Ed Stetzer has written a passionate plea to resist the full-body scans and the invasive pat-downs that the TSA is now demanding for those who fly.
Read it. He makes a lot of sense.
He gives four reasons why the searches are wrong.
He also makes three suggestions for action.
- We should, if possible, not fly and then tell the airlines that the TSA searches are the reason.
- We should opt out of the full-body scans if you must fly. You will then be “patted down” in the most personal way, but he suggests this is better than the virtual naked pictures of what he calls “virtual strip search machines.”
- We should call our Senators to get them acting. The house passed a ban on these as primary screening tools, but the Senate did not act.
His response is measured and reasonable. Worth reading anyway.
I think we should treat the TSA the same we would anyone else who sexually assaulted a child. Beat them to a pulp. If we’re not comfortable with that we should refuse to fly.
A quote I saw today:
You should never have to explain to your children, Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it’s a government employee, then it’s OK.
I think that was in Stetzer’s article.
I left this note on his blog:
“By Christiane on November 17, 2010 5:15 PM
I favor the scans, but not the ‘pat downs’ as I saw them modeled on television. That’s too ‘personal’ for me, being female.
But the scans are not ‘contact’, and are done for safety reasons. And, having a son in the Coast Guard, who risks his life for the safety of our country, I am not opposed to those who do what is needed, for the safety of the flying public.
‘Modesty’? “Pride’? “Don’t Tread On Me With Your Restrictions”?
For these people, I suggest finding other modes of transportation than flying on a carrier. People’s lives are at stake.
And after all, at least there is CHOICE (now) in whether or not to go through either the scan OR the ‘pat down’. At least we have that.
I’ll take safety for our people, over my prideful ways in this. ‘
Refusing to be fondled is prideful?
Obviously, you are not happy with the safety precautions as they are. Can you suggest something better than would provide the same security and would be more acceptable to yourself?
If you have a better idea, for goodness sake, have the good will to share it with those who are RESPONSIBLE for the safety of the flying public.
No one likes the ‘scan’s, or the ‘pat downs’, but, until something more effective and less upsetting comes along, my advice is ‘don’t fly’. There are plenty of other options.
I have a suggestion….profile, profile, profile and then profile some more.
How’s this for a profile:
1) Male
2) Has bushy beard
3) Has Arabic last name
4) Booked flight last minute
5) Flying out of National Airport (Washington)
This profile, I guarantee you, will result in a “random” more intensive search. I guarantee it because I fit it. And yet it makes me much more angry than body scans. Why? It describes ME, the last two items when my father-in-law died and we took the first flight we could get to him. Male? Guilty. Beard? Absolutely! Just picture me in a red suit saying, “Ho, ho, ho!” Arabic last name? My family has been in America since before the Revolutionary War, and fought (FOR America) in most of her wars; some claim our name is derived from the Scottish name Fergus; others say that we were English, Farrar (and before that, in Normandy as Farrah), but lived on this little spit of land that jutted out into the James River that became known as Farrar’s Island and got slurred over the years; but regardless of that, Fariss is a very common Arabic name–indeed one story is that we were originally from Lebanon. Last minute flight? Yes, few few people get to plan the date of a loved one’s death very far in advance. National, Airport? A very sensitive place to fly in or out of because it is right in Washington, but yes, it had the most convenient flight. And I fit the profile, not withstanding that I am a Baptist preacher and while not a a miliary veteran, am a former police officer. So consequently, I don’t think much of profiling people. It’s personal to me. Scan me all you want; heck, I lost all semblance of modesty when I was in the hospital for a heart attack anyway.
John Fariss
I never got the whole profiling thing. My brother and I both flew to Maine a few years ago – him from GA, me from IA. At every security point, he was searched, his bags opened, full security package. They pretty much waved me through.
Never really understood that.
I have offered to help the TSA on the Department of Homeland Security but they are not interested.
“Don’t fly” is my philosophy as long as the sexual assaults continue.
The scanners and pat downs are worthless at stopping a determined terrorist. I have thought of dozens of ways someone could get explosives past security and onto a jet with zero chance of detection. The TSA and DHS don’t care.
You are right on about plenty of options! My wife and I were planning to go to Europe early next year to celebrate our 25th anniversary. Starting an anniversary celebration with a sexual assault doesn’t sound so good to us. Thus, we will be driving somewhere closer to home. Oh, well. The price of sanity.
Hello STAN,
I’m sorry about your travel plans. My own daughter travels to England periodically, and she is furious about the scans, but she also understands that the intent is for protection of life.
But if anyone ever attempted to pat her down, I’m afraid there would such a scene, that it would make the media for sure!!!
Actually, I’ll be flying more next year, as my son is moving to Hawaii for military duty. Maybe, by then, there will be screening that is not so upsetting.
