TSA mess and the police

[WDWisTheBest]

Two examples of the TSA "listening" in the past week:

* TSA changes pat-down process for children under 12 after complaints.
* TSA director calls several people who have gone public with specific complaints because of medical conditions. He then talks to them about ways the TSA might have handled their situation better and apologizes.

Yeah, I would say that they are listening.

To add to this, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has recently said that the TSA policy is "evolving". Let's follow how it is evolving.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Aw come on . . . it was good theater.

He tried to save them time when they wanted to do a "virtual strip search."

I disagree. I know good theater. Good theater is a friend of mine. Sam Wolanyk, sir, is not good theater .

Seriously, though - that's absolutely not what he was doing. He refused to go through the scanner - the "virtual strip search", according to many loud voices. He also attempted to bypass the pat-down by stripping down. That's not an option at this time. It may be in the future (although with the horrified outcry about 'nude-o-scopes' and 'viritual strip searches' and 'molestation' I wouldn't hold my breath for actual voluntarypublic strip searches). Since Wolanyk chose to strip in public and wasn't indecently exposed, I don't expect the police to accommodate him by making things easier for him after he refused to comply with the TSA request to put his clothes back on.

And it's UNDERWEAR. Calling the garment 'unmentionables' undermines any point one is trying to make.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Two examples of the TSA "listening" in the past week:

* TSA changes pat-down process for children under 12 after complaints.
* TSA director calls several people who have gone public with specific complaints because of medical conditions. He then talks to them about ways the TSA might have handled their situation better and apologizes.

Yeah, I would say that they are listening.

No, that's not quite listening in my book, that's soothing. I get the same sort of response from my kids when they know I'm unhappy and just want me to go away.

The TSA et al. have absolutely zero intention of listening to any of us because of unmitigated arrogance. Why shouldn't they be arrogant? They answer to no-one after all. If the arrangement doesn't scream, "I'm better than you" I don't know what does. The whole thing stuns me, I thought we did away with the idea of an Aristocracy?

It doesn't matter what they say or do, I am simply not going to play along. This household is firmly in the won't fly camp. It may be true that the TSA itself doesn't care but everyone has a boss and their bosses are in charge of keeping the economy running, so losses will upset the bosses, and more importantly, the Bosses do answer to us.

It seems the TSA really is free to stomp all over us and that doesn't make them right, it just makes them bullies. That's ok, I can wait until someone wakes up and realizes that the general population has teeth, and those teeth are sitting in our wallets and in those voting machines we get to visit every so often. I have a VERY VERY long memory, and once I'm angered I'm not the sort of girl who responds to flowers and a lame oops... I'm more of the "Don't let the door hit you on your way out, see ya around" sort.

Right now it's all about pride and vanity and I'm not going to let some bottom rung TSA agent quasi-military wannabe-cop touch my kids just because some big shot says it's in my best interests. I am not a criminal and my body and my kids bodies are off limits. Good grief, has everyone lost their minds? Our children do not deserve this, I do not deserve this.

Isn't this 'trust no-one and treat them all the same' mentality the same ideology that justified rounding up the US Japanese population in WW2? Agggh, will we never learn that fear can cause unreasonable ideas to appear reasonable? Is this somehow morally and ethically justified because the entire population is dehumanized? I don't think so.

BTW DisneyBamafan, you are not my enemy. I know you think I am yours but you're not mine, if it matters. I have no quarrel with you, as far as I'm concerned we're all on the same team, my beef is with the TSA.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

No, that's not quite listening, that's soothing. I get the same sort of response from my kids when they know I'm unhappy and just want me to go away...

Whatever.

 

[kaytieeldr]

No, that's not quite listening, that's soothing. I get the same sort of response from my kids when they know I'm unhappy and just want me to go away.

No, changing the patdown procedure for children under twelve from the enhanced patdown back to the standard patdown is, indeed, not just listening, but responding. How can it be considered anything else???? Soothing? Really? Children were patted down prior to the changes earlier this month; this isn't new.

As for what results come from the TSA talking with the (relatively few) passengers who've had issues, well, we'll have to wait and see what happens. Maybe that is just placating, who knows? Maybe, on the other hand - here comes the optimist - it will result in changes.

 

[skater]

bicker - you don't have to tell me to remember that the terrorists killed lots of people. And still do.

 

[skater]

No, that's not quite listening in my book, that's soothing. I get the same sort of response from my kids when they know I'm unhappy and just want me to go away.

The TSA et al. have absolutely zero intention of listening to any of us because of unmitigated arrogance. Why shouldn't they be arrogant? They answer to no-one after all. If the arrangement doesn't scream, "I'm better than you" I don't know what does. The whole thing stuns me, I thought we did away with the idea of an Aristocracy?

