The obligatory “TSA screeners grabbing passengers’ asses now” post

posted at 8:12 pm on November 11, 2010 by Allahpundit

People keep e-mailing or tweeting to ask why we haven’t written about this, but I don’t know what there is to say that isn’t completely obvious. (I know, I know: “That’s never stopped you before.”) No one wants their kid getting a genital patdown from a federal security guard, but then, no one wants their kid plunging 35,000 feet to the ground either after some jihadi degenerate cooks up a PETN bomb mid-air and sets it off. Remember Flight 253? Abdulmutallab had the bomb components sewn into his undies, which presents a challenge to finding the goods before the would-be bomber boards the plane. You can either run them through a full-body scanner, subject them to an “enhanced patdown,” a.k.a. crotch inspection, or … what? I’m open to alternatives, but you and I both know that for all the complaining going on right now, all it’ll take is one 757 exploding and suddenly airline passengers will have strange new respect for showing TSA screeners their junk.

Unions representing U.S. Airways pilots, American Airlines pilots, and some flight attendants are advising their members to skip the full-body scans, even if it means that their genitals are touched. Air travelers are speaking out online, with a woman saying in a YouTube video her breasts were “twisted,” and ExpressJet pilot Michael Roberts emerging as an instant hero after he rejected both the body scanning and “enhanced pat-downs” options and was unceremoniously ejected from the security line from Memphis International Airport…

TSA’s official blogger, who uses the apparent pseudonym Blogger Bob, went so far as to say this week that: “There is no fondling, squeezing, groping, or any sort of sexual assault taking place at airports. You have a professional workforce carrying out procedures they were trained to perform to keep aviation security safe.”…

TSA has “always done pat-downs,” but until recently they haven’t been so aggressive, says Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel at the ACLU in Washington, D.C. “The pat-downs never used to go up a woman’s skirt.”

“It’s become troubling,” Calabrese says. “You’ve got these controversial naked strip search machines that they’re rolling out at airports across America. And if you choose not to go through the naked strip search machine, you’re subject to this (level of intrusive physical contact). It seems punitive. It seems designed to drive you to the naked strip search machine.”

One passenger whose young son had his groin patted down with the back of a TSA screener’s hand told Reuters, “We spend my child’s whole life telling him that only mom, dad and a doctor can touch you in your private area, and now we have to add TSA agent and that’s just wrong. At some point the terrorists have won.” Fair enough, although of course the big “win” terrorists are looking for is plummeting fuselage, not awkward moments in line in front of the metal detector. Meanwhile, Scott Ott argues that the most effective countermeasures against terrorists are the passengers and crew onboard the planes, not TSA’s dopey security theater. There’s some truth in that — the heroes of Flight 93 saved the Capitol and it was passengers who subdued both Richard Reid and Abdulmutallab — but I don’t see how it advances the ball on the privacy/security conundrum. Metal detectors are a very slight invasion of privacy but surely we wouldn’t do away with them on the assumption that passengers will handle a terrorist with a gun once the plane’s in the air.

The best argument in all this, I think, is the boss emeritus’s point that the feds are trying to atone for inexcusable gaps at the macro level of security by tightening procedures at the micro level. That was another, even more important lesson of Flight 253: There were plenty of red flags about Abdulmutallab’s intentions before he got on the plane, and yet bureaucratic inefficiency among counterterror agencies prevented anyone from doing anything until it was too late. Do something about that and you can afford to worry less about crotch-patting at the terminal.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Personally, I think that the security junk is merely for show, it’s expensive, and it ought to be top of the list of budget cuts.

I’ve never seen such waste in my life as what passes for security.

AnninCA on November 12, 2010 at 8:07 AM

The US could never implement profiling because you can’t profile the profilers.

Think about it.

Solution: subcontract the entire nationwide TSA operation to Israel. :)

Shy Guy on November 12, 2010 at 8:08 AM

I was considering going back to PR with my kids for Christmas, but after this no way no how I will allow any stranger to mess up with their privates, nor mine.

No scanning machines; that only makes Obama’s minion richer.

Whoever becomes POTUS has to:

1-get rid of the stupid lightbulb ban;
2-return things AS THEY WERE at the airports, meaning my family can say goodbye to me at the gate. Get on board with Israeli airport check mode.