I hope someday, you and your wife will be able to feel comfortable with boarding procedures so that you can see Europe together. Ah, well . . .
Christiane, Thanks for that!
We did go to France in 1999 and had a wonderful time. Hopefully sanity will return and we can go to France again and you can travel worry-free to Hawaii very often!
Are you serious or is being obtuse just a face you show to the blogosphere? You really need to separate your philosophical support for all things Democrat from what is common sense and what is logically effective. It is disengenuous and along the lines of the defense used at Nuremburg: “well, I was just doing my job.”
If this President Bush were still in charge, I think your voice would be loud against these methods. As it is, since the TSA was created under his watch, I’d think you would be opposed to it’s existence ( i know I am). The scans are medically suspect and can be fooled by creases in clothes. The pat downs are incapable of detecting anything that would explode.
The simplist, safest, and most effective methods for stopping terrorists are good police work (a criminal profile of likely terrorists) and bomb sniffing dogs in every airport. There are no bomb making materiels on the planet that a dog cannot be trained to detect (one breed or another). Every passenger goes through a metal detector (shoes on), their bags are scanned (my carry-ons are usually exhibitionist and don’t mind the process), and every-one goes past one or more dogs (2-3 would probably be enough).
There is no reason a Nun of 35years should have to be “felt-up” by anyone from the TSA, let alone a Muslim. The Catholic church hasn’t practiced anything resembling terrorism since the Inquisition. There is also NO reason my children should ever have naked pictures taken (that have been and WILL be stored, and can and HAVE been transmitted) nor should anyone ever touch them without me breaking off someone’s hand.
I usually travel for personal reasons. But there are people for whom travel is a necessity – a part of the job.
The TSA might have overstepped on this one. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Congress act on this pretty soon.
Perhaps this is a side-note, but I think it is on task. Why is it when someone gets a bit of notoriety in one area they become experts in all other areas?
Stetzer is not a security expert that I know of. He offers no viable solution. He assumes the worst about the individuals at the TSA. I’m not even sure I disagree with him, but I sure am uncomfortable with him presenting himself as any sort of expert in national security.
Every American has the right to speak on issues. I thought Stetzer made some good points, so I posted this link to the post.
I don’t think he was holding himself out as a worldwide expert or anything. Just voicing his opinion. I think he does fly a lot, though.
Dave, I hear what you are saying and I agree that “he has the right.” What I am saying is, we don’t have to always exercise our rights.
I’m saying that this dilutes his credibility in my eyes. Secondly, whether he explicitly put himself forth as an expert, I think it is implicit.
I also appreciate the post because it gave me a chance to express my opinion also. So, I am fully in support of all your posts and moderation. I think this is a significant topic and I appreciate what has been said. My post sounded more critical of Stetzer than I intended.
I think there are a few things to consider here:
1.) you don’t actually have a constitutional right to fly and no not even pointing out that it’s part of your job equals constitutional right.
2.) the government has proven to be incompetent in pretty much everything it does.
3.) Punishing the Air Lines isn’t going to help because the Air Lines would prefer the government get out of their businesss. It is in the Air lines best interest to make flying safe. The Air Line doesn’t have control over or little control over government regulations.
4.) Anybody think it’s a coinkydink that George Soros is making money off of the scanners now required by the government?
and finally how to make flying safe:
Talk to Israel – their flights are safe and they gots all kinds of ideas.
I think the idea of not flying is based on this calculus – that if we stop flying, the airlines will start squawking and their lobbyists will put pressure on the folks in Washington to act.
You think the Air Line lobbyists have not already been squawking?
The government just uses the excuse that it’s for our own good and invokes 9/11. Certain factions of the government will always take as much control as possible all under the guise of keeping us safe but in reality it’s government gaining more and more control. It’s the Overton Window effect which is sorta this “yeah the scanners are bad but at least you don’t have to completely strip and submit to a cavity search.” and many people will say oh yeah the scanner’s not so bad so ok and then the government becomes more intrusive.
Or look at what Ray Lahood is doing in transportation – for our own safety he wants cars to have cell phone scramblers – well what to you do in case of emergency? Oh well ever here of OnStar – the cars can now be equipped for your safety and oh by the way the technology is now available to not only help you in an emergency but tell any official where you are at any moment and tell the green police how many miles you’ve driven. But you know that cell phone driving is not safe so for your safety the government will intrude.
If this is acceptable, what’s next? When the next terrorist hides something in his rectum, will we then have to submit to cavity searches? Anything to be safe, right? Is safety a greater good than liberty?
I heard they were considering allowing Muslim women to bypass these security measures. If that happens, I hope it shuts the entire airline industry down.
