TSA mess and the police

[LuvOrlando]

I don't think anyone was saying "It's ok with me so it should be ok with the world". I think this point was, "I know what REAL sexual molestation is, and this isn't it."

The patdowns are well advertised. Everyone has been warned that they're in place. If they are likely to be traumatic to you, then don't undergo them. Spend your vacation dollars locally, or discover your country by train instead.

I think that is exactly what was meant by the statements regarding my terminology and since this is my thread they were, at least partially, directed squarely at me. So this particular line of defense is terrifically offensive as much because it is wrong as it is because it is inappropriate.

Next up is the assertion that the solution is for me to just not fly, quiet down and go away to resolve the problem. Again, offensive because I am not the peoblem. My reaction is not the problem. The procedures ARE the problem. I think people talking about problems is the only way to fix them so I'll keep talking.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Problem solved. stay home. no touching, no xrays, no pedophiles groping your kids. NO one is uncomfortable with ugly words if they were some semblance of the truth. People are uncomfortable with ugly words when they are used to distort, mislead, and inflame.

Have you even experience this so called "physical assualt" yet?

Oh, so am I to understand that the only reality you accept is the reality you, yourself experience. I see that is a common denominator in your posts. That explains a lot. Since I do not require to see love to know it exists, I do not require to have witnessed a murder to accept it exists. Further, I don't need to be mugged to know I don't want to be mugged so I'm not going to go out and give the airlines a go, I'll wait until changes are made. You see I do not demand to experience all forms of crime to acknowledge they happen to other people so I suppose I just have to chalk up the difference between us to the fact that you and I just approach life very differently.

You see, when I see things on You-tube and in the news and when I hear reports in the news I tend to assume that at least a few of them are credible. I don't immediately jump to the conclusion that there is a conspiracy to undermine a protocol, that a bunch of people are banding together to undo a very great cause. I can see that some of you feel this way but I assure you, I'm not in a conspiracy. I'm just an angry Mom who is not happy with the choices I am being asked to make.

FYI, people are ALWAYS uncomfortable with ugly words, that's what makes them ugly in the first place.

 

[pilotwife_02]

I just wish that the TSA was subjected to the same screening that passengers AND pilots are. I'm not comfortable knowing that they don't get screened at all and are allowed on an airplane for a "security sweep" whenever they want. So therefore, they are allowing unscreened people on an airplane. That doesn't seem right, does it?

Who's to say that a TSA employee won't be the next person to put something on a plane.

 

[LuvOrlando]

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, it's more of a general observation about how this dialogue is going and how I feel about it:

It's one thing for people to say they are ok with something or not ok with something and quite another to go around attacking people who disagree with them. If people want to come here and offer their points of view THAT'S a good thing but to stomp all over someone else to do so is not only a cheap shot, but it's a weak argument and not one I am not likely to listen to. People don't generally hear an argument, people do hear ideas. There is a big difference.

IF someone has another point of view to present, by all means do so, but do it on your own 2 feet. Make your voice separate and distinct from other people then, and only then, does it have the weight of independent thought and then, and only then, do I pay attention. DON'T tell other people how wrong they are, DO tell people how right you are. One style has power the other does not.

 

[eliza61]

Oh, so am I to understand that the only reality you accept is the reality you, yourself experience. I see that is a common denominator in your posts. That explains a lot. Since I do not require to see love to know it exists, I do not require to have witnessed a murder to accept it exists. Further, I don't need to be mugged to know I don't want to be mugged so I'm not going to go out and give the airlines a go, I'll wait until changes are made. You see I do not demand to experience all forms of crime to acknowledge they happen to other people so I suppose I just have to chalk up the difference between us to the fact that you and I just approach life very differently.

You see, when I see things on You-tube and in the news and when I hear reports in the news I tend to assume that at least a few of them are credible. I don't immediately jump to the conclusion that there is a conspiracy to undermine a protocol, that a bunch of people are banding together to undo a very great cause. I can see that some of you feel this way but I assure you, I'm not in a conspiracy. I'm just an angry Mom who is not happy with the choices I am being asked to make.

FYI, people are ALWAYS uncomfortable with ugly words, that's what makes them ugly in the first place.

No I'm saying when you are accusing or painting a wide group of people with some thing that is a crime (physical assualt and rapes are crimes) it helps if you are doing so from first hand experience or at least witnessed these things being done.