In the meantime we can drive for more than a day to see my bro, but hey…a message has to be sent to those bozo’s.

ProudPalinFan on November 12, 2010 at 8:16 AM

How long do you think it will be before TSA pictures start showing up on the World Wide web?..3..2..1..:)

Dire Straits on November 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

I haven’t checked but there are some claims that you can Google them (after TSA employees mock passengers for their “sizes” ykwim) they may “forget” to delete an image or two, and voilá! Your junk and/or your trunk are for all to see.

ProudPalinFan on November 12, 2010 at 8:21 AM

Shouldn’t we all be appalled by these machines… and the fact that government workers are the ones monitoring them? I get nervous flying myself but I am not walking through one of the cancer causing tunnels. The various studies done show two things…
1. These machines increase your risk of cancer
2. These machines do nothing to help stop the recent type of terrorist attempted attacks.
While I don’t care if the TSA agent sees me naked… I will be damned before my wife (or my children) is forced to either walk through one of these machines to be oggled…or she is forced to submit to one of these facist uber-patdowns.
We just won’t fly… problem solved. The airlines better get behind a boycott of these machines or they will lose ALOT of business.

therambler on November 12, 2010 at 8:28 AM

What’s the problem with profiling again? Until the terrorists start recruiting Norwegians and little Jewish grandmas, I say we profile the hell out of them. Of course, that’s ridiculous, right? In Bushville-Obamaland every citizen must be humiliated and degraded so that Islamo-fascist murdering scum aren’t singled out or made uncomfortable.

Extrafishy on November 12, 2010 at 8:35 AM

If she’s cute she can happily grab my ass!

Tim Burton on November 11, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Sorry Tim; only a beta male can pat you. Chicks get the boob squeeze treatment *sigh* /jk

ProudPalinFan on November 12, 2010 at 8:36 AM

All part of the continuing indoctrination of Big Brother Government to show everyone that it can do anything it wants to you.
Then when the the next higher-level invasion of your privacy everyone comes along will complain and say “It was a lot better when they only rubbed their hands on your privates”.

We are sheep.

albill on November 12, 2010 at 8:39 AM

As an airport operator I am confronted daily by the actions of the TSA, use of the new equipment to strippsearch you and the use of the enhanced patdown.

These measures are boltering the ego driven personality of TSA personnel whose mundane tasks need brief momemnts of excitement to want to remain on the job.

In reality, the TSA needs to convince those in the intell business that they can be trusted to keep secrects, regarding who they are really looking for. Currently they require the airport to match their employees againist watchlist and carriers to match pasengers againit these same roles. Therefore the airport and air carrier know who they are.

The ideal way to use this equipment is to stay with the current divestiture, and walk thru the Metal Detector, and when they beep to subject them to the Boddy scanner to confirm the existence of claimed protehitis and on you go. If you have no medical implants then put these person throurgh the full Montey while they run the name againist their “No Fly” and “Sellectee” lists to determine if they match and if they do the TSA can do what they want, while still moving passengers through the process in a timely manner.

They must stop treating everyone as the enemy until proven otherwise.

MSGTAS on November 12, 2010 at 8:47 AM

No one wants their kid getting a genital patdown from a federal security guard, but then, no one wants their kid plunging 35,000 feet to the ground either after some jihadi degenerate cooks up a PETN bomb mid-air and sets it off.

This quote is a really good example of…

Why this site has become so utterly worthless.

Sure, it’s still good for a laugh now and again – but sadly a mere shadow of it’s former self.

Does anyone really need some weird anonymous guy telling you that you should give up your freedom for some level of security on a conservative site? Jeez, I think Diane Sawyer already has that covered for me.

Thanks anyway.

Dorvillian on November 12, 2010 at 8:48 AM

So you think I’d be more or less likely to get the “special” treatment if I went to the airport wearing a Hijab?

Vera on November 12, 2010 at 8:50 AM

So you think I’d be more or less likely to get the “special” treatment if I went to the airport wearing a Hijab?

