John Tyner: The Nail That Sticks Up Will Be Hammered Down (Update: Penn’s Justice)
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here.]
Update: Iowahawk goofs on the whole controversy with a song: Comply with Me.
Update (II): New post here on what happened when Penn Jillette did call the cops.
So recently there has been a lot of rebellion against the TSA’s frankly invasive scanning and pat downs. I haven’t written on it, because frankly I wasn’t sure how I felt about the core issue. I mean the fact is we do have people putting bombs in their shoes and underwear. That is the reality we live with. And complaining that we are patting down a three year old girl and so on, forgets that if we give them a free pass the terrorists are given an incentive to use three year old girls. Our enemies are that big a bunch of @$$holes. But on the other hand, I can completely understand where people are coming from when they say, “this is too far, whatever the justification.”
And certainly the award for the most ridiculous complaint has to go to CAIR which seems to think that Muslim women, and only Muslim women, should be exempt from the full body pat-down. The amazing thing in this press release is that this comes on the heels of instructing Muslim women to be ready to accuse TSA officials of profiling:
If you are selected for secondary screening after you go through the metal detector and it does not go off, and “sss” is not written on your boarding pass, ask the TSA officer if the reason you are being selected is because of your head scarf.
So rather than profile Muslim women, single them out for especially nice treatment, I guess. What a dhimwitted thing to say.
Still, while I am not sure how I feel about the full body scans, I can agree with this simple proposition. You should be allowed to refuse to fly, rather than be subjected to any of this. And that is where John Tyner comes in. John Tyner is the famous “if you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested” guy. He wrote an absolutely famous blog post where he described his encounter with the TSA, where basically he said, pat me down, but hands off the jewels. The TSA said, “if you don’t submit to this, you can’t fly” in which case he told them he was not willing to fly under those circumstances. Really read the whole thing, but he was perfectly reasonable and as far as I know not at all disruptive. He just objected to being felt up. And while I am of two minds on the issue of whether they can make that a requirement of flying, certainly he should be able to refuse to fly as an option.
And so naturally, they are investigating him. That’s right, because supposedly it’s a crime to leave the security area without permission once you have entered. Which is funny, because they not only gave him permission to leave the security area, but actually escorted him out. So depending on the wording of the statute (I have not found the actual statute), their official explanation for the investigation doesn’t seem to make sense. Further, if you look at the guidance they give for fines, the one that corresponds with refusing the pat downs maxes at $3,000, not the $11,000 amount they keep bandying around.
No, I am sorry, but this looks like payback for a man who embarrassed them nationally. And it’s wrong. The TSA should back down and leave this man alone.
Of course the real problem with this scan-or-molest approach is that it is playing defense. Which means you are inevitably going to annoy a lot of innocent people (even if you do profile), and we still won’t be safe. The correct response from a national security standpoint isn’t to play defense like this. It’s to go on offense, to kill the bad guys where they live. Kill them over there, so we don’t have to face them over here.
But then again, with our current president that will never happen. So its scan or grope, for now.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
Patrick at Popehat says it best:
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:26 pm“… Tyner is really under investigation for embarrassing the TSA and Michael Aguilar, a vindictive little thug who’s been elevated beyond his natural station, which is shining the jackboots of San Diego mall cops …“
“Kill them over there, so we don’t have to face them over here.”
A.W. – One problem with that approach, increasingly, some of these angry people of undetermined religious background, like the Fort Hood shooter and the Times Square Bomber, live over here now.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:29 pmIt’s really frustrating that they are using investigations to chill free speech and freedom.
Tyner did nothing wrong, and the TSA owes him an apology.
This is simply security theatre. Aaron’s right that we’ve got people hiding bombs in their shorts, but we know how to thwart that much more effectively than we are.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:33 pmYeah I’m sure Pres. Palin will restore our civil liberties.
AJB (d64738) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:38 pmShe really isn’t the hard liner some think she is.
She’s pretty moderate. I don’t know that she is the kind of leader who can get us out of this national security quagmire (that’s what it is).
Obama has predicted his own policies will lead to more terrorists.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:42 pmComment by daleyrocks — 11/16/2010 @ 1:29 pm
And, TSA never stopped, and never would have stopped, either one of those a$$hole$.
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:44 pmI liked Richard Forno’s take on this
http://infowarrior.org/pubs/oped/tsa-zero-risk.html
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:47 pmI’ve watched them search an 80 year – old grandmother at O’Hare and a 1,000 year – old guy whose pacemaker went off. I think some common sense is in order for some of these cases – yeah, AQ can try to make the elderly caucasians wear bombs and such, but does anyone think they could pull this off?
Dmac (498ece) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:50 pmIt is kind of an odd situation. There will always be some people working for government agencies who just go off the deep end..and it sounds to me like one of them encountered John Tyner, a guy who was just not going to go along to get along.
But this reminds me of the Asian man who got in trouble for leaving the secured area by going under a rope. If I remember correctly he was upset because his girlfriend was leaving and he just did not think about what he was doing. I think he had to pay a fine for that.
But I hate to defame everybody who works for TSA or assume this is part of some conspiracy to detain law abiding people. I just think that some people in jobs like this go too far sometimes and have to be jerked up. But we have to have security measures and if we did not and something bad happened, you can bet on the fact that people would blame TSA for not keeping them safe.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:53 pmVOR2,
sometimes I wonder how we’d protect ourselves if Al Qaida plotted to sexually assault or take x-ray nude pics of a bunch of people waiting in line to board a plane.
