DO YOU THINK THIS WOMAN DESERVED A PAT DOWN?

Not just carry-ons: luggage of any sort, stored OR carry on.

More:

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=6687

Kind of like giving Al Capone some sort of a general immunity from the laws against the illegal manufacture and marketing of alcoholic beverages you say??

that's fine - nothing wrong with sending things ahead unless you're chronically disorganized

Just thinking of the lady on my last flight with the giant pinata who got mad because it wouldn't fit in the overhead and then even madder when our departure was delayed 20 minutes while everyone scrambled to find a place to put the damn thing.

I have a hard time giving that video much credence. Looks to me like they loaded a watermelon with a bunch of firecrackers.

Try this, and this is real and in the early 90s, long before 9-11...

I was flying to S. Korea on a NW flight from Detroit and there was one passenger with stored luggage who for whatever reason never got on the airplane. We sat on that tarmac for seven hours while security took every bag off the plane and went through all of them to remove the one passenger's stuff. That was BEFORE spending the usual 14 - 16 hours getting to Seoul Korea.

Firecrackers would not totally vaporize a watermelon of an instant.

The airline security people aren't looking to feel you up so they can get a cheap thrill. They aren't enjoying this, but they are doing it because it's their job.

Because of increased attempts by terrorists to bring down planes recently, there is a real need for increased caution and preventitive measures (especially during the holiday season when there is heavy traveling). Recent polls indicate that the majority of Americans (80%), are in favor of these measures.

As for the other 20%, I'm sick of hearing their crying and complaining. Suck it up, and deal with it!

That's almost a comedy bit, Irish.

There's Lambchop!

They ended up sticking the thing in the first-class head for take-off. When passengers had to pee, I guess they took it out. That would have had some comedic value, but I fell asleep and would have missed it anyway.

My niece in El Paso sent me this one:

TSA Airport Screening: Come Die With Me

You are witnessing the death of an industry. What the eco-freaks could never do -- drum up significant support for mass transit -- the TSA has done in just one decade.

Hard to believe there was a time when flying was glamorous, but glamorous, exciting and sexy it was from the 1940s through the 1960s. Stewardesses wore cute little suits, and passengers dressed up too. Airline meals weren't great, but they sure beat the tiny bags of pretzels we get now.

Back in the day, the word airplane conjured up images of passengers disembarking in Honolulu, welcomed by young women holding leis. An airplane meant vacationing in Paris or Rome. After the war, interest in European travel surged. Hollywood took note, and gave us "Three Coins in the Fountain," "An American in Paris," "Roman Holiday" and "Light in the Piazza."

Things began to change around 1968, when the book "Airport" came out. The novel's plot involved a disturbed man who brings a bomb on board a plane. The book became a bestseller, and the 1970 movie practically invented the disaster-film genre, and is still enjoyed for its camp value. Although the bomber was not a terrorist but just a poor schlub with a life insurance policy, the public now had an image of what it might be like to be trapped at 39,000 feet with a madman and a deadly weapon.

There were hijackings in the 1950s and 1960s, but in the 1970s hijackings kicked into high gear. Some ended with hostages freed and hijacker arrested. Others ended with crashes and fatalities. One, the 1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814, ended with a negotiated release of three jailed militants, including a man who would later be implicated in the attacks on September 11, 2001 and in the 2002 murder of journalist Daniel Pearl.

Besides the hijackings, there were accidents too. Lots of them, and they always ended up on the front page. The most fatalities (3,232) occurred in 1972, followed by 1985 and 1996.

Starting some 40 years ago, flying shifted from a few hours of pampering while en route to a European capitol or beach resort to a means to get from point A to point B. Except for the east coast, taking the train was no longer practical for most Americans. Amtrak was created in 1971, and that ended competition in the railroad industry.

Train travel went into decline. Even if your city was one of the few still served by trains, and even if you had the time to take the train from one coast to another and were not choosy about your arrival time, the service and food left a lot to be desired.

Related Stories
The Barbed Wire Airport: Is America Afflicted with Security Fatigue?
TSA Chief Defends Airport Pat-Downs (but Hillary Clinton Wouldn't Want One)
GOP Senator on Airport Security Pat-Downs: Hands Off My Wife
But it could be worse. You could be taking the bus. And in point of fact, the low-cost airlines got dubbed "the bus" by the traveling public. In the 1970s passengers proved they were willing to be herded like cattle on to planes in exchange for cheap tickets. That cattle roundup was just a prelude to the air travel of the new millennium. In the 2000s, life was about to get a whole lot harder for passengers.