Vera on November 12, 2010 at 8:50 AM

How were the 9/11 terrorists dressed? Profiling should be used more aggressively. However, it can be circumvented. If I get on a plane with my kids I’d rather have everyone on the flight scanned and not rely on the TSA having real-time information, a sharp eye, the ability to spot fake drivers licenses, or tell if someone from the Southern hemisphere is Muslim, Hindi, or just dark skinned.

dedalus on November 12, 2010 at 8:56 AM

First, PETN has an odor sniffy dogs find it. Full body scan machines are simply in place to line the pockets of some political hack who’s invested in the company.

Second,

You have a professional workforce carrying out procedures they were trained to perform to keep aviation security safe

I’m not buying it, the Department of Homeboy Security is packed with affirmative action McDonald’s fryolator rejects.

Alden Pyle on November 12, 2010 at 8:58 AM

If I get on a plane with my kids I’d rather have everyone on the flight scanned
dedalus on November 12, 2010 at 8:56 AM

I was with you on the metal detectors, even on the boarding passes (no buh-byes at the gate), and I was even willing to wear easy-off footwear and take of my jacket like a nice little sheeple.
Not anymore. They DON’T GET TO IRRADIATE ME!
Radiation to find dental caries, or tumors, or other threats to my health, fine. Radiation to get on an airplane? REALLY??

zenscreamer on November 12, 2010 at 9:09 AM

Issue every passenger a Walther P22 or a stun gun. Voila.

Beo on November 12, 2010 at 9:22 AM

Not sure why this hasn’t been mentioned, but all you need to secure air travel (as much as it can be secured – nothing is 100%) is the following:

1. Remove the TSA. Spend half that money on bomb sniffing dogs and their handlers. Load every airport with hundreds of them. Dogs can do a better job of finding stuff than any TSA groper can. Run folks through a metal detector and then have them walk a path through a dozen pooches. I’d feel safe sitting next to a jihadist who cleared that gauntlet.

2. Spend half that money on air marshals trained in counter-ops. Have them profile away. Cops profile every day. We just don’t want to admit it. Have two marshals on every flight. I doubt we’d even come close to the number of TSA employees currently on the government tit.

So with dogs sniffing away all over the airport and marshals on every flight looking for bad guys, wouldn’t that solve the problem? I’d even announce loudly that every flight in America will have two things on it. A bomb sniffing dog walking the cabin and two or more marshals. If I am a terrorist, I wouldn’t like my odds.

Thunderstorm129 on November 12, 2010 at 9:25 AM

They could use bomb sniffing dogs or other animals trained to do that. There is also a machine available that can sniff bombs. It would be more accurate than someone looking at genitals on a screen and trying to decide if the ball point pen in your pocket is something that needs a pat down.

Kissmygrits on November 12, 2010 at 9:27 AM

And when the image is un-inverted – full color! NSFW!

Akzed on November 12, 2010 at 9:29 AM

This is all a result of being reactive instead of proactive. This is just bandaids on a gaping wound. Typical gummint approach.

ultracon on November 12, 2010 at 9:29 AM

You think you’re SAFER because of Naked Body Scanners?!

They aren’t screening CARGO, ya know.

PETN in underpants would not have been detected by a naked body scanner.

It’s a violation of your 4th Amendment Rights and more. Join the RESISTANCE:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/68995.html

http://www.prlog.org/10891401-airline-pilots-reject-tsa-tyranny.html

Airline Pilots Reject Tsa Tyranny

Body_Scan_Pic

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) – Aug 27, 2010 – Contact: Michael S. Roberts
Phone: 901.237.6308
Email: FedUpFlyers@nonpartisan.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

AIRLINE PILOTS REJECT TSA TYRANNY

Professional Flight Crews Say Airport Security Measures Encroach Upon Travelers’ Privacy and Freedom

mountainaires on November 12, 2010 at 9:33 AM

Issue every passenger a Walther P22 or a stun gun. Voila.

Beo on November 12, 2010 at 9:22 AM

The first gun I bought for my daughter was a Walther P22 (good gun, not great). I wouldn’t want every passenger to have access to one (the terrorists would have the same access), but the stun gun is not a horrible idea (without thinking deeply about it). Even if the terrorists grab one, they’d still have to deal with a dozen or so angry passengers who would stun them, then stomp on their throat until they died…well, that’s what I would do to them. Your results may vary. Just an interesting thing to argue about. Will never happen.