El-Al uses methods that screen everyone, combined with profiling. It’s not irrationally prejudiced, and it’s not particularly breezy to get through (it’s a hassle, actually). But it’s effective security and it retains some modicum of humanity.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 1:58 pmI bet most of them hate these measures more than you or I do. They don’t want to feel people up all day.
Some also want unquestioning obedience at those radiation machines.
But the problem is in the White House. The buck stops there.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:00 pmDmac:
I wondered about this. Judge Nepalitano went on Fox and Friends this morning and called the TSA thugs..I thought that was kind of a broad brush myself. Most of these people are just ordinary folks doing a job. I am sure a lot of conservatives would have agreed with the Judge on this issue, and wanted a different kind of approach..but then again the Judge did not support the Arizona Immigration law on the grounds that it was unconstitutional. I doubt very much if he would have supported any kind of profiling.
So, while I understand that people are tired of the pat downs and all that crap..it is also true that the public expects the government to protect them from all sorts of evils. The public is just not real clear on how they think that will happen.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:01 pmIf you watch the video, he clearly knew what he was doing. He waited behind the rope before he snuck under it.
MayBee (b8f705) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:03 pmBut the TSA guard had wandered away from his post, and some of the cameras weren’t set up.
“It’s to go on offense, to kill the bad guys where they live. Kill them over there, so we don’t have to face them over here.”
Like europe?
imdw (e62ae1) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:04 pmsoo if you break wind during an enhanced body search – what type of assault is that considered to be?
Not that this blog advocates ANY civil disobedience…
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:05 pmThe last time I flew was in October. I had to do this stuff myself. I did not much like it, but then again I knew when I bought the airline ticket that this was part of flying. I actually thought about taking a train or a bus or driving in fact.
But if anyone goes in an airport today, they should not be surprised if they are expected to go through a scanner, if you don’t want to do that, do not fly.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:06 pmso what this all boils down to is that if El Al doesn’t fly there, i’m either driving or not going.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:08 pmIf you watch the video, he clearly knew what he was doing. He waited behind the rope before he snuck under it.
But the TSA guard had wandered away from his post, and some of the cameras weren’t set up.
Comment by MayBee — 11/16/2010 @ 2:03 pm
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:09 pmYou maybe right. I thought he was just upset, but maybe he was more calculating than I thought. However, he was not a terrorist either. But of course, how can a TSA agent really know that?
Tying this in to the other thread, is TSA fully funded by taxes on flights, or are the non-flyers subsidizing flyers?
imdw (0172f3) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:09 pmThis post 9/11 air security is funded by the federal government. Even the private contractors.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:12 pmwhat if you offer to drop trou instead of being groped?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:13 pmred:
The Isrealis use some methods that civil libertarians would not be too crazy about here either. For instance, they can approach people and ask them their reasons for traveling…they scan license plates on cars coming to the airport, they have hundreds of hidden cameras. It is not just a case of them profiling for a certain kind of person. And they are a small country with a limited number of flights.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:13 pmAnd aren’t these methods a lot better than nuns and little girls and boys being groped by an agency that doesn’t screen out perverts?
Or machines pilots fear will give them cancer?
I wonder if El Al’s methods are more expensive than the USA’s. It’s possible. But I think the objection to their methods are political, related to profiling (even though they do screen everyone quite well).
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:15 pm“I bet most of them hate these measures more than you or I do. They don’t want to feel people up all day.”
Dustin – I disagree. I would bet that a budding authoritarian like imdw would love to get a job feeling people up all day.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:17 pmThere is an alternative, as I point out in a post at my blog. This is going to kill an airline or two this next two months unless something drastic happens. I don’t have to fly and will wait a few months until the new Congress is settled in.
Norman Mineta was made Sec Transportation by Bush and he was adamant that there could be no profiling because his parents were interned in WWII. That’s how bureaucrats make decisions. Of course, he is a Democrat.
Mike K (568408) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:17 pmTerrye: i’m somewhat familiar with how ElAl does things and i’ve got no problems with what they do from what i’ve read.
if i had to fly overseas, they would certainly be my first choice.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:17 pm#4, what on earth makes you imagine for a moment that she wouldn’t? What in her background makes you think that?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:17 pmI’m not sure how the two situations are similar.
MayBee (b8f705) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:17 pm“This post 9/11 air security is funded by the federal government. Even the private contractors.”
I’m guessing this means from general taxes, not taxes on flying.
“I wonder if El Al’s methods are more expensive than the USA’s.”
They most certainly are time-consuming.
imdw (0172f3) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:18 pmThere are a lot of weirdos out there and I am usually the most naive about it.
If it were a normal person working for TSA, they would probably be considering a new job. Which makes Daleyrocks’s point seem pretty good.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:20 pmThey aren’t simple. I also suspect they are very expensive. Unlike our screeners, they aren’t unionized, either. They probably still are paid much more.
I’m OK with that method, if this is the alternative.
There’s an ideal out there, where we aren’t profiling or asking tough questions or taking too much time… and planes aren’t blowing up. And that’s not an actual option we have.
What we’re doing now is so radical. Aren’t there other radical ideas that would work a lot better?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:24 pmAlso, what’s to stop someone from having a bomb put in their body (like in The Dark Knight) and then opting for the molestation?