Fear of flying courses date back to 1975. Even before 9/11, the cumulative trauma of plane disasters was suggested by dreams, which inspired one blog post titled "Recurring Plane Crash Dreams" that prompted a string of comments from others who had them.

Into this anxious mental landscape came the terrorist attacks of September 11. On the first anniversary, people said: We will never forget. How right they were. Every time we flew, we remembered. Security was there to remind us: It could happen again. It could happen today. It could happen to you.

Even prior to 9/11, stepping inside an airplane was an act of faith. Oh sure, the safety statistics might be on your side in the air. But if something went wrong, you can't exactly wriggle out of a window to safety like you might in a derailed train or overturned bus. You can't just let your survival instinct take over. You have to sit and hope and take what comes.

So you'd think anything that would make a flight safer would be comforting. But the new, enhanced pat downs and full-body scanners seem to be having the opposite effect on the flying public, as noted by my colleague Walter Shapiro.

What have you heard? the passenger may be wondering. Why, all of a sudden, are my shoes, my laptop, my liquids and gels, my jacket, my purse, my belt not enough for you anymore? What's going on? What is the government keeping secret?

I am no prude. I believe TSA agents are doing their jobs and, no doubt, the vast majority are professional and conscientious. While I understand the objections to birthday-suit scanners and aggressive pat-downs, modesty and dignity are not my main concerns. If I believed the new TSA measures really saved lives, I'd probably submit to them without complaint the same way I endure medical tortures and indignities on the advice of physicians. I want to live. However, I demand scientific proof that whatever horror my doctor plans to visit upon me will help more than hurt.

Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber" was stopped not by the TSA screener, but by an alert crew member on Miami-bound flight on Dec. 22, 2001. Luck played a part too. Officials in Paris found Reid suspicious and delayed his trip for a day. Presumably walking around for a day, along with rain or perspiration, damaged the bomb's fuse, which Reid could not light.

The liquid explosives plot of 2006, in which ten American and Canadian airliners bound for the United States were to be blown up in the sky, was foiled not by TSA screeners but by British police.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the "underwear bomber," was foiled on Dec. 25, 2009 by his own incompetence at bomb assembly, not by TSA screeners. We had intelligence on him, but the government failed to act. His U.S. visa was not revoked. Even Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano admitted that the system failed, although TSA administrator John Pistole told a Senate panel last week that if Abdulmutallab had been patted down under the new procedures, "We might be having a different dialogue here this afternoon and in the public."

Like the proverbial man who looks for his keys under the light rather than where he dropped them, America tends to fight the last war because we know how. We make our armored vehicles stronger. Insurgents respond by making IEDs more powerful. So now we're looking for shoe bombers, gel bombers and underwear bombers. And it is taking a toll. Read some first-hand accounts on the new "enhanced" pat-down.

A woman from Grand Rapids was singled out because she was wearing a skirt. Our own Sandra Fish here at Politics Daily has a story to tell about the TSA and her mastectomy implant.

Perhaps the most disturbing story of all, though, happened not in the last week, but last year. Writes a New York Times reader named Kathleen: "TSA agents forced my 96-year-old aunt recovering from a hip replacement surgery to get out of her wheelchair. They refused to let us help her, and so she fell in the security area, hitting her head and badly bruising her neck."

The same woman had her pumped breast milk thrown into the trash by a TSA agent. She was traveling with a baby and two small children.

On Nov. 16, Pistole testified before Congress that the 3-year-old getting patted down is "urban legend." Really, Mr. Pistole? You mean you haven't watched the videos? Well, we need to get you up to speed. Here's one:

Of course, you could avoid the pat-down by going through the "Rapiscan" instead. But the health concerns about this type of scan are not imaginary. A French software engineer worries about bugs in the code, which could accidentally unleash radiation in high doses. "In these machines, unless the bug completely disables the machine, how can you tell there is problem? Your hair is not going to catch fire because the radiation level is 100 stronger than normal."

And then there's the stench of conflict of interest. Follow the money! Michael Chertoff, former head of Homeland Security, promoted the "Rapiscan" in 2005 without revealing that the manufacturer was a client of his consulting company, The Chertoff Group. (Comments one boingboing.net reader: "I'll See You in Hell Dept. Could this logo BE any more sinister??")