Actually, terrorists are already trying to smuggle explosives using “body cavities.” Breast implants is another method they have been experimenting with. There are numerous other undetectable methods that have not yet been made public but I am reasonably certain are being considered by terrorists.
Oh gross but the rectum thing has already been tried and bombs have been found planted in dogs. And of course Muslims are claiming oppression and Islamaphobia for having to submit to the scanners. Some nonsense about racial profiling.
Let’s see people who blow up or want to blow up airplanes look a certain way but let’s exempt those people from checks because of their religion which tells them to blow up the airplanes and then let’s strip search 3 year old blue eyed blond toddlers from Oklahoma. That makes perfect sense to the government workers at the TSA and Janet Napolitano.
Pilots at American and US Airways have made a formal protest over the scans and the radiation involved. Flight Attendents will be included in those decisions. Crew members may have to walk thru the scanners several times a day and many days a month exposing them to a far greater degree of cumulative radiation than passengers; however, they have petitioned for these figures and will surely get them. I’m not a prude but I don’t wear thong bathing suits like some do in Europe but that guy with explosives in his underwear has to be stopped or you’ll find yourself strapped in a seat which isn’t attached to an airplane. It’s cold out there. The “pat downs” for me are out of the question because they haven’t standardised the procedures with every inspector and mistakes are made. There are jerks everywhere including TSA and passengers who will “tell you how it’s going to be done”. This is one of the biggest Christian Holidays of the year in the world and these bums only have to get it right once. No one is forced to fly and no one has the right to jeaporadise the rest of the passengers by being put on without a proper check – including crew members but that may happen at a lesser rate not known to the general public. No matter how many miles a person has sitting in a passenger seat their not an expert in any other part of the operation no matter “who they know”. [Edited by blog administrator] Think of the number of terrorists we’ve caught already, and our attitude should be to do whatever it takes to make it work. Some that don’t mind the pat downs will lessen the lines at the scanners. Who else out here has your interest at heart ? If someone doesn’t like your attitude after your on the flight your going to be put off even if the flight has to divert. That includes Stetzer and any of his friends. No such thing as a cute joke.
Jack, I did not delete the entire comment, but I edited the part in which you insulted another frequent commenter. I am serious about this. I am not going to let the nonsense that goes on at the “Playground” go on here.
If you would like me to remove the entire comment, I will be glad to do it, but I thought it made some reasonable points.
Dave, When I saw your note I knew what part was taken out but the comment was not made to be insulting but only my attempt at some humor. People will be having a good time and a group that knows each other as some do on this blog would surely point and make comments even when there is nothing to be seen except by the screener. I left out the possibility of a private scan with two or more inspectors; but if you anticipate a problem then allow some time because their not going to hold a flight.
Jack, I saw your comment and didn’t think it would have been taken poorly, but poor Dave has a tough job and I’ve been rather “bessie” today if you know what I mean so Dave’s having a rough day as Blog Guard.
Here’s a verse for TSA employees working airport screenings: If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity. Deut 25:11-12 (NASB)
What most people don’t realize is that the phrase “are struggling together” in Hebrew is very close to “are trying to board an airplane”. Ok, I totally made that up. But I still thek the verse is applicable.
I just had an interesting conversation with a man who is an electronics guru and has worked with things like this scanner. He told me two things:
1) The scanners used by the TSA at airports are very low power and do not give extremely clear images.
2) Many of the pictures purported to be actual scans by TSA scanners have been shown to be photoshopped fakes. The man I talked to says the real images are not that clear.
He said the scanner is no big deal.
I don’t know. I’m just saying what he said.
So the scanners are really worthless and the only reason they’re in use is someone somewhere needs to make a buck.
Actually, he said they show guns and such very clearly. But at lower power, living tissue does not show with great resolution.
But the question is would they show “cavities” clearly? My mind wanders to all sorts of other gross things – like what if someone is wearing extra padding – what if someone claims a need for Depends? And if they don’t show things clearly are they really worth the extra hassle?
Bess 22, I was away almost all day and knew when I got in what I wanted to read and that article was first because I knew I could dispatch it quicker than the SBC Part One thing. I can imagine TSA, Crew Members, Baggage, Ticket personnel, Passenger Service people, many of whom know each other. Recognising a fellow employee and without anybody else around knowing they’ll start going through a charade that will either keep others in stitches or have them calling the cops. Like a circus, most airport employees know each other and trying to keep things on the light side during stressful times works. And all employees have dependents, wives, children, parents who employees don’t know but understand us. When one gets abused it’s like “hey rube” in a carnival. Guns are back in the cockpit thanks to the help of the NRA. We’re fighting other things now but guns are still important. Some entire crews, front & back, are female and wrestling matches to take a device away from somebody are out. A good young soldier might be you’re best friend. A good “Blackwater” person may be at his airline work today and a nice loving kissy, kissy thing with only nice thoughts in church on Sunday – if they’re off. Everybody is ready to be as nasty or as nice as required. Know who the enemy really is. Hope this gives a little different perspective.