I don’t think the TSA methods are secure enough to justify what we’re going through.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:25 pmAs I travel internationally several times a year, From Doha here is the procedure
Once you enter the door, your checkin bags are scanned before you even get to the ticket counter.
After ticketing, which also is passport scanning you then go to immirgation. Where your carryon bags are checked and everyone goes through a detector, wands, and pat downs – no exceptions
Then you go to a special section for the USA in the departures hall
Then you again go through scanned carryons, detectors, wands and hands, then they hand search your baggage.,
If you take BA, then you stop in Bahrain for refueling, however you have to deplane, and they twice – repeat the full treatment – once getting into the transfer hall and once getting back on the plane.
Then there again is the search in Heathrow
If you take Lufansa, then they do an immediate El AL style interrogation getting off the ramp from the plane and then again the Doha special, wands, hands, bag screen and search.
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:29 pm“You maybe right. I thought he was just upset, but maybe he was more calculating than I thought. However, he was not a terrorist either. But of course, how can a TSA agent really know that?”
He wasn’t a Muslim of Middle Eastern/North African/Southeast Asian (rarely) descent between the ages of 17 and 50? Out of say, the last 100 terrorist incidents against American and/or Western targets, in how many of those incidents have the perpetrators NOT matched that profile?
Andcar (ce488c) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:29 pmAs an obese male in his mid-40s, I’d like to know if I have the right to demand a female TSA supervisor be the one to perform the pat-down, and if I would be subject to any penalties if I moaned during the procedure. Which would, of course, be recorded for posting on YouTube.
malclave (1db6c5) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:30 pmCareful what you wish for.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:35 pmMy Democrat friends told me in 2008 that if I voted for McCain we’d soon see government goons conducting invasive scanning and patdown inspections of innocent citizens.
Well, I voted for McCain anyway…AND MY FRIENDS WERE RIGHT!
😉
MarkJ (42fe5b) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:37 pmHmmm…
A shave, some makeup and a burkha….
I’m ready to travel now …. “girls?”
Just A Guy (ac0201) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:41 pmAnd aren’t these methods a lot better than nuns and little girls and boys being groped by an agency that doesn’t screen out perverts?
Or machines pilots fear will give them cancer?
I wonder if El Al’s methods are more expensive than the USA’s. It’s possible. But I think the objection to their methods are political, related to profiling (even though they do screen everyone quite well).
Comment by Dustin — 11/16/2010 @ 2:15 pm
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:42 pmI am not saying they are better or worse, I am saying they would be frowned upon by civil libertarians. And I don’t think that you could interview everyone flying in the United States. The Israelis have a small country and not that many people flying into and out of that country. No, I don’t think you could duplicate that sort of thing in this country.
@36
That would be awesome. Instead of having to explain the behavior of TSA supervisors, she’d have to explain her own.
malclave (1db6c5) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:43 pmI am sorry I hit the link thing instead of the italic thing. My mistake.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:43 pmHe wasn’t a Muslim of Middle Eastern/North African/Southeast Asian (rarely) descent between the ages of 17 and 50? Out of say, the last 100 terrorist incidents against American and/or Western targets, in how many of those incidents have the perpetrators NOT matched that profile?
Comment by Andcar — 11/16/2010 @ 2:29 pm
There are Asian Muslims in Gitmo. I understand what you are saying about profiling, but these people are cunning. Do not underestimate their ability to get past a profile. The Palestinians have used every means from retarded boys to pack mules. My guess is one reason the recent attempts to smuggle bombs were through UPS was because passenger air lines are getting more difficult.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:46 pmI took your meaning, Terry.
You’re probably right.
Instead, we have this method, which sucks partly because it won’t keep us as safe and partly just because it sucks to experience.
It will take a great leader to solve this. Looks like a job for Mike Castle!
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:48 pmDustin,
VOR2 (10aa64) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:50 pmI agree about El Al and to a degree about the white house being ultimately responsible. But part of the onus falls on Americans. I think all of the plots discovered to blow up a plane have been done through intelligence or passengers subdued the wannabe suicide bomber. They have adjusted tactics and we are still using prevention that focuses on the individuals getting on the plane. 9-11 proved to the terrorists that Americans would fight them in the aisles as in flight 93.
Everything has a risk associated with it. The Israelis live under constant terrorist threat from missiles and suicide bombers but have set a good example of a people not afraid of venturing out or avoiding such extreme measures as the TSA has done.
they adapt to an ever changing threat – we are not doing that with the current setup.
There is the option that Janet could just be as honest as possible with us.
How much radiation will be in the full body scans?
Is it safe for pregnant women?
How will the images be used?
What will happen to employees who are caught saving photos or discussing them?
Are they really not going to store photos to examine in the case of a security breach?
Instead of any honesty, they’ve decided to threaten to grope us to get us to accept the scanners. That’s really disgusting.
MayBee (b8f705) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:52 pmas always, while the rest of us are talking, Iowahawk nails it.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:52 pmThat’s very insightful.
And you’re right about the great Israeli people adapting. We can’t live in a zero risk world. I think we should still try to live our lives. Letting some kid get groped is not in line with that.