Still other travelers have noted that unscreened people, including janitors and food service workers, have unfettered access to airplanes. And the woods surrounding some airports are unguarded. Why couldn't a terrorist fire a shoulder-launched missile on an airplane during taxi, takeoff or landing? The TSA enhanced passenger pat-downs and scans will not stop that.

Congressman Ron Paul has introduced the American Traveler Dignity Act. Wednesday, November 24, the day before Thanksgiving, has been declared National Opt Out Day, as a protest.

Writes one reader: "i suspect that aeroplanes will be falling out of the sky due to freight/checked in items. no amount of vigilance will fix this, given the volume. maybe flying is over?" Ten years ago such a statement would have been regarded as laughable. A lot can change in ten years. Even in three years, as seen in the newspaper industry.

One of the more intriguing transportation solutions I've encountered involves many small planes and a dozen small airports scattered all over a city. Instead of planning weeks in advance to travel in a big jet, you'd instead fly with the same ease as riding in a shuttle van. The big numbers of bodies terrorists crave would be gone, and planes would lose their allure as targets.

What then?

Another commenter makes this point: "With the cockpit secure on planes, if an explosive did make it on a plane, a few hundred people at best would die. But who monitors who goes in and out of our malls, hospitals, theaters, colleges, etc. At a NJ mall two years ago there was a bomb scare on black Friday. Police decided not to evacuate the mall because it would be like evacuating a small city of 20-30,000 people. Why is the safety of 200 more important than the safety of 20,000?"

Related Articles
From Politics Daily
TSA Chief Defends Airport Pat-Downs (but Hillary Clinton Wouldn’t Want One)
10 hours ago

The Barbed Wire Airport: Is America Afflicted with Security Fatigue?
4 days ago

GOP Senator on Airport Security Pat-Downs: Hands Off My Wife
4 days ago

Lawmakers Ask, Has Airport Screening Gone Overboard?
5 days ago
From Our Partners
Florida Airport Wants to Lose TSA Staff
Aol News-3 days ago

TSA Chief Says No Change in Airport Scanners, Pat-Downs
Aol News-4 days ago

Should gay TSA agents give pat-downs?
Salon-4 days ago

Are You OK With the New Full-Body X-Ray Scans at Airports?
Asylum-5 days ago

Our New Approach to Comments
In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add Your Comment
Signed in as: faith(Sign out)

Add your comment

Comment Moderation Enabled
Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

26Commentsturn comments off
Sort By: Oldest first Newest first bonefish2610:26 PM Nov 21, 2010(1) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down I remember riding a train in Japan in the 1960's - absolutely smooth ride, glass doors between cars, facing seats with a table and hosteses. Now more than 40 years later and all Americans seem to be able to ask is whether their suv is bigger than the other guy's.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse Susan10:13 PM Nov 21, 2010(2) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down "Those who refuse to go through the scanners are subject to thorough pat-downs that include agency officials touching the clothed genital areas of passengers" This is why the airlines may fail.....this is absolutely shameful.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse tj1231239:47 PM Nov 21, 2010(4) vote this comment up (0) vote this comment down Wonder how long it will be, before the Airlines will be looking for bailouts again?

Reply to this comment Report Abuse cvnchichay9:47 PM Nov 21, 2010(8) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down The problem is the government who is willing to subject the travelling public to these indignities so they do not have to profile the relative few. Political correctness has finally reached intolerable consequences, but the public still has no clue what's causing it. Political correctness often calls for denying the obvious.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse rneal161599:23 PM Nov 21, 2010(1) vote this comment up (0) vote this comment down Excellent commentary, Donna.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse Richard9:19 PM Nov 21, 2010(7) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down I wrote to Congressman Dr. Paul thanking him for his legislation proposal, my congressman and my two senators asking that they support Congressman Dr. Paul's proposal. Enough is enough. Americans are NOT the criminals here!

