Shocking Blog Post Concerning New Airport Security...

[Mama Geek]

 

Yep, I said it. We've had exactly ONE non-muslim terrorist in recent memory - Timothy McVeigh. Everyone else has ascribed to Islam. And before anyone starts tossing "moderate Muslims" and "religion of peace" at me, go read the Koran. It is meant to be read sequentially (says so, right inside). All of those soft fluffy bunny suras you hear repeated ad nauseam about peace and harmony are at the BEGINNING. The kill all of the infidels stuff comes later. And guess what? If you're not Muslim, you're an infidel.

 

Well, here's my take on it - I will not submit.

 

Conspiracy theory or not, there are some that believe that McVeigh was involved with the muslim terrorist.

[Mejane]

In the spring, my husband flew with his 85 year old grandfather, wearing his WWII veteran's cap, who was made to walk without his cane, remove his shoes, belt, suspenders, stand for over 10 minutes while they searched him, patted him down, asked what metal he might still have on or in his person (to which he replied "I don't know, I may have some shrapnel left from WWII.") At the end of all of it, my husband's grandfather was so weak from standing, he couldn't even put his own shoes or belt back on. My husband had to do it for him.

 

 

This just makes me want to kick something. Disgusting is not the word for it, and anyone who advocates this as a rational act that will protect fliers has his/her head up his ***. IMHO.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Mejane

[Giraffe]

Have not read all the posts - there are just too many.

 

We may have to fly next week instead of drive to see my family for Thanksgiving due to a family emergency in DH's family. He may have to fly overseas. Ugh.

 

So I asked my MIL (a neuro radiologist) about the radiation as it concerns DD and me (DH can hack it, I'm trying to conceive and DD is only 3). So she did some research in the radiology literature and among her colleagues. She recommends that DD not go through the machines due to the radiation risk. She recommends I also be patted down for two reasons: so DD can see it and understand what's about to happen to her and because of the radiation risk.

 

DH recommends that while I not encourage her to pee on the agent, that I don't punish her should she do it (she will pee when she's upset). It's a violation, pure and simple. An unwarranted one. So now we have to educate our children that only Mommy, Daddy, and the doctor can see their privates, but government agents are allowed to grope them?!

 

If it's so safe, why not put the first family and the head of Homeland Security and her family through it? And if it's not, then put them through the pat downs so they can experience what we commoners will have to go through?

Edited November 16, 2010 by Hopscotch67
Correct phrasing to avoid misunderstanding

[mommaduck]

If people are acting strangely, have purchased their tickets with cash, don't have luggage, or a return trip, appear stressed when questioned, or give any of a number of the behavior or transactional cues that they might warrant special attention, then it would be fool-hearty to ignore such things, and TBS officials should be well trained and vigilant in such situation (much like the border agent who found the bombs being smuggled in from Canada).

 

But when the Israel system is offered as a model, people really need to know what they are talking about.

 

Bill

I can understand that being upsetting, but I think they were suggesting that we use only one part of their screening process. The part that does not profile ethnically and does not cause the abuses that you and I both disagree with, and we seem to be heading towards (the description of the toddler having her genitalia manipulated, that is pretty darn close to a cavity search on an young child). I think that is where we can agree. (again, I cannot speak on Israel...I only know that you say one thing and Asta says another. I agree that it's a possibility and I'm sorry to even hear that such would be done).

[Spy Car]

It is not the whole Israeli system that is being held up as the way to go. It is the behavioral profiling we are talking about, so quit saying otherwise. I have clarified this a couple of time now, just in this thread.

 

It may be your position that you just want "behavioral" profiling, but others have argued for Israeli-style profiling which includes the systematic humiliation of Arabs and Muslims whether there are "behavioral issues" or not.

 

Don't kid yourself.

 

Our objection to the new practices is because we don't want young, completely safe women (or anyone else for that matter) to be subject to cavity searches for no good reason.

 

I understand the objections, I don't like it either. But unwarranted cavity searches of women go on all the time in Israel. It is no good to have policies towards others that we would find hateful ourselves.

 

Bill

[Caraway]

:lol::lol::lol: OMG...so predictable...:lol::lol::lol: Oh, yes, "Certainly More...":lol:

 

They might terrorize the plane by reciting Paul Revere's Ride from memory...

 

 

:smilielol5:

[KingM]

The thing is, it's not a choice between the Israeli-style security and the new security. What we were doing before was working just fine. When was the last time terrorists brought down a plane? Over nine years ago and they used tactics that would not work now.