Juan Williams is STILL nervous.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:52 pmthe next time I fly and get the pat down I think I will pull a Harry Met Sally moment and scream out “Oh Janet!”…/sarc
VOR2 (10aa64) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:52 pmthe fact that she’s not a nanny state Lieberal?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 2:53 pmAfter we finish the fence, why can’t Nappy do this kind of thing on the border?
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 3:09 pmThe public is just not real clear on how they think that will happen.
True enough – it’s always a case of trying to prevent future disasters vs. giving up your already – limited freedoms while flying. I just wish that TSA would be more coherent while performing their daily tasks.
Dmac (498ece) — 11/16/2010 @ 3:35 pmDo you think by now Obama may regret the Janet N. cabinet appointment almost as much as we do? When you think about it, pretty much everything she’s touched and nearly every word she’s publicly uttered has turned to cr*p and made the administration look inept and clueless.
On another note, on the nightly news a TSA spokesman said NO ONE will be exempted for “religious” reasons from a full body scan or a pat down if they want to get on a plane. Sounds like that might tend to cut down on flying by certain groups, no?
elissa (ed75e1) — 11/16/2010 @ 3:53 pmProfile, profile…profile.
Paul Albers (23002d) — 11/16/2010 @ 3:54 pmIt will be interesting though, when one of those “Thugs” grab onto some guys crotch and Kaboom. Bits and pieces everywhere. It will happen. Effective deterrence by a volunteer virgin hopeful.
As far as them being “Thugs,” No chance. They are just “Good German Guards, following orders.
Any doubt that this is insane should be settled by thinking about why TSA is screening pilots. They don’t need a bomb. They just push the yoke forward and everybody dies, like Egypt Air.
Mike K (568408) — 11/16/2010 @ 3:55 pmBecause Mike, by grabbing the pilot’s crotch, they’ll be able to tell that he’s got his head up his ass, and intends to kill everyone, or something.
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:01 pmwhy TSA is screening pilots
how do you know the dude is a pilot?
what, he has a badge? some sort of identification?
how secure is that? would you be able to tell at a glance if it were forged?
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:14 pmYou’re probably right.
Instead, we have this method, which sucks partly because it won’t keep us as safe and partly just because it sucks to experience.
It will take a great leader to solve this. Looks like a job for Mike Castle!
Comment by Dustin — 11/16/2010 @ 2:48 pm
The thing is no method is perfect and real safety is something of an illusion.
For instance, let’s say we profile. The libertarians will not like that intrusion anymore than they like this one. And there will be innocent people who get caught up in the profiles as well. They will be detained, questioned, and no doubt patted down as well. And to those people that invasion of privacy will be every bit as onerous as this one was to John Tyner.
But I honestly don’t blame all the people who work these jobs or the TSA in general. Sure some of them are going to go too far and behave stupidly, but that is always the case when you give people power over other people.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:17 pmAnd what has Mike Castle got to do with this?
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:19 pm#
Profile, profile…profile.
It will be interesting though, when one of those “Thugs” grab onto some guys crotch and Kaboom. Bits and pieces everywhere. It will happen. Effective deterrence by a volunteer virgin hopeful.
As far as them being “Thugs,” No chance. They are just “Good German Guards, following orders.
Comment by Paul Albers — 11/16/2010 @ 3:54 pm
Actually, we have an unemployment rate of 9.6% in this country and a lot of these people are working at TSA because they need a job and there are not a lot of them out there. I think it is incredibly unfair to assume that all of those people are nazis. It is also unfair to assume that they are all abusing their position or jerking people around. You might as well say all cops are nazis because some of them abuse their authority.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:23 pmComment by aphrael — 11/16/2010 @ 4:14 pm
This is sarcasm, right?
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:25 pmOther than being in the uniform of the airline which employs him/her, and carrying a flight bag filled with tech materials, and having a photo-ID clipped to the front of his/her uni (of a format cleared by, if not dictated by, the TSA/FAA), there would be nothing to indicate that the “pilot” is the pilot.
Right!
Terrye, you might not be a fool, but you are surely amply qualified to play one on TV!
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:26 pmThe problem is the policy, which is designed to be equally insufferable to everyone, defeating the purpose of such a policy
narciso (82637e) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:36 pm#
Terrye, you might not be a fool, but you are surely amply qualified to play one on TV!
Comment by AD-RtR/OS! — 11/16/2010 @ 4:26 pm
What is this supposed to mean? I am not saying it is okay to deprive people of their civil liberties..but the idea that everyone who works for TSA is a nazi is ridiculous. Does this make me a fool?..And the idea that if you start profiling people that there will not be people who claim their rights are being violated is also naive. Or do you think I am a fool for saying that?
The truth is if people want this to stop, they can stop flying…that will do more to get the attention of the airlines and the government than anything else they can do.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:46 pmI’ve been thinking about this a lot. In the past I flew for business nearly every week, but now my business flights are infrequent. I suppose I will tolerate a scan once in a while, but if I were still flying all the time I’d be very concerned about radiation exposure as I know many travelers are. The alternative invasive pat-downs? No effen way!
With respect to the frequent flying my family and friends used to do for celebrations/pleasure/vacations, we recently purchased a wonderful, comfortable new touring car with a huge trunk and great sound system, and have already started to choose to take vacation days and drive to destinations when feasible. (This had less to do with airport screening, and more to do with the hassles, restrictions, and fees related to luggage.) Between the TSA and the airlines’ own greed I can’t see how the airline industry in the US will survive.
elissa (ed75e1) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:47 pmNo, it’s not sarcasm.