Bess, I don’t think he meant they’re “useless” but that the don’t show if a person has fleas. Lets not tell the bums what we can or cannot see. That’s stupid.
But Jack, at the risk of having my hand smacked by Dave for going off topic here……can you believe Bristol made it to the finals in DWTS??? and have you seen all the hullabaloo on the left……I mean they just think the Tea Party has crashed computer systems or some such conspiracy all to get a Palin to the finals. Pretty funny!
Jack, I am all for doing everything possible to keep planes safe and I absolutely don’t agree with these people screaming that their rights are somehow being denied. I think the right to get on a plane that is safe and the right to know that some plane isn’t going to be crashed into my neighborhood usurps someone’s rights of not being scanned or what have you. However, after having stated all that. The government is notoriously bad at pretty much everything and all indications are that these scanners and pat downs are not actually doing anything to make anybody safer. Israel is thought to have the highest safest standards in the world for airline safety but we’re over here trying to reinvent the wheel when other countries are not this intrusive but are likely to be more effective. And that’s just my two cents.
“The government is notoriously bad at pretty much everything and all indications are that these scanners and pat downs are not actually doing anything to make anybody safer.”
‘all indications’ ?
do you have ‘back-up’ references ?
I mean real documentation.
Just open your eyes. It is all around you. Public schools churning out graduates that can barely read or write……..medicare, social security, the post office, the VA, you name it. Health care has suffered horribly because of government involvement. (It would be a lot cheaper with more competition.
Even though “free”in Canada, there is rationing. A friend of mine has a dear friend in Canada who was denied chemo because she was 70 and they ration this based upon age. She recently died)
A vocational rehab counselor told me that after the motor voter bill was passed, she was required to sign up all her 18 year old clients to vote. Her clients are mainly those with an IQ of 70 and under. Her files are audited every year by the Feds to make sure she is signing up these mentally disabled people to vote!
All the documentation in the world would not convince you. You would simply tell some heart wrenching story and dismiss facts.
Hi LYDIA,
Here’s some fun to cheer you up. Don’t worry, I made sure it’s the ‘cleaned-up’ version:
http://whattheheckhasobamadonesofar.com/?q=40
Here’s a GAO report and I’ve copied a paragraph which admits these scanners may not have stopped the Christmas Day bomber.
If you care to research it’s all over the internet that these scanners are not thought to be able to do what people are expecting them to do which is stop some one like the underwear bomber.
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d10484t.html
While officials said AITs performed as well as physical pat downs in operational tests, it remains unclear whether the AIT would have detected the weapon used in the December 2009 [Abdulmutallab] incident based on the preliminary information GAO has received.
We estimate that, based on TSA’s fiscal year 2011 budget request and current AIT deployment strategy, increases in staffing costs due to doubling the number of AITs that TSA plans to deploy could add up to $2.4 billion over the expected service life of this investment.
Bess, thank you for the documentation. It’s an interesting read.
That 2.4 billion investment in American property and lives is not unreasonable, I think. Not when aircraft have been flown into buildings like the Pentagon.
You know, somewhere between the ‘crazy’ ideas on both sides, there must be a middle road that is ‘reasonable’. I think we all are inconvenienced by airport security ( I remember my poor father trying to get his shoes off and back on . . . we had to help him, which embarrassed him at the time).
My military son is flying home commercially for Christmas Holiday and I, for one, am grateful for ANY precautions that may protect him and all the innocent people aboard).
Documentation IS needed instead of right wing/left wing media pundits right now.
‘Perfect’ we will never have, but MOST Americans would want the full protection of our flying public by GOVERNMENT agencies, rather than the miserable performance on 9/11 of those ineffective ‘security’ people from outsourced private agencies who were hired to screen passengers by the airports at that time.
THAT, at least, is a ‘given’.
Christiane, this is not a right or left thing. I frequent blogs of all political persuasions. Everyone from Daily Kos to Red State are disturbed by this.
I agree that a couple of billion dollars is not a lot to spend when it’s spent to save lives. The problem is spending money on technology that it seems many in the industry think isn’t acutally going to actually be an advance in safety. That’s where the government fails. After the Christmas Day Bomber when the current administration looked foolish for declaring that the “system worked” they decided to overcompensate and spend lot’s of money to try to make us forget about their incompetence. It was intelligence failures like those that led to 9/11 that allowed the Underwear Bomber to fly to Detroit. But you are certainly entitled to disagree.