It doesn't matter what they say or do, I am simply not going to play along. This household is firmly in the won't fly camp. It may be true that the TSA itself doesn't care but everyone has a boss and their bosses are in charge of keeping the economy running, so losses will upset the bosses, and more importantly, the Bosses do answer to us.

It seems the TSA really is free to stomp all over us and that doesn't make them right, it just makes them bullies. That's ok, I can wait until someone wakes up and realizes that the general population has teeth, and those teeth are sitting in our wallets and in those voting machines we get to visit every so often. I have a VERY VERY long memory, and once I'm angered I'm not the sort of girl who responds to flowers and a lame oops... I'm more of the "Don't let the door hit you on your way out, see ya around" sort.

Right now it's all about pride and vanity and I'm not going to let some bottom rung TSA agent quasi-military wannabe-cop touch my kids just because some big shot says it's in my best interests. I am not a criminal and my body and my kids bodies are off limits. Good grief, has everyone lost their minds? Our children do not deserve this, I do not deserve this.

Isn't this 'trust no-one and treat them all the same' mentality the same ideology that justified rounding up the US Japanese population in WW2? Agggh, will we never learn that fear can cause unreasonable ideas to appear reasonable? Is this somehow morally and ethically justified because the entire population is dehumanized? I don't think so.

BTW DisneyBamafan, you are not my enemy. I know you think I am yours but you're not mine, if it matters. I have no quarrel with you, as far as I'm concerned we're all on the same team, my beef is with the TSA.

I kind of feel that everyone has lost their minds too .

 

[DMRick]

This household is firmly in the won't fly camp.

For me, who would find driving to LA from NY tedious, it would be saying, "cutting off your nose to spite your face". That would be a long trip in two weeks...it would take days, instead of a few hours. It would mean not knowing my granddaughter, who is here from Ireland. It would mean the enemy won, and I was now stuck at home, instead of vacationing in places to far to drive. This household is firmly in the we'll do what it takes to fly camp. Because a little inconvenience beats a lot of inconvenience.

Agggh, will we never learn that fear can cause unreasonable ideas to appear reasonable?

I look at it a bit differently:
Agggh, will we never learn that fear can cause reasonable ideas to appear unreasonable?

 

[Magpie]

i never understand comments like "the terrorists must be laughing because they have made you change your way of life so much". I just dont really think Osama bin Laden was sitting around in a cave thinking "what could we do that would make those americans have to change all of their airport security measures. I know, we will run planes into the twin towers, thats how !" i just dont see that. Terrorrists want to blow things up, kill lots of people, and watch lots of people die. I just dont see them thinking much beyond that. I dont think they have a huge grand objective that is still being played out. Kill people. blow stuff up, cut off people's heads, thats what they do. thats it.

And as far as I've seen, terrorists (well, extremists of any sort, really) are notable for their LACK of a sense of humour, so they probably don't laugh at much.

Westerners often laugh at them, though.

 

[OceanAnnie]

These people are liars and murderers. How stupid would we be to listen to this and reduce security, opening the door to them for bigger attackes again?

Firstly to be clear, the quote you responded to was from the article, not from me. Not saying, "you" thought any different. Clearing it up for anyone skimming the posts.

I agree with you. They are liars and murderers.

I don't advocate reducing security. I think we should look at other effective security measures such as the Israeli's airport security management, which is the best in the world.

 

[OceanAnnie]

And as far as I've seen, terrorists (well, extremists of any sort, really) are notable for their LACK of a sense of humour, so they probably don't laugh at much.

Westerners often laugh at them, though.

I think they found great humor in turning our "911" code for help into one of the worst tragedies in US history. The date was no accident.

 

[skater]

For me, who would find driving to LA from NY tedious, it would be saying, "cutting off your nose to spite your face". That would be a long trip in two weeks...it would take days, instead of a few hours. It would mean not knowing my granddaughter, who is here from Ireland. It would mean the enemy won, and I was now stuck at home, instead of vacationing in places to far to drive. This household is firmly in the we'll do what it takes to fly camp. Because a little inconvenience beats a lot of inconvenience.


I look at it a bit differently:
Agggh, will we never learn that fear can cause reasonable ideas to appear unreasonable?

I agree, for some it makes no sense to not fly. I'm sure I will occasionally fly - in fact, I will be doing so in Feb. What I will do is cut down as much as possible. We drove to Fl in Sept. and it really wasn't that bad. I didn't feel like I was cutting off my nose to spite my face - I felt like we were in control (I guess that's an illusion too, but it still felt good ).