How hard is it to, say, steal someone’s uniform (while they’re doing laundry) and forge a photo ID?
I don’t think this is a large risk. But it’s enough of a risk that the TSA shouldn’t treat “pilots” differently just because they look different. If they do, it’s a huge gaping security hole waiting for someone to abuse it.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:49 pm“And what has Mike Castle got to do with this?
Comment by Terrye ”
Just injecting humor into the situation.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:49 pmaphrael has a point, and yet, his point applies whether we screen pilots or not. What’s to stop someone from taking a pilot’s identify and flying a plane into another building?
The answer is that there is security regarding this and it is not something on the front page of the newspapers.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 4:50 pm“I don’t think this is a large risk.”
aphrael – Unless it’s a small plane, usually there are a couple of people in the cockpit. Unfamiliarity with procedures or terminology would give the game away IMHO.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:12 pmJust injecting humor into the situation.
Comment by Dustin — 11/16/2010 @ 4:49 pm
Sorry. I did not mean to be so snippy.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:14 pmI have been through one of these scanners. I did not think it was that big a deal. I did not notice anyone making an issue of it either. Last I heard 81% of the public supports them, but that could change.
I think the TSA could do away with a lot of the criticism just by showing some common courtesy and leaving the kids alone.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:17 pmYeah, a little common sense goes a very long way sometimes.
I think the pat downs are meant to intimidate people who object to the scanners, and that is unacceptable if so.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:41 pmLet’s talk about my penis and my testicles and my anus some more. TSA is infatuated with my penis and my testicles and my anus. TSA wants more than anything else in the world to grope my penis and my testicles and my anus.
Wesson (019671) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:44 pmWe are going to visit relatives, Christmas time.
If they try a backscatter or pat down on my eight-year old, we’re not flying.
If they ask me, I’ll just take off all my clothes.
nk (db4a41) — 11/16/2010 @ 5:49 pmI think the pat downs are meant to intimidate people who object to the scanners, and that is unacceptable if so.
Comment by Dustin — 11/16/2010 @ 5:41 pm
That might be true. I flew out of Indpls in October and they have the scanners there. No one seemed to mind. I think most people have resigned themselves to these measures. They don’t much like them, but they don’t get steamed about them either. I did not see anyone video taping anything either.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:23 pmThis is how our government sees us; WE are the enemy, not Islam.
Once TSA is satisfied that one is not a suicidal fanatic (say, a 3-year-old or a Medal of Honor winner) it should be hands off with a big smile.
Instead TSA has the attitude of a meter maid crossed with a Social Security bureaucrat.
ironhorzmn (cb80d7) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:27 pm“Kill them over there, so we don’t have to face them over here.”
In fact, being ‘over there’ ensures they will be over here. From our first imperial adventure in the Philippines to Vietnam to Somalia, our getting involved in some third world cesspit means that population will follow us home.
stari_momak (53e043) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:37 pmMy mid-20 sons riffed on glib responses they would give TSA attendants doing the grab ‘n grope:
*Is it customary to tip you after this?
*Was it as good for you as it was for me?
*Hey, did one of those feel smaller than the other? I’m worried I might have an infection.
If anything, it’s fodder for one-liners.
On a serious note, Gizmodo reports on One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans.
U.S. Marshals operating the machine in the Orlando, Florida courthouse had improperly-perhaps illegally-saved images of the scans of public servants and private citizens.
Big Sis was not telling us the truth.
Shut Up and Get In the Scanner is an interesting take on the subject by an ex-TSA worker. The title of her post pretty much sums it up. She does make some good points,
The TSA officer who is looking at the image will never see you and you won’t see them. But that vibrator in your carry-on luggage that looks like it would satisfy an elephant, yeah I see that and I see you standing right in front of me. But sure be offended by the naked x-ray image a person in another room is seeing, don’t worry about the vibrator at all or the other weird and crazy crap in your bag.
Flying is a privilege not a right. As such, it can be and is regulated. Requirements can and are set up to ensure that everyone who flies is safe. If you don’t like it, then don’t fly. You may not be as concerned as the next guy about the safety or you may be more concerned. Point is the job of TSA is to ensure the entire traveling public is safe not just you. TSA officers don’t care what you as an individual want, they can’t, it just isn’t possible. You may be ok with lax security but what about the next passenger who wants thorough security?
Your right to privacy isn’t being violated at all. You always have the option to drive a car, take a train, grab the bus or start rowing a boat. You do not have to fly, you just want to fly. The minute you decide you want to fly then you have to accept that security is involved and you are going to have consent and submit to it period the end.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:37 pmDustin, daleyrocks: I’m not positing that someone who goes through security pretending to be a pilot would then actually get on the plane as a pilot.
ISTM that the risk to security of planes remains the same if they go through security pretending to be a captain, change into other clothes in the mens’ roo, and then get on the plane as a passenger.
aphrael (5017ba) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:41 pmDana:
Well the truth is no matter what they do, it means that people who are not terrorists are going to have to deal with some inconvenience or worse. Even if you profile, there will be totally innocent people who are targeted in some way.