I don't think you are in a conspiracy at all. I have said there are some valid points but calling TSA agents names and making claims that your children will be assualted by these agents goes "way beyond" angry mom.

every one runs across choices they wish they didn't have to make, it's called the "lesser of two" evils but the bottom line is You do have a choice.

I don't need to experience a murder to know they happen but I should have witnessed one before I go accusing a person of murder. it's called evidence. Do you have evidence outside of a youtube video that children are being molested at airports? Do you know some one with a child who has been physically assaulted by a TSA agent? Do you know a young girl who has had her eggs destroyed by one of the back scatter machines? any medical proof that this is occuring?

My reality has absolutely nothing to do with it, I've made my choices and will continue to do so based on my criteria. I just do so without calling a large segment of working people criminals.

 

[Magpie]

Next up is the assertion that the solution is for me to just not fly, quiet down and go away to resolve the problem. Again, offensive because I am not the peoblem. My reaction is not the problem. The procedures ARE the problem. I think people talking about problems is the only way to fix them so I'll keep talking.

But what are you doing to actually change things, for real? A Dis Board debate, while entertaining as all heck, doesn't actually achieve anything useful.

Have you written to your Congressman yet?

 

[LuvOrlando]

No I'm saying when you are accusing or painting a wide group of people with some thing that is a crime (physical assualt and rapes are crimes) it helps if you are doing so from first hand experience or at least witnessed these things being done.

I don't think you are in a conspiracy at all. I have said there are some valid points but calling TSA agents names and making claims that your children will be assualted by these agents goes "way beyond" angry mom.

every one runs across choices they wish they didn't have to make, it's called the "lesser of two" evils but the bottom line is You do have a choice.

I don't need to experience a murder to know they happen but I should have witnessed one before I go accusing a person of murder. it's called evidence. Do you have evidence outside of a youtube video that children are being molested at airports? Do you know some one with a child who has been physically assaulted by a TSA agent? Do you know a young girl who has had her eggs destroyed by one of the back scatter machines? any medical proof that this is occuring?

My reality has absolutely nothing to do with it, I've made my choices and will continue to do so based on my criteria. I just do so without calling a large segment of working people criminals.

Did cigarettes cause cancer before they were acknowledged to do so by the medical community or not? I kind of think they did. The report didn't make cigarettes carcinogens. Was the earth round before the scientific community declared it so or not? Again, I kind of think it was. In my opinion, sometimes common sense should take over where the establishment is slow. Common sense tells me that if the whole counties female population gets a lead blanket when getting dental or other x-rays then there must have been research somewhere along the lines to warrant the trouble and expense.

Common sense also tells me considering everything I've read on the subject of child development, and my own experiences, that an adult invasively touching a child is a bad idea all the way around. I don't need a report to tell me this, I'm sure there are reports on this but i don't need one in my hand to know the situation has got disaster written all over it.

I acknowledge that your common sense may tell you something different than mine, and that's fine. What isn't fine is telling me I'm wrong because I see things differently. I am just as capable of thinking things through as you are and the fact that we reach different conclusions does not mean one or the other is wrong, it just means we're different. I think I'm right for me and you are right for you.

 

[LuvOrlando]

But what are you doing to actually change things, for real? A Dis Board debate, while entertaining as all heck, doesn't actually achieve anything useful.

Have you written to your Congressman yet?

Yep, I did.... oh, and another thing I did was vote.

Silence is never the answer IMHO

 

[Becky2005]

That indeed is an excellent point. Who screens the screeners each time they enter a secured area and probably one of the most important things that should be addressed. A possible scenario is a "poorly paid" TSA agent receives a large sum of money for simply delivering a package. Interesing.

I was just going to say it wouldn't surprise me any since people are greedy. Add someone disgruntled about something and/or want the "15 minutes of fame" it could bring them or they are paid off to "not find anything/look the other way" during security. Who knows, if I'm just your average citizen and can come up with a scenerio I'm positive those that have full intention of doing harm have much more sophisticated and better ones than I could even fathom.

 

[Heidict]

I don't need to experience a murder to know they happen but I should have witnessed one before I go accusing a person of murder. it's called evidence. Do you have evidence outside of a youtube video that children are being molested at airports? Do you know some one with a child who has been physically assaulted by a TSA agent? Do you know a young girl who has had her eggs destroyed by one of the back scatter machines? any medical proof that this is occuring?