Reply to this comment Report Abuse flavioos9:03 PM Nov 21, 2010(6) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down Hey TSA - Stop the "body-patting" or, if you prefer, the "body-bullying." Enough! You are already the most hated airlines in the Americas.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse Sonja Dunbar9:00 PM Nov 21, 2010(9) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down I refuse to be treated like a criminal/terrorist, so I will no longer be flying. These measures have finally reached the point of being rediculous and if they aren't changed, airplane travel could really be over. I am NOT at criminal or terrorist and would NEVER commit a crime of any kind and I'm just sick and tired of being treated like one, not only when flying, but even stores make me feel uncomfortable. I refuse to leave purchases at the service desk because they think I might sneak something out of their store in those bags. I wouldn't and I resent them thinking that I would, so I will not shop at that store. I'm just sick and tired of being treated like something I'm not!!!!

Reply to this comment Report Abuse dxman78:46 PM Nov 21, 2010(3) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down Excellent Essay, Ms Trussell. Anyone reading it endorses the words of an Australian when U.S. invaded Iraqi: "Americans are not intelligent anymore as they used to be."

Reply to this comment Report Abuse Liz7:32 PM Nov 21, 2010(4) vote this comment up (13) vote this comment down This video is so old, that it isn't even relevent. The white uniforms haven't been worn in over two years. It has been many years since getting only two chances to walk through the metal detector. It is now unlimited times. The video and the article have nothing to do with each other. I have worked for TSA for over 8 years, thus I know these things for a fact. Please, if you are going to do an article, at least provide up-to-date material.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse jc8:26 PM Nov 21, 2010(10) vote this comment up (2) vote this comment down she was trying to prove a point....young children ARE being patted down, and for no reason. it makes NO difference how long ago this was.

Report Abuse pjpilot7:22 PM Nov 21, 2010(7) vote this comment up (4) vote this comment down Good article!

Reply to this comment Report Abuse moeelmore7:05 PM Nov 21, 2010(10) vote this comment up (3) vote this comment down too bad our train system for passenger service sucks so much and is expensive too. A perfect example of how we refuse to offer reasonable alternatives to air travel for domestic uses. I, for one, would like to take the train from Albuquerqu to Austin TX to see my kids - but I have to go by way of Los Angeles and it cost about $1400 per person. As for air travel and TSA, its mostly smoke and mirrors as dedicated terrorists will find a way to bypass safeguards. I guess I will have to walk, take a car, or swim to get anyplace now.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse Gene Bluder8:30 PM Nov 21, 2010(1) vote this comment up (0) vote this comment down While your statement re.connecting thru Los Angeles is correct, the price quoted on the Amtrak website is considerably more reasonable---$196 I believe.

Report Abuse ascha798466:28 PM Nov 21, 2010(17) vote this comment up (2) vote this comment down It's time we start over and privatize government.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse bjzink6:18 PM Nov 21, 2010(29) vote this comment up (5) vote this comment down Three words ---- profile, profile, profile. I'm sick of being inconvenienced and embarrassed because the overwhelming majority of the terrorist attacks are committed by young Muslim males. Of course Muslim females are being used now because they are not required to be totally searched. We have to accept that they need to be singled out. They want to kill us.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse jneal112546:07 PM Nov 21, 2010(21) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down You hit the nail right on the head. I don't recall any terrorists every flying out of Ukraine, but there the security is not intrusive, shoes are not removed, and the staff are truly helpful. TSA and the airlines in concert have made flying a miserable experience, and I now drive if the trip is under a thousand miles.....and I know I am not alone. Our governement is so damn omnipotent they do anything they like, without regard to the conseqences on the economy and the anger of their employers......US.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse David R. Collins5:25 PM Nov 21, 2010(34) vote this comment up (4) vote this comment down A great man once said: "Those who would exchange essential liberties for greater security deserve neither!" I completely agree. This man was Benjamin Franklin; one of the founding fathers of this country, and a remarkable scientist and philosopher. I have not flown since 9/11/00, and will not do so. We must not accept erosion of or civil rights and the destruction of our dignity. Write letters to you representatives, and vote with your pocketbook. Freedom is not to discarded lightly, nor will it be easily reclaimed if lost.

Reply to this comment Report Abuse joyce6:08 PM Nov 21, 2010(4) vote this comment up (32) vote this comment down Question: Can you, with all your liberties yell FIRE in a crowded theatre? This sir, has nothing to to with civil rights and if you think it does...what about my civil rights to be as safe as possible when I fly.

Report Abuse bioandroidmel6:15 PM Nov 21, 2010(15) vote this comment up (1) vote this comment down Normally Joyce you aren't given a pat down unless charged with something.