I’ve stated several times here now that I am not one of these folks screaming “my rights are being violated” Keeping the public safety trumps some individual rights when it comes to flying. Flying like driving is a privelege. But if you’re goinna do something do the right something. Look to countries like Israel who have very detailed procedures for boarding planes. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel here. Other countries are already way ahead on this subject.
Here’s an article about what Israel does:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/full-body-scanners-are-illusion-security
And yes I know it’s considered a right wing source but does anybody know anythng about the Global Traveler Magazine which ranked Israel as #1 in security?
Yes, Israel is doing great, but BESS, how many airports does Israel have?
Our airport traffic in this country is proportionally much greater and the solutions Israel has applied successfully may not be ‘practical’ in our situation.
Just a thought.
@ Christine 43 // that was not a well thought out thought. To implement El Al security measures would be easy. Also it would protect the public as opposed to the “show-trail” antics of our current Maxist/Leninist govt.
I, too, have problems with ‘our goverment’, as ‘wealth-care’ is still out-of-control,
and if allowed to continue, this country must borrow trillions to pay for it.
Here’s another article and Mclatchy is pretty MSM:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/17/103930/us-firm-may-have-solution-to-airport.html
Nah Christiane I don’t think implementing Israel’s policies here would be problem. Airports are like self contained cities so the number of airports doesn’t actually factor into it.
It’s okl Chrisitaine, I think we really pretty much agree in that we have to do everything necessary to keep ourselves safe and if that means being inconvenienced so be it. I think what most people draw the line is doing these intrusive invasive measures and then seeing/hearing that “well that’s not really gonna work.”
Now on tax policy I’m sure you must agree that the government should not spend money it doesn’t have. Allowing citiizens to keep their own money doesn’t add to deficits – spending money you don’t have adds to deficits. 🙂
BESS,
allowing the top two percent to keep their cut will mean that we must slice into a whole lot more than just earmarks:
‘course cutting Social Security, undercutting the Military during a time of two wars not to mention abandoning our promises to veterans, and dismantling Medicare JUST MIGHT enable us to afford those tax breaks for the super-rich.
But we will still have to borrow more, even then, to let them ‘keep their money’.
And who gets to pay for that?
BESS,
this chart shows you the proportions:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-blogs/79006-gop-plan-extend-tax-cuts-rich-adds-36-billion.html
Christiane – the money doesn’t belong to the government. And yes entitlements are going to have to be reformed if we are ever going to get a handle on the deficit. Yes the military probably could stand some cuts but I would turn around and keep those cuts within the military – rebuilding and upgrading infrastructure used during two wars and more importantly paying the men and women of the military something closer to what they deserve.
Now let me let you in on a little secret on taxes – most people would not mind having a minimal increase in their taxes if those taxes were allocated specifically for deficit reduction, but what will happen if the government is allowed to take peoples money is not that they will make the choices necessary to get our fiscal house in order, no the bleeding heart librerals will decide “hey more revenue let’s spend it.” We don’t have a tax problem we have a spending problem. And until the government starts fixing their spending problem then people are going to resist any increase in government confiscation of citizens money.
And Christiana something like 47% of Americans are paying 0 in federal income tax so who’s going pay for everything is not those lower income Americans. The problem with spending other people’s money is eventually you run out of money.
And here’s your link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36226444/ns/business-personal_finance
So who is paying for the federal government?
That’s what we all want particularly this time of year. Lets say all this talk is just that – talk, a bluff to keep these bums believing their behind the curve. Good, so much the better. I’ve never seen a scanner image = at least one that wasn’t “cut out” and pasted on the screen.
Bess, Well I watched last night and thought I saw surprise in Palin’s eyes. I saw tears after a while in the black lady’s eyes. My son & I driving to NC today discussed it. I asked if it was a black/white thing. He thought “no” but rather more white middle class people watched that show than did blacks. Maybe the entire State of Alaska including Inuit Villages called in I don’t know. But I felt a little embarrassment that she ,Palin who had never danced beat a Lady with a perfect score whose been at it for awhile. Dave can always delete it.
Jack, I don’t think it’s a black/white thing. I think that more “conservative” people watch because it’s a clean show. That’s what I like about it – my whole family can watch and even my teenage boys who think everything is lame pick favorites. Palin is popular because of conservatism.
I hope the producers pay attention to who their audience is beacuse I’ve read reports that Israel’s DWTS has a same-sex couple and the US is watching to see if they could do that here. There are rumors that Ellen’s “wife” is considered as possible same-sex couple. I think if they do that the show is done.
It’s just been an absolutely hoot to me to watch the liberal blogs go nuts because Bristol Palin has made it so far. They actually think there is some kind of tea party conspiracy at ABC.
I’m disappointed that Jennifer is probably going to win. Bristol will get voted off by when it’s left of only judges voting. It’d be nice if Kyle would win. He seems like a sweet kid.