My reality has absolutely nothing to do with it, I've made my choices and will continue to do so based on my criteria. I just do so without calling a large segment of working people criminals.

So, you would have to actually witness the murder to determine if a person is guilty? Evidence and testimony of other witnesses means nothing to you? If that were the case then I guess we would have a lot more murderers running around the streets instead of locked safely in prison.

 

[Magpie]

Yep, I did.... oh, and another thing I did was vote.

Silence is never the answer IMHO

I voted, too. Though not in your country.

And FWIW, while silence isn't the answer, neither is shouting. How about a (saner) alternative; "I disagree with your policies, but I don't actually think your agents are child molesters."

 

[JLTraveling]

I'm late to the party, but I support LuvOrlando 100%. My background is in psychology, and I write professionally about phobias. Both the scanners and the invasive pat downs are what is known as "triggers." A trigger is, simply, something that causes a portion of the population distress, fear, or discomfort. It could be because that person was previously molested. It could be because that person is touch-sensitive (have any of the moms of kids with autistic spectrum disorders weighed in yet?). It could be for absolutely no discernible reason at all. But it doesn't make someone "hysterical" or "panicky" or a "conspiracy theorist" to have a negative reaction to a trigger.

Now, just about anything could trigger someone, somewhere. Some people are afraid of cats. Some are afraid of toothbrushes. We can't make the world entirely safe and comfortable for everyone. BUT, the visceral reactions being expressed both here and around the world indicate that the number of people who are being triggered by these new security measures is reasonably high. I haven't done a study, so I can't say precisely how high. But clearly high enough to be a problem.

Now add in a little matter known as civil liberties. Someone upthread quoted the 4th Amendment, so I won't rehash it. For those who say "you don't have to fly," that's true for me and apparently true for LuvOrlando. But it's not true for everyone. Flying is required by many employers. Why should someone have to choose between being groped/exposed or losing their job? What if your boss told you that you had to allow him/her to fondle you? Wouldn't you immediately file a sexual harassment suit?

I was particularly interested in eliza61's arguments regarding profiling. I am truly sorry that your family experienced those horrible things. But I'm confused as to why you are then okay with being automatically suspected of terrorism whenever you enter an airport. Just like the police officers who harass your family for being black and owning a Lexus, the TSA agents harass you for being American and choosing to fly. I don't see a lot of distinction there. Unless, perhaps, you would be fine with being harassed for owning a Lexus, as long as all Lexus owners of all ethnicities were being harassed? In which case it appears that the racial component is your only concern, not the fact of the harassment itself

I'm half-Jewish. I lost relatives in the Holocaust. So perhaps my opinions are colored by the very real fact that I, too, see a slippery slope. Hitler also started with policies that were designed to "keep the people safe." I never thought I would live to see the day when the American public would tolerate daily invasion into their lives in the name of "safety." I was appalled by the Patriot Act. The fact that it has now escalated into the choice between naked scanners and invasive pat downs, and people are STILL okay with that, has me completely boggled.

For those who keep saying that this will somehow "prevent" another 9/11, do you really believe that the terrorists (well-developed terror cells, not random idiots) are stupid? In case you hadn't noticed, we're still chasing previous threats. How many "underwear bombers" have there been in the past year? How many "shoe bombers" have there been since we started taking off our shoes? They adapt to whatever we're doing and change their MO.

Finally, okay, let's say that you're right. Security theater is going to prevent all future attacks. At what price, then, are we safe? September 11 wasn't an attack on those who died. It was an attack on our way of life. Their goal was to disrupt our freedom, and they've done a heck of a job at that. I, personally, would rather die in a free society than live in one controlled by fear.

 

[BCDisneyFanatic]

I voted, too. Though not in your country.

And FWIW, while silence isn't the answer, neither is shouting. How about a (saner) alternative; "I disagree with your policies, but I don't actually think your agents are child molesters."

That made me LOL. I'm not sure the reference will be appreciated, though.

 

[Magpie]

I'm late to the party, but I support LuvOrlando 100%. My background is in psychology, and I write professionally about phobias. Both the scanners and the invasive pat downs are what is known as "triggers." A trigger is, simply, something that causes a portion of the population distress, fear, or discomfort. It could be because that person was previously molested. It could be because that person is touch-sensitive (have any of the moms of kids with autistic spectrum disorders weighed in yet?). It could be for absolutely no discernible reason at all. But it doesn't make someone "hysterical" or "panicky" or a "conspiracy theorist" to have a negative reaction to a trigger.