Report Abuse gweedosezz8:26 PM Nov 21, 2010(10) vote this comment up (2) vote this comment down Joyce, No only CAN you yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre, If you DON'T and people burn to death, you can be charged with criminal negligence. As for your civil rights to be as safe as possible when you fly, there is no such right. You do however have the right NOT to be searched or have your property seized without reasonable evidence that YOU SPECIFICALLY have rr are about to commit a crime. There is no PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that EVERY single American who attemps to board an airplane intends to commit an act of terroism. It is just as unconstitutional as taking away EVERYONE'S gun because some people use them to commit murder. ....."The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures/\

Report Abuse Wendy3:22 PM Nov 21, 2010(34) vote this comment up (5) vote this comment down Excellent article. I was serving on active duty in California when the various bombings of 9/11 occurred. Immediately, my military base locked-down and was surrounded by a permanent barbed wire fence. Life forever changed, and I am afraid, not for the better. Long a proponent of train travel and small commuter-hopping prop-jets, my air travel life changed little. The miles I logged during the '80s and '90s served me well, as transferrable frequent flyer points. The days of relaxing, enjoyable air travel are gone. Even so, consider this: what HAS been relaxing and enjoyable in the past nine years? Our country has been taken over by hyper-vigilance. Our citizens have been frightened to the point of numbness. That is what this current airport screening revolt is all about, and it is just the beginning. Just like what happened after the bombings in Pearl Harbor that lead to this country's entrance into WWII, the "sleeping giant" is again awakening. Only this time, the reaction is to atrocities at home. As I said before, it is just the beginning. Hold onto your socks.

I did a very choppy cut and paste. My apologies.

From the article above:

Here's an idea for a thread or a 'civilogue':



Maybe they should start having two lines in the security area like they do in the customs - you know - all EU passports this way / all other passports that way:
They could have heterosexual male pat downs this way - and it'd be a woman doing the patting, all homosexual men that way - a man doing the patdowns/ all lesbians this way - a woman doing the patdowns/all heterosexual women this way - a man doing the patdowns...oh wait...that's four lines.
But they'd probably move faster - or maybe not - depending on how much people got into the patdowns.

This just gets sillier and sillier. Someone really wrote an article on whether or not to have gay people do pat downs?!
Is it don't ask/don't tell in the airline industry?
Does a person have to disclose their sexual preference before being assigned to pat down duty?



'Civilogues' now, huh?'


I wonder how many 'civilogues' go on in real life in the airports.
Actually I can't wait to fly again - I'm gonna take my notebook and camera and do a 'photologue' on the situation.

There really are a lot of possibilities, and some of the possibilities make you giddy.

Having the capacity of being a total exhibitionist at times, I would at least want to do something that would hit the papers. I love a parade.

Yeah - all the human drama that goes on - especially in airports.
My daughter sometimes has to grab my arm and whisper in my ear, 'Mom - stop staring...' to get me to realize that I am in fact, staring.
Life is fascinating.

Well, maybe you'll find this fascinating - it could have been your daughter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4

I've been reading along, being pulled by both points of view and figuring out what I think past my first reactions. I'm still working on that, but my strongest take is that this is all a master fizzle that creates a huge amount of trouble in many ways, is close to useless as a mechanism to prevent a well planned attack, is personally invasive beyond all reasoning, and completely unrealistic in terms of actual danger in our lives. Oh, and that some are making money from the fear, but that is tangential to my thoughts in the sentence before.

On the elements of the screening, I don't fly much these days, and haven't had difficulty or rudeness happen when I have gone through boarding screens, the metal detector and search for too much in carry on liquids (silly, me thinks). I think the reaction some people have to the body scan is understandable, but I don't share it, except that I question the need for such invasiveness. On the body searches, I can see that as useful with people on watch lists or otherwise high profile, at the same time I'm queasy about profiling as either right or even effective... don't know. I do know that I think TSA (etc) should be sharp on getting people on watch lists on the lists of the people at screening in airports, including ticket buying, and ticket buying with cash.

At the same time I'm working out what I think, I see the whole measure of this as inevitably flowing from our fear behavior after the world trade center episodes, inexorably flowing - the same way one can see certain situations in the world in retrospect as inevitable, and even not in retrospect but as they are happening. I can understand how the system considers that perps would use grandmothers and children as carriers... because in some places, some conflicts, they have.

What?