are ever in that situation that we have the courage to collectively confront and disarm that threat before it can fully manifest.

Janet has lied to us by putting on this crock of a show while buying our freedom out from under us. How much more are you willing to give up of other people's rights and freedom just so you can "feel" safe?

So clever, aren't you ByteRider? Are you still going to feel clever if you manage to get illusory control back in November? Do you know what will happen next? The problem behind Obama and the Democrats will simply find a new way to get at you. It isn't just going to roll over and play dead just because you went and cast a vote in a ballot box. Your adversary is far more resilient and dedicated to a cause than you could ever hope to be.

Go ahead and blame homosexuals for your social ills. All you are truly doing is adding fuel to an already large fire. Maybe this country will even get to the point where people act like those skinheads. Or worse, maybe we'll end up doing what the Nazi's did to their minorities. All we'll be doing is sowing the seeds to our own destruction then.

The thing is, for all your clever remarks, you just don't get it. You don't see the real problem, and thus you'll never see the right solution. You'll just keep repeating the same mistakes as your forefathers and live to experience the same regrets that they did.

So have a great day! :)

PS. Heterosexuals spread more disease with unprotected sex than homosexuals could ever hope to accomplish if such were their ambition.

If you choose to marry religion and politics, mscoffy, that is up to you. But claiming that moral values is what separates the left from the right is not only ridiculous it also belies your hidden need to be dis-identified from any group relating to homosexuality. I'm sorry to break the news to you, but homosexuals can be conservatives too. They can be fiscally conservative and even socially conservative. If the one thing that makes them different than you is that they see things different regarding homosexuality than you do, well, that still doesn't make them any less republican/right-wing/conservative.

Furthermore, unless you have some sort of meter that determines who around you is without a doubt homosexual, let's not rely on your scientifically unsound method of determining what % of the tea party movement is gay or not. I would much rather depend on Miss Chleo than someone on this forum for determining that. Considering she's a fraud, that's saying something.

Here's your scripture:
A lion has come out of his lair; a destroyer of nations has set out. He has left his place to lay waste your land. Your towns will lie in ruins without inhabitant. So put on sackcloth, lament and wail, for the fierce anger of the LORD has not turned away from us "In that day," declares the LORD, "the king and the officials will lose heart, the priests will be horrified, and the prophets will be appalled."

Then I said, "Ah, Sovereign LORD, how completely you have deceived this people and Jerusalem by saying, 'You will have peace,' when the sword is at our throats."

Here's a thought for you:
Consider the condition of your economy, your government. The fact that a tyrant has a boot over the throats of your businesses and your government and is grabbing power faster than the whole of you can scoop it up and put it back into the hole-ridden bucket you call "We the People."

Maybe you should spend more time focusing on what's important and less on picking on people smaller than you. Because now you get to play with a Destroyer of Nations and the whole bunch of you are specks before him. And I'm not talking about Obama, he's just another one of the many instruments being used to stick it to you. You may get some things back in order come November, but you'll never be able to stop what's oppressing your land and your people until you get your heart's right first.

Frankly, my bets are on the Destroyer of Nations than on that actually happening. I have no faith in any of you. :)

Not all homosexuals are liberals.

What explanation do you have for your fellow gay conservatives/gay tea partiers who you've basically turned your back on? If you won't shed a tear for your allies, don't expect them to shed a tear for you when the real problem shows up on your doorstep.

Are you telling me that the concept of self-referential statements is lost on you? God wasn't telling Moses his name, God was telling Moses there is no name that gives meaning to God; God gives meaning to God. Also, please keep your fingers out of my mouth and stop telling me what you think I am saying. If you want to know, ask.

I am not afraid or intimidated by your ridiculous assertions. Accusing me of blasphemy when I have done no such thing is on you, not me. I was merely illustrating the ridiculousness of using self-reference in a discussion. It's one thing for God to go around telling others who ask him his name, "I am that I am." After all, one would expect God to know who is. It is quite another for you to tell me God is who he is, because that infers that you actually know who he is and understand how he works, which you do not. You may understand a little of God, but not enough to use his own self-reference as any form of explanation. It's just ridiculous.

Go ahead and pray for me all you wish. I'm sure you'll pray for me just as hard as everyone else always has--that is as soon as enough time has passed I'll be dust blown from your mind and forgotten, which is to say, the only reason you're telling me that you're going to pray for me is to express to the greater public your righteous superiority to me( the outcast heathen in need of prayer). But the truth of the matter is quite a bit uglier, I'm afraid.

I am who I am too. Mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery. And I can no longer take you seriously. A man who has to send you on a treasure hunt to find out what he's communicating is making you do all the work. His non-verbal communication is saying two things: 1) he doesn't believe you are worth the time to say it himself and 2) he doesn't believe that what he wants to say is worth the trouble of saying it himself.

What will be your explanation if you are ever called to account?

If,as you suggest, he hardens people's hearts to display his power over us, then it must be asked, since God is sovereign, who the hell is God to interfere with what God has set in motion?

You want to play logical games with words and put God on both sides of the table, that's fine. But when your God is on both sides of the table, you've just put God up against himself. You can play clever tricks with the idea that God in all his power is ultimately responsible for even the hardened waywardness of men, but once your God goes there, he has his own justice to deal with. Supposing we put your example in human terms, a mastermind orchestrates a bank robbery then turns the robbers in for the reward and gets away with it. How do you suppose God's justice would handle that?

Then God's justice suddenly turns a blind eye to God for doing the exact same thing? I don't have to question God, let God's justice and judgment question God, since according to you, he is so good at it.

You do realize you actually have to act like Christ to be persecuted for Christ. You did read the fine print, right? It doesn't count to be persecuted for acting like a jerk because people of all beliefs don't like jerks. Just because you cover it up with self-righteous, self-justifying lingo doesn't make it any less...jerky. Sorry for the overly technical verb-age, but it's important to be understood.