Now, just about anything could trigger someone, somewhere. Some people are afraid of cats. Some are afraid of toothbrushes. We can't make the world entirely safe and comfortable for everyone. BUT, the visceral reactions being expressed both here and around the world indicate that the number of people who are being triggered by these new security measures is reasonably high. I haven't done a study, so I can't say precisely how high. But clearly high enough to be a problem.

Now add in a little matter known as civil liberties. Someone upthread quoted the 4th Amendment, so I won't rehash it. For those who say "you don't have to fly," that's true for me and apparently true for LuvOrlando. But it's not true for everyone. Flying is required by many employers. Why should someone have to choose between being groped/exposed or losing their job? What if your boss told you that you had to allow him/her to fondle you? Wouldn't you immediately file a sexual harassment suit?

I was particularly interested in eliza61's arguments regarding profiling. I am truly sorry that your family experienced those horrible things. But I'm confused as to why you are then okay with being automatically suspected of terrorism whenever you enter an airport. Just like the police officers who harass your family for being black and owning a Lexus, the TSA agents harass you for being American and choosing to fly. I don't see a lot of distinction there. Unless, perhaps, you would be fine with being harassed for owning a Lexus, as long as all Lexus owners of all ethnicities were being harassed? In which case it appears that the racial component is your only concern, not the fact of the harassment itself

I'm half-Jewish. I lost relatives in the Holocaust. So perhaps my opinions are colored by the very real fact that I, too, see a slippery slope. Hitler also started with policies that were designed to "keep the people safe." I never thought I would live to see the day when the American public would tolerate daily invasion into their lives in the name of "safety." I was appalled by the Patriot Act. The fact that it has now escalated into the choice between naked scanners and invasive pat downs, and people are STILL okay with that, has me completely boggled.

For those who keep saying that this will somehow "prevent" another 9/11, do you really believe that the terrorists (well-developed terror cells, not random idiots) are stupid? In case you hadn't noticed, we're still chasing previous threats. How many "underwear bombers" have there been in the past year? How many "shoe bombers" have there been since we started taking off our shoes? They adapt to whatever we're doing and change their MO.

Finally, okay, let's say that you're right. Security theater is going to prevent all future attacks. At what price, then, are we safe? September 11 wasn't an attack on those who died. It was an attack on our way of life. Their goal was to disrupt our freedom, and they've done a heck of a job at that. I, personally, would rather die in a free society than live in one controlled by fear.

These are all good points. From a personal perspective, I'm not bothered by the scans, but I can certainly see the larger picture as you paint it.

Thank you for a cogent contribution to the debate.

 

[adkkev]

Yes, it's fine to object and be critical of these TSA policies, but I wish the OP would put forth some alternatives. How would the OP insure airline travelers' safety? What are your ideas?

 

[kaytieeldr]

Complaining, writing letters, protesting...these are the only things that ever change anything!

Well, complaining on an internet forum won't change anything. Taking the other actions you recommended, and directing them properly? Yeah, maybe.

Punkin, you are right. I think I'll let Continental know they are losing $2,000 in tickets to Aruba over this... money talks right?

Interesting. There doesn't seem to be another airline that'll be gaining money from the decision to not fly Continental to Aruba, right? Perhaps better recipients would be Congress, the Department of Commerce...

What was wrong with how things were being done 1 year to 6 months ago? I took 2 flights last year and managed to get there safely without x-rays and without being groped. The tragedy of 9/11 happened years ago and there has been no repeat so I think we can assume what was going on since then was working just fine.

And a century ago, our grandparents or great-grandparents (or parents) emigrated here by boat. Boats were working 'just fine', so there was no need to change - yet now we have airplane travel

 

[kaytieeldr]

Just as any line of work - you know what you're getting yourself into, correct? Which makes me question the whole thing, even more.

Well, except most of the TSOs have been employed WAY more than the few weeks since the new practices went into effect.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Yes, it's fine to object and be critical of these TSA policies, but I wish the OP would put forth some alternatives. How would the OP insure airline travelers' safety? What are your ideas?

Really? This is at least the 3rd time I've repeated myself. Again, MY idea is stick with whatever was happening prior to the scanners and invasive pat downs. There have been many flights and passengers since 9/11 and no repeat of that terrible day so obviously what we were doing has been effective. There have been no incidents in the news, no increases in arrests, nothing that warrants the changes, I guess if there were other incidents I might be persuaded to accept more but as it stands this seems to be an arbitrary change. Why ask ME to incur more risk when supposedly I am the person the powers that be are supposed to be trying to protect???