The thing is if people do not want to do this, then they should not fly and they should make it plain to the airlines how they feel. If enough of them react that way then maybe there will be changes in security. For instance right now some airports are thinking about using private companies instead of TSA..but even private security companies will have certain requirements.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:53 pmI don’t think this is a large risk. But it’s enough of a risk that the TSA shouldn’t treat “pilots” differently just because they look different. If they do, it’s a huge gaping security hole waiting for someone to abuse it.
Comment by aphrael
I’m trying not to call you an idiot because I think you’re girl and therefore not responsible for statements like this. I assume you think that the entire flight crew is in on the caper. The stewardess wouldn’t point at the pseudo-pilot and say “Hey, that’s a jihadi !”
Are you really this dumb ?
Mike K (568408) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:57 pmAs for images not being used properly, that is going to happen with all kinds of stuff. Look at the Patriot Act, even with safe guards there will be times when people’s privacy is violated. To be honest, in this day and age everything from medical records to private conversations may not stay private. This could just be one more instance where something private goes public.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 6:58 pmMike:
I think the point is that you could use the uniform just to get past security. I am sure it is more complicated than that, but I am not sure anyone was talking about a pretend pilot flying the plane.
Terrye (7d99e4) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:02 pmTerrye,
I’m not sure where I land on this issue yet. On one hand, clearly there needs to be a standard of security protocol followed to the T. But at what point it crosses the line to an overt invasion of privacy and/or an abuse, I’m unclear.
I will say that it’s very interesting to me that the left who has screamed bloody murder about the Patriot Act being an abuse of power and invasion of the privacy of American citizens, is apparently fine with this invasion of
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:04 pmprivacyprivate parts. It’s rather inconsistent.Mike, Aphrael’s a man. But while I agree that obviously this is a problem other people have considered and figured some ways to prevent (not to mention the obvious), I think Aph’s point is that someone could get through security and then just board the plane as a passenger once they took off their uniform’s jacket.
After all, a suicide pilot can happily agree to body scans.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:05 pmDoes anyone know if the whole body scan procedure used by TSA has been approved by the FDA?
John (98859b) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:08 pmI heard John Tyner on the Bill Carroll radio show on KFI 640 in Los Angeles, yesterday 11/16.
It went pretty well, until the last five minutes. Bill Carroll was making the point that the TSA people were not the true enemy, it was the terrorists forcing this upon us all. Tyner did NOT agree, and ALMOST went off on a tangent about U.S. policies that ‘justify’ terrorist actions and foreign nations defending themselves.
Wow! Things are not as they seem with this guy. I will be very curious what the background check turns up, because this guy came to the airport with a plan and agenda. Reminds me of the “don’t Taze me, Bro!” guy.
TimesDisliker (5af4c3) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:09 pmOh, comment 78 shows Aph explaining his point.
Anyway, it’s a valid point. However, I don’t think pilots should deal with the damn machines every day.
I don’t think they should be groped either. Perhaps some biometric means of bypassing the line.
What’s to stop the TSA from having a bomb in THEIR underwear that they put in YOUR underwear? I think we need a TSASA to grope the TSA before they grope you.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:09 pmThis whole thing is the worst porno plot device I’ve ever heard of.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:10 pmThe TSA Theme Song!
Iowahawk again…. 8)
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:53 pm“then get on the plane as a passenger.”
aphrael – Sure, after changing close they could get a boarding pass from an accomplice that had been scribbled on by TSA at the security checkpoint. Anything is possible in theory.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:58 pmclothes not close
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/16/2010 @ 7:59 pmTerrye – yeah, I’m certainly not talking about a pretend pilot flying the plane. I’m talking about someone pretending to be a pilot to get past the security checkpoint and then doing something that doesn’t involve flying the plane.
I think that if we have massively different security requirements for pilots than we do for passengers, unless the method for verifying pilot status is secure, we’re just asking for someone to do this.
aphrael (5017ba) — 11/16/2010 @ 8:03 pmPerhaps some biometric means of bypassing the line
That would assuage my concern on this, yes.
aphrael (5017ba) — 11/16/2010 @ 8:05 pmDustin: so i’m wondering how long before the porn market is flooded with TSA-themed BDSM.
aphrael (5017ba) — 11/16/2010 @ 8:09 pmhow embarrassing … our little country befarces itself a lot these days but this is going above and beyond
happyfeet (42fd61) — 11/16/2010 @ 9:04 pmI hope “TSA secondary screening” enters the lexicon of sexual euphemisms.
Yes, happyfeet, I think our nation is shamed by this. We need better leadership. It’s not an easy task to handle these problems, but it’s not like we just let any old cokehead run the country.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/16/2010 @ 9:09 pmAmerica should have more self-respect than to tolerate the behavior of these TSA losers
happyfeet (42fd61) — 11/16/2010 @ 9:14 pmSecurity for pilots…
There is a secure program for airport access called SIDA:
Security Identification Display Area, or SIDA, is a special security area designated by an airport operator in the US to comply with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements directed by Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) part 107.205. An identification system must be used in this area. Before allowing unescorted access to this area, a person must be trained and their background investigated. Normally, the flight ramp and other sensitive operational areas of a US commercial airport are designated as a SIDA.
The flight-crews, at this time, are not included in this program. This pilots union is pressing for their inclusion:
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 9:50 pm(scroll down to see the letter sent by the union to the FAA)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/worlds-pilots-reject-naked-body-scanners-over-radiation-danger-privacy-breach.html
Even flight attendants and their union are speaking out against this and have contacted the ACLU,
The unveiling of the website comes as a flight attendants union with 2,000 members is upset over what it calls “invasive pat-downs” recently implemented by the TSA.