Extrafishy on November 12, 2010 at 9:34 AM

If they grope the woman I love (or hell ANY woman) I’m going to break someone.

SgtSVJones on November 11, 2010 at 9:23 PM

There are many like you sir, rightfully defending you and yours, who will be labelled as criminal in this environment. They’re forgetting who the bad guy is by targeting the easy guy.

ExPat on November 11, 2010 at 9:32 PM

Gentlemen, I admire you for your deep sense of protection; Mr. PPF does not have it wired in his system; I so wish he did, for my peace of mind. Therefore, this Grizzly Mama Bear is defending my cubs from human probing.

I was checking AmTrak for the trip I want to take, but if it’s the same crap, I am driving. ANYTHING to keep strangers’ hands off my children’s bodies.

Big Bubba and Big Bertha squeezing my 9 and 6 year olds’ private parts? Over.My.Dead.Body.

ProudPalinFan on November 12, 2010 at 9:50 AM

You can either run them through a full-body scanner, subject them to an “enhanced patdown,” a.k.a. crotch inspection, or … what? I’m open to alternatives…

Bomb sniffing dogs. Dogs like to stick their noses in peoples crotches anyway.

mizflame98 on November 12, 2010 at 9:52 AM

ProudPalinFan on November 12, 2010 at 9:50 AM

Pst… I’m a lady bear too. ;o)

ExPat on November 12, 2010 at 10:00 AM

TSA = The Sexual Assault

On Children? Really TSA? You have to grope CHILDREN?!

This is an obscenity. Don’t give in; resist. OPT OUT EVERY TIME. FOR YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=172033

mountainaires on November 12, 2010 at 10:01 AM

The TSA was formed by George W. Bush’s administration.

The Dean on November 12, 2010 at 10:36 AM

There might be an initial thrill for a TSA screener to see a naked body on a screen, or to pat down some cutie. But to do it hundreds or thousands of times, day after day after day, especially when so many are NOT cuties? I can’t think of anything more nausea inducing. I predict massive burnout of TSA personnel.

I won’t be contributing, however, as flying has simply become too uncomfortable.

RebeccaH on November 12, 2010 at 10:37 AM

For all the tea party liberty rhetoric, I don’t see any calls to abolish the TSA. Not to mention homeland security in general. They don’t want to cut Medicaid, Iraq, the drug war, etc. If this new Republican wave isn’t another phony movement, you figure someone would speak up soon.

The Dean on November 12, 2010 at 10:43 AM

“Junk” is an awful expression. Your body is a temple, Allah.

Or perhaps it was an unusual nautical allusion?

Seth Halpern on November 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM

The TSA was formed by George W. Bush’s administration.

The Dean on November 12, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Yes. We know. Many of us were against it then too.

stvnscott on November 12, 2010 at 10:56 AM

That’s what I suspect will happen–strip searches for Presbyterians and kids. Free pass to suspects.

PattyJ on November 12, 2010 at 10:59 AM

CAIR is advising muslim women to only allow pat downs of their heads and necks.

dogsoldier on November 12, 2010 at 11:03 AM

The Panty Bomber could have been caught by other means before he ever left home. All of this scanning and groping could have been stopped way before this. The government has a problem actually going after the real problem. Profile away! Then do it some more. Do it. Do it. Do it.
Then watch to see how many terrorists you catch before it is too late.

BetseyRoss on November 12, 2010 at 11:11 AM

“Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.” Benjamin Franklin.
What gripes me is that the people they are groping and laughing at in the back rooms are American citizens. They wouldn’t dare fondle a dark complected muslim looking man for fear of being decked or a muslim woman because of her religious convictions. It doesn’t matter about ours. The whole thing is disgusting.

theaddora on November 12, 2010 at 11:11 AM

CAIR is advising muslim women to only allow pat downs of their heads and necks.

dogsoldier on November 12, 2010 at 11:03 AM

Goodness knows, I’m no fan of CAIR, but I read the advisory. They recommended that hijab-wearing women ask the TSA person if scarf was the reason for the more intensive screening. And then if the TSA person answers affirmatively, said muslim woman should only allow the patdown of the head/neck or to offer to do it themselves and then have their hands swabbed for bomb residue.