 

There are 20,000 flights a day in the U.S. 65,000,000 flights since 9/11 and not one terrorist-related fatality. And to stop the one that might theoretically happen sometime in the next ten years we're willing to have hundreds of millions of people suffer humiliation and degradation of their rights.

 

We need to have a better understanding of risk. The damage terrorism is causing is almost entire self-inflicted wounds on our part.

[Spy Car]

I can understand that being upsetting, but I think they were suggesting that we use only one part of their screening process. The part that does not profile ethnically and does not cause the abuses that you and I both disagree with, and we seem to be heading towards (the description of the toddler having her genitalia manipulated, that is pretty darn close to a cavity search on an young child). I think that is where we can agree. (again, I cannot speak on Israel...I only know that you say one thing and Asta says another. I agree that it's a possibility and I'm sorry to even hear that such would be done).

 

I think we have common ground.

 

As to what happens in Israeli screenings I hear it from very close personal friends. It is not easy for these women to even mention the humiliations they must endure every year simply to be able to visit loved ones at home.

 

Bill

[Aggie]

They might terrorize the plane by reciting Paul Revere's Ride from memory...

 

Perhaps this should be part of the Nov 24 protest. Everyone standing in line can do this.:lol:

[Spy Car]

The thing is, it's not a choice between the Israeli-style security and the new security. What we were doing before was working just fine. When was the last time terrorists brought down a plane? Over nine years ago and they used tactics that would not work now.

 

There are 20,000 flights a day in the U.S. 65,000,000 flights since 9/11 and not one terrorist-related fatality. And to stop the one that might theoretically happen sometime in the next ten years we're willing to have hundreds of millions of people suffer humiliation and degradation of their rights.

 

We need to have a better understanding of risk. The damage terrorism is causing is almost entire self-inflicted wounds on our part.

 

I'm with you there.

 

Bill

[Laurie4b]

Please go back and read the last several pages, particularly the posts by FaithManor. This isn't just "patting down"...it isn't even "just" groping. It's gone beyond that.

 

http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com/2010/11/tsa-sexual-assault.html

 

Exactly. It's just short of a cavity search. Read this mother's account.

[Murphy101]

Okay, that's even better than I heard! I heard that it was just an opt out of the scanner. . .but a total boycott is even better!

 

I did read just a moment ago that airports - by law - can get private security. I don't know if that would change their having to use the scanners and give pat downs, but apparently security doesn't have to be done by TSA. In my experience, private contractors are usually a little more concerned about their own job security, so they might think twice before subjecting anyone to an invasive "measures" in case their company gets sued. Maybe it wouldn't be any better, but it might be.

 

 

Idk. If the issue is a violation of basic rights, I don't know that I'd be any more okay with a private company being given the okay by the govt either.

 

 

So, here's a nasty question...if the airlines go bankrupt because people just get sick of it and stop flying, do we the taxpayers, have to pay them bailouts on top of everything else????

 

I have met so many people who say they will fly no longer. I do think this is going to be a problem.

 

I don't believe in bailouts.

 

It's not even just about how a person feels about the TSA mandates.

 

It literally takes so freaking long to deal with flight crap, you often could have driven there in the same amount of time! It might not affect a NYC to LAX destination as much, but you can bet if a person can drive there in 8 hours or less, they have to asking why the heck they'd fly. Even my dh's current contract has adjusted their travel for this reason. If it is only in the next state over, they give the option of driving. In fact, dh makes a profit by driving! The company says the employees prefer it, it saves time and it saves them money over paying for a flight and a rental car. Prime example, last time my dh flew, my dh spent 5 hours at airport and in air. The drive would have only taken 6. Top that off with being made to feel like a criminal, the hassle, and then sitting in a sardine can and the cost of the tickets and neither of us can comprehend why anyone would fly unless they were under duress of some sort.

[Brilliant]

There's lots of anecdotal evidence that at most airports, there's no random-ness to the selection of passengers to go through the virtual strip-search machine. Agents are choosing women and children at a much higher rate than men, and the younger & more attractive the woman is, the more likely she is to be chosen. As I said, it's anecdotal - apparently the TSA isn't tracking or sharing numbers. I imagine that soon they will be forced to change their selection process and/or report demographic breakdown on those numbers. (if you search on "statistics" at the TSA website you'll find a helpful list of the number of lighters they confiscated in 2006. 11.6 million)

[Sputterduck]

I am friends with multiple families who are either Isreali Arabs with Israeli and American citizenship, or Palestinians married to Israeli Arabs, and I can tell you the women they get pulled aside for humiliating "body cavity" searches every time they fly into Ben Gurion airport when visiting family. It is a disgusting system.

