Alyssa Milano's breast milk

Author	Post
greg spader Member 720 Posts 2/13	Posted - Apr 11 2015 : 1:51PM http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/baby/breastfeeding/67698297/alyssa-milanos-breast-milk-confiscated I'd love to taste and drink it ;-) [Link]
Pieps Senior Member Honey, come quick, somebody on the internet is wrong! 9233 Posts 11/13	Posted - Apr 13 2015 : 4:18PM Okay, well, it's been unrefrigerated in the trash for a few days already. How long will it take you to get to Heathrow? [Link]
greg spader Member 720 Posts 2/13	Posted - Apr 18 2015 : 3:58PM ^ Ha, you know what I mean, my friend. Straight from the source.... ;-) [Link]
jillymayr Deactivated User 29 Posts 12/13	Posted - May 18 2015 : 11:55AM this thread reminds me of a chick on [mod edit: spam removed] who literally sucks breast milk out of her own tits Edited by - killbillvol69 on 5/18/2015 5:07:24 PM [Link]
cubesnake Senior Member 3858 Posts 10/02	Posted - Jan 24 2016 : 7:21PM "confiscating her pumped breast milk because it was deemed a security risk." that is so insanely out of this world ... i don´t know what to say. What´s next ? Woman with milk in their breasts have to be pumped empty before they can enter a fucking plane ? bladder scan ? hello, mcfly somebody home ?? common sense gone to hell Cube Edited by - cubesnake on 1/24/2016 7:26:02 PM [Link]

Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User 1102 Posts 2/15	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 1:57PM I am not sure this is as outrageous as people want to think. She didn't have her baby with her and it was in a container larger than the restricted sizes. Sure , they could have let her through, but there is always that fear that a bomber is using such scenarios as a cover, so they lean hard on the side of restraint. If some bomber ever gets through a screening when breaking a rule and someone let them through "out of common sense", the world would be screaming for the heads of anyone involved in the management of that airport. They got to do what they got to do. The hole or exception created so Person A is less inconvenienced , is a hole a bad person can exploit. This is the world we live in and we need to work with it. We all know the container sizes we have to use when going through screening as did Milano. All she had to do was follow the rules that have been in place for years. Breast milk is not a security risk and that is not why they did it. The risk is someone without a baby, claiming they are a parent, with a container of fluild larger than the specific sizes. Someone, somewhere, could exploit that so they have to keep it tight. She can also take her larger container through empty, and pump it after she is done security (which she ended up doing anyways). There are ways to work with these tough restrictions instead of pulling out the outrage every time the rule gets enforced and it becomes inconvenient. Those of us who travel have learned to adapt and work within the security protocols and get on with it. Air travel will always be subject to very restrictive security protocols, many of which are inconvenient. while almost all of us are innocent and deserve common sense, there is that one in a million traveller that could be a threat. They have to govern the security according to the risk of that one in a million person. The rules are not there to inconvenience the 99.9% of travelers that are regular people. They are there so the .01% of extremists can not get through to an airplane with something to blow it up. Any exception made means it is now a hole that can be exploited. They also have to project the image they are very tight with their security so extremist don't bother to try. We have to live with it! It isn't a big deal. Edited by - Canadian_Cindy on 1/27/2016 2:11:29 PM [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 2:15PM Canadian_Cindy wrote: There are ways to work with these tough restrictions instead of pulling out the outrage every time the rule gets enforced and it becomes inconvenient. Those of us who travel have learned to adapt and work within the security protocols and get on with it. Click to expand I'm sure a great many people will learn to casually acquiesce to the state's ever more repressive measures, as long as it's for our own good of course. [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 2:33PM Canadian_Cindy wrote: If some bomber ever gets through a screening when breaking a rule and someone let them through "out of common sense", the world would be screaming for the heads of anyone involved in the management of that airport. They got to do what they got to do. The hole or exception created so Person A is less inconvenienced , is a hole a bad person can exploit. This is the world we live in and we need to work with it. Click to expand And as the state closes down on us evermore, always for our own good, people will shrug and say "This is the world we live in and we need to work with it." [Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User 1102 Posts 2/15	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 3:34PM misspornUSA