Of course, what TSA official is going to admit, “Sure. I only selected you because because you’re obviously muslim and we know that the only people trying to bring down airliners are muslims”? Yeah, like that’s going to happen.

But if I flew more often (and right now, I don’t want to fly at all), it might be interesting to do an experiment — wearing a hijab half the time and going without the other half.

CJ on November 12, 2010 at 11:23 AM

Does anyone really need some weird anonymous guy telling you that you should give up your freedom for some level of security on a conservative site? Jeez, I think Diane Sawyer already has that covered for me.

Thanks anyway.

Dorvillian on November 12, 2010 at 8:48 AM

Touche’

theaddora on November 12, 2010 at 11:31 AM

Show me an attempted terrorist attack that TSA thwarted. Show me a criminal activity that TSA prevented. I searched for one, but all I can get is claims that the presences of the security has prevented many crimes.

The presence of the lock on my car door has prevented it from being stolen a million times just yesterday. The presence of my Swiss Army Knife has prevented me from having to peel an orange with my thumb nail.

The TSA has prevented me from flying. Not because I’m on any watch list, or a danger to my fellow passengers. But because I refuse to trust my life with the Kabuki Theater starring the Keystone Cops.

No thanks, I’ll take my chances on the roads with distracted drivers, drunks, morons, and God alone knows what else. No matter what manner of fool I’ll find on the roads, a bigger collection than is working in the TSA would be impossible to locate.

Snake307 on November 12, 2010 at 11:39 AM

At some point the terrorists have won.” Fair enough, although of course the big “win” terrorists are looking for is plummeting fuselage, not awkward moments in line in front of the metal detector.

Not completely accurate. Terrorists are trying to create fear, confusion, and mistrust. The new security measures seem like a fear-based response, and the coming fight between TSA and fliers certainly would be confusion.

Al Qaeda would probably feel that the new humiliating procedures that millions of Americans are being subjected to are a victory for them.

hawksruleva on November 12, 2010 at 11:43 AM

You can either run them through a full-body scanner, subject them to an “enhanced patdown,” a.k.a. crotch inspection, or … what? I’m open to alternatives, but you and I both know that for all the complaining going on right now, all it’ll take is one 757 exploding and suddenly airline passengers will have strange new respect for showing TSA screeners their junk.

Hold him, he’s scared.

And aren’t the TSA goons just so GD hysterical?!

Rae on November 12, 2010 at 11:46 AM

For all the tea party liberty rhetoric, I don’t see any calls to abolish the TSA. Not to mention homeland security in general.
The Dean on November 12, 2010 at 10:43 AM

Sure we have. You just weren’t paying attention. The TSA should, if anything, be a private security force. It’s creation was a big win for the unions. A private firm would also be more efficient and likely more judicious in their use of patdowns.

Homeland security need to be streamlined, and the scope of FEMA reduced sharply. Americans can respond to disasters without government interference, thanks. Federal disaster response is always too late, inefficient, and a waste of money. If it didn’t exist, states and localities would plan better.

Homeland security also begins the blurring of the lines between the use of the military and police. It’s a step towards allowing troops to control U.S. Citizens, and that’s a step in the wrong direction.

hawksruleva on November 12, 2010 at 11:50 AM

but you and I both know that for all the complaining going on right now, all it’ll take is one 757 exploding and suddenly airline passengers will have strange new respect for showing TSA screeners their junk.

You’re assuming hte new searches will be effective. But Al Qaeda doesn’t use last year’s ideas for bringing bombs onto planes. They look at our security procedures, then work around them.

How many bombs or other dangerous materials have the new procedures uncovered? Show me some evidence that these procedures work.

The safest airlines in the world don’t use the procedures. Why don’t we try doing what they’re doing? Is talking to passengers really worse than having TSA screeners get to 2nd base with them?

hawksruleva on November 12, 2010 at 11:54 AM

Profiling would be nice.

Young Arab dudes, and dudettes go through the more rigorous pat downs.

Problem solved.

1IDVET on November 12, 2010 at 11:58 AM

Profiling would be nice.

Young Arab dudes, and dudettes go through the more rigorous pat downs.