 

Bill

 

And now America is doing it to babies, according to a previous poster. I'd rather it be full grown women.

[i.love.lucy]

Here is a link showing the scanner photo and what the TSA sees. Not invasive? Quite the opposite. Also, the images are stored and saved.

 

Diclaimer: The male genitalia can be see quite well. If this offends you, please do not click on the link.

:001_huh:

 

Thank-you for saying it, Asta. I could.not.agree.more.

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

When homeschoolers start strapping on bombs and blowing up restaurants or taking over planes, I will expect my family's lifestyle to come under scrutiny.

Yep.

 

Seriously though, I am opting out of flying as long as this is going on. It's too bad because my family is pretty far away.:(

[kristavws]

I think this quote from another poster sums it up -

 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

 

- Benjamin Franklin

 

Let's not forget, that governments often use fear to control the masses. Ever heard of the Patriot Act? It was fear that allowed the government to shove that one through.

 

On another note, I will probably have to fly across the country by the end of the year to visit a sick relative. Since I will not have the kiddos with me, I am considering wearing this t-shirt - http://www.cafepress.com/tsagetoffgeton .

 

Krista

[KingM]

http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com/2010/11/tsa-sexual-assault.html

 

Exactly. It's just short of a cavity search. Read this mother's account.

 

From her post:

 

“It is acceptable and encouraged that a TSA government official can do something to an American citizen that US military personnel cannot do to a member of the Taliban.â€

[mommaduck]

There's lots of anecdotal evidence that at most airports, there's no random-ness to the selection of passengers to go through the virtual strip-search machine. Agents are choosing women and children at a much higher rate than men, and the younger & more attractive the woman is, the more likely she is to be chosen. As I said, it's anecdotal - apparently the TSA isn't tracking or sharing numbers. I imagine that soon they will be forced to change their selection process and/or report demographic breakdown on those numbers. (if you search on "statistics" at the TSA website you'll find a helpful list of the number of lighters they confiscated in 2006. 11.6 million)

It would be interesting for a reporter to sit nearby during a 24hr period and record the statistics of who they see being pulled.

[Brilliant]

It might not affect a NYC to LAX destination as much, but you can bet if a person can drive there in 8 hours or less, they have to asking why the heck they'd fly.

 

For me, it's even more than 8 hours.

 

Dh and I have discussed under what circumstances I'd be willing to fly. My parents live 15 hours away - if they have an emergency, we'd drive. (because of having to change planes, and the distance my parents live from an airport, it would take over 10 hours for us to get there by plane/rental car).

 

The only circumstance I can think of right now that would get me & my children on a plane is if my m-i-l had an emergency. She is 24 hours away by car, or about 8 hours by plane.

 

For the last 6 or 7 years, we have taken about 2 plane trips a year to visit family or go on vacation. Because of my dh's frequent flyer miles, it was nothing to us to hop on a plane, for example, for my cousin's wedding in another state. If anybody gets married next year, too bad for us. :(

[Spy Car]

And now America is doing it to babies, according to a previous poster. I'd rather it be full grown women.

 

I don't want it done to babies either, but how about if it were done to you?

 

What if the government (in its wisdom) figured there were a lot of anti-government types in the home schooling population (you know, people who call ever bit of legislation an act of the Nanny State comparable with the march of totalitarians on our freedoms) and that these extremists were a potential threat to national security. And so you, every time you cross the border from Mexico, were pulled over for "special treatment"? I imagine you would object, as I would object for you.

 

The same thing happens in other "profiling" situations, it certain does in the Israeli system.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Do we protest the tyranny for all? Or do we just protest the invasion of our own privacy while asking it be focused more intensively on "the other"?

 

Big difference there.

 

Bill

[Kates]

I don't want it done to babies either, but how about if it were done to you?

 

What if the government (in its wisdom) figured there were a lot of anti-government types in the home schooling population (you know, people who call ever bit of legislation an act of the Nanny State comparable with the march of totalitarians on our freedoms) and that these extremists were a potential threat to national security. And so you, every time you cross the border from Mexico, were pulled over for "special treatment"? I imagine you would object, as I would object for you.

 

The same thing happens in other "profiling" situations, it certain does in the Israeli system.

 

Bill

 

I would much sooner have it done to me than to a baby. For crying out loud.