Ron Paul has a few things to say about the TSA.
I have a question. If a veiled Muslim woman has to be searched because she set off the alarms…and she is groped…will she be “punished” by her Muslim colleagues for being touched by another man?
I have heard rumblings that some will be exempted…such as Muslim women because of the danger they might face from their own. But we know that there are instances of Muslim women suicide bombers…so an exemption would not be fair.
Exempting muslims is the very LAST thing that needs to be done.
Put ALL camel jocks on the same plane……including identified suicide bombers!
Maybe TSA has overreached with this. I don’t know. It is always interesting when folks from the Left and Right come together on a cause. Nonetheless, a CBS poll showed that 81% of Americans support the full-body airport scanners.
I did enjoy the commentary of Lewis Black on Tuesday night’s Daily Show. Pretty funny.
I can tell you this – I’m 6’4 and without getting specific, I’d love to weigh less than 300 pounds.
Next time I fly, if I do one of these full-body scans and I hear the agent either laughing or groaning, someone is getting hurt and I am getting arrested!
How can anyone reasonably say: “Maybe the TSA has over reached…“??? Of course they have overreached. None fo the current processes or procedures would have stopped 9/11 because at that point in time the US (and the World) had been conditioned by government to just cooperate with terrorist; let the “expert negotiators” and the Delta Force handle them. I remember a PSA/propaganda piece put out by AFN (Armed Forces Network) from 1997/8 when I was in Korea showing this exact thing: an older couple was seated next to a soldier who was special forces. When the terrorists collected passports, he simply said, “i’m a teacher” (technically true in some sense). Teh couple asked him if he would do anything adn he said, “No, let the experts/govt handle it.” In the end they all lived happily ever after.
We are being further conditioned that public humiliation and questionably effective radiation scanners are the ONLY key to public safety, because if we did what makes sense, we might hurt someone’s feelings.
The simplist, safest, and most effective methods for stopping terrorists are good police work (a criminal profile of likely terrorists including FBI/CIA/NSA reports and intercepts) and bomb sniffing dogs in every airport. There are no bomb making materiels on the planet that a dog cannot be trained to detect (one breed or another). Every passenger goes through a metal detector (shoes on), their bags are scanned (my carry-ons are usually exhibitionist and don’t mind the process), and every-one goes past one or more dogs (2-3 would probably be enough).
How can anyone reasonably say: “Maybe the TSA has over reached…“???
Well, left wingers have no problem with what the TSA is doing.
The fact still remains that 81% of Americans are supportive of the full-body scanners.
The other 19% includes a wide spectrum of people including both the ACLU and Ed Stetzer.
Your line about left-wingers is junk. You’re with the ACLU and many very liberal civil liberties groups on this one.
And by demanding a broad definition of what privacy entails, you’re actually furthering the liberal conception of privacy rights that justifies a number of positions that you would describe as liberal including reproductive rights. After all, Roe was all about privacy…
So yea, it’s not everyday that you see social conservatives teaming up with civil libertarians….
Strangely, Joe, I read an article (which is in direct conflict to BDW’s statistics – not sure what’s going on) that says that this issue is bringing left and right together in opposition.
Maybe the TSA scanners will be the thing that will bring us all together to join hands and sing “kum-ba-ya” and have a giant group hug.
BDW,
I’m a little befuddled by your stat. Do you know when that survey was taken. I’ve been reading stuff that would indicate a shift in sentiment – especially after the story about the guy that has gone viral.
I think that the stat maybe was taken at a time of in general would a screeing be ok. What’s really making this controversial is the people who refuse the screening and then the “pat” down they are now subjected to. As more press is given I would bet that the trend would be lower for people who approve. Especially as more media is focused on “do these scanner even help” and “why aren’t we using the next generation scanners which are not as invasive?”
I’m sure the numbers have changed since November 7th due to the pat-downs. Nonetheless, less than two weeks ago, 4 out of 5 Americans were OK with the full-body Xray.
Here’s the CBS poll link: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20022876-503544.html
When I went to see the Yankees vs. Rangers back in August during the regular season, there was a pretty invasive pat-down required for EVERYONE. There was no required pat-down that I recall during the ALCS. But the night I went, President Bush was at the game. So the increased security probably had something to do with his presence. I have no problem taking a pat-down to see Jeter and C.C.
I wonder though how many in the survey had actually experienced the scanners/pat? I guess I could just look at the survey but were those surveyed actually airline custormers or was a more general population survey where maybe people who don’t actually fly are asked and think “well that seems reasonable”
It’ll be intersting to see a poll taken perhaps after Thanksgiving when more people are traveling and after all this hullabaloo in the news has raised alot of other issues such as effectiveness of scanners.
Taking a pat down to see the Yankees is a completely different thing.
A security expert are we?