After 9/11 I accepted my world needed to change so I went along with invasion after invasion of my rights in the name of safety. I understood that we are at War and that the situation demands some changes. But here and now I am personally drawing a line, and that line runs right around my body and the bodies of my kids. It is not OK to subject me and my kids to invasive procedures when I have done nothing wrong. They can look through my stuff, they can look through my life, they can take biometric scans of me and finger print me, I don't care, but what they CAN'T do is touch us invasively and what they CAN'T do is deliberately expose us to carcinogens.

 

[Colleen27]

To the first part, I suppose it's likely because the front of one's hand is better able to feel for foreign objects since it's much more sensitive than the back of the hand.

To the second part, I understand. I feel differently. And as a victim of childhood molestation I can say I am able to distinguish the difference between the thorough pat-down and the horror I suffered for years as a kid. It actually sickens me a bit to see people try to equate the two. But hey, there is no issue on earth that will ever find universal acceptance.

There is a range of what constitutes molestation, though. An authority figure from my childhood was convicted of sexual assault (in some lesser degree than rape, but he's still a registered offender and served time) for doing basically what the TSA agents are supposed to be doing under the new protocols. He never actually had sex with any of his victims, but fondled/groped a rather large number of young boys.

And as far as feeling for objects, I'm with a previous poster on that count - someone committed enough to enact a suicide plot isn't going to draw the line at stashing something in a body cavity for later retrieval. This is nothing more than security-for-show, and isn't likely to prevent anything.

 

[eliza61]

Now, just about anything could trigger someone, somewhere. Some people are afraid of cats. Some are afraid of toothbrushes. We can't make the world entirely safe and comfortable for everyone. BUT, the visceral reactions being expressed both here and around the world indicate that the number of people who are being triggered by these new security measures is reasonably high. I haven't done a study, so I can't say precisely how high. But clearly high enough to be a problem.

I was particularly interested in eliza61's arguments regarding profiling. I am truly sorry that your family experienced those horrible things. But I'm confused as to why you are then okay with being automatically suspected of terrorism whenever you enter an airport. Just like the police officers who harass your family for being black and owning a Lexus, the TSA agents harass you for being American and choosing to fly. I don't see a lot of distinction there. Unless, perhaps, you would be fine with being harassed for owning a Lexus, as long as all Lexus owners of all ethnicities were being harassed? In which case it appears that the racial component is your only concern, not the fact of the harassment itself

I'm half-Jewish. I lost relatives in the Holocaust. So perhaps my opinions are colored by the very real fact that I, too, see a slippery slope. Hitler also started with policies that were designed to "keep the people safe." I never thought I would live to see the day when the American public would tolerate daily invasion into their lives in the name of "safety." I was appalled by the Patriot Act. The fact that it has now escalated into the choice between naked scanners and invasive pat downs, and people are STILL okay with
Finally, okay, let's say that you're right. Security theater is going to prevent all future attacks. At what price, then, are we safe? September 11 wasn't an attack on those who died. It was an attack on our way of life. Their goal was to disrupt our freedom, and they've done a heck of a job at that. I, personally, would rather die in a free society than live in one controlled by fear.

Hey JL, thanks for the question.

No I have quite a few issues with the security measures and as I've said before every time I fly I must evaluate what I deem as too invasive. what I object to is painting the AGENTS who for the most part are not power hungry pedophiles waiting to get their hands on people but simply hardworking folks trying to keep a job. Are there some scums in the pond sure. But they are no more all child pedophiles than all black men are drug dealers and the problem is that once you start spreading the lie, the lie becomes the preception. Just as the preception among most americans is that african american men are criminals, not based on truth but based on years of portraying them that way. It is because of my history with racial profiling and discrimination that makes me object to these post. So now you have op and bloggers screaming that the agents are "perverts, feeling them up, sexually assualting children" and the hysteria becomes the preception.


You're lucky, you have always had your civil rights. so sure you can say you'd rather die in a free society. Some of us are not so fortunate, that choice has never been extended to us. So maybe it's more of an issue of not missing some thing I never had.


The bottom line there is absolutely no safety measure thats going to guarantee our safety. nada, zip, nothing.

Happy travels