Problem solved.

1IDVET on November 12, 2010 at 11:58 AM

Proper profiling is much more then looking for Arabs. The Israelis know that terrorists often use unsuspecting dupes. Their methods account for this. It’s not about finding Muslims, but finding threats. And nothing we do now at our airports finds threats.

NotCoach on November 12, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Is talking to passengers really worse than having TSA screeners get to 2nd base with them?

hawksruleva on November 12, 2010 at 11:54 AM

+1000

The problem is that for talking to passengers to be effective, as it is with Israeli air security, the screeners have to be intelligent and savvy. I doubt that most TSA employees would fit the bill.

ProfessorMiao on November 12, 2010 at 12:15 PM

Fair enough, although of course the big “win” terrorists are looking for is plummeting fuselage, not awkward moments in line in front of the metal detector.

That’s a total mischaracterization of what terrorists want. Of course they want planes crashing, as many as possible, but the true intent of splashing the planes is to terrorize a population into submission.

Now the US government is terrorizing its own people with actions that don’t work. Has a single terrorist ever been caught with any of the screening processes since 9/11? No.

So we the people have our privacy invaded in the most horrific ways. That’s the ‘Big Win’ for the terrorists.

JonPrichard on November 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM

we the people have our privacy invaded in the most horrific ways. That’s the ‘Big Win’ for the terrorists.

JonPrichard on November 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM

+1000

I’ll bet they’re laughing at American key stone kops airport security.

ProfessorMiao on November 12, 2010 at 12:19 PM

The best argument in all this, I think, is the boss emeritus’s point that the feds are trying to atone for inexcusable gaps at the macro level of security by tightening procedures at the micro level. That was another, even more important lesson of Flight 253: There were plenty of red flags about Abdulmutallab’s intentions before he got on the plane, and yet bureaucratic inefficiency among counterterror agencies prevented anyone from doing anything until it was too late. Do something about that and you can afford to worry less about crotch-patting at the terminal.

It’s certainly possible that even if the feds were perfect at the macro level, something will happen that could have been caught at the micro level.

We’re fighting the Battle of the Bulge in a slightly different war. That said, if you really want to win, you fight the war 100% at the macro level, and 100% at the micro level. Then the passengers don’t have to figure out who’s going to die taking down the terrorist — or, even worse, don’t ever figure out that they are all going to die because of some well-endowed (in one place or another) terrorist.

The absolute best way to get these terrorists is for us to force them to strip nearly naked, because sometimes the micro level is the macro level.

unclesmrgol on November 12, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Abolish the TSA.

Life without dignity is no life at all.

MadisonConservative on November 12, 2010 at 12:25 PM

there is an alternative: profiling.

reliapundit on November 12, 2010 at 12:50 PM

Cute how the TSA goons call themselves “professionals.”

Don’t get worked up about those naked airport scanners, because TSA agents are mocking your personal foibles anyway

we may be professionals but when you come through the checkpoint with crazy stuff in your bag or acting like an idiot, we are going to talk about you after you leave. Oh hell yes we are. It is going to become the highlight of the conversation at TSA officer gatherings.

The TSA Is Cracking: Increase the Pressure!

The MSM, as adjuncts of the State, always disguise the real reasons for such national-socialist measures: to control, humiliate, intimidate, and condition us to abject obedience. We are the cattle, they are the overlords.

FWIW, these strip search machines were funded by Barry’s Big Porkulus Bill. The TSA goons would no doubt be unemployable otherwise.

Rae on November 12, 2010 at 1:29 PM

So the TSA will either scan you are frisk you. Unless you’re a muslim, and especially a muslim woman wearing the full slave uniform – whatever the heck it’s called. Remind me to laugh when the Airlines cry for a bailout next year.

Dork B. on November 12, 2010 at 2:03 PM

At this stage in life, I couldn’t care less if they scan it and post it. However, what makes me super-crazy is that we read story after story about how the scanners don’t really uncover the problems that triggered the change.

And yet they spent a small fortune on the machines anyway?

What makes me even crazier is that we can’t profile which has been effective in other areas of the world because we’re being so sensitive, but it’s totally against Muslim tradition to either scan or frisk in such an intimate way.

I hate cognitive dissonance.