wrote: Canadian_Cindy wrote: If some bomber ever gets through a screening when breaking a rule and someone let them through "out of common sense", the world would be screaming for the heads of anyone involved in the management of that airport. They got to do what they got to do. The hole or exception created so Person A is less inconvenienced , is a hole a bad person can exploit. This is the world we live in and we need to work with it. Click to expand And as the state closes down on us evermore, always for our own good, people will shrug and say "This is the world we live in and we need to work with it." Click to expand Security at air travel should not be compared to freedoms and liberties in every day life. I can't believe you are drawing the two together. Flying by air is not a right nor is it democratic. They tell you exactly what you can bring or not bring, it is no secret. They enact what often seem nonsensical policies so that one in a million does not sneak through.... Having to be inconvenienced at an airport such as take your shoes off , or take a pat down, or have a container of fluid refused entry has nothing to do with civil liberties in society at large. Oh this is horrible, its only a jar of face cream why wont they let it through! Where is the common sense!!!!! well, because if they do let it through some one somewhere, is going to try to exploit that. Again, this is air travel..... it is not a human right to be allowed to get on a plane without any searches or restrictions. [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 4:58PM ^Perhaps Heathrow has its own private security (I've never asked them), but in the United States the TSA is part of Homeland Security and is therefore an arm of the state. This is very different than, say, a corporate building having its own security procedures that are enforced by a private security firm. We should recognize that crucial distinction and respond accordingly. [Link]
Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04	Posted - Jan 27 2016 : 7:30PM The whole TSA crap is security theatre anyways. But the ban on liquids (which has no scientific grounds, ask any chemist) is great for the overpriced stores after security. Jacco [Link]
cubesnake Senior Member 3858 Posts 10/02	Posted - Jan 28 2016 : 12:38PM Canadian_Cindy wrote: ... Click to expand thanks for this good explanation. I´m aware that the world becomes more and more a shitty place to live in but I DO think it´s wrong to "fuck" all 99,9 % in order to keep 0,1 % away. That´s why I will never sat any foot into an Airplane again ... and that´s since fucking 2001 I even fear of loosing my job some day according to "the rules" they will pull over our heads claiming it´s for own good. As long as people "swallow" this pill every time it´s being given ... nothing will change. Politicians and other bad people are the ones who are the bad people not the general crowd. I know i´m talking against the wall most of the times but i´m glad i don´t have to live forever in this "nice" world Cube Edited by - cubesnake on 1/28/2016 12:51:16 PM [Link]
Heohel Member 6 Posts 1/16	Posted - Jan 28 2016 : 12:53PM I'd love :D [Tube Site Spam removed] Edited by - flash on 2/7/2016 11:24:55 AM [Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User 1102 Posts 2/15	Posted - Jan 28 2016 : 8:30PM cubesnake wrote: I DO think it´s wrong to "fuck" all 99,9 % in order to keep 0,1 % away. Edited by - cubesnake on 1/28/2016 12:51:16 PM Click to expand I understand this sentiment. But you know , if one guy gets through with something in his underwear or a lady puts toxic chemicals in a container and claims it is milk even though there is no baby with her, or someone carries on a butcher knife, then everyone will yell about how security was lax. There are people in this world who's sole thought is how can they destroy an airplane. If they see any exception made by any airport, they will devise a plan to exploit it. There is a reason there have not been more airplane bombings in the last 10 years..... because security has been so incredibly tight. If security was relaxed and everything got passed through we would have had a lot more planes come down. And really, let's take a step back. Are you really being "Fucked over" if you have to wait 30 minutes in a security line, or someone decides to pat you down, or you can't bring your large water bottle through the checkpoint? The reward for all of this horrible inconvenience is you get on the plane knowing it isn't going to be in danger because security made a bunch of exceptions out of convenience. Air travelers are one of the most self entitled and un-appreciative bunch you will ever see. Quite amazing how angry people get over a safety check, a maintenance delay, a weather delay, etc. As for Milano... hey it sucks, sure...... but her body will continue to produce milk so one container does not cause any destruction, and she knew the container size restrictions for airports (as everyone does); and knows full well that if you do not have a baby with you, you can not take a large sized milk container with you. Framing it as "they