Statistical expert are we? See others can make comments that are equally inane and dismissive.
Your citation of a popularity stat is silly on it’s face: if 81% of the people supported the forced deportation of Muslims or Mexicans or Germans would it make things right? If 81% supported the forced internment of Japanese or Jews (oh, wait, both have already been done) does it make it right?
Just becasue “everybody is doing it” doesn’t make it good policy or good security. Most people who listen to Art Bell & George Noory believe in mass consciousness experiments that make rain (maybe as high as 81%) but it doesn’t mean it really works.
The TSA’s security procedures hamper normal law abiding citizens (from all cultural backgrounds) but they are not effective @ stopping “TERRORISTS” the definition of which has not been decided by the TSA. If they cannot admit, acknowledge, or agree publically that the lion-share of “terrorists” are Middle-Eastern Muslim men, then they will never be effective at stopping them.
Random security procedures will only have random effectiveness. The 81% opinion poll changes nothing.
The 81% opinion poll doesn’t change anything.
But it is a pretty good response when someone like yourself makes such a broad-sweeping statement like:
“How can ANYONE REASONABLY say: “Maybe the TSA has over reached…“???
And I bet you have used opinion polls to make a point. Everyone does. Politicians and Radio personalities do it all the time, especially during national debates like Health Care Reform. Average people do the same.
Not claiming to be a polling expert (although I do have a background in sociology and have done quantitative analysis). You’re doing a bit more than cite a published stat (reached by someone else). You’re making statements as if you have a background in security. Just wondering if you did….
🙂
“but they are not effective @ stopping “TERRORISTS” the definition of which has not been decided by the TSA. If they cannot admit, acknowledge, or agree publically that the lion-share of “terrorists” are Middle-Eastern Muslim men, then they will never be effective at stopping them.’
This is exactly right. And bizarre. It is like saying we cannot admit the elephant in the room is gray.
I saw something last week about the Israeli security practices of talking with passengers at several levels and looking for body language each time as the several levels of interviews took place.
Remember: the TSA inspector who let Atta on his first plane said he noted the hateful look in his eyes and the cold demeanor and almost didn’t let him on. I would hate to live with his conscience as it reminds him every day of the thoughts he didn’t entertain that morning.
Ultimately this whole debate about the invasive procedures of the TSA is because of the fact that many care more about being PC than they do about being honest. The fact that we don’t profile is ridiculous. I’m not trying to sound insensative or racist, but the stats show us very clearly what do look for in airline safety. If the terrorists change their tactics in the meantime than we will adapt and in the interim foil the plots of terrorists. Honestly, we need to wake up and quit being so foolish.
Gene actually makes a great point, and if that TSA officer had refused to let Atta on board, based on the description Gene gave, it would have been due to profiling.
Just a fact reminder, but no TSA officer let any 9/11 terrorist on a plane. TSA was created as part of the Homeland Security Department in response to 9/11.
Most airport security was handled by contractors overseen by the FAA.
That said, the profiling issue is a big part of it, and the Fed won’t admit it. Most Americans are not so much just angry about procedures, they’re angry that the same procedure is applied to a WWII vet as to a 9-year-old as to someone who actually looks suspicious, or worse, not to the ones that seem suspicious. Something has to give with this.
I think the 3yr old girl screaming “don’t touch me” might have something to do with public opinion.. It did not help that daddy just happened to be a reporter. The video is copyrighted. Anyone know how to find it?
As has been said, we teach our kids not to allow strangers to touch them but now we have to say “except the strange government man at the airport”.
All I’m gonna say is if my family had to fly somewhere and one of those TSA pervs tried to put their hand down my child’s pants he’d spend the rest of his life answering the qeustion “Hey buddy, where’d you get that limp?”
So all TSA personnel are “pervs.” I always thought of myself as basically a cynic, at worst, and skeptic at best. I just don’t understand these “broad” accusations against a whole class of people.
I don’t fly a lot, but in January I did fly. Because of a unique package I was carrying, I was called aside by the TSA personnel. They frisk me, ask me questions, double examined the package I was carrying. They delayed my passage through security to some length.
They did not exhibit any behavior that was not professional and courteous. Certainly, they were not lewd in any way.
Tough talk, Joe. I’m just not sure it has any credibility.
PS–If you really want to protect your children, and you are not too old, you can volunteer to fight the terrorist face to face in the Middle East. I’m sure our armed forces could use another “tough guy” willing to lay down his life for people he does not even know.
Frank and Larry, SSBN, whoever
At the point my wife or child was going to be fondled and have their crotch felt, unless it was by a doctor or nurse in the course of treating them, they automatically get classified as a perv.
And as to whether my talk has any credibility, well, you’re welcome to your opinion. As to whether I’d defend my wife or my child I wouldn’t bet against it if I were you.
