TSA mess and the police

[DisneyBamaFan]

The people who won't fly aren't there with you so how could you hear them?

This may be true, but it is immaterial. The only opinions that matter are those who will be able to impact the policies - and those are the people who fly regularly. Why? Because $$$ is the only thing that will bring sufficient pressure to affect change, and frequent fliers are still flying.

To be frank, the airlines do not care about the person who flies once or twice each year. They will sell you a seat, but they will make no effort to accommodate your needs.

 

[eliza61]

Contrary to a pp, PHL has had problems with over zealous TSAers:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/colu...ch_at_Philadelphia_International_Airport.html

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/l...in_about_TSA_screeners_at_Philly_airport.html (includes stories of several women)

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/colu...bin__Another_flier_s_run-in_with_the_TSA.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tsa-thugs-harass-4-year-old-disabled-boy.html

http://www.goldinvestmentstocks.com...e-tsa-employee-puts-white-powder-in-carry-on/

http://www.infowars.com/tsa-grilled-student-about-his-opinion-of-911/

http://tsa-abuse.blogspot.com/2010/06/nadine-pellegrino-philadelphia-airport_30.html

It's a long sordid story of systemic problems.

Reread again dude (since I'm the poster your referring to) I did not say they weren't occuring, in fact I believe I specifically said, " not to say they do not happen". What I said was there is not a lot of noise and there isn't.

I did not include prison planet and infowars simply because I was referring to main stream media.

Oh and Daniel Rubin has stated many times he hates the TSA so the articles you posted (by the way from June and August) are hardly what I would call objective journalism. Once again not saying that this incidents did not happen only that the report you choose to use as an example is not exactly going to ever, ever say that the passengers out of phl are simply flying very happily along.

Since you hate the new regulations and the TSA of course you are going to scour the net for the very miniscule problems we have had here at PHL AND LET ME STATE THAT I'M SURE IF YOU ARE THE ONE HAVING THESE ISSUES THEY ARE IN NO WAY MINISCULE. But the fact of the matter is PHL handles thousands of passengers every day, offering over 600 outbound flights daily, most without so much as a blip, lately you hear way more stories on how the weather is effecting flights than troubles with TSA.

But to reiterate, I didnot say they were not occuring. I said that there is not a lot of protest here in the city of brotherly love and there is not.

so since you posted, daniel I'll post the link the day the new scanners went into use and as you can see depending on what video you watch it's not a huge outcry here in Philly.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20101124_Airport_scanner_is_ready_for_work.html

I'm hard pressed to find one complaint outta philly since the so called opt-out fiasco, in fact the last article in the Inquirer was back in the 2nd week of November, as Bicker said before at least pretend like your going to calm down on the hyperbole. hardly the "long sordid story".

 

[bicker]

Bicker, I sincerely doubt that many if anybody on this thread think that I don't care about the concerns of people on the other side of this issue.

You've clearly forgotten the context of the comment you're replying to. I wrote:

Yet assuredly there are other things that they feel aggrieved about, that you probably couldn't care less about.

As you can see, it was a statement of the obvious that you decided to take out of context. However, we can, and have, discussed it in further detail, and I don't see how you can claim, much less prove, that you care about the concerns of everyone else. What you're outlining is an impossibility, because the various concerns, here, conflict. So the best you can do is decide which concerns to care about and which ones not to care about, or care more about versus less about. Either way, every concern is clearly not equal in your mind - in anyone's mind.

And the reasonable measures that you're discussing - that's just your opinion.

No, not really. However, I'd be very interested in hearing your explanation how the deceptive manipulation and exploitation of a media that has an insatiable appetite for salaciousness and sensationalism, the tactics that the critics have used that is the entirety of the context of my objections, qualifies as "reasonable measures".

How is that more important than the "other side?"

You should know that the "redress of grievances" stuff comes from the US Constitution. I'm sure that that makes it very clear, to practically everyone, that that is indeed a reasonable measure.

A real discussion of everybody's rights is OK here

Including challenging you to prove that the rights you're asserting are actually granted to you by something, rather than just something that you've chosen to claim for yourself.

I don't know if you plan to attack people with your posts, but they come across that way.

Actually, I rarely look at user names. When I comment, I comment on what is posted, not who posted it. I'm just as likely to object to something someone wrote in one thread, and then post kudos to that same poster in another thread, moments later. We - including you - shouldn't be commenting on the poster, but rather what is posted.

Maybe its using the word selfish (or words like that) when you discuss people with an opinion other than yours?

I'm almost always very careful to address my comments categorically. In this thread, I refer to "the critics" not meaning any one other poster. If you choose to put yourself in the place of "the critics" because you feel my characterization does apply to you, then that is your decision. Did you post the manipulated photo I referred to earlier? If not, then I haven't said anything about you personally, except that people can tell what you care about from what you post, and even that is a general statement that applies to everyone. So perhaps your best approach would be to stop putting yourself, individually and specifically, in place as the target of my assessments, since I'm not.

 

[bicker]

Legal experts are divided about whether the measures cross the constitutional line or not. I think that is important to note.

Ask the next, logical question: Why hasn't there been an injunction yet?

