I thought your O.P. was tongue in cheek but it appears you actually are against this. So you don't have a problem with the govt. eavesdropping on your personal, private conversations, but you do have a problem with someone checking out your junk to make sure you don't have a bomb or weapon before boarding a plane?
That's exactly right. I have nothing to hide in my communications, so the government, if it's even interested enough, can listen in all it wants. However, the TSA doesn't need to be sticking their hands down my pants. Thing is, these new procedures were intitiated after the panty bomber incident. That guy was coming INTO the country, not standing in line to get out. So because of this, Americans have to be subjected to this crap, but future panty bombers still get to get on a plane outside the country
Somehow, I'm not seeing the big difference when it comes to security. In fact, IMHO the invasion of privacy is much greater with the former than the later.
Your opinion, of course
As for your question above, I'd also ask how many people on the ground are at risk from a jetliner being used as a missle? Obviously it's not just those on the plane that are at risk, so they don't get to unilaterally make a decision that could affect many more people on the ground.
Objections to this are no different than people that object to being seen naked during healthcare exams/procedures on religious grounds or due to modesty. Trust me, we've seen a million of them just like yours, albeit most about 50% bigger
and at this point we're so desensitized that the only reaction you're likely to get is a