called my breast milk a security risk" is nonsense. Nobody did that. THey have a rule for containers that we all know about ,and if they start to make exceptions it will get exploited, and that is why they stopped her. The contents of the container were not the issue. Get over it I say. Edited by - Canadian_Cindy on 1/28/2016 8:36:57 PM [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 28 2016 : 11:01PM Canadian_Cindy wrote: There is a reason there have not been more airplane bombings in the last 10 years..... because security has been so incredibly tight. If security was relaxed and everything got passed through we would have had a lot more planes come down. Click to expand Really? How many terrorists has the TSA caught? How many acts of terrorism have they prevented? Here's another view to consider: As Bruce Schneier, a security technologist, explained to Vanity Fair, “The only useful airport security measures since 9/11 were locking and reinforcing the cockpit doors, so terrorists can’t break in, positive baggage matching and teaching the passengers to fight back. The rest is security theater.” Click to expand [Link]

Pieps Senior Member Honey, come quick, somebody on the internet is wrong! 9233 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 28 2016 : 11:22PM June 2015, TSA agents FAILED 95% of the time when undercover teams ran tests. ...airport screeners failed to detect explosives and weapons in nearly every test that an undercover team conducted at dozens of airports. According to a report based on an internal investigation, "red teams" with the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General were able to get banned items through the screening process in 67 out of 70 tests it conducted across the nation. Click to expand They intercepted your toenail clippers and shampoo, though. November 2015, Surprise: TSA Hasn't Improved Since Failing 95 Percent of Security Tests. Roth said during testimony in front of the House Oversight Committee Tuesday. "We ran multiple tests at eight different airports of different sizes, including large category X airports across the country, and tested airports using private screeners as part of the Screening Partnership Program. The results were consistent across every airport. Our testing was designed to test checkpoint operations in real world conditions. It was not designed to test specific, discrete segments of checkpoint operations, but rather the system as a whole. The failures included failures in the technology, failures in TSA procedures, and human error. We found layers of security simply missing. It would be misleading to minimize the rigor of our testing, or to imply that our testing was not an accurate reflection of the effectiveness of the totality of aviation security." Click to expand Edited by - Pieps on 1/28/2016 11:22:48 PM [Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User 1102 Posts 2/15	Posted - Jan 29 2016 : 9:26AM misspornUSA wrote: Canadian_Cindy wrote: There is a reason there have not been more airplane bombings in the last 10 years..... because security has been so incredibly tight. If security was relaxed and everything got passed through we would have had a lot more planes come down. Click to expand Really? How many terrorists has the TSA caught? How many acts of terrorism have they prevented? Here's another view to consider: As Bruce Schneier, a security technologist, explained to Vanity Fair, “The only useful airport security measures since 9/11 were locking and reinforcing the cockpit doors, so terrorists can’t break in, positive baggage matching and teaching the passengers to fight back. The rest is security theater.” Click to expand Click to expand matter of opinion.... That "security theatre" sends a reminder for potential terrorists to not bother trying getting a weapon or bomb through in their clothing or bag. They don't find bombs and weapons because people don't do it; as they know they are most certain to be caught. The very fact people are not trying to take bombs on planes tells me this theatre as you call it, is working. My point still stands.... being inconvenienced at an airport is not something worthy of such anger and frustration. Edited by - Canadian_Cindy on 1/29/2016 9:29:35 AM [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 29 2016 : 11:00AM ^What I quoted is the informed conclusion of an independent expert. Who are the independent experts who agree that the TSA security measures work? [Link]
misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13	Posted - Jan 29 2016 : 11:02AM Canadian_Cindy wrote: My point still stands.... being inconvenienced at an airport is not something worthy of such anger and frustration. Click to expand As I already argued, we are talking about more here than merely "being inconvenienced at an airport." [Link]
Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04	Posted - Jan 29 2016 : 1:05PM No, the security theatre is not for the terrorists, it's for Joe Public, so he thinks the government does something and for the government cronies who make a fortune selling crappy scanners and such. Jacco [Link]