 

[bicker]

That's a really short list, one item . . . tell your congressman/senator.

No, there are more. File suit in federal court on the basis of some of the claims several posters in this thread have mentioned. Write essays for the commentary page of newspapers. There are ways to engage in a dialog about the issue without resorting to the exploitation that is the entirety of what I'm objecting to in this thread.

 

[skater]

Bicker, believe what you want, but it is possible for me to be concerned about other people's conflicting interests. I can have an opinion - even a strong one and be able to listen to, understand, and be concerned about people's feelings on the other side of the issue.

And maybe we can agree to disagree about reasonable measures.

And if you had simply said that people can tell "what I care about" by my posts, then I wouldn't have had an issue.


And I guess any of us who oppose your view could be termed critics, so how is it unreasonable when one of us is quoted, if the term critic is used along with the word selfish or whatever other negative word (I don't have time to read this whole thread again), to assume that the person quoted is one of the critics? Saying, that it is my decision to put myself there is simply not taking responsibility for your own words.

It is still my opinion that you could argue a great point and be more respectful of other people. If that's not possible, I guess I need to go back to ignoring you. Its a shame because I LOVE a good debate. I don't claim to have all the answers, but the journey can be lots of fun.

 

[LuvOrlando]

That's disingenuous. Those people are speaking with their wallets. IF (big if) air travel drops and it can be proven to be a direct result of preboarding screenings and not the economy, that's former/potential passengers speaking with their wallets. WHEN people don't go to the movies - 'when' accentuated because it's already happening - partly due to the high cost, partly due to the economy, and partly due to the reasonably available alternatives, that too is people speaking with their wallets. They don't need to literally speak.

No, I quite literally meant speaking, as in words coming out of their mouths. If I'm not there I can't literally make any noise can I? I can't complain, hold a sign or show I'm not happy if I'm not physically there. Same goes for movie goers, I can't literally hear them either if they are not there to complain. My point is to consider what sort of conclusions are reasonable regarding silence? The assumption I addressed is that if complaints can't be heard they doesn't exist, I'm just pointing out that it the complainers are simply somewhere else how is that misleading? Its a fact

 

[LuvOrlando]

No, there are more. File suit in federal court on the basis of some of the claims several posters in this thread have mentioned. Write essays for the commentary page of newspapers. There are ways to engage in a dialog about the issue without resorting to the exploitation that is the entirety of what I'm objecting to in this thread.

What sort of exploitation do you mean? You can't mean conversation or my right to not buy the product... please explain

 

[bicker]

And I guess any of us who oppose your view could be termed critics

No: In this context, only people criticizing the agency and the government can be termed critics. Any other attempt to apply what I've said with regard to critics is absolutely misuse of my comments.

so how is it unreasonable when one of us is quoted, if the term critic is used along with the word selfish or whatever other negative word (I don't have time to read this whole thread again), to assume that the person quoted is one of the critics?

Because my comments are about what critics of the agency and the government are doing to try to get their way outside the reasonable measures we've discussed. Again, any other attempt to apply what I've said is absolutely misuse of my comments.

Saying, that it is my decision to put myself there is simply not taking responsibility for your own words.

Incorrect. My intention is clear. Your decision to redirect what I've said at a different target, a more specific and immediate target, is your responsibility.

It is still my opinion that you could argue a great point and be more respectful of other people.

Don't take my unwillingness to let you dictate the perspective I'm outlining as disrespect. Again, I'm not saying anything about you. I'm saying what I'm saying - not something that you might find easier to argue against.

 

[bicker]

What sort of exploitation do you mean?

I've outlined it a dozen times in the thread already. The comment you replied to was a reply to a reply to a reply, etc., within which I expanded on that aspect in greater detail.

 

[Bilberry]

Looks like the TSA pat down has caused an international incident with India.

http://dougpowers.com/2010/12/09/ts...he-us-sparks-apparent-international-incident/

 

[skater]

No: In this context, only people criticizing the agency and the government can be termed critics. Any other attempt to apply what I've said with regard to critics is absolutely misuse of my comments.

Because my comments are about what critics of the agency and the government are doing to try to get their way outside the reasonable measures we've discussed. Again, any other attempt to apply what I've said is absolutely misuse of my comments.

Incorrect. My intention is clear. Your decision to redirect what I've said at a different target, a more specific and immediate target, is your responsibility.

Don't take my unwillingness to let you dictate the perspective I'm outlining as disrespect. Again, I'm not saying anything about you. I'm saying what I'm saying - not something that you might find easier to argue against.

I disagree with most of this, but I'm tired (like I think others here got tired) of beating my head against a wall. I disagree with you, but that's OK and I'm too tired to go through every point.

 

[skater]

Looks like the TSA pat down has caused an international incident with India.

http://dougpowers.com/2010/12/09/ts...he-us-sparks-apparent-international-incident/

I read this too. It will be interesting to see what becomes of this. Whether or not ambassadors will be exempt from what ordinary U.S. citizens must do. It wouldn't be the only thing .