Absolutely, Joe!
Grope my wife or child and you die! Think of it as a TSA agent opting out of life.
Your problem, Joe, is you look for a fight behind any bush. I can assure you I’ll sleep well tonight and am not the least bit intimidated by your veiled threats.
Of course, I would support you in defending your wife or child against molestation. I also support your right to say whatever stupid thought comes to your mind.
I see, now, why so many people have trouble taking you seriously. And, we do agree — it is just my opinion.
SSBN/Larr…whoever
I went back and read what I wrote and I’m not seeing where I made a veiled threat against you. I told you that I wouldn’t bet against it if I were you but that, well, kinda meant what it said. I wouldn’t bet (put something down in a wager) against my defending my wife or child against TSA pervs if I were you. The obviously implication being that if you did you would lose whatever (money, bling bling, car, whatever you chose to bet) you had put up as part of the bet.
Joe, you missed the point — but, as I’ve watched you interact with others, it appears that’s common with you. For one, I never suggested anyone should allow their wife or child to be molested. You had to “make that point, just to miss the point.”
My point was in regard to suggesting that all TSA personnel are “pervs.” I think that is a typical Blackmon overstatement.
Guys, the exchange of insults that goes on with other comment streams will not go on here.
Discuss the topic. Disagree. Tell the other one his opinions are all wet. Fine. But the personal insults are not permitted here.
Ok, here’s some crazy:
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/
Prior to September 11, my wife and I had booked a flight from Amman, Jordan to Tel-Aviv, Israel via Jordanian Air. Prior to boarding, We were all interviewed as to what our purpose was in Israel, etc. All of the checked baggage was lined up beside the airplane and each owner identified his/her luggage to eliminate any “unclaimed” bomb containing luggage. Then each piece of luggage was sniffed by a German shepard and only then was the luggage placed on the aircraft.
As each male boarded the aircraft, we were told to stand with our feet spread apart and our arms raised. We were scanned with a hand held scanner/detector and then the person whom I think was the captain of the aircraft, patted us down. I was shocked to have his hands actually run up each leg and into my groin and then a sudden, short check of my “junk”. The “pat-down” was done in a thorough and professional manner and I did not feel that I had been violated in any way. This was the only time to date that I have been checked so thoroughly and in such a manner.
I am neither defending nor advocating such practices but, one thing was certain, these people were dead serious that there was no bomb or other weapon that was on that plane. I felt that that particular flight was as safe as humanly possible.
Remember, this was four years prior to 9/11 and there were no “body scanners” available at that time. I have given no thought to that incident until recently.
If the TSA was as serious about this stuff as those Jordanians were, there would be similar measures such as the sniffing dogs, and luggage identification as well as the full body scan or pat-down.
Why are they focusing only on those practices that are personally invasive and dehumanizing? Why no dogs? Why no identification of luggage? Why no interviews?
BTW, I do not know if this was the usual practice of the Jordanians or only those flights entering Israel. and my wife was not subjected to the same “frisk” that I was.
“Resistance is futile.” – The Borg
My wife grew up an MK in Jordan. Her statement about this was that there are ways to do this security without making people feel violated. She’s seen the security on both sides, and it was intense.
We could learn a ton from what Isreal does for security on airliners. They have been dealing with this for 40 years.
I wish we would.
Janet Napolatano and Janet Reno are sisters.
I guess I can make a reccomendation to everyone. If I “knew” anything then I couldn’t surmise. But I think something is up and they have gotten wind and along with the holidays they, TSA has to do something Now – immediately. Get there early. Don’t threaten the inspector with anything. Ask what inspection needs to be done with your children and if uncomfortable with it get a private inspection of the right gender and you do the lifting and moving. This doesn’t work get a supervisor but that’s an additional wait. Just remember their using people educated in this country who could be married with children and don’t care about their welfare anymore than they care about themselves. For you and your family’s sake you want everyone and everything that’s necessary “Today”- inspected. Then if you want to be helpful be observant of everyone and any unusual moves – like lighting their shoe with a match. Don’t ask them to please put the match out – take their head off. Others will help you including military men. Don’t be afraid of making a mistake. If someone says,” What do you think I have a bomb?” He’s done. The odds are with you – but your and my flight is the one that counts.
“But I think something is up and they have gotten wind and along with the holidays they, TSA has to do something Now – immediately.”
Makes sense.
Anthony Russo has written on this – and the opportunity Christian travelers have this holiday season. Read it here.
That is a great article. I think we need to remember that despite a few overpublicized abuses, these are just people doing their jobs. They don’t set policy. It wasn’t their idea. We should remember how Jesus responded to real bad guys with real evil intent. You know: scourges, crowns of thorns, hammers, nails, etc.
Yep.