I also agree that the enemy has won if you stay home. But in my opinion, the enemy has won a lot of victories including the fact that many of us are willing to give up our rights to be treated innocent and to not have unreasonable searches.

What would be too much for you? (She asks, in a respectful, kind manner ). I'm truly curious where many people would draw the line. Are body scans in malls OK? Bus stations? Hospitals? Are cavity searches OK? (Just because I'm thinking it may be a matter of time before someone takes down a plane with something hidding very deep ). I think that history has taught us that freedom is often taken away in small doses.

 

[ccgirl]

So when does it go to far? When a woman is told to remove in public her nipple rings? a man with a false knee or a teenager with a false leg given a pat down because the limb they warned would set off alarms did so? Really the terrorists you claim to be fighting must be laughing you have let them change your way of life so much, you haven't put anything in place of the two towers you have let them win. If you didn't want them to win you should have built something at ground zero as soon as possible. If we did what you have done most of Coventry wouldn't exist today because of ww2 bombing and Manchester, and Liverpool.

I think most of us have a point where things are "too far" and it would seem that this is not the point for a lot of us. As far as the false knee or leg pat down that has been in place for quite a while, long before the new enhanced patdown as they would have set off hte WTMD as well. Hasn't the UK had the full body scanners in place as well?

Al Qaeda Promises U.S. Death By A 'Thousand Cuts'
Terror Group Boasts That Printer Bomb Cost Only $4200, Meant To Bleed U.S. Economy

Printer bombs planted on two cargo flights last month cost only a few thousand dollars and were intended to affect the American economy, according to a newly published Al Qaeda-affiliated magazine.

The attempt was called "Operation Hemorrhage," boasted the magazine, and the entire plot cost al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, only $4,200.

Yesterday, a special edition of Inspire magazine -- an English-language propaganda publication produced by AQAP -- gave a detailed description of how the attempted attack was conceived and produced.

"Two Nokia mobiles, $150 each, two HP printers, $300 each, plus shipping, transportation and other miscellaneous expenses add up to a total bill of $4,200," one article said. "That is all that Operation Hemorrhage cost us. In terms of time, it took us three months to plan and execute the operation from beginning to end."

The magazine also revealed the attack was not meant to kill more than the plane's pilot and co-pilot, and was meant to force the U.S. government to spend billions of dollars on preventive security screening measures.

The strategy, the magazine said, was "of attacking the enemy with smaller, but more frequent operations is what some may refer to as the strategy of a thousand cuts. The aim is to bleed the enemy to death."


AQAP also took credit for the September crash of a UPS cargo flight in Dubai. However, U.S. and U.A.E. officials have concluded that the crash was not an act of terrorism.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-promises-us-death-thousand-cuts/story?id=12204726

Sorry...don't usually believe what propoganda magazines write.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...I agree with you. They are liars and murderers.

I don't advocate reducing security. I think we should look at other effective security measures such as the Israeli's airport security management, which is the best in the world.

Agreed - and we got the idea for these scanners from Israel. The difference - they take security seriously. Everyone has to go through the scanner - no exceptions - even their religious and political leaders.

 

[Lionqueen2]

I also am in the no-fly camp. I travel a lot, have the time and a very comfortable car.
I do feel bad for my elderly in-laws who were looking forward to a visit from their young great grandchildren. The children's parents have decided they don't want their little ones exposed to radiation or 'patted' down so they have canceled their family trip unless TSA regulations affecting children change.

 

[Muushka]

Exactly how many terrorists have been stopped at the check point at the airports?

 

[wvjules]

Anyway, I was just wondering if people would feel any better if nurses were the one's doing the pat-downs? From a nurses's standpoint, I can see where the TSA is going all wrong with their approach. It would be like me going straight into a patients room and heading for their personal areas before even introducing myself. There is a proper way to go about doing anything invasive, and it just doesn't seem like TSA is following those simple rules. (Earn trust...small talk a few minutes, start with the least evasive and go to the more evasive... explain what you are doing and where you are doing it... respect all medical equipment such as ostomies as part of that person's body... assume to do it in private unless the person wants family around).

Are you suggesting a chit-chat in an already long security line to appease those that won't be appeased anyway? The wait to get through security would be even worse than it is now.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Exactly how many terrorists have been stopped at the check point at the airports?

The appropriate question - how many potential terrorists had to choose other mechanisms because of airport security? There have been many terrorist attempts in America since 9/11.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Former Israeli Airline Security Chief: U.S. Needs to Profile Air Passengers
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
By Edwin Mora

(CNSNews.com) - As criticism mounts over the use of full-body scanners and physical pat-downs at U.S. airports, the former security director for Israel’s national airline told CNSNews.com that airline security in America is an “illusion,” and that the United States should adopt El Al’s passenger profiling approach to ensure safety.