AnninCA on November 12, 2010 at 2:16 PM

But…..either we’re growing very stupid terrorists these days or something else….because blowing up planes is so passe’.

Want to really just throw the entire system into a flipping panic? All you do is waltz into any major airport during a typical problem day, where people are sleeping on the floors waiting for flights that aren’t really going to arrive….

And toss a nice firecracker or, if you’re really serious, something that hurts. The first option would guarantee major news for days, ensure that airports would lock down everywhere, money would be lost by the kazoo….and a few broken arms and legs as people trample one another to get out.

TSA, meanwhile, will be WAYYYYYYYYYY UP THE corridor and probably not even learn of the episode for at least 10 minutes. They are busy, you know, making scared white women on flights to visit their grandkids for the first time in years, freak out.

And I do think they target people with “attitude.”

AnninCA on November 12, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Nice ad hominem n0doz. The reason I would be an asshole is because they are assholes. The biggest threat to airport security is my attitude? Ever stop to think I wouldn’t have this attitude towards TSA if they didn’t treat myself and every other traveler like naughty children. I’m not asking for personal respect from TSA, just human decency. You defend TSA like you are one…

Eprider on November 12, 2010 at 2:46 PM

Sorry, but don’t fly. I’ve had it with the discomfort (seats not accomodating for tall people), the rudeness and humiliation of having to all but strip for security, and oh yeah, the lost luggage (that they charged you to carry and then lose), late and/or cancelled flights and airline customer service reps that give exactly 2 squirts about how your vacation just got ruined by their less than stellar service. I am voting with my feet and driving. I hope all of the airlines but Southwest go broke.

search4truth on November 12, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Yeah, with ad hominems like that, I could pass for a dimmycrat.
>The reason I would be an asshole is because they are assholes.<
Tit-for-tat. Precisely.
As for attitude as a "threat," I don't recall that one. I did say, over and over: profiling, Israeli-style or similar, is the answer. For God’s sake, you people piss and moan over and over about every tiny aspect of airport security, yet less than one percent of you can see beyond the limits of your own righteous indignation to acknowledge that friggin’ profiling is the only real answer to your problem… that, and the fact that your politicians are so frightened of being seen as bigots or racists that they’ve outlawed the only 100% field tested, proven-under-the-worst-conditions-possible method of aviation security.
No, instead you’d rather piss off and make fun of the people that are stuck trying to make this PC-crippled excuse of a security system work the best they can, in spite of the best efforts of the ACLU and every smart-ass that shows up for a flight and proudly declares that they ain’t no f’in’ terrorist and therefore, none of this security crap should apply to them.
So my point is this: Is acting like a fool at the airport going to persuade the pols and bureaucrats to grow a pair and secure our air travel properly, or is it going to make everyone around think you’re just f’ing stupid? If that’s your way of making a point, well….
And no, I don’t work for TSA, nor do I play one on TV. However, I did get off a plane once, when a guy that boarded after me and sat down in the next seat pulled out his prayer beads and started rocking back and forth, muttering in some foreign language… which only means I can’t work for TSA or NPR.

n0doz on November 12, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Put a photo of the shoe bomber, Richard Reed on the inside bottom of each grey tub so I can put my shoes on his face each time I fly. That way it makes it easier to take off my shoes.

scruplesrx on November 12, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Let dogs do the profiling. The stick their noses often where they don’t belong and people laugh it off. And they can sense fear.

scruplesrx on November 12, 2010 at 10:21 PM

Just some info to think about since I’m sure most of you have never been arrested or in jail. Having been a correction officer, I am very familiar with a full body pat down. What is being done at the airports, including, but not limited to, the “crotch” check, is taught to Police, correction officers, court security etc. Nothing out of the ordinary here.
In my line of work, females were patted down by females. Since I haven’t flown since all this broohaha started, can’t speak to the airport’s policy on that, and nothing I’ve read has mentioned it.
In defense of the “crotch” check….a few years back around this time of year, I witnessed a women stash a frozen turkey
between her legs and walk toward the exit doors. I kid you not! She didn’t get far. but gets a A+ for effort. If someone is out to hurt others, just assume they will go to any means possible to accomplish their goals. I guarantee the radicals are glued to this argument to see who prevails!!

hopefloats on November 12, 2010 at 10:23 PM

They might as well just have a few of those gynecologists’ examination chairs at the security TSA sections of the airport. All the females must strip naked, including toddlers, infants, etc., and get complete cavity searches of the vagina, urethra, anus, mouths and throa, and ears.