 

According to Obama and Napolitano, I've already been deemed an "enemy" :glare: And honestly, I think you're taking the Israeli thing a bit too far - no one on this thread has said that we should model TSA after the Israeli system. I can see that it's a hot button for you, but the only things that have been said on this thread are that we should station profilers at airports (since refusing to profile because we might "offend" someone who may later attack us is stupid) and that BG hasn't had a successful attack in over 40 years. That's all, and you'd be hard pressed to refute those two statements. I'm sorry that friends of yours have had humiliating experiences with security there - truly I am. But no one has said that we should have the BG security team train the TSA.

 

And if profiling ever does get to that point, I really don't see hs'ing being the main point of attack, especially since many states don't even require hs'ers to register. (Quite frankly, no one would even know to pull us aside, unless my kid actually did recite Paul Revere ;)) It would be much more aimed at religious or political affiliation - and would last about a month, until people got riled and got that practice tossed.

 

When hs'ers, Tea Partiers, SEIU union members, or any other group that anyone could consider "fringe" (for whatever reason) start commandeering planes and blowing up buildings, I'll expect to be pulled aside if I'm a member of such a group. Until then, the practice of humiliating and molesting people who don't fit any profile whatsoever (simply to prove that it's "random") needs to stop.

[MissKNG]

And honestly, I think you're taking the Israeli thing a bit too far - .

 

:iagree:

 

Thanks for saying this. And I agree that the humilating experiences his friends endured are sad.

And I'm not going to say any more because slamming Israeli's security systems (with only knowing one side of the coin) is a hot button for me as well.

Edited November 16, 2010 by MissKNG

[Sputterduck]

I don't want it done to babies either, but how about if it were done to you?

 

What if the government (in its wisdom) figured there were a lot of anti-government types in the home schooling population (you know, people who call ever bit of legislation an act of the Nanny State comparable with the march of totalitarians on our freedoms) and that these extremists were a potential threat to national security. And so you, every time you cross the border from Mexico, were pulled over for "special treatment"? I imagine you would object, as I would object for you.

 

The same thing happens in other "profiling" situations, it certain does in the Israeli system.

 

Bill

 

It's wrong in any place it is happening.

 

After being sent to secondary inspection by Americans and being treated very poorly by border patrol, I starting talking to people down here. Everyone has a story of themselves or a women they know who have been taken into the bathrooms by an agent for a cavity search. I thought America was better than that. I was shocked. And I wouldn't have believed them if they weren't truly emotional in telling their stories.

 

America does it, too. We've just now added it to airports and infants.

 

Mexicans at the border are often treated like animals.

 

As for x-rays, they gave me little choice but to have my son and I x-rayed. He was only 5. They said if I refused I could be there for a really long time. As it was, they kept us until 10 at night and we still had a 4 hour drive ahead of us.

 

They only let us go after I got on the phone within earshot of the agents and threatened to make a big deal of how we were being treated. One of them went right into the building, gave us our paperwork, and let us go. I have never been treated so rudely as I was, and I'm an American citizen and was trying to get into my own country! They even questioned my son several times. It was ridiculous.

[jujsky]

Here is a link showing the scanner photo and what the TSA sees. Not invasive? Quite the opposite. Also, the images are stored and saved.

 

Diclaimer: The male genitalia can be see quite well. If this offends you, please do not click on the link.

 

Wow! I had no idea the scans were THAT invasive! Thank you for sharing the link.

[Murphy101]

We protest the tyranny for all. That is the only way to be free.

 

These scanners and searches won't make us safer. They only offer the appearance of safety. Even if they did make us slightly safer I wouldn't be ok with them. Living free has inherent risk. I am ok with my level of risk and I am not willing to give up more freedoms for the marginal amount "safer" I might be. The safety of my freedoms, and those of all people, are too important to me.

 

:iagree:

 

 

Wow! I had no idea the scans were THAT invasive! Thank you for sharing the link.

 

I know. This is one of the reasons I don't believe the claims of low level radiation. It's got to be near what a regular xray is in order to be effective. Bottom line, is if it were as weak as they claim, there's no way it would be that effective.:confused:

[pdalley]

This is another reason I will never fly in a plane. This is beyond ridiculous.

 

Just google or search for TSA body scans leaked onto the internet and tell me just how this benefits our safety? It doesn't. Profiling - behavior profiling -does.

 

And I with Asta. I will not submit.

[KingM]

Using one of the TSA's own examples, when someone flipped the invert on the image. Again, don't click if nudity bothers you.

 

Edit: I did some digging and I can't vouch for the veracity of that image, so I'm going to cut it.

Edited November 16, 2010 by KingM