According to Isaac Yeffet, the former security chief for El Al Israel Airlines, the United States should adopt El Al’s security approach of ensuring that every passenger is interviewed by a well-trained agent before check-in, a move that involves profiling passengers, which he said is not discriminatory.

El Al is considered by most security analysts as the most secure airline in the world because of its track-record in deterring hijackings and terror plots. The airline has been free of terrorist attacks for about 30 years and it has experienced only one hijacking in its history. Global Traveler magazine has named El Al as number one in its Best Airline for Security for the last three years in a row.

Nonetheless, critics of American airliners adopting El Al’s security approach say it would violate passengers’ civil rights by allowing some passengers to be more intensely scrutinized than others.

Yeffet said that U.S. airliners should implement “exactly the same [security] system” as El Al.

“Yes, profiling,” he said. “Profiling is not that I am choosing that I want to interview them. We don’t have discrimination [at El Al]. Every passenger--I don’t care who he or she is--has to be interviewed by security. We have to be polite. We know how to ask questions.”

“The TSA [Transportation Safety Administration in USA] wants to tell me we now have security in this country--this is an illusion,” he said. “It’s not security. It’s about time that we are proactive and reactive. In this country we fear reactive, we don’t do anything to be proactive.”

When asked if he thought the use of full-body scanners created an illusion of security, Yeffet said, "Yes, they are a small part of the entire system that you use to check a passenger if he is suspicious."

The TSA, a Department of Homeland Security agency, has put in place a procedure for a physical pat-down of airline passengers as part of an overall increase in security and has also ramped-up the use electronic (x-ray) body scanners at airports.

The TSA has decided that if a passenger opts out of going through the body scanner or if the scanner shows something suspicious, a security officer will do a pat-down.

Reacting to TSA’s move to step-up air security, Yeffet said, “Technology in general can never replace a qualified and well-trained human being.”

“We have to use body search and body scanners only against seriously suspicious passengers,” he said.

Yeffet indicated that it is unnecessary to search innocent people, which he said make up about 99.9 percent of air travelers.

Instead, security should be focused on determining whether an individual is suspicious by intensively interviewing the person before he or she boards the plane.

“We at El Al have used the hand/body search for so many years, but we did it only to suspicious passengers that were interviewed by us,” said Yeffet. “We asked the questions and we were able to determine that there was something wrong with a passenger.”

Yeffet pointed out that El Al’s security personnel are highly trained in reading people’s physical actions as indicators of behavior.

“If you are bona fide, you have no problems answering [questions]” he said. “If you want to hide from us, we see the physical changes in your face--suddenly you raise your voice, suddenly your Adam’s apple jumps up and down, you’re nervous. Then we ask, 'Why are you nervous? I'm doing it for your safety sir or Ma'am.’”

Using that approach, “You can see how fast and easy we survive, and we put the hand on the right people that are trying to blow up an aircraft or to commit suicide,” he said.

According to Yeffet, unless they are suspicious, “most passengers” cooperate with El Al’s security approach of interviewing every passenger.

The former El Al security chief criticized the TSA’s decision to allow passengers to opt out of being body scanned and endure a pat-down instead, saying that this option makes body scanners irrelevant.

Yeffet also said that technology, such as X-ray machines, already failed to deter the Pan Am Lockerbie bombing, the Sept. 11 attacks, and the attempted Christmas Day underwear bomber, among other terrorists, by allowing them to go through security check points with illicit materials.

"I don’t need a scanner,” said Yeffet. “I don’t mean to insult anyone. There is what is called hand search. We take you to a special room where you are interviewed by security experts. If we notice any suspicion, we search you from the head to the toe. We won’t leave one piece on your body that we do not do a hand search on. Why do we have to spend millions of dollars on these body scanners?”

At El Al, Yeffet formulated the airline's total security system, developing passenger- profiling and passenger-screening programs and training security personnel.

Yeffet is also a retired senior intelligence director for the Israeli Secret Service, where he was responsible for the security of all Israeli embassies, consulates and delegations around the world.


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/full-body-scanners-are-illusion-security

----------------------

Interesting article.

Quoting the article I posted.

Agreed - and we got the idea for these scanners from Israel. The difference - they take security seriously. Everyone has to go through the scanner - no exceptions - even their religious and political leaders.

Have things changed? The bolded and underlined above didn't indicate everyone goes through scanners. Yeffet stated they are used only if a person is suspicious.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Quoting the article I posted.



Have things changed? The bolded and underlined above didn't indicate everyone goes through scanners. Yeffet stated they are used only if a person is suspicious.

Sorry - you are correct - I was thinking of another European country.