“We’re getting calls daily about peoples’ experiences, our members are concerned,” said Deborah Volpe, Vice President of the Association of Flight Attendants Local 66.
Volpe confirmed that the union is offering advice to its flight attendants, who mostly work for Tempe-based USAirways, involving the security moves.
According to a union email obtained by ABC15, it tells flight attendants if they opt out of using the body scanner through security and are required to undergo a pat-down to ask the pat-down be conducted in a private area with a witness.
“We don’t want them in uniform going through this enhanced screening where their private areas are being touched in public,” said Volpe. “They actually make contact with the genital area.”
Some passengers have told ABC15 they’ve already encountered flight delays due to crew members having problems with TSA employees.
“It (delay) was over three hours when they finally found a crew member to take her place,” said Les Johnson who says his Charlotte bound flight was delayed. “She (flight attendant) felt that she was groped and supposedly filed a claim.”
According to Volpe, complaints from flight attendants are expected to continue to increase and said some flight attendants are planning to file lawsuits.
A flight attendant who contacted ABC15, and asked not to be named because they are not authorized to be speak about the issue without union approval, says there have been more complaints from flight attendants filed Wednesday morning.
It will be interesting to see if union pushback and potential lawsuits have more impact than Mr. Tyner or the citizens that have spoken out against the procedures.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 11/16/2010 @ 10:09 pmIf the flight crews go on strike, the airlines will be forced to do something.
This new proceedure could possibly be found as a violation of their collective bargaining contract, especially if it requires flight crew to arrive much earlier, which could be considered unpaid work time.
Here is a link to the TSA which lists the airports that currently utilyze the new scanning machines…
AD-RtR/OS! (ba1e7c) — 11/16/2010 @ 10:21 pmhttp://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/faqs.shtm
My feeling on the full body scans are the same as any that infringe the invasion of privacy,especially in the regard to these machines because they will not stop a determined terrorist.
In fact, the question that I pose to anyone who will listen is what is the next step, now that we submitted our privacy to these machines, “when” a terrorist slips past and boards a plane with explosives?
Seriously, we want to make flying as safe as possible, hence these full bodied scanners but we already “know” they are beatable so, what will be the “next” safeguard for flying?
What do the Israeli’s do that we don’t when it comes to flying, I never hear of terrorists boarding their planes with bombs and why can’t we emulate some of what they are doing?
Drider (5ef5c6) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:40 amOne word-PROFILE. If Arabs and Muslims don’t like it, instead of embracing whiny victimhood they could police their own to stop the madness.
And as someone who has family from Ireland, I understand. My grandfather grew up in western Ireland and had family in the IRA way back. When he traveled to England on his way to Lourdes in the 1970s he understood why the British customs checked him out seriously. My father-in-law was born in Belfast and served in the Irish and US Armies and NYPD. Yet when he went back home until recently he knew he would be seriously screened and considered a possible security risk. Neither instance was pleasant but it’s part of life.
If Arabs and Muslims don’t like it, the should stay in the Middle East.This airport kabuki isn’t security, it’s nonsense. And it has to end. PROFILE.
Bugg (996c34) — 11/17/2010 @ 4:36 amTerrye my concern is that the more we submit to these invasions of privacy the more we set ourselves up for abuse by a future leader. It is not okay imo – as citizens we should expect that the government prevents these terror acts before we get in line at the airport.
VOR2 (8e6b90) — 11/17/2010 @ 4:41 amIf we live in such fear that this kind of intrusive search is accepted for the sake of security the terrorists have accomplished far more than they could have dreamed.
“One word-PROFILE. If Arabs and Muslims don’t like it, instead of embracing whiny victimhood they could police their own to stop the madness. ”
So, instead of profiling, you’d like to let muslims be in charge of more security? I tell you the mind of the bigot baffles.
imdw (8bb588) — 11/17/2010 @ 4:54 amimdw – it is unfair to characterize the view you criticized as the mark of a bigot. I understand the sentiment to profile but in terms of effectiveness it doesn’t work all that well.
VOR2 (c9795e) — 11/17/2010 @ 5:17 amThe terrorists have been trying to recruit women and non “Arab looking” people to do their acts of terror. That is why I think that profiling should not be the primary method.
“imdw – it is unfair to characterize the view you criticized as the mark of a bigot. I understand the sentiment to profile but in terms of effectiveness it doesn’t work all that well.”
It was more the “police their own.”
imdw (418908) — 11/17/2010 @ 5:29 amCheap name calling, its all imdw has to offer.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/17/2010 @ 5:39 amGiven imdw’s history, I would suggest he be just a little bit cautious about name-calling others. If you know what I mean.
I particularly liked the bit about policing the actions of others. Cura te ipsum.
Eric Blair (720ce1) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:26 am“I tell you the mind of the bigot baffles.”
imdw – No. I think people here have you pegged pretty well.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:57 am“I tell you the mind of the bigot baffles.”
There is no subject that a leftist cannot turn into racism/bigotry/sexism/xenophobia/homophobia?etc … None.
