|
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by slapphead_otool
(Post 8395069)
Hitler of course would have done it differently. He would have the bombers entire extended family hanging alive off meathooks at the airport. Families would then deter bombers…..
:ohmy: |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by iamthecreaturefromuranus
(Post 8394799)
No need to buy it all twice though. :)
|
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by Deancm
(Post 8394830)
Who knows for sure? I don't. Do you? There are people that do however...
I have to say though re. 9-11. The engineers who believe it couldn't have been caused by an aircraft collision and believed it was a controlled demolition DO have a very compelling case. Those opposed to the evidence of evolution would say that it's wrong to say that A evolved into Z unless you produce the "missing link". Then, when a fossil M is found, they say you can't infer anything unless you produce the "missing link" between A and M. Then they find fossil E... and the same argument is put forward ad infinitum. You can't argue a case with these people. |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by slapphead_otool
(Post 8395069)
You are hitting the nail on the head there mate.
All of our legislation, procedures, strategy and beliefs are built upon the assumption that the offender wants to escape unharmed. Suicide bombers don’t think like that. It’s a big problem. Israel has struggled with it for decades. If a suicide bomber cant reach the intended target, well anything or anyone else will do. Stopped at the border they will blow themselves up rather then risk being caught during a body search. They hope to kill a few Israeli soldiers in the process. Israel has tried may ways to counter this. They best so far have been the “Wall†– thus controlling access by suicide bombers to a limited number of bomb secure border crossings, and the practice of punishing the bombers family by destroying possessions like houses, loss of jobs, and access to work areas. I am not sure I like either of those options but they do work. Hitler of course would have done it differently. He would have the bombers entire extended family hanging alive off meathooks at the airport. Families would then deter bombers….. :ohmy: |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by Wol
(Post 8395092)
Those opposed to the evidence of evolution would say that it's wrong to say that A evolved into Z unless you produce the "missing link". Then, when a fossil M is found, they say you can't infer anything unless you produce the "missing link" between A and M. Then they find fossil E... and the same argument is put forward ad infinitum. You can't argue a case with these people.
I have to say though a building free falling in a vacuum is a bit different to a building collapsing that is not in a vacuum. The laws of physics don't lie. |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by Deancm
(Post 8395071)
Only one problem with that. You have to get married 4 times... As if once isn't bad enough! :eek:
You can have a "mut'ah" marriage, which allows a Muslim man to take up with a part-time wife for a short contract. At the end of the agreed period, the man no longer has any responsibility for the woman. Or a "Misyar" marriage, sometimes referred to as "traveler's marriage" where the husband does not live with the wife, and has no responsibility financially for her, and can divorce her at any time. I have considered both when working in Indonesia, but you have to be Muslim to have them recognized. So I just stuck with one night stands and telling them my name was Dean, a copper from Melbourne. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by slapphead_otool
(Post 8395107)
I have considered both when working in Indonesia, but you have to be Muslim to have them recognized. So I just stuck with one night stands and telling them my name was Dean, a copper from Melbourne. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
A Misyar marriage is the only format of marriage which I would believe could potentially work. Maybe they are on to something... |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by slapphead_otool
(Post 8395107)
NOOOOOOOO
You can have a "mut'ah" marriage, which allows a Muslim man to take up with a part-time wife for a short contract. At the end of the agreed period, the man no longer has any responsibility for the woman. Or a "Misyar" marriage, sometimes referred to as "traveler's marriage" where the husband does not live with the wife, and has no responsibility financially for her, and can divorce her at any time. I have considered both when working in Indonesia, but you have to be Muslim to have them recognized. So I just stuck with one night stands and telling them my name was Dean, a copper from Melbourne. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by DeadVim
(Post 8395143)
Or a Myers marriage where one person earns money and the other spends it in overpriced department stores.
And when you divorce her she hangs around with some guy called Ali Moni... |
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Or a Harvey Norman marriage, where you get several years of 'interest free', before being hit with a big bill at the end of the contract.
|
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by Hino
(Post 8395160)
Or a Harvey Norman marriage, where you get several years of 'interest free', before being hit with a big bill at the end of the contract.
|
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Originally Posted by slapphead_otool
(Post 8395230)
I had a Kmart special, cheap, didn’t work and fell apart within a year.
|
body scanners at airport
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/trav...-1225837224641
TWO Muslim women have become the first passengers to refuse to subject themselves to controversial "nude'' full body airport scans in Britain. The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth $670 each. One of the women refused to go through the full-body scanner at Manchester Airport on religious grounds, while her companion declined for "medical reasons''. The women were travelling together to Islamabad when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen after checking in. An estimated 15,000 people have already been through the scanners, with the pair the only ones reported to have refused. Both told airport staff they were not willing to be scanned. They were warned they would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if they refused. The scanners were introduced at Heathrow and Manchester airports on February 5. The X-ray machines allow security staff to see a "naked'' image of passengers to show up hidden weapons and explosives, but it has attracted criticism for also showing clear outlines of passengers' genitals. Manchester Airport confirmed the passengers had refused to be scanned but said it had received no complaint from the women. But civil liberties campaigners say the incident could form the basis of a legal test case to challenge the use of the devices. Alex Deane, director of Big Brother Watch, said the organisation would represent the women if they wished to challenge the decision in court. "People shouldn't have to sacrifice their health, their faith, their dignity, or their privacy in order to fly,'' he said. |
Re: body scanners at airport
24 hours late. See this thread: http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=657690
|
Re: refusing a bodyscan at the airport...
Merged :)
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:42 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.