Same for the man, sans the vagina. They bend over and get a rectal exam, mouth and throat examination, ears examined, etc.

All breasts, normal female breats, and male manboobs get inspected as well.

All Muslims, of course, will be granted a 100% pass on all such humiliation. What else would you expect? We can’t have Muslims offended, humiliated, or profiled for being at higher chance of being terrorists now, can we?

That brings up another point, there should be a separate line for Muslims.

All Muslims, including all men and women wearing Burkhas, with their faces and heads covered (men do so, hiding weapons, and also hiding out with women so that soldiers and police do not stop them, go through their own line, with no security provisions, no pat downs, no taking off the shoes, nothing. Straight through, while the rest of us stand around for long periods of time to have our pants inspected, our shoes taken off, our bodies groped, scanned, questions asked, objectionable, rude orders to toss our small, half filled bottles of water in the trash, even when we have small children traveling with us who could use a drink of filtered water, etc.

This entire TSA-airport security thing is way out of hand.

Thank you, militant, violent, hate filled, blood and death cult Islamic Jihadis for the wonderful disrespect and abuse you have visited upon us, while your Muslim brothers and sisters get special hands-off treatment promised by the Homelands Security, TSA, FBI, etc.

William2006 on November 12, 2010 at 11:56 PM

Thank you, militant, violent, hate filled, blood and death cult Islamic Jihadis for the wonderful disrespect and abuse you have visited upon us, while your Muslim brothers and sisters get special hands-off treatment promised by the Homelands Security, TSA, FBI, etc.

William2006 on November 12, 2010 at 11:56 PM

The terrorists are laughing their asses off at us, and not just because American “men” allow their women and children to be ogled naked and/or molested by the TSA goons. They have gotten nearly everything they wanted because we delivered it: American citizens in a constant state of fear of them, an obliteration of much of our BoR, two (going on three) holy wars and a Christian exodus from the ME, and our impending bankruptcy (after which comes the unavoidable consequence of the US military closing down its bases on their lands).

Rae on November 13, 2010 at 10:03 AM

This country really is completely devoid of morals and decency.

USAID-Sponsored Planned Parenthood program: “Healthy, Happy and Hot”

US taxpayers, that’s you, are spending millions of dollars exporting pornographic sex guides to Russian children urging them to experiment with “casual sex with multiple partners, as well as oral, anal, and homosexual sex.”
[...]
No wonder they’re putting naked scanners in all the airports. Statists are twisted perverts. It’s Caligula all over again.

Rae on November 13, 2010 at 10:29 AM

If TSA wanted to be more effective they would BAN most of the carry-on luggage that people insist on cramming on board instead of checking. The airlines should eliminate the checked bag fee to encourage more checked luggage and reduce the amount of ‘crap’ that TSA needs to screen at checkpoints. Spirit Airlines has it right…charge for carry-on bags!

I travel a lot and have a Global Entry/Trusted Traveller pass. I went through the ‘naked scanner’ last week and because I kept my $20 watch on I was told I’d have to go for a pat down as well because of it. Obviously common sense will not be tolerated but it was all over in matter of seconds and I was on my way.

Every time some pilot, flight attendant or fussy passenger decides to buck the system and opt out and then complain about the hand check, another avenue is open for a person or group that wants to compromise security. No more ‘opt outs’ and no more exceptions. It’s time to make sensible rules and stick to them. Don’t like ‘em? Don’t fly!

JetBlast on November 13, 2010 at 1:40 PM

You can x-ray every passenger, that’s not the way to fight terrorism

Phoenician on November 13, 2010 at 5:44 PM

If you are forced to subject to a body search, get the name of the employee doing the search. File a criminal complaint against them in the state where this occurred. State law protects people form behavior like this. And I would love to see how the feds are going to argue that the 10th Amendment should be ignored to allow them to sexually assault people.

Jim M. on November 14, 2010 at 2:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3