Yet, there is very little that is baffling about imdw’s bigotry. It is transparent.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 7:03 am“There is no subject that a leftist cannot turn into racism/bigotry/sexism/xenophobia/homophobia?etc … None. ”
What a stretch…. ‘profiling’ and ‘police their own’ being ‘turned’ into bigotry and xenophobia huh? I specially liked the part where “If Arabs and Muslims don’t like it, the should stay in the Middle East”
imdw (19a675) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:31 amEven Patterico thinks this guy is a troll. Which begs the question: why does he post, except to fight and do nasty things?
Sheesh.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:45 amIt somehow feels better about it’s miserable existence by going to a place where it has been asked to leave in the past, and is cleary an unwelcome guest, and calling people names.
JD (560680) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:49 amTroof to powder, JD.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:41 amRadiation, molestation or deportation: No one flies for free.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 11/17/2010 @ 12:26 pm~TSA Motto
It’s not bigotry to point out that 99.9995% of all terrorist attacks in the last quarter century were committed by Muslims. Possibly if the Arab/Muslim community policed their own in the sense they discouraged, shamed and ostracized extremists it would be better for all of us. But I’m not holding my breath. Seems the victimhood nonsense has taken hold of them permanently. After Fort Hood the silence was again deafening. But if they don’t sometime soon join America for real may be they should go to JFK and LAX and fly back one way to their beloved sharia lands , since they cannot abide by a pluralist Western society.
Bugg (4e0dda) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:23 pm“It’s not bigotry to point out that 99.9995% of all terrorist attacks in the last quarter century were committed by Muslims”
Would it be bigotry if this “statistic” was wrong? Or if you were to draw incorrect conclusions, such as group blame, from it? Of course not.
imdw (ca9f6c) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:18 pmimdw, if the statistic is wrong, then prove it. Assuming it, as you apparently prefer, is not an argument but merely a pathetic way to wrap up more of your namecalling.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:20 pmActually, imdw exposes himself really badly here.
The actual question is if it’s bigotry if that statistic is correct. Anyone with reasonable intelligence should see that’s actually what’s being discussed.
Is it bigotry it, realizing most terrorists share certain characteristics, to rely on that when screening passengers?
imdw’s objection is backwards. In fact, his argument is this supposed bigotry, since he is saying that if some other race or sex or religion is committing terrorism, we can then rely on this information.
Obviously, imdw is just trying to pretend he can make a point. He likes to keep his commentary as shallow and brief as possible, because these are issues he just doesn’t understand. That’s why he resorts to quasi death threats and rape jokes.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:27 pm“imdw, if the statistic is wrong, then prove it.”
So, would it be enough if I just “proved” that instead the number was 99.9994%? This is a joke, right? Where does this number even come from? Could it be made up?
imdw (3ac9fb) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:37 pmAre you really debating hyperbole?
There is a serious argument being made. You completely misunderstood the issue, in your attempt to pose as intellectual. It’s pathetic.
The fact is that our war on terror is a war on islamofasict terror. The people with bombs are almost exclusively motivated by Islam.
Getting from that point to the point where we change the way we screen passengers takes some argumentation, but you completely got it backwards. You’re just saying the portion of terrorists who are Islamic might not be high enough to justify your presumed racial profiling.
Obviously, you don’t mean anything you’re saying seriously. You don’t really even know what you’re saying.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:45 pm“Are you really debating hyperbole?”
Instead of debating hyperbole, we should instead just take it as as evidence of bigotry. Like the hyperbole about sending people back to the middle east — ignoring the worlds largest Muslim country, Indonesia. At some point hyperbolic displays of ignorance aren’t simply mistakes, but are also expressions of bigotry.
imdw (011cd2) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:56 pmThat’s what I thought, imdw. You’ve nothing but namecalling.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:15 pmDimwit always loops back to xenophobia, racism, sexism, etc .. It is ultimately all it has.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:27 pmHall of Fame of Trolldom:
And the fellow doesn’t see that this describes precisely his own silly troll actions. It’s like he doesn’t read his own posts. Probably he doesn’t.
This is almost as good as “I work here is done.”
Hall. Of. Fame.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:35 pmIt’s easier to call someone racist than have a rational conversation. I can only speak for myself, call me what ever you want.I live in the real world. And in that world, not some campus multi culti textbook of happy nonsense, real people-a dear friend, several neighbors,3 clients, a guy a played Pop Warner football with, my best friend in 6th grade-were brutally murdered on 9/11.
I will not be silenced. And I suspect a great many people think the same thing, that the PC stupidity has to stop now.
If you want to question what the 2 wars we are “fighting” now have to do with that awful day, where deadly rules of engagement and nation-building in 2 insane places comes in, I agree with you. Let’s discuss all our military commitments, the missions we are asking our troops to carry out, what the goals are and if if they can ever be accomplished.
But you and the rest of the Left are going to have to face the very real danger we are facing in Islamic crazies.Calling everything and everyone racist like a Turrets syndrome tic is not going to short circuit the discussion any longer. The backward “Up With People!” pretend silliness that everyone is potentially a terrorist is a dangerous lie and it has to be stopped. The bulk of terrorists are Muslim fanatics. The airport would be a good place to start. And start with profiling.
Bugg (996c34) — 11/17/2010 @ 6:50 pmimdw – That statistic is obviously part of the Global Zionist Conspiracy. How many times have you read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:06 pmBugg – I too lost several good friends on 9/11 and detest this namby pamby PC BS.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:08 pm