 

[MushyMushy]

Smooth sailingThrough Pittsburgh security. Didn't see any putdowns or anyone going through scanners. TSA agents were friendly and polite. One even expressed concern and sympathy because dd was limping.

Happy so far. Now the terror begins. I hate to fly. LOL.

 

[skater]

Smooth sailingThrough Pittsburgh security. Didn't see any putdowns or anyone going through scanners. TSA agents were friendly and polite. One even expressed concern and sympathy because dd was limping.

Happy so far. Now the terror begins. I hate to fly. LOL.

Good news! I had one experience like this - out of Atlanta. I thought it was a southern thing

 

[CPT Tripss]

Reread again dude (since I'm the poster your referring to) I did not say they weren't occuring, in fact I believe I specifically said, " not to say they do not happen". What I said was there is not a lot of noise and there isn't.

I did not include prison planet and infowars simply because I was referring to main stream media.

snip

Who needs to reread? Immediately before your bolded statement, you wrote

We never did have the pat down horror stories that people found here on this forum (not to say they did not happen).

I included Prison Planet and Infowars simply because they each republished one of Rubin's pieces not available to me on The Inky's site. You are correct that all these incidents occurred prior to the new processes. Whether you are accurate in your appraissal of Rubin does not undo the pat down horror stories that occured anymore than the lifting of the federal court decree about the NJSP means that those abuses never happened and that similar events haven't occurred since.

Just for the folks not familiar with terminal F at PHL - the location of PHL's one WBI. It's primary use is for the smaller commuter planes that fly into smaller airports - not the likely targets of terrorists.

 

[eliza61]

Who needs to reread? Immediately before your bolded statement, you wrote

I included Prison Planet and Infowars simply because they each republished one of Rubin's pieces not available to me on The Inky's site. You are correct that all these incidents occurred prior to the new processes. Whether you are accurate in your appraissal of Rubin does not undo the pat down horror stories that occured anymore than the lifting of the federal court decree about the NJSP means that those abuses never happened and that similar events haven't occurred since.

Just for the folks not familiar with terminal F at PHL - the location of PHL's one WBI. It's primary use is for the smaller commuter planes that fly into smaller airports - not the likely targets of terrorists.

LOL, and we all know terrorist would never strike where we think they are not likely too. Oh wait, they already did that back on 9/11. I don't believe anyone saw that coming.

Not one person is trying to "undo" the horror stories. Every one has said time and time again, in just about every way possible that we totally agree, the rotten eggs of the TSA need to go. so scouring tiny news journatls and blowing the problem out of proportion does nothing except as we said before cause people to wonder at the hyperbole.

So I stand by the original statement. Here in Philly there is close to zippo reports of problems with the TSA at any terminal. So today almost 70,000 people passed through the TSA security gates and as of the 6 oclock evening news not one was molested, groped, no little girls were felt up.

I know it comes as a shock but more complaints were probably launched about delayed flights than out of control TSA agents.

But cheer up, you may be able to find a report tomorrow. So I ask, actually whats the point? do you think linking every report af TSA mayhem is going to some how change our mind and we'll some how change our minds.

Plu-eeze, PHL is happily taking care of it's consumers and that's the real thing that is bothering you. So once again outside of the 2 articles you quoted which by the way were months before the new machine or the new patdowns came into play, where exactly is this "long sordid story" of TSA abuse at philly international?

 

[Magpie]

On Saturday I'll be flying from Syracuse to Detroit, and then from Detroit to Orlando. A week after that, it'll be Orlando to Washington, and then Washington to Syracuse.

So, three airports in all. I'll be sure to give a report on our airport experiences when I get back!

 

[kaytieeldr]

Whether you are accurate in your appraissal of Rubin

I never heard of Daniel Rubin until this week; I never read anything about or by him before this week, either. I can tell from the couple of articles/columns I read that he detests, if not the TSA, airport security processes overall. He's not presenting a fair/balanced view by any stretch.

does not undo the pat down horror stories

Horror stories are the exception, despite what the media and YouTube would lead one to believe. Look at the number of so-called horror stories (even including the intentional ones run amok like the "junk" guy in San Diego) compared to the total number of domestic airline passengers departing in the last forty days. Minimal.

 

[rascalmom]

I flew twice this week and during one of the screening processes I was pulled aside for the pat down. The departure airport is fairly small and does not (yet) have the scanners; when I went through the traditional metal detectors the metal in my ankle from serious fracture repair a few years ago triggered the alarm.

I was "patted" by a female TSA agent. She was wonderfully polite and professional. At each move that she made, she gave me a full explanation of what to expect. I felt the procedure was thorough without being invasive. Her hands were gloved and she primarily used the back of her hands.

The procedure was quick, respectful and as unobtrusive as it could possibly be. I am one of those people who has ABSOLUTELY no problem with the scanners, but I will admit pondering some hesitancy were my college-aged daughters have to face a pat down.

After my experience, my concerns were alleviated.

As consumers, we all have a right to decide what we are willing to put up with before we make a purchase. I am one of these people who never goes in any bar or restaurant that allows smoking because I choose to not smell the smoke. As a flyer, this new policy will not keep me from flying. I prefer to see